Ali Ataie – When Muslims Quote the Bible

			Imam al Hazadi, for example, is a medieval
		

			scholar. He quotes the Bible a lot actually.
		

			In the Ikhail al Madin, the quote from
		

			the gospel of Matthew,
		

			he quotes a lot from Isa,
		

			sometimes from the Bible, sometimes from our own
		

			hadith. But sometimes he does quote from the
		

			Bible.
		

			So the general rule here is that as
		

			long as it doesn't,
		

			contradict our essential aqidah,
		

			then you can quote from his Saidiya tradition.
		

			But we do it with caution. Imam al
		

			Zawdi actually wrote a great a great reputation
		

			of Christianity,
		

			called
		

			the beautiful reputation
		

			of the divinity of Jesus,
		

			based on the Bible itself.
		

			Right? He just quoted the Bible.
		

			He used the Bible as his proof text
		

			that Isa
		

			is not God.
		

			Ibn Utaimiya has something similar. Ibn Utaimiya has
		

			a book called Urat al Sahir, which is
		

			actually really interesting
		

			because Imam Ghazari, he said the Bible
		

			is corrupted in its meanings.
		

			Right? It's called Taheref. Taheref means
		

			corruption of of of text.
		

			So Quran talks about the Quran, the Bible
		

			being corrupted in text.
		

			But what is the nature of this tahareef?
		

			Imam Ghazali says the text itself is sound,
		

			but the Christians corrupted the meanings.
		

			So he accepts the text of the New
		

			Testament.
		

			It's a they call it an affirmative approach
		

			of the New Testament.
		

			But the Christians have changed the meanings of
		

			these texts. If Nutanix says, no. The actual
		

			text has changed.
		

			And this is correct. The text has changed.
		

			And he shows different,
		

			manuscripts
		

			that say different things. Right? So they have
		

			this type of really academic,
		

			engagement
		

			with the, with the Bible.
		

			So generally then, there's 3 types of Isaridiyat.
		

			There's 3 types of
		

			or 3
		

			3 types of looking 3 ways of looking
		

			at these Israelite traditions.
		

			The first is those known to be true
		

			because the revelation of the prophet
		

			confirms
		

			them. For example,
		

			in the 5th book of the Torah, it
		

			says, hear, oh, Israel, the Lord our God,
		

			the Lord is 1.
		

			Okay? You guys wanna hear it in Hebrew?
		

			God is
		

			Right?
		

			So we would say, oh,
		

			That sounds like a valid
		

			portion of the Torah.
		

			Right?
		

			But it sounds good.
		

			Right?
		

			In Mark chapter 10 18, he repeats this
		

			verse verbatim.
		

			Right?
		

			Israel, the lord our god, the lord is
		

			1.
		

			Those known to be true because the revelation
		

			of the prophet confirms them. The second type
		

			are those known to be false
		

			because the revelation of the prophet
		

			rejects
		

			them.
		

			For example, if you read the Old Testament,
		

			you'll read about the prophets
		

			like Dawud and Suhaimah doing things that are
		

			completely haram,
		

			that are mustahil,
		

			impossible
		

			for prophets to do. I'm not gonna mention
		

			what they do. But even we don't do
		

			these types of things, and we do a
		

			lot of things. But these must be prophets
		

			doing all kinds of crazy things. So we
		

			don't confirm these stories. This is obviously false.
		

			Right? Or like in the New Testament, it
		

			says, Risa, alayhis salam, is crucified.
		

			All 4 gospels mentioned, he's crucified.
		

			The Quran says,
		

			so we don't affirm that either.