Home > Arguments for the Bible's corruption
"The Injeel given to Jesus (peace be upon him) was in Aramaic, his spoken language, but what we call the Bible today exists only in Greek manuscripts, far removed from his original words. The Qur'an says, ‘And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming what came before him of the Torah; and We gave him the Injeel, in which was guidance and light' (Surah Al-Ma'idah, 5:46). That Injeel was Allah's revelation he preached to his people, not the Greek texts written later by others.
In Islam, we know the Qur'an was preserved in its revealed Arabic: ‘Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an' (Surah Yusuf, 12:2). Jesus, a messenger—‘The Messiah, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger' (Surah Al-Ma'idah, 5:75)—spoke the Injeel in Aramaic, but its shift to Greek shows human hands at work. The Qur'an warns, ‘They distort words from their places' (Surah Al-Ma'idah, 5:13). The Bible's Greek form isn't the true Injeel; the Qur'an restores what Jesus taught: submission to Allah alone."
The very name "Injeel" is a transliteration of the Greek word "Evangelion", and translates to "Good News". The reason why the Gospel had a Greek name was because Greek was the dominant language during its time; it made perfect sense to write it in Greek, so that as many people as possible could read and copy it. However, Jesus himself spoke Aramaic — thus, it would have been nonsensical for God to give him a book with a Greek name. This is strong evidence that the Qur'an does indeed refer to the Gospel that Christians had at the time, that being the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, not some magical book that no one in history ever heard of.
It's also worth pointing out that the Qur'an doesn't "restore" the supposedly true Injeel; it mentions some details about Jesus' life, his miraculous works, and claims that he was a mere prophet (which is funny given that he is also the messiah and the most miraculous person to ever live, according to the Quran). But what did the Injeel contain? This is never clarified, and it's a complete mystery to this day. In other words, the point of the islamic Injeel is incoherent — what is the "good news" about? The fact that God is one? If so, why would this have been controversial to the point that the Jews wanted to kill him for it? They, too, believed that God is one. Thus, the Qur'an tells us nothing about what the Injeel was intended for, and what it truly contained. Compare this to the Christian model: in Greek the term "evangelion" has a specific meaning. It referred to the victory against a powerful enemy (sin / death) and the emergence of a new king or emperor. In the context of the Gospel accounts, this name describes the story of Jesus ministry, crucifixion and resurrection perfectly. So why should we disbelief the narrative that is internally completely coherent, contains a profound message with strong ties to previous scriptures, and has consistently been transmitted throughout history, and instead believe a much later narrative that is totally disconnected from previous scriptures, has no apparent point or purpose, and no evidence to support it?