Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

How do Shias view the Old Testament?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm not sure whether I'm asking this question in the right forum but I just wanted your understanding of what Shias in general believe about the Old Testament Bible.

@Son of Placid Do you really want to know what a Shia thinks about old testament !? If you ask this from a Sunni he would only point to the signs of prophet of Islam PBUH. But if you as

Divine origin corrupted by man.

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, ChristianVisitor said:

I'm not sure whether I'm asking this question in the right forum but I just wanted your understanding of what Shias in general believe about the Old Testament Bible.

 

46 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

That the Torah and the Psalms have divine origin.

Divine origin corrupted by man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

The Psalms of David (Zabur), The Old Testament (Torah), the New Testament (Bible) and the Final Testament (Quran) are all of divine origin, we believe the difference is that only the final testament has been fully preserved in it's entirety since it's revelation. The other older testaments have been corrupted and altered by men. 

The Quran also says 15:9 "Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Veteran Member
On 11/17/2016 at 6:12 PM, Logic. said:

The Psalms of David (Zabur), The Old Testament (Torah), the New Testament (Bible) and the Final Testament (Quran) are all of divine origin, we believe the difference is that only the final testament has been fully preserved in it's entirety since it's revelation. The other older testaments have been corrupted and altered by men. 

The Quran also says 15:9 "Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian."

Looking for which version says "...We sent down the Quran..."

I see "reminder", I see "Exhortation", I see "message", ahh, found it.

Can we just set Sahih and NIV aside? They both have a notorious knack for altering key points.

The "message" was the same for all Prophets. It was sent down many times. Prophets wrote about it. God sent Muhammad a recitation so people would remember what was preserved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
16 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

 

The "message" was the same for all Prophets. It was sent down many times. Prophets wrote about it. God sent Muhammad a recitation so people would remember what was preserved.

The Quran, NT, OT, all differ. The messages are not the same. They are adapted to different societies. Trying to convert modern societies to what they were long ago is a hopeless dream that only a minority of extremists fight for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, andres said:

The Quran, NT, OT, all differ. The messages are not the same. They are adapted to different societies. Trying to convert modern societies to what they were long ago is a hopeless dream that only a minority of extremists fight for. 

The message was the same, the demographics played a part in how the message was received and adapted. In that case, yes, the message evolved along with mankind, which is why we don't have to wash our earthenware 7 times between uses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

The message was the same, the demographics played a part in how the message was received and adapted. In that case, yes, the message evolved along with mankind, which is why we don't have to wash our earthenware 7 times between uses. 

Something like that. Only I would not say the message is the same when rules change. There are also contradictions between the Quran, NT and OT. Also within each of the Books. Due to human errors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
19 hours ago, andres said:

Something like that. Only I would not say the message is the same when rules change. There are also contradictions between the Quran, NT and OT. Also within each of the Books. Due to human errors. 

I guess it depends which laws changed. As time goes on there seems to be the need to add more rules, (man made god laws). Jesus didn't change any laws, but He sure played with the rules.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
8 minutes ago, andres said:

Judaism had some 600 laws. We do not folliw these. With Christianity God gave humanity more responsability to follow our consciense. 

Rambam came up with the 613 laws. It was an expansion on the Jewish laws of the time, meant to keep Jews as Jews.

If you ever see a Jew driving his car on the Sabbath, you know how much these laws mean now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On ۱۳۹۵/۸/۲۸ ه‍.ش. at 0:50 AM, ChristianVisitor said:

I'm not sure whether I'm asking this question in the right forum but I just wanted your understanding of what Shias in general believe about the Old Testament Bible.

@Son of Placid

Do you really want to know what a Shia thinks about old testament !?

If you ask this from a Sunni he would only point to the signs of prophet of Islam PBUH.

But if you ask a Shia, in addition to that, he believes not only the prophet of Islam but the signs of the twelve imams from Muhammad is also mentioned in the old testament. Even Shia believes in what it is called (Rajat), Rajat means that when Mahdi comes accompanied with Jesus, some of the dead righteous people will also return to this world. Also they believe in those interpretations of old testament that points to this. 

So as you see Shia believes in an interpretation of old testament and even somehow new testament in a way that no Sunni(most of Muslims) and no Christians believe in it.

These beliefs of Shia may be odd for most of the world, most of Christians and most of Muslims, but Shia believes most of the signs exist in the old testament and even new testament.

Shia believes Jews knew the old testament well, and because of this and as usual the corrupted people among the Jews started assassinating and deviating the path of covenant which was continuing after Jesus, through Ishmael and Muhammad, Fatima and those twelve imams and because of this Allah saved Mahdi alive, the twelfth imam, the saviour of Muslims like how he saved Jesus.     

So Shia still considers itself in a direct confrontation and battle with the corrupted people among Jews, because the corrupted people among Jews are trying to prevent the return of Mahdi and Jesus and they want to postpone it as much as they can. So you see the most conflicts in the middle east are mainly between these two extremes. Jews (Zhionists) and twelver Shias. As a good example ISIS which was made by Zhionists, Israel, USA and .... have a great enmity against two groups in the middle east, Christians and Shias.

Why !?

Yes this emanated from their Jew(Zhionist) nature.       

Of course I am not against good people among Jews, they themselves are against corruptions, but the corrupted people among them are foremost in corruption because of their money and power.  

Edited by maes
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 1:20 PM, ChristianVisitor said:

I'm not sure whether I'm asking this question in the right forum but I just wanted your understanding of what Shias in general believe about the Old Testament Bible.

In the name of God, the most companionate, the most merciful.

Shias believe the Holy Bible is from Allah/God in the original form, but the ones we have today are not the original ones or from the same time of Jesus Christ a.s.. I give you one  perfect example which I have witnessed it with my own eyes. In 1985 the old Holy Bible was completely rewritten because of one statement that God said in the Holy Bible that: "God damned Jews" . So they took the "God damned Jews". So now they made a new "Bible" that's "politically correct Bible". Who has the right to change the words of God?? NOBODY!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 5:16 PM, Ozzy said:

The New Testament is somewhat preserved in meaning only and not in the original text like the Torah.

Then how do you explain when Jews took out this part of the Holy Bible: "God damned Jews"! Find any Holy Bible that was printed before 1985 and it says in the Holy Bible "God damn Jews".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Endtimes said:

Then how do you explain when Jews took out this part of the Holy Bible: "God damned Jews"! Find any Holy Bible that was printed before 1985 and it says in the Holy Bible "God damn Jews".

It would not be a bad thing to add book, chapter, and verse to your statement as a proper reference. Note you changed the wording yourself. That's how easily things get corrupt. Not in the text, but in the mind.

Hebrews 12:8 has been changed since the KJV as well. The word [Edited Out] has been replaced with illegitimate. It might be modified for the socially thin skinned, but changes nothing in the verse. 

Not sure, but think you are referring to the New Jerusalem Bible, published in the UK by a prominent Christian publisher, edited by a Brit, written for the Catholics. 

I've also heard tale of a gender neutral bible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

It would not be a bad thing to add book, chapter, and verse to your statement as a proper reference. Note you changed the wording

I am not sure I understand you correctly, as a Christian (at least that's what you claim to be) are you defending Jews who rewrote your Bible or you are actually Jewish and come here as a Christian? How am I going to add the book and verse from the Bible when you or your Jewish fellows took that part out of the Bible? If you are a true Christian go find that out for yourself brother/sister.  Know who the real enemies are! Check this out where Jews piss on your god an get away with it!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Endtimes said:

I am not sure I understand you correctly

I know you don't understand me correctly.

Quote

, as a Christian (at least that's what you claim to be) are you defending Jews who rewrote your Bible

All those that hate Jews to the point they make up their own opinions of people based on how they react to statements that include "God damn" ...anything, for the sake of future fabrication, leading to the annihilation of God's CHOSEN ones...raise your hand.

A man I'll call my friend who lives in Egypt just yesterday told me of his conversion from Salafi to Sufi. One of his key points was that he had to shift his attention from condemning all others around him, (outside of his klik), to a self awareness of guilt for his crimes against the people, whether physical, or mental state, and coming to proper terms with Allah. A story I'd like to hear more often.

 

Quote

go find that out for yourself

Is the lamest of answers. If there was a list of lame answers, this would be on top. Certainly not the most popular, for obvious reasons, and nobody made a list because that would be lame, but if the list existed, just know "go find out" would def be on it. "I saw it on TV" would be on the list too.

This forum is not well known for lame answers. Most everyone adds their sources because they want to be understood. 

Quote

brother/sister.  

Thought that might be evident.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Which one was #4?

Word for Word Translation Reading
Level
Year Published and Description
Interlinear 12 + The original Masoretic (Jewish) text in Hebrew and Greek. English translations available. Very difficult to read and understand. Need a concordance.
New American Standard (NASB) 11.0 1971, updated 1995. A revision of the American Standard Version of 1901. Formal modern English; somewhat difficult but more readable than KJV.
Amplified 11.0 1965. Modern English version from original Greek text. Has bracketed words and phrases to help explain more difficult and complicated passages.
English Standard Version (ESV) 8.0 2001. A literal translation that makes use of recently discovered sources. Easier reading than other word for word translations.
Modern English Version (MEV) 10.0 2014. Formal equivalence update of the King James Version (KJV), re-translated from the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus.
King James Version (KJV) 12.0 1611. Draws heavily on the Bishops Bible (1568) and also on the Geneva Bible (1560). Difficult to read and understand due to 17th Century vocabulary and style. Uses no original or recently discovered sources.
New King James Version (NKJV) 9.0 1982. Taken directly from KJV but with more modern words. Choppy reading because it maintains 17th Century sentence structure.
Revised Standard Version (RSV) 8.7 1952. A revision of the ASV of 1901. Further revision to New Testament in 1971. Widely accepted by both Protestant and Roman Catholic churches.
Holman Christian Standard (HCSV) 8.5 2004. Highly readable, accurate translation in modern English. Good balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought leans toward word-for-word.
Thought for Thought   also sometimes called Dynamic Equivalence
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) 10.4 1990. Revision of RSV, still literal, but moves in the thought-for-thought direction. Language not updated but tends to gender neutrality and political correctness.
New American Bible (NAB) 6.6 1970 with updates to 1991. Clear, straightforward translation from the Greek. The first Roman Catholic Bible in modern American English.
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) 7.4 1986. Revision of Jerusalem Bible (1966). Roman Catholic. Highly readable modern translation.
New International Version (NIV) 7.8 1978-84. Completely new translation from oldest and best Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic sources. Accurate, smooth reading version in modern English. Widely accepted by most churches in USA. Today’s NIV (TNIV, 2005) and revised NIV (2011) are gender neutral versions of NIV.
Revised English Bible (REB) 7.5 1989. Revision of New English Bible (1970). More “literary” than NIV, more dynamic equivalence. Highly readable. Widely accepted by churches in UK.
New Century Version (NCV) 5.0 1987. Revision of International Children’s Bible aimed at young readers and those with low reading skills. Gender neutral version published 1991.
New Living Translation (NLT) 6.3 1996, updated 2004. Converts of paraphrased Living Bible to a thought-for-thought translation. Highly readable in vocabulary and language. Gender neutral. Does not use original or recently discovered sources.
New Int'l Readers Version (NIrV) 2.9 1996. Revision of NIV for early and ESL readers. Uses simple short words and sentences. Complex meanings sometimes lost.
Good News Bible (GNB) formerly Today's English Version (TEV) 6.0 1976. Faithful translation draws on Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic sources. Very simple, readable version without jargon. Uses limited vocabulary.
Common English Bible (CEB) ? 2011. Fresh translation is highly readable but sickeningly politically correct and gender neutral. For example, “Son of Man” is translated as “human.”
Contemporary English Version (CEV) aka "The Promise" 5.4 1995. Clear, simple English but with a mature style. Suitable for both children and adults.
Paraphrase Translation    
The Living Bible (TLB or LB) 6.3 1971. Paraphrase translation by Kenneth Taylor largely based on ASV of 1901. Modern language is very easy to read and understand. Also a Catholic version.
The Message 4.8 1991-2002. Paraphrase translation by Eugene Peterson using 1980s American idioms. Easy to read but heavily criticized for scriptural deviations, altered meanings, informality, and lack of precision.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

All those that hate Jews to the point they make up their own opinions of people based on how they react to statements that include "God damn" ...anything, for the sake of future fabrication, leading to the annihilation of God's CHOSEN ones...raise your hand.

bismillah.gif

I take it you did not watch the youtube videos I posted here?? What kind of fake Christian are you to not get bothered watching a Jew pissing on your so called god and still defend the Zionist jews who do not even believe in Jesus Christ?? Sometimes wolves come here dressed as sheep!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
32 minutes ago, power said:

How many are their? Is it just one, with many translations?

No idea, doesn't matter unless you want to study them for abstract opinions. If you wonder about a translation you can do some research on the publishers, translator, people in the office. If you find the background on the N.I.V. you'll never pick it up again. Actually, it's kind of opinionated like the Sahih. 

Not to say the KJV is perfect, but anything written in the last century+ has been to appease one group or another. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 minutes ago, Endtimes said:

bismillah.gif

I take it you did not watch the youtube videos I posted here?? What kind of fake Christian are you to not get bothered watching a Jew pissing on your so called god and still defend the Zionist jews who do not even believe in Jesus Christ?? Sometimes wolves come here dressed as sheep!

I can watch any form of garbage I want, why should I watch yours? I'll decide if I want to get dragged down to that level. I won't let demonic advocates steal my joy, nor alarmists. Are you sure you shouldn't be waving a plastic AK-47 somewhere on facebook? 

You still have many questions to answer, I suggest you move on to them. Which version was #4?

Are you talking in form from original script to the fourth generation of translations, (probably in Latin around then) or are you just picking off a list and decided the Amplified (published 1965) was the fourth ever translation?

We are willing to help you straighten this out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Are you sure you shouldn't be waving a plastic AK-47 somewhere on facebook? 

No son, that's your job, I am not a wolf, dressed as a sheep!  Just because you claim to be a Christian, it does not make a Christian. A true Christian will always defend Jesus Christ from his enemies, you are siding with his enemies or are his enemies but dressed as a Christian! You are a waste of my time, do not reply to me again. Grow a backbone!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, Endtimes said:

No son, that's your job, I am not a wolf, dressed as a sheep!  Just because you claim to be a Christian, it does not make a Christian. A true Christian will always defend Jesus Christ from his enemies, you are siding with his enemies or are his enemies but dressed as a Christian! You are a waste of my time, do not reply to me again. Grow a backbone!

All this because I choose not to watch your filth. 

Actually, I'm the one wasting time. A late lunch coming and then I'm on the shed roof to wave my Jewish flag at the Muslims. Nah, I'm stalling because I have to reshingle a roof and I'd like to see the temperature rise above zero. The late lunch part is true, and I'm actually in the country surrounded by Mennonites who's women don't wear the traditional head covers, and Hutterites who don't use horse and buggy anymore. Not sure what this world is coming to.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

All this because I choose not to watch your filth. 

Actually, I'm the one wasting time. A late lunch coming and then I'm on the shed roof to wave my Jewish flag at the Muslims. Nah, I'm stalling because I have to reshingle a roof and I'd like to see the temperature rise above zero. The late lunch part is true, and I'm actually in the country surrounded by Mennonites who's women don't wear the traditional head covers, and Hutterites who don't use horse and buggy anymore. Not sure what this world is coming to.

 

bismillah.gifNot at all. From your own posts I realized how defensive  you get when you hear the word Jews. You do not get offended by Jews who degrade Jesus Christ, who make fun f Jesus Christ, rather you try to defend them like you are a Jew yourself. Nobody has a problem with Torah Jews who practice their religion and respects other people and their believe, people including real Christians have problems with Zionist Jews who do not even believe in God. If I had to equate you with anybody, I would equate you with ISIS, you would chop someone's head off just because they don't agree your way. You will be ignored from now on because you don't make sense so you are a waste of my time!

ZULFIQAR.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Endtimes said:

bismillah.gifNot at all. From your own posts I realized how defensive  you get when you hear the word Jews. You do not get offended by Jews who degrade Jesus Christ, who make fun f Jesus Christ, rather you try to defend them like you are a Jew yourself. Nobody has a problem with Torah Jews who practice their religion and respects other people and their believe, people including real Christians have problems with Zionist Jews who do not even believe in God. If I had to equate you with anybody, I would equate you with ISIS, you would chop someone's head off just because they don't agree your way. You will be ignored from now on because you don't make sense so you are a waste of my time!

 

Cool, take that back to your covvey and tell your friends you found another one.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Reading Genesis we quickly reach the part where Lot's daughters have him drunk and commit incest with him (sorry for putting it plainly). Now, Sunnis may have stomach for such stories but we Shia do not to be honest, because unlike Sunnis we do not believe that Adam's progeny slept with each other to propagate the human race. God is eternal and does not change and His way never changes so there is no way incest can be allowed.

By the way, I am much more interested to know why Christians are concerned with the OT while clearly its burdens should not be upon you? Especially because the NT vividly describes the hate and conspiracies of the Jews towards Jesus (peace be upon him) and the rot in their ways at the time of Jesus (ref: how their rabbis would put on display their scholarly status with rosaries and parchments). So How and when did submission to the OT become binding upon you lot?

Edited by Darth Vader
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
10 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:

Reading Genesis we quickly reach the part where Lot's daughters have him drunk and commit incest with him (sorry for putting it plainly). Now, Sunnis may have stomach for such stories but we Shia do not to be honest, because unlike Sunnis we do not believe that Adam's progeny slept with each other to propagate the human race. God is eternal and does not change and His way never changes so there is no way incest can be allowed.

Genesis happens before the laws are laid out, even so, nobody questions Abraham, married to Sarah, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, Jafar moh said:

@Son of Placid ive went through this whole thread and I'm still lost as to why you and @Endtimes are butting heads?

 

what happened

I was not of a mind to argue his opinion of me.Note how I moved from Jew lover to Isis member. It's a sign not to take things too seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...