Islam
Critiqued has gained a fascination for the Talmud (oral tradition). He tries to
use his limited understanding by deceiving his Patreon followers that he found
something troubling for Muslims e.g. the Quran copied from the oral tradition,
Talmud/Mishna/ Legend of the Jews etc…
He
claims since the oral tradition, (Talmud/Mishna/ Legend of the Jews) came
before the Quran and a lot of its contents are found withing the Quranic
stories then the Quran must have borrowed its stories and elaborated them? This
is one absurd claim which carries no ounce of truth nor does it help Christians
as we will see later In Shaa Allah.
Let's
start by citing what the Quran says about the events which happened in the
past.
These are some stories from
the past that we reveal to you. Neither you, nor your people knew them before
this. So be patient. The future belongs to the pious. (Surah 11:49)
In their stories is
a lesson for those who possess intelligence. This is not a fabricated tale, but
a confirmation of what came before it, and a detailed explanation of all
things, and guidance, and mercy for people who believe. (Surah 12:111)
We relate to you their story in
truth. They were youths who believed in their Lord, and We increased them in
guidance. (Surah 18:13)
He
sent down to you the Book with the Truth, confirming what came before it; and
He sent down the Torah and the Gospel. (Surah 3:3)
As
you can read the Quran is very clear in informing us that the stories which are
being mentioned were already in circulation however, the Quran is telling the
us the "true" events on what really happened.
The Quran is confirming what
came before it. Many stories were circulating from the Jews. The Jews added
their own twist to those stories. The Quran tells us the true events to what
happened. If the stories of Prophets
were being passed down by oral traditions and twisted how could you tell what
is true and what is false?
Remember the same stories found
in the "Torah" are also oral traditions written down by Jewish
rabbis. The events took place first then
decades or centuries later they were written down. E.g. the Gilgamesh speaks of the flood of
Noah. The "Torah" you have
also speaks of the same flood? Let's assume Moses was the author of Genesis,
are you saying Moses wrote 2600 later the story of Noah and it was unknown to
other people? How do you explain the Gilgamesh?
What about the hammurabi code which predates
the "Torah". The hammurabi code mirrors many laws of the
"Torah". So, the question is, what makes you say the oral tradition
did not have some truth in what they said? Bear in mind the same bible you
claim to defend stems from the same form oral tradition. Luke is a prime example to this. Luke 1:1
states "eyewitnesses passed down the information which Luke is using. This
is the oral tradition. It's highly
possible the Jews had accurate information about events of the past which
gradually was fading by the word of mouth or deliberate changes were made. This
kind of stuff happens with the bible even now. It's easy to make an allegation
but to prove it is difficult. You have no evidence at all from the 7th century
that the Quran copied and previous information. We have evidence from ancient
text Proverbs plagiarised from Egyptian instruction of Amenemope. Isaiah
plagiarised from Yasna (sacred text of the Zoroastrians) even Jesus plagiarised
from Bhudda.
If Islam Critique believe stories or legends
which pre=date a particular revealed or written text makes it more authentic then
we have a surprise for him.
Christians
throughout the world unanimously agree Jesus was crucified on the cross which
killed him. The source they use to verify this "historical event" is the
New Testament which they believe accurately documented this event. Here’s were Islam Critique disqualifies the
authenticity of his bible.
According
to Islam critique any ancient document which pre-dates scriptures but be
accepted as giving sound information. The earliest manuscripts which speak of
the crucifixion of Jesus come from the 3rd century. We have nothing earlier
which mentioned the crucifixion narratives.
We
have the Babylonian Talmudic documents which stemming from the 2nd century predating
the gospel narratives which speak of Jesus.
BELOW
WE DEMONSTRATE HOW THE GOSPELS TOOK INFORMTION FROM EARLIER SOURCES I.E. TALMUD
AND CHANGE IT TO MAKE JESUS LOOK GOOD
Jesus
was stoned and then "hanged" (Talmud Sanhedrin 43a-45b)
Jesus
was burned after he was lowered into dung to his armpits with his mouth forced
open and molten lead was poured in, burning his internal organs. (Talmud
Sanhedrin 52a)
Jesus
was strangled after being lowered into the dung (Talmud Sanhedrin 56a, 106b)
Jesus
is in Hell where his punishment is boiling in hot semen. (Talmud Gittin 57A)
Jesus
committed bestiality, corrupted the people, and is turned into Hell. (Talmud
Sanhedrin 105a)
Jesus
limped on one foot, was blind in one eye, practiced enhancement by way of
membrum, committed bestiality with an ass, and was a fool who did not know his
beast's mind. (Talmud Sanhedrin. 105a, 105b)
Jesus
attempted to seduce a woman, was excommunicated by a Rabbi, and then worshipped
a brick. He was a seducer of Israel and practiced magic. (Talmud Sanhedrin
107b)
Using
Islam Critique's criteria on authenticating earlier traditions put his gospels
in a serious dilemma. Let's go through a few on them
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus was stoned and
then hanged." The gospels of Islam Critique show no sign of this Jewish
practice of stoning sanction by the Torah instead says he was beaten then
hanged.
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus was burned,
lowered in dung and forced to open his mouth so lead can be poured." The
gospels of Islam Critique clearly didn't mention this punishment.
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus was strangled then
lowered in dung." Islam Critique's gospels makes no mention of Jesus being
strangled?
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus is in hell boiling
in hot semen" Islam Critique's gospels tell us Jesus was in paradise not
hell?
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus committed
bestiality" Islam Critique's gospels don't mention Jesus committed
bestiality however, does state we was left alone with the beast to be tempted.
Babylonian
Talmud 2nd century predating the gospels states: "Jesus limped on one
foot, was blind in one eye, practiced enhancement" Islam Critique's
gospels doesn't make mention of such features or practices?
Do
you see the dilemma Islam Critique put his bible into? The earliest documents
speak of a severe punishment inflicted on Jesus. The gospels took that
information, but added their own personal censored version dismissing what the
earliest traditions said.
Islam
Critique should use all the early documented tradition which pre-date his
gospels and embrace them. Why did the
gospels take Jesus's trial and punishment for the Talmud and change it?
Wait
we have more. Since Islam Critique loves using the Talmud to prove it early
attestation as authenticity. What does he make out of the following information
from the Talmud?
1)
This is a reference to the passage from the
Talmud that: “Adam was created alone to teach you that whoever takes a human
life is considered by the Bible to have destroyed an entire world. And whoever
saves a human life is considered by the Bible as if he preserved an entire
world (Sanhedrin 4.5).
Take attention to the second line from the
saying
"that whoever takes a human life is
considered by the Bible to have destroyed an entire world"
it says "whoever takes a human life of a
Israeli is considered BY THE BIBLE as destroying the entire world"
Can Islam Critique show us from his
"inerrant, preserved Bible", such saying? Where can we find this quote
from the Bible which says "killing one Israeli is like killing the whole
world?"
2)
The Gemara
asks: Why does the verse say: And he said? It should say: And I said. Why does
the verse say: And you spared? It should say: And I spared.Rather, Rabbi Elazar
said: David said to Saul: By Torah law, you should be killed, as you are a
pursuer who seeks to kill me, and the Torah says: If one comes to kill you,
kill him first. But it was the modesty that you displayed that spared you.
(Talmud Berakhot Daf 62b:8)
Christians
shouldn't have a problem showing us where in the Torah it say’s “If one comes
to kill you, kill him first” Unless the Jews were reading a different Torah.
If Islam Critiqued cannot show
us from his bible where those saying are then we conclude the Jews he relies on
confirmed his book is no more than garbage
3)
Show us where this saying can be found word for word in the
Torah? If you can't then admit the ancient Jews were reading a different
"Torah"
Similarly the Torah says, "Through the reishis Hashem
created [the heavens and the earth]," and reishis means Torah, as in
"Hashem made me [the Torah] the beginning (reishis) of His way".
(Midrash Bereishit Rabbah Chapter 1
Islam Critiqued's bogus argument only backfired on him
