Ijaz Ahmad put the following video up not that long ago. Here is my response.
Surah 5:46 of the Quran reads:
And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah before him and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah before it, as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing.
According to the Quran, the Gospel of Jesus Christ was something given to Jesus by Allah. Muslims believe that this Gospel is similar to the Quran in that it was delivered to a Prophet then preached. The only difference is that while the followers of Jesus forgot every word and didn’t record anything, the followers of Muhammad remembered every single word, and recorded it perfectly in the Quran we have today.
There is a problem with this. There is no evidence of this Gospel(also called the Injeel) from the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth centuries; there is no evidence that this document even existed. Only in the seventh century, do we get Surah 5:46. Most people would simply say that the Quran is simply wrong on this issue. I certainly think that and you don’t need to be a Christian to come to this conclusion.
Let’s look at some of the evidence that he presents. He first references Luke 5:1 which reads:
One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, the people were crowding around him and listening to the word of God.
Ibrahim said that this speech ends in verse 4. He mentions that the words are not recorded and this is what Muslims believe to be the Gospel of Jesus Christ. First of all, in verse 1, nowhere does it say Jesus was preaching. One can assume this, but it’s just that, an assumption. The speech that ends in verse 4 actually starts in verse 3 which Wael Ibrahim conveniently skipped over.
He also quotes Mark 2:2 which reads:
They gathered in such large numbers that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them.
What is the word of God according to Jesus Christ? Is it the Injeel of Surah 5 which isn’t referenced until the seventh century? We are told what Jesus thought the word of God was. In Matthew 4, Jesus says:
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
Shouldn’t words from the mouth of God be considered the words of God? But what are these words? This is actually a quote from the Torah, specifically Deuteronomy 8:3. Obviously if you read Deuteronomy, this refers to the words of God commanded to the Israelites recorded in the Torah. It’s no mystery. This is simple contextual and historical exegesis which Wael Ibrahim isn’t interested in at all because of his seventh century beliefs.
While there is zero evidence of the Injeel existing in the first century, we can be 100% sure that the Torah existed in the first century and that Jews believed it to be the word of God. This was all that was being preached by Jesus. Ibrahim jumps from “Word of God preach by Jesus but not recorded” to the “Injeel from Surah 5:46 not mentioned until the seventh century”.
Later, Ibrahim simply points out that if the Jews killed the Prophets, they can distort their message. The verse he quoted doesn’t say that. Ibrahim is trying to draw that conclusion since the Bible doesn’t say what he wants it to say. He then quotes John 8:45 which reads:
Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!
Ibrahim then says that the truth mentioned here is the “Gospel we wanted to find”. John 8:45 is referring to the Injeel of Surah 5:46 not mentioned until the seventh century. It’s a good thing we have Wael Ibrahim to point this out.
Ibrahim now quotes Mark 4:15 which says:
Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them.
Ibrahim says: “Satan here is helping people to change the words of God”. What Ibrahim doesn’t mention is that many categories of people were mentioned. The last category is in verse 20 which reads:
Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown.”
Ibrahim doesn’t bring this up since it doesn’t fit his ahistorical corruption of the Gospel narrative.
The title of this video is Where is the Gospel of Jesus the Christ?
If Ibrahim wants to look to the first century evidence, this is what he will find:
Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.
– Galatians 1:7
by the power of signs and wonders, through the power of the Spirit of God. So from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ.
– Romans 15:19
But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.
– 1 Corinthians 9:12
Now when I went to Troas to preach the gospel of Christ and found that the Lord had opened a door for me,
– 2 Corinthians 2:12
Because of the service by which you have proved yourselves, others will praise God for the obedience that accompanies your confession of the gospel of Christ, and for your generosity in sharing with them and with everyone else.
– 2 Corinthians 9:13
We are not going too far in our boasting, as would be the case if we had not come to you, for we did get as far as you with the gospel of Christ.
– 2 Corinthians 10:14
Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.
– Philippians 1:27
We sent Timothy, who is our brother and co-worker in God’s service in spreading the gospel of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith,
– 1 Thessalonians 3:2
I don’t think you have to be an expert in Christian-Muslim polemics to know why Wael Ibrahim or Ijaz Ahmad don’t look to this clear and unambiguous first century evidence of what the Gospel of Christ actually was.
Ibrahim is barely coherent, (he hardly even counts as a Sophist). He must be desperate: truly a slave to the Father of Lies who, by the arguments of his ardent followers, is revealed to be Allah. At one time I would not have used such terms but I think I have heard enough from apologists for Islam and there is no end to their foolishness. Unfortunately for them I think their misunderstanding is wilful.
Man is a creature of passion and desire; what Man desires he justifies. Why oh why do these supposed learned Muslims so desire to believe Mohammed? Arguments will not work against such apologists, but at least they may give the opportunity for listeners to escape the trap that they are in.
Wael Ibrahim’s utterances are probably not really worth commenting on in your excellent blog, but have made some very useful points in displaying the “first century evidence” which is about as clear as one can get to point out that early Christians knew what the gospel was, and that we still know what it is.
(Pardon my typing faults. No matter how often I check, I only ever notice the mistakes after I have clicked the “Post Comment” button.)
Hi Christopher,
Thank you for the kind words. Unfortunately I have to deal with Wael Ibrahim on my blog because this video that Ijaz Ahmad made of him is making the rounds. I’m still waiting for the slightest shred of evidence that the injeel existed. I think as a Christian who deals with Muslims, you are as well.
Muslims and secularists don’t believe the NT is divine scripture but they do admit that they are first century documents surrounding the early Christian community. We could also look to early second century texts like Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna and the Didache.
It should be pointed out that St. Paul when writing his letters doesn’t argue against such a document. As you know Muslims oppose St. Paul(Although Latias seems to have some respect for him) and say he’s the one who corrupted the Islamic Christian faith; why doesn’t he try to oppose this Injeel document? Surely he would have been arguing against it.
Ijaz Ahmad wrote a post a while back arguing for probable reasons that there would have been an Injeel but not actually giving first century evidence of its existence. I don’t have the link on me. Orangehunter provided me the link in some earlier comment but I don’t know where it is.
God bless,
Here is Ahmad’s article:
https://callingchristians.com/tag/what-is-the-evidence-that-the-injeel-ever-existed/
Very good response to Mr. Ibrahim, I almost felt sorry for the sly smile on his face. I’ll come up with some additional points later.
Christ Is risen, He is our blessed Lord.
>He must be desperate: truly a slave to the Father of Lies who, by the arguments of his ardent followers, is revealed to be Allah.
This is true:
But they (the Jews) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers. – Sura 3:54
One could add the following hints as to the ultimate source of Islam (anyone familiar with the Bible should know what the parallels are):
– Of all the angels, Jibril is foremost enemy of the Jews
– Jibril and other angels are beings of light
– Jibril’s grabbed Mo’s shoulders hard (implying some violent shaking), Mo thought he was demon possessed and tried throwing himself off a cliff
In the End Times:
– There is a Beast from the earth that will spread Islam
– The Mahdi will unite the world under Islam
– Isa will return and support the Mahdi
– Those who reject Islam will rebel and be warred upon (probably beheaded as ISIS had been doing)
Have you covered these parallels before, Mr Ruhl?
Go back to verse 44! Don’t take the “deceiver” word negatively; it just means planner.
There is no compulsion. Stop believing in the news about ISIS and all that terrorist stuff, they do not follow the Qur’an properly, much less Ma’idah verse 32.
You will be “judged by the Gospel”. Such ignorance.
“God” comes from Germanic, while “al-Ilah”/”Allah” is from Arabic from other Semitic languages. They both mean the same so stop asserting they’re not.
>which Wael Ibrahim conveniently skipped over
Muslim apologists/polemicists have been doing this since Ahmed Deedat, the template for modern Muslim debators.
My first example I ever encountered:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Debates/Deedat_McDowell.html
Deedat claims that all Jesus’ followers abandoned Him, according to the Bible – the Gospel of St. Mark, chapter 14, verse 50, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life of Jesus, all His disciples forsook Him, and fled. ALL.
McDowell follows with a clear refutation of that claim – just the next four verses. It says this: “And Peter followed Him.”
You don’t know what the phrase “Even Homer nods” is.
Sheikh Deedat has done his duty. Forever divided are the Abrahamics until each follows of them “come to common terms”.
Episodes such as the one displayed above are so frustrating. Western thought is more than capable of putting the false doctrine of Islam in its place. But the West lacks the confidence to do so, because the people who purvey the dominant ideology within our societies are too scared of the powerful Muslim minority that they (the political class) have invited into our Western homelands.
Islam cannot stand except through fear, intimidation and ignorance. Unfortunately there is plenty of all those qualities, and especially of the latter.
How I wish that Western politicians (and Christian denominations, including the Catholic Church) had the wisdom and the courage to see the falsehoods of this pernicious religion for what they are. And to recognise that the Muslim people, who sincerely desire the Divine, are cruelly misguided.
Most of all I wish that I didn’t have to think about this. I would much rather concentrate on deepening my understanding of Jesus Christ and His gospel.
Hi Christopher,
What you say is true. We’re spineless. There are exceptions of course. It’s true that interfaith dialogue, ecumenism, and political correctness are the idols worshipped by many in the Church. These idols stand in the way of the proclamation of the Gospel, whether it be to Muslims or anyone else.
God Bless
I’ll listen to the whole debate when I have more time, I’m pretty sure there are more apologetic gems to facepalm at, but for now I’ll just add some more arguments that expose Mr. Ibrahim for the dawa fraud he is. And here we go:
1. “The Gospels “fail” to tell us what were the words of God that Jesus preached! Just look at Mark 2:2 and Luke 5:1-4!”- you mean, just like the Quran fails to explain quite a few important issues (what is the function of the Messiah, how many persons is Allah consisting of (there are at least two, but one of them apparently can divide himself into three or four others), why does Allah think that not believing in Jesus is worse than believing that He Is God, how did the hundreds of prophets that allegedly were sent to all other peoples beside the Jews vanished without a single trace of their existence, etc., etc.). And how do you know that these passages are authentic? You consider our Bible to be full of interpolations, remember? If the passages, as you assert, describe moments in which Christ was preaching the “authentic” Injeel, why did St. Mark and St. Luke (or whoever inserted the passages in their Gospels) even bother to include them? Besides, your assertion, as Allan pointed out, is baseless. What can be freely asserted can also be freely rejected. You need to provide evidence that in these episodes Jesus preached Islamic message. Which brings us to my next point. The said passages can be easily decoded by following the basic rules of interpretation- Mark 2:2 and Luke 5:1-4 should be examined in the context of the entire texts of St. Mark’s and St. Luke’s Gospels. In Mark 1:14-15 we read:
“Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the Gospel!”
Hmm, that doesn’t sound very Islamic to me. But it is at the very beginning of St. Mark’s Gospel, and it’s telling us the theme of what Christ was preaching. How about Mark 4:1-32? We are told SPECIFICALLY what Christ preached to the multitude around Him, and it’s even called “the word” in verse 33:
“And with many such parables He spoke the word to them as they were able to hear it.”
Not enough? Mark 8:31-32:
“And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 HE SPOKE THIS WORD OPENLY.”
And later in 9:31 we get this:
“For He taught His disciples and said to them, “The Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of men, and they will kill Him. And after He is killed, He will rise the third day.”
Do I need to explain that since this is what Jesus emphasized while teaching His disciples, it’s obviously the gist of His revelation? Is this what Ijaz Ahmad calls “spectacular answer”? Do you people have any sense of integrity and credibility at all? Is this what Islam does to human brain?
Now let’s examine Luke 5:1-4. Again, we are told what exactly Jesus preached to the people later in the Gospel- Luke 6:20-49, 8:4-18, Luke 9:23-27. In Luke 10:25-28 we are told what is considered by Jesus to be the most important teaching, so we can safely assume that it is the foundation of His preachings to the Jews. And it is not smoething that you find in the Quran. Luke 12 is entirely dedicated to Jesus’ public preaching to “great multitude”. Luke 18-22 is a passage that Muslims love to quote, and it contains another generalization of what Jesus considers to be most important for people to do. In the end of the Gospel (24:44-47) the Messiah sums up what is to be preached to “all nations”:
“Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you WHILE I WAS STILL WITH YOU…And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”
If Muslims think that in Luke 5:1-4 Christ taught something different, they need to provide evidence in support of their claim. Thus far e have no reason to believe that it was any different to what’s recorded in the four Gospels and the Epistles that we have from His disciples.
More will follow soon.
Christ is risen, He is our blessed Lord and Saviour.
2. “None can change Allah’s words” (Sura 6:115; 18:27) actually refers to Allah’s decrees, not his revelations. Take that, Christians!”- Like, seriously? I thought that divine revelations are type of divine decree, aren’t they? Aren’t Allah’s orders to believers to follow a specific moral and legal set of rules part of Allah’s decrees? Aren’t prophecies about Muhammad that are contained in Allah’s alleged revelations also part of what Allah decrees? Both are things that Muslims consider revealed in Allah’s previous scriptures. If someone can change Allah’s revelations, then by definition they can also change his decrees, which means that Allah is either lying or not knowing what is he talking about. More on this issue here:
http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/gods_words_unchangable_r1.html
3. “The Bible says that God’s revelations can be changed!”- Nope, it says exactly the opposite- Psalm 12:6-7, Isaiah 40:8, Matthew 5:18, Luke 21:33. You cannot cut the Bible into pieces and use only those that seemingly suit your agenda, because that would mean you’re not an honest seeker of the Truth, Mr. Ibrahim. Besides, you commit the fallacy of hasty generalization by claiming that “Jews have killed the prophets and seem to love falsehood, therefore they’ve certainly distorted previous revelations”. The prophet is a vessel, used by God to disseminate His revelation to the recipients of the said revelation. The prophet is only temporary in this world and is also one of the recipients. Nothing presupposes that whatever happens to the prophet (even if it is caused by the very recipients of the revelation), it must also reflect on the condition of the divine revelation. On the contrary, the purpose of the revealed divine Truth is to make an impact on those to whom it is addressed. To change THEM, not to be changed BY THEM.
Finally, a question to all Muslims: Why do you think that Allah preserved the Quran, but not the Torah and the Gospel? If you respond “Because he promised so in Sura 15:9, while he has never made such promise for the previous Scriptures”, I would ask “How do you know that? Since you have never seen the original texts of the previous Scriptures, you don’t really know whether they contained a similar promise by Allah to preserve them or not. Show me the evidence they didn’t!”
The misery of Islamic apologetics is truly appalling, and things only seem to get worse.
May God guide us all to His revealed Truth. Amen.
Then what about the other Gospels deemed Gnostic or otherwise non-canonical? The Samaritan Pentateuch? Where is the proto-Torah before the exile?
This is why ancient texts get “corrupted”: they are either written after the supposed life of the persons involved or lost in translation.
Experience Islam yourself. Stop believing in the media and use your head for once. “Why look outside?”
You didn’t answer the question though.
The better question would be “Where is the Evangelium *according to* Jesus the Christ,” claim to be from ho Theos as you say St. Paul mentioned in his letters?
Still conclude there should’ve not been a Bible at all to be compiled by some council. Rather, we have the many Gospels, epistles, and revelations that everyone needs to discern. That supports the claim of corruption of mainstream Christianity.
By the way, “Injeel” comes from Syriac ultimately to the Greek.