* The Qur'an affirms the original inspiration, preservation, and authority of the Torah and the Gospel (referred to as the Injil). It often uses these texts as a baseline for its own legitimacy.
* If previous scriptures have been corrupted by humans and lost their original message, then the Qur'an itself is allegedly false for affirming and commanding people to follow them, and for claiming that God's words cannot be altered.
Because Deuteronomy warns against adding or subtracting from the Law, and Jeremiah mentions the "lying pen of the scribes", the writings themselves show they're able to be corrupted and have been. This is already clear from various numerical errors and issues like Elihu being ignored in Job.
As the writings are able to be corrupted at all, they're unreliable. A person is left to pick and choose what's true or not with no way of knowing what's correct, if any of it, and even those who believe there is a way to know (e.g. sincerely asking God) seem to disagree with each other, as there are many denominations. Therefore, they are no more knowledgeable about God's existence, character and desires than those who haven't read the writings.
Since writings as ancient as Job and other writings less so, such as Jeremiah, have significant sections that are uncertain, and the originals are unknown, the extent of potential corruption, especially in the earlier writings, goes beyond less significant issues, such as the numerical errors, and into larger issues, such as information about God. Even when multiple versions of texts exist, it cannot necessarily be known which is original (if any) for each, what was or wasn't changed, and so on. From there then, it relies on God, if existent, yet ultimately, given the differences in what believers consider true, it relies on human opinion and likely preference, which does nothing for truth and unity. Tradition isn't very helpful either, as it clearly changes over time, and even the early church members didn't agree.
Supporting passages:
- Ability to remove and add:
- "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you." - Deuteronomy 4:2
- "'Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it." - Deuteronomy 12:32
- Corruption:
- "'How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. The wise men shall be put to shame; they shall be dismayed and taken; behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" - Jeremiah 8:8-9
- "Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: 'Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh. For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them: 'Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people. And walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.'" - Jeremiah 7:21-23
The OP uses this verse to argue that the physical text of the Torah was corrupted and rewritten, rendering the transmission process unreliable. This completely misunderstands both ancient scribal culture and the literary context of Jeremiah.
Reinterpretation vs. Erasure: In the ancient Near East, the "lying pen of the scribes" did not mean they were erasing Moses' words and rewriting Genesis or Exodus. Rather, it referred to the production of false administrative decrees, unauthorized legal commentaries, and deceptive interpretations (what would later be known as oral law or halakha). The religious elite were writing their own political and religious loopholes and claiming they carried the authority of Yahweh.
The Prophet's Logical Prerequisite: Jeremiah’s entire polemic relies on the fact that an authentic, uncorrupted standard of the Law still existed and was known to the people. He asks, "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us'?" If the text itself had been completely corrupted beyond recognition, Jeremiah would have no objective baseline from which to accuse them of "rejecting the word of the Lord" (v. 9). You cannot accuse someone of breaking or distorting a standard if the standard no longer exists.
2. Refuting the Misinterpretation of Jeremiah 7:21–23 (Sacrifices vs. Obedience)
The OP claims a direct contradiction here: God says He never commanded sacrifices when He brought Israel out of Egypt, which flatly contradicts Leviticus. The OP claims this proves massive textual corruption. This error stems from ignoring ancient Near Eastern rhetorical devices.
The Use of Semitic Hyperbole: Ancient Hebrew regularly used absolute, negating contrasts ("Not A, but B") to establish absolute priority, not literal exclusion. This is an idiom of comparative negation.
Parallel Examples: * In Hosea 6:6, God states: "For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." The second line explicitly clarifies the first: it is about priority, not a literal ban on sacrifice.
In the New Testament, Jesus uses the same idiom: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother... he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). Jesus is not literally demanding hatred; He is using extreme contrast to demand supreme allegiance.
The Chronological Reality: Historically and textually, when Israel was brought out of Egypt, the first thing given at Mount Sinai was the Decalogue (The Ten Commandments) and the covenant of obedience (Exodus 19–20), which contained no sacrificial laws. The elaborate Levitical sacrificial system was instituted afterward. Jeremiah is pointing out a historical fact to emphasize a theological point: God's primary mandate was relationship and moral obedience; the ritual system was always secondary and meaningless without it.
3. The Textual Criticism Counter-Evidence
The OP asserts that because the texts could be corrupted, we have "no way of knowing what's correct." This completely bypasses the science of textual criticism.
The Safety of Numbers: The Old Testament was not passed down via a single, fragile telephone line. It was copied across multiple geographic streams (the Masoretic Text, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Greek Septuagint).
The Dead Sea Scrolls Proof: The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 provided manuscripts dating back to the 2nd century BCE—over a thousand years older than the previous oldest copies. When compared to the medieval Masoretic Text, the preservation was staggering. The variants discovered were overwhelmingly minor stylistic shifts, spelling differences, or copyist slips. No major narrative shifts or theological rewrites occurred. Thus proving any corruption theory invalid, or at least without any evidentiary support.
The "corruption" argument fails because it treats prophetic hyperbole and condemnations of bad commentary as if they were literal admissions of physical forgery. Historically and textually, Jeremiah was fighting against corrupt religious lawyers, not a corrupted manuscript tradition.
No comments:
Post a Comment