Error in Quran?


#1

I was reading an old thread and if in the Quran it says that Christians believe Mary is Divine or part of the Blessed Trinity, surely that is proof that Quran is man-made?

Btw question for Muslims, I was wondering if the Quran is a word for word dictation to Muhammed, because I’ve read from English translations of it, and it not as clear if it is a complete dictation?


#2

I am not Muslim, but the Bible is also man-made. It is inspired by the word of God. Now, the 10 commandments are made by God according to the Bible.


#3

The following is an excerpt from a web page concerning the question of whether or not Mary being a part of the Trinity.

It is quite clear that the doctrine of Trinity evolved and took its final shape nearly 350 years of CE. But before that:

**Christianity in the second and third centuries was in a remarkable state of flux. To be sure, at no point in its history has the religion constituted a monolith. But the diverse manifestations of its first three hundred years - whether in terms of social structures, religious practices, or ideologies - have never been replicated.

Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the realm of theology. In the second and third centuries there were, of course, Christians who believed in only one God; others, however, claimed that there were two Gods; yet others subscribed to 30, or 365, or more. Some Christians accepted the Hebrew Scriptures as a revelation of the one true God, the sacred possession of all believers; others claimed that the scriptures had been inspired by an evil deity. Some Christians believed that God had created the world and was soon going to redeem it; others said that God neither had created the world nor had ever had any dealings with it. Some Christians believed that Christ was somehow both a man and God; others said that he was a man, but not God; others claimed that he was God but not a man; others insisted that he was a man who had been temporarily inhabited by God. Some Christians believed that Christ's death had brought about the salvation of the world; others claimed that his death had no bearing on salvation; yet others alleged that he had never even died.**

And so, there is no point calling the modern day trinitarian Christianity as ‘true’ Christianity and all others as ‘false’ since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late. The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures. Moreover Jesus (pbuh) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it. Would then the modern day ‘true’ Christianity brand them as heretics?


#4

Wrong again hamba2han. It did not evolve like Islam’s revelations did. Christs message never changed, nor did the early Church’s understanding of Christs position.

What is clear is that your prophet did not understand Christian doctrine, or the Jewish faith which is why the Qur’an records his error with no proof of error toward teh earlier texts.


#5

In “The New Catholic Encyclopedia” (Bearing the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, indicating official approval) we get a glimpse of how the concept of the Trinity was not introduced into Christianity until close to four hundred years after Jesus (pbuh):

“…It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and theological elaboration of the Mystery of the trinity. Trinitarian discussion, Roman Catholic as well as other, present a somewhat unsteady silhouette. Two things have happened. There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma ‘One God in three Persons’ became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought … it was the product of 3 centuries of doctrinal development” (emphasis added).

“The New Catholic Encyclopedia,” Volume XIV, p. 295

And so then, Jesus (pbuh), John, Matthew, Luke, Mark, all of the apostles, and even Paul, were completely unaware of any “Trinity”… and this is a fact.


#6

This topic is currently being discussed in THIS thread. Read it and you’ll understand what the Qur’an is talking about here.

And please Hamba, if you don’t know the answer then don’t try to give one; because the answer you’ve given is wrong and you’re making perfectly accurate Qur’anic verses seem erroneouns to Christians in telling them this (false) interpretation is the correct one. It would be quite irrelevant and pointless for the Qur’an to bring up such heretical beliefs three centuries after the First Council of Nicaea when it’s talking about Christians as a whole.

What the Qur’an is talking about here is mainstream Christianity (Catholic and Eastern Orthodox particularly), and is relevant for today. It isn’t however claiming that Christians belief Mary to be a god in the literal sense neither does it have anything to do with the Trinity. Again read the thread I linked to above.


#7

In the Quran (19:28), why is Mary the mother of Jesus referred to as Aaron’s sister? I think Muhammed thought she was the same person as Miriam from the book of Exodus (the sister of Aaron)?


#8

The Judea/Christian traditions acknowledge that the Bible was written men who they say were inspired by God.
Muslims claim that God created the Qur’an in heaven and then gave it to Muhammad. Muslims claim that the Qur’an was given to Muhammad orally by and angel for God. They claim that it is in heaven, has always existed. That the one here on earth is identical to the one in heaven. They have different claims as to how to was written down… everything from Muhammad dictated it to a scribe to it was written from oral tradition 100-200 years after his death.
This is why when we see Muslims discussing which religion is correct, one of the first things they bring up is that God did not directly author the bible.


#9

What you describe above are mostly the small heretical groups who came up will all kinds of ideas. THE main difference between them and Catholicism is that Catholicism came directly from the apostles.
The early church fathers where the ones who first discussed the trinity. They are the ones who taught it.
I am always amused that those who try to discredit Christianity act as though Catholicism/Orthodoxy does not exist. The fast majority of Christianity has always been Catholic/Orthodox.


#10

The doctrine was always there. The perfect way to describe it was not. Trinitarian teachings have their source in the Gospels, or as you know them, the Inji. Jesus never called it a “Trinity” because the word (not the concept) is based on a Latin word. He did, however tell his Apostles to baptise in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Notice he said name - not names.

And so, there is no point calling the modern day trinitarian Christianity as ‘true’ Christianity and all others as ‘false’ since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late.

The lateness of the doctrine developing is inconsequential. Like I said, the concept was there. The name was not there.

The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures.

Bizarre to you and Mohammed. Mohammed was thought to be bizarre and still is thought to be bizarre.

Moreover Jesus (pbuh) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it.

They did practice it, but they were not uniform in their beliefs because they lacked a common understanding. They did not lack a common truth, they lacked understanding. Islam has it’s divisions too. There are Sunnis, Shiite, and even Ahmadi. The Sunnis and Shiites split as soon as Muhammad died and Abu Bakr succeeded him to rule as a Caliph. So Islam has had it’s disunities as well.

Would then the modern day ‘true’ Christianity brand them as heretics?

Yes, we would brand them as heretics. Just like a Sunni, Shiite, and Ahmadi’s and Allah knows who else would all brand each other as heretical. At least in Christianity, God can forgive ignorance and misunderstanding for Christ realized that sometimes “we know not what we do.”


#11

For a quick introduction, please read this article islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/mary.html. This isn’t a recent criticism, infact Christians once asked for an explanation of this verse to Muhammad’s face.

And there’s also the example that when Abdullah ibn Salam met the Prophet he is reported to have said “Auntie, he is really, by God, the brother of Moses and follows his religion.” Of course Abdullah didn’t really think Muhammad (saaw) was the literal brother of Moses (as)

And a couple of other quotes from Christians who’ve studied this topic:

“From the identity of names it has been generally imagined by Christian writers that the Koran here confounds Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary of Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron; which intolerable anachronism, if it were certain, is sufficient of itself to destroy the pretended authority of this book. But though Mohammed may be supposed to have been ignorant enough in ancient history and chronology, to have committed so gross a blunder; yet I do not see how it can be made out from the words of the Koran. For it does not follow, because two persons have the same name, and have each a father and brother who bear the same names, that they must therefore necessarily be the same whereby it manifestly appears that Mohammed well knew and asserted that Moses preceded Jesus several ages. And the commentators accordingly fail not to tell us, that there had passed about one thousand eight hundred years between Amran the father of Moses and Amrean the father of the Virgin Mary: they also make them the sons of different persons; the first, they say, was the son of Yeshar, or Izhar (though he was really his brother) the son of Kahath, the son of Levi; and the other was the son of Matthan, whose genealogy they trace, but in a very corrupt and imperfect manner, up to David and thence to Adam. It must be observed that though the Virgin Mary is called in the Koran, the sister of Aaron, yet she is nowhere called the sister of Moses.
(George Sale, The Koran, IX Edition of 1923, London, p. 38)

And from logon.org/english/s/p163.html, elucidating on the last sentence of the previous quote:

At verse 28, Muhammad makes a most important observation where he refers to Mary as Sister of Aaron. From Matthew and Luke we are given Christ’s lineage, which is from David in Matthew through to Solomon; and in Luke, through Nathan (see the paper Genealogy of the Messiah (No. 119)). Christ was of the line of Judah and both these lines are of Judah,** but in order to fulfil the expectations that the Messiah would be of two advents, the Messiah of Aaron and the Messiah of Israel, lineage from Levi is required.** The Judaic lineages alone would not be sufficient to complete those expectations, which we know were widespread from the writings of the Sons of Zadok. Further, the prophecy in Zechariah 12:10-14 shows that when they look on me; the one they pierced the houses of his lineage appear to be of David through Nathan (v. 12) and Levi through Shimei (v. 13). As Mariam’s cousin, Elizabeth, was wife to Zechariah, high priest of the Division of Abijah, and because of the limitations imposed upon Levites by Numbers, Elizabeth and, probably therefore, Mariam (Mary) would have been full Levite, in the case of Elizabeth and part Levite in the case of Mariam, allowing Zechariah to be fulfilled and Christ to be the Messiah of Aaron and Israel. Far from being an error or a generalised term, Muhammad’s statement is corroboration of this prophecy in Zechariah, perhaps showing that he had also read and understood Zechariah.

Hope that helps


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.