Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately!  See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.

Further Topic Research:
Syntax help

 

After you finish reading this article, for much more examples and elaborations please visit:

Differences between the Noble Quran and Bible only prove Islam's Truthfulness and Divinity.

 

 

Is Uzair the son of God?

Let us look at the Noble Verse 9:30 "The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!"

There is no error or contradiction in the above Noble Verse!  Ezra was regarded as a very important figure in Judaism.  By many Jews, he is believed to have never even died:

From: http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/summaries/2esdras-notes.htm

Second Esdras

 

Summary:  

 

The Second Book of Esdras is an apocalypse that attempts to explain why God allowed the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem to be destroyed by Gentiles in AD 70. The book claims to report seven visions of Ezra the Scribe concerning ethical issues and the problem of evil and suffering. The first three revelations (3:1—9:25) concern the angel Uriel’s instructions to Ezra about the spiritual-moral realm. In the fourth revelation (9:26—10:59), Ezra witnesses a mourning woman change into the heavenly Jerusalem. The fifth and sixth revelations (11—13) condemn the Roman Empire and forecast its destruction along with other evil Gentile nations by a messiah. The seventh revelation (14) describes Ezra’s role in producing the books included in the canonical Scriptures (the 22 books in the Hebrew Bible) and the (70) apocryphal books. This revelation closes with Ezra being taken into heaven without dying. Chapters 1 and 2 and 15 and 16 are generally recognized as subsequent Christian interpolations.

 

Titles and Nomenclature:

 

        Also known as:
 

o       Fourth Esdras in the Vulgate

o       Third Esdras in the Slavonic Bible

o       Fourth Ezra

o       The Apocalypse of Ezra
 

        Its component sections are referred to as:
 

o       Chapters 3—14: 4 Ezra

o       Chapters 1—2: 5 Ezra

o       Chapters 15—16: 6 Ezra

 

Canonical Status:

 

        Among the Deuterocanonical Books of the Old

Testament of the Russian Orthodox Church

        Among the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha of the Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant Churches

 

Authors:

 

        Chs. 3—14: Anonymous Palestinian Jew

        Chs. 1—2: Anonymous Christian

        Chs. 15—16: Anonymous Christian

 

Dates:

 

        Chs. 3—14: late 1st century AD (after AD 70)

        Chs. 1—2: 2nd century AD

        Chs. 15—16: 3rd century AD

 

Original Languages:

 

        Chs. 3—14: Hebrew or Aramaic

        Chs. 1—2: Greek

        Chs. 15—16: Greek

 

Manuscripts:

 

        No original Hebrew or Aramaic manuscripts survive from the central section (chapters 3—14). This section was translated into Greek, but no manuscripts are extant from this version either.

        A fragment (15:57-59) survives from the third, and latest, section (chapters 15—16) in Greek.

        Translations from the Greek are extant in Syriac, Latin, Arabic, Georgian, Armenian, Ethiopic, and fragments from a Coptic version.

 

 

 


Notes prepared by Mark Seitz
(Junior Biblical Literature Major)

for the
Wesley Center for Applied Theology
at Northwest Nazarene University

 

Copyright 2000 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology

 

Text may be freely used for personal or scholarly purposes or mirrored on other web sites, provided the notice below the horizontal line is left intact. Any use of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686. Contact webadmin@wesley.nnu.edu for permission or to report errors.

 

Continuing with my article....

Mr. Jochen Katz claimed in his attack on the Noble Quran that since there is no evidence in the Bible that Uzair was called the "son of God", then therefore we can conclude that the Noble Quran is in error regarding this issue.

Few points to notice about Uzair:

1-  According to Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 6, Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, page 1108, Uzair was called the Father of Judaism by the Jews.

2-  According to the same resource in point #1, the Arab Jews in Yemen did indeed consider Uzair as the "son of God".

The two points were taken from http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html  

The above resources come straight from Jewish books !.  It is quite ironic that the Jewish and Christian (Old Testament) resources disagree and contradict each others, and yet Mr. Jochen Katz claims that the Noble Quran is in error.

Jochen, if the Bible in the Old Testament contradicts what the real Jewish resources say, then what in the world is your point ???!!!

 

How do Muslims view the Bible of today?

Muslims and Christians both agree that the Noble Quran does not agree with today's Bible in everything. Just because the Bible might disagree on something in the Noble Quran, it doesn't at all negate the claim of the Noble Quran or make it false. There is a certain flow of logic that the Noble Quran presents which we the Muslims believe that it is the truth. 

The Bible's contents today were not written by their original authors.  For example, we read from the book of Matthew so many verses such as this one:

"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

Did "Matthew" write this about himself? Why then didn't Matthew write for example: "he (Jesus) saw ME, and my name is Matthew. I was sitting at the receipt of custom…" etc.

Similarly, we read in the books of Moses things such as "And the LORD said to Moses...", or "Moses went to that place....", etc...  We also read in the Old Testament about Moses's burial.  Now if Moses alone supposedly wrote his books, then how is it possible for him to write about his own burial when he is already dead??!!

Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament.  The so called "Original letters/Gospels" that were written in Greek and Hebrew, were written by third party people!

Consider the following few examples that consist of historical contradictions in the Bible:

II Samuel 10:18 talks about David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen and Shobach the commander.
I Chronicles 1:18 says that David slew the men of 7000 chariots and 40,000 footmen

I Chronicles 9:25 says that Solomon had 4000 stalls for horses and chariots.
I Kings 4:26 says that he had 40,000 stalls for horses

Ezra 2:5 talks about an exile Arah having 775 sons.
Nehemiah 7:10 talks about the same exile Arah having 652 sons.

II Samuel 24:13 So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?
I Chronicles 21:11 SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

How did Judas die?
"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:5)
"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

2 Samuel 6:23 Therefore MICHAL the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
2 Samuel 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of MICHAL the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite.

2 Kings 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2 Chronicles 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

26th year of the reign of Asa I Kings 16:6-8
36th year of the reign of Asa I 2 Chronicles 16:1

How old was Ahaziah when he began to reign?
22 in 2 Kings 8:26
42 in 2 Chronicle 22:2

Who was Josiah's successor?
Jehoahaz - 2 Chronicle 36:1
Shallum - Jeremiah 22:11

Also, your original scriptures are all doubtful according to the Bible's own theologians and historians.  It's quite hellarious that even the Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and corrupted by man's garbage:

"`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie(From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

And regarding who wrote the books and gospels of the Bible, well here is a sample of what the NIV Bible's theologians and historians wrote:

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark.  They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark.  His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost.  (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"

"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"

"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"

"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)"

"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"

"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"

"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)"

"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368)"

"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"

"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"

"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)"

"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)"

"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources....(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722)"

"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)"

etc...

How do you respond to this?


Please visit: Just who were the original authors of the Bible? to see the book's bibliography to the above quotes.

Also, why don't you visit: Contradictions and proofs of Historical Corruptions in the Bible, and see exactly what I mean, instead of acting like a total fool and saying things that even the Bible refutes in it!

It is quite obvious that Christians today believe in third party authors' words as the words of GOD.  This is a very serious corruption in the Bible that must be taken into deep consideration by the Bible's followers.  Please visit "Is the Bible the true word of GOD?" to see a full and complete paper about the logical corruptions in the Bible, along with many Christian famous priests and ministers appinions that agree with the Bible's corruption.  I have their personal quotes in that site.

It is quite obvious that Christians today believe in third party authors' words as the words of GOD.  This is a very serious corruption in the Bible that must be taken into deep consideration by the Bible's followers.  Please visit "Is the Bible the true word of GOD?" to see a full and complete paper about the logical corruptions in the Bible, along with many Christian famous priests and ministers opinions that agree with the Bible's corruption.  I have their personal quotes in that site.

You can not disprove Islam by presenting stories from the Bible that are not narrated the same from the Noble Quran. We Muslims believe that there are many disagreements in today's Bible, and that the Noble Quran should be the Bible that the Jews and the Christians should follow.

Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran in Noble Verse 11:110 "We (Allah) certainly gave the Book To Moses, but differences Arose therein: had it not been That a Word had gone forth Before from thy Lord, the matter Would have been decided Between them: but they Are in suspicious doubt Concerning it."

Previous revelations have been corrupted and deprived of their spiritual value by their followers' vain controversies and disputes. It was possible to settle such disputes under the flag, as it were, or the old Revelations, but Allah's Plan was to revive and rejuvenate His Message through Islam, amongst a newer and younger people, unhampered by the burden of age-old prejudices.

There is always in human affairs the conflict between the old and the new, the worn out system of our ancestors, and the fresh living spring of Allah's inspiration fitting in with new times and new surroundings.  The advocates of the former look upon this latter not only with intellectual doubt but with moral suspicion, as did the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) upon Islam, with its fresh outlook and vigorous realistic way of looking at things.

 

 

After you finish reading this article, for much more examples and elaborations please visit:

Differences between the Noble Quran and Bible only prove Islam's Truthfulness and Divinity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back to Responses to the so-called "contradictions" in the Noble Quran.


Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.