We intend to provide our readers with answers to five out of many such attempts to mislead.

First Contention


Protestant scholars sometimes try to convince people that the claim of distortion in the Bible is made only by the Muslims and that no such claim is made by anyone else. The fact is that the ancient and later writers of both the Jews and the Christians have claimed the presence of distortions in the Bible more frequently than the Muslims. Before producing witnesses to prove our claim we must mention particularly two terms which are frequently used in their books about the history of the holy books. The two words are ‘errata’, and ‘various readings’ (variations in reading). Horne said on page 325 of vol. 2:

The best difference between ‘errata’, an error of a copier, and ‘various readings’, a variation in the text, is that described by Michaelis who said, ‘When there is difference between two or more descriptions only one of them can be true; the rest will be either deliberate distortion or an error of the copier. It is really difficult to separate right from wrong. If there remains any doubt, it is called variation of the text, and when we are certain that the copier has written it wrong we call it ’errata.’

In short there is no great difference between the two terms. A variation in the text is nothing but distortion according to generally accepted terminology. Now any admission to the presence of such variations would obviously be an admission to the presence of distortion. According to the findings of Mill the number ol such variations in the text of the Biblc is thirty thousand, and according to Gricsbach it is one hundred and lifty thousand and according to Sholtz the number of such variations is innumerablc and unknown.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica under the entry, “Scripture”, in vol. 19 includes the statement of Wettstein that the number of such variations in the Bible is one million. With the above in mind, we now proceed to reproduce the opinions of many varied authentic sources regarding this matter.

Observations of Non-Christian Scholars


Celsus was a great pagan scholar of the second century who wrote a book refuting Christianity. A famous German scholar Eichhorn reproduced the following statement of Celsus:

The Christians have changed their Gospels three or four times to the extent that the contents of the Gospels have become distorted.

This is clear evidence coming from a non-Christian scholar, confirming the deliberate distortions made in the Gospels. There are people in European countries who do not believe in prophet-hood and divine revelation. If we were to try and collect their statements with regard to the distortions it would require a separate volume. We confine ourselves to the presentation of only two. Anyone curious to know more should refer to their books which are easily available all over the world. One of their scholars, Parker said:

The Protestants claim that the Old and the New Testaments have been preserved and protected from the slightest damage through an eternal and everlasting miracle, but this claim is not strong enough to stand against the great army of variations present in the Bible.

The number of these is not less than thirty thousand.

He seems to have based his remark on Mill’s findings. He avoided other statements which describe this number as being up to one million. The author of Ecce Homo printed in London in 1813 said in the supplement to his book:

This is the list of the books which are ascribed to Jesus by the ancient Christians. Some of them are attributed to the Disciples and other follower”:

The Books of Jesus

The books that are ascribed to Jesus are seven in number.

1. The letter that was written to Achars, King of Odessia.

2. .Epistle of Peter and Paul.

3. The book of Parables and Sermons.

4. The Psalms, a collection of his cryptic teachings to the disciples and followers.

5. The book of Jugglery and Magic.

6. The book of Jesus and Mary.

7. The Epistle that fell from heaven in the 6th century AD.

The Books of Mary

The books that are ascribed to Mary are eight in number.

1. Her letter to lgnatius.

2. Her letter to Siciliane.

3. The Book of Mary.

4. The biography of Mary and her Sayings.

5. The book of Christ’s miracles.

6. The book of questions put to her by the elders and the young.

7. The book of Solomon’s ring.

The Books of Peter

The books ascribed to Peter are eleven in number.

1. The Gospel of Peter.

2. The Acts of Peter.

3. The Revelation of Peter I.

4. The Revelation of Peter 11.

5. His Epistle to Clement.

6. The discourse of Peter and Epian.

7. The Teaching of Peter.

8. The Sermon of Peter.

9. The Mode of Peter’s Prayer.

10. The book of Peter’s travels.

11. The book of Peter’s inferences.

The Books of John

The books ascribed to John are nine.

1. 1.The Acts of John.

2. 2.The Gospel of John.

3. The book of John's travels.

4. The sayings of John.

5. His Epistle to Andrew.

6. The book of Mary's death.

7. The story of Christ and his descent from the cross.

8. The Apocryphon of John.

9. The Book of John's prayers.

The Books of Andrew

The books ascribed to Andrew are two.

1. The Gospel of Andrew.

2. The Acts of Andrew.

The Books of Matthew

The books ascribed to Matthew are two.

1. The Gospel of Childhood.

2. The Mode of Matthew’s Prayers.

The Books of Philip

There are two books ascribed to Philip.

1. The Gospel of Philip.

2. The Acts of Philip.

There is also the Gospel of Bartholomew, ascribed to the Disciple Bartholomew.

The Books of Thomas

The books that are ascribed to Thomas are five.

1. The Gospel of Thomas.

2. The Acts of Thomas.

3. The Gospel of Christ’s childhood.

4. The book of Thomas's travels.

5. The book of Thomas’s revelation.

The Books of James

The books ascribed to James are three.

1. The Gospel of James.

2. The book of James.

3. The book of of James's travels.

The Books of Matthias

There are three books ascribed to Matthias who is said to have been admitted among the disciples.

1. The Gospel of Matthias.

2. The traditions of Matthias.

3. The acts of Matthias

The Books of Mark

The books that are a scribed to Mark are three.

1. The Gospel of Egyptians.

2. The Prayers of Mark.

3. The Book of Pishan Barhas.

The Books of Barnabas

Barnabas was a disciple of the Apostles, a descendant of Levi. His name was Joseph, and was called Barnabas because he sold his farm gave the money to the Apostles for preaching. The word signifies ‘son of guidance’.

There are two books ascribed to Barnabas.

1. The Gospel of Barnabas.

2. The Epistle of Barnabas.

The Gospel of Theodotion is ascribed to Theodotion

The Books of Paul

The number of books ascribed to Paul, apart from those included in the New Testament, is fifteen.

1. The Acts of Paul.

2. The Acts of Thecla.

3. The Epistle to the Laodiceans.

4. The Third Epistle to the Thessalonians.

5. The Third Epistle to the Corinthians.

6. The Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul and his reply to them.

7. His Epistle to the lonians and their reply to him.

8. The Apocalypse of Paul.

9. The Second Revelation of Paul.

10. The Vision of Paul.

11. The Ascent of Paul.

12. The Gospel of Paul.

13. The Sermon of Paul.

14. The book of Spells of Serpents.

15. The book of Acts of Peter and Paul.

The author of Ecce Homo also said:

When the falsity of the Gospels, the Revelations, and the Epistles is so evident, how can it be ascertained that the genuine books are those which are acknowledged by the Protestants, especially with the fact in mind that even these books also had many alterations and additions before the invention of printing machines. The difficulties are really serious.

Observations of Heretical Christian Scholars


The Christian sect of the Ebionites belongs to the time of Paul and flourished in the first century. The Ebionites strongly opposed Paul and considered him an apostate. Although they acknowledged the Gospel of Matthew they claimed that the present Gospel, attributed to Matthew by the followers of Paul, is quite different from the original Gospel. They also claimed that the first two chapters of the Gospel did not belong to it. According to them these two chapters and many other verses of this Gospel were later additions. The famous historian Bell said with regard to these people:

This sect acknowledged only the Pentateuch of the Old Testament and despised the names of David, Solomon, Jeremiah and Hezekiel. They accepted only the Gospel of Matthew from the New Testament but they changed even this Gospel in many places and excluded its first two chapters.

Similarly the Marcionites were one of the ancient sects of Christianity. They rejected all the books of the Old Testament and denied their being divinely revealed. Likewise they disacknowledged all the books of the New Testament except the Gospel of Luke and the ten epistles of Paul. This gospel, too, was considered by them to he different from the onewe know today. The historian Bell said:

This sect used to reject all the books of the Old Testament and only accepted the Gospel of Luke from the New Testament and even of this Gospel they used to reject the first two chapters. They also accepted the ten epistles of Paul but rejected many parts that they did not like in these letters.

Lardner showed in volume 8 of his commentary with regard to alterations made by this sect that they rejected many parts of the Gospel of Luke. The parts of Luke’s Gospel which were distorted or omitted by this sect are the first two chapters, the event of the Christ’s baptism by John, the genealogy of Jesus in chapter 3, the tempting of Jesus by Satan, his entry into the temple, his reading the book of isaiah in chapter 4, verses 30, 31, 32, 49, 50 and 51 of chapter 11, the words “but the sign of Jonas, the prophet,” verses 6, 8 and 20 of chapter 12, verses 1-6 of chapter 13, verses 11-32 of chapter 15, verses 31. 32 and 33 of chapter 18, verses 28-46 of chapter 19, verses 9-18 of chapter 20, verses 8, 21 and 23 of chapter 21, verses 16, 35, 36, 37, 50, 51 of chapter 22, verse 43 of chapter 23, and verses 26 and 28 from chapter 24. The above details were given by Epiphanius. Dr. Mill added that they also omitted verses 38 and 39 of chapter 4. In volume 3 of his commentary Lardner quotes, through Augustine, the words of Faustus, a great scholar of the Manichaeans in the fourth century:

Faustus says: I totally refute the things that your forefathers have deceitfully added in the New Testament, marring its beauty, because it is an established fact that the New Testament was neither written by Christ nor by his Disciples. The author is an unknown person, who has attributed his work to the Disciples fearing that people would not accept him as an eye-witness of these accounts. Thus he defamed the Disciples by writing books that are full of errors and contradictions.

It can be said without fear of denial that the above scholar, even though he belongs to a heretical sect, is absolutely correct in his above three claims. We have already reproduced Norton’s opinion regarding the falsity of the Pentateuch and his claim that thc present Gospel of Matthew is not in fact the original book written by him, but only a translation which has itself been altered and distorted.

The above is enough to have an idea of the views of non-Christian scholars and those of Christians who are considered heretics by the majority of other Christians.

Observations of Christian Theologians


We reproduce below the opinions and statements of celebrated and widely trusted scholars and theologians of the Christian world.

Observation No. 1: Adam Clarke

Adam Clarke said on page 369 of vol. 5 of his commentary:

It is customary that the number of the writers on the lives of great men has always been large. The same is true of Jesus and the Apostles; that is to say the number of narrators of their lives is also great but many of the statements they make are erroneous. They used to write fictional events as if they were facts. They also made mistakes, deliberate or accidental, in other descriptions, especially the historians of the land where Luke wrote his Gospel. For this reason the Holy Spirit imparted appropriate knowledge to Luke so that the faithful might know the true accounts.

This gives us to understand that prior to Luke’s Gospel there were many false gospels present replete with errors and mistakes. The above statement is a plain admission of the dishonesty of their authors. His words that they made deliberate or accidental mistakes is enough evidence of this fact.

Observation No. 2: The Apostle Paul

In his Epistle to the Galatians Paul said:

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel; which is not another but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 1[1]

The above statement of Paul brings out three important facts, firstly that there was a gospel called the Gospel of Christ in the time of apostles; secondly that there was another gospel that was different and contrary to the Gospel of Christ; and thirdly that there were some people who wanted to distort and change the Gospel of Christ, even in the time of Paul, not to speak of subsequent periods

[1] Gal.1:5,6.

when there was nothing left of this Gospel but its name. Adam Clarke under his comments on the above verse said in vol. 6 of his commentary:

It is established that many minor gospels had become common in the early centuries of Christianity. The abundance of such false and incorrect accounts led Luke to write his Gospel. We read about more than seventy such gospels. Some parts of these gospels are still in existence and available. Many such gospels were collected and published in three volumes by Fabricius. Some describe the obligatory nature of the laws of Moses, the validity of circumcision and imperativeness of the Gospel.

The above implies that many spurious gospels were present before the compilation of the Gospel of Luke and Paul’s letter to Galatians. It also proves that Paul referred to a properly compiled Gospel and not to the meanings that he had conceived in his mind, as sometimes is contended by the Protestants.

Observation No. 3: The Gospel of Christ

The fact that a gospel called the Gospel of Christ existed in the time of the Apostles is certainly true and was also testified to by Eichhorn and many other German scholars. Similarly scholars like Leclerc, Grabe, Michael, Lessing, Niemeyer and Marsh also agree with this opinion.

Observation No. 4: Another Statement of Paul

In his Second Epistle to the Corinthians Paul said:

But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.

For such are false apostles deceitful workers, trans-forming themselves into the apostles of Christ.1[2]

[2]II Cor. 11:12.13.

The above statement of Paul is a clear admission of the fact that there were many false apostles present in his time. Adam Clarke under his comments of this verse said:

They falsely claimed to be the Apostles of Christ while in fact they were not apostles. They used to deliver sermons and take pains in worship but they aimed at nothing but their personal interests.

We read the following in the First Epistle of John:

Beloved, believes not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 3[3]

3[3].I John 4: 1 .

John too joined Paul in admitting the presence of false prophets in their time. Adam Clarke made the following comments on this verse:

In the past every teacher used to claim that he received inspiration from the Holy Ghost, because every true prophet received inspiration. The word ’spirit’ at this place signifies the man claiming that he was under the effect of the spirit. Put them therefore to test. Such preachers should be examined with arguments. His phrase ‘many false prophets’ refers to those who were not inspired by the Holy Ghost especially from among the Jews.

The above is enough to show that there were many false claimants to prophethood at that time.

Observation No. 5: The Pentateuch

In addition to the five known books of the Pentateuch there are six more books that are similarly attributed to Moses. These are:

1. The Book of Revelation.

2. The Small Book of Genesis.

3. The Book of Ascension.

4. The Book of Mysteries.

5. The Book of Testaments

6. The Book of Confession.

The second of the above books existed in the fourth century in Hebrew and Jerome and Cedrenus quoted from it in their books Origen said:

Paul copied from this book in his letter to the Galatians 5:6. Its translation existed up to the sixteenth century. The Council of Trent declared it false in that century and it continued to be considered so from that time on.

It is surprising that they can acknowledge a certain book as authentic revelation and then, after using it for centuries, suddenly stop liking it and declare it to be false. The holy books are treated by them just like political decisions, being changed at their whim. The third of the above books was similarly acknowledged by the ancients. Lardner said on page 521 of the second volume of his commentary:

Origen claims that Judah copied verse 9 of his letter from this book.

This book is also considered as false like all other books in the list, but it is strange that passages borrowed from these books and inserted into the present book still continue to be considered as revealed. Horne said:

It is thought that these false books were forged quite near the beginning of Christianity.

This scholar has blamed the people of the first century for this forgery.

Observation No. 6: Mosheim’s Admission

The historian Mosheim said on page 65 in vol. 1 of his History printed in 1832 under his description of the scholars of the second century:

Among the followers of Plato 4[4] and Pythagoras 5[5] it was considered not only admissible but also creditable to tell a lie and deceive others in the cause of truth.

4[4] Plato, the famous Greek philosopher and the teacher of Aristotle. His book Democracy and Politics are famous (430 ? 347 BC).


5[5] . Pythagoras, a Greek philosopher known as the father of mathematics.

As is understood from the ancient books, the first to indulge in this practice were the Jews of Egypt, in the time before Christ.

This unholy act was later on borrowed by the Christians, a fact which is clear from the many books that were falsely attributed to great personalities.

We can understand from this why a great number of false books were written and falsely attributed to others in the name of, and in the cause of, truth and religion.

Observation No. 7: Watson and Eusebius

Eusebius said in chapter 18 of the fourth volume of his History:

Justin the Martyr related many of the prophecies of Christ and claimed that the Jews excluded them from the Holy Scriptures.

Watson also said on page 32 vol. 2 of his book: I have no trace of doubt about the passages that Justin quoted in his polemic against a Jew, that, in the time of Justin and Irenaeus, they were part of the Hebrew and Greek versions of the Bible, while today they no longer exist. Especially the text that Justin claimed was part of the Book of Jeremiah. Sylbergius in his annotation of Justin, and Dr. Grabe in his annotation of Irenaeus, pointed out that this prophecy was before Peter when he wrote the text of chapter 4 verse 6 of his epistle.

Horne said on page 62 of the fourth volume of his commentary:

Justin proved that Ezra said to the people, ”The Passover is the feast of our Lord, the Saviour. If you keep the Lord superior to the Passover and keep your faith in him, the earth will flourish for ever. If you do not hear and do not keep faith in him you will be ridiculed by other nations.”

The above statements are enough to prove that Justin blamed the Jews for excluding many of the prophecies about Jesus from thc Holly Books, and that this claim is also supported by other scholars. These prophecies were part of the holy books at the time of Irenaeus and Justin while they are no longer there today. According to Watson the distortion of the holy books is proved because of the additions in the Hebrew and Greek versions.

Observation No. 8: Lardner

Lardner observed on page 124 of the fifth volume of his commentary:

At the time when Anastasius reigned in Constantinople he ruled that the Holy Gospels were not correct since their authors were not known so they were corrected a second time.

The above implies that up to the time of the above emperor the authenticity of the Gospels was doubted, otherwise he would not have ordered them to be corrected on the ground that their authors were not known. He believed them to be inspired books and therefore tried to remove the contradictions found in them. This also disproves the claim of the Protestants that no ruler or king of any time ever intruded in to the affairs of the Church.

Observation No. 9

It has been pointed out earlier in this book that Augustine and other ancient Christians used to blame the Jews for distorting the Pentateuch in order to invalidate the Greek translation, because of their enmity towards the Christians. Hales and Kennicott also supported this view. Hales proved the authenticity of the Samaritan version with irrefutable arguments. Kennicott said that the Jews made deliberate alterations to the Pentateuch and opposed the view that the Samaritans changed it.

Observation No. 10

Kennicott proved the authenticity of the Samaritan translation and many scholars have said that his arguments are infallible and correct. They believe that the Jews changed it out of their enmity towards the Samaritans.

Observation No. 11

We have already pointed out earlier that Adam Clarke openly admitted that the historical books of the Old Testament had been changed in many places and that it would be useless to try to find any explanation for the changes.

Observation No.12

We have shown earlier in this book that Adam CIarke adopted the view that the Jews changed the Hebrew and the Greek texts at chapter 64 verse 2 of the Book of Isaiah and that such distortions are also found at some other places.

Observation No. 13

As we have pointed out earlier Horne admitted that twelve verses in the books of the Old Testament were changed by the Jews.

Observation No. 14

We have shown earlier that the Catholic Church is unanimously agreed on the authenticity of the seven apocryphal books we listed. My also acknowledge the Latin translation as being inspired and genuine.

Protestant theologians, on the other hand, claim that those books have been distorted and should be rejected. They also claim that the Latin translation underwent innumerable alterations and additions and from the fifth to the fifteenth century and that the copiers of this translation took great liberties with it. They in inserted many sentences from one book of the Old Testament into another and included the marginal notes in the main text of the book.

Observation No. 15

As has been already stated, Adam Clarke, following the example of Kennicott, adopted the opinion that in the time of Josephus the Jews intended to “enhance the beauty of the books by including spurious prayers, new episodes and songs”. For example from thc Book of Esther, the episode relating to wine, women and truth was added to the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, now known as the First Book or Ezra. The song of the three children was added to the Book of Daniel and there are many more examples.

These alterations, additions and other changes in the sacred books, made in the name of refinement, are enough to show that such changes were not objectionable to the Jews. They made as many changes as they liked as is clear in the light of the statement we quoted in observation No. 6 above which allowed them religiously to make changes in the sacred books for the cause of the truth.

Observation No. 16

We have already cited the statement of Adam Clarke with regard to the live books of the Pentateuch where he admitted that thc majority of Christian scholars think that thc Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch is the most correct of all the versions.

Observation No. 17

It has been already shown that the supplement which is found at the end of the book of Job of the Latin translation is false and spurious according to the Protestants, while, in fact, it was written before Christ, was a part of this translation in the time of the Apostles and was held to be genuine by the ancients.

Observation No. 18

We have already quoted the statement of Chrysostom witnessing that the Jews had lost or destroyed many books out of their dishonesty and carelessness and that some of them were destroyed and burnt by them. This view is upheld and acknow-ledged by the Catholics.

Observation No. 19

Horne said in the second volume of his commentary with regard to the Greek translation:

This translation is very old. It was considered authentic and was very popular among the ancient Christians. It was recited in the churches of both groups. The Christian elders, both Latins and Greeks, all copied from this version. Every subsequent translation acknowledged by the Christian Churches, save the Syrian version, has been prepared from this version. For example, the Arabic, the Armenian, the Ethiopian, and the old Italian and Latin translations, which were in vogue before Jerome. And this is the only translation which is taught up to this day in Greek and Eastern Churches.

Further he said:

According to our opinion, this was translated in 285 or 286 BC.

He also added:

It is an obvious argument, proving the great popularity of this translation, that the authors of the New Testament quoted many sentences from this it. The Christian elders of the past, with the exception of Jerome, had no knowledge of the Hebrew language. In copying the texts, they followed only the people who wrote the books with inspiration. Although they enjoyed the status of great renovators of Christianity they did not know Hebrew which is the basic source of all the sacred books. They put their trust in this translation and acquired deep knowledge of it. The Greek Church held it as a sacred book and had great esteem for it.

Again he said:

This translation continued to be recited in the Greek and Latin churches and was referred to for authenticity. It was also greatly trusted by the Jews and they recited it in their synagogues. Later, when thc Christians started to derive their arguments against the Jews from this translation, the Jews commenced their criticism against it and said that it was not in accordance with the Hebrew version and that many verses from this translation had been removed at the beginning of the second century. They adopted Aquila's translation in its place. As this translation remained in vogue among the Jews up to the end of the first century and was equally used by the Christians, there were many copies of it. This translation too, was corrupted by the copiers and scribes by the inclusion of marginal notes and explanatory remarks in the main text. Ward, the great scholar of the Catholics, remarked in his book printed in 1841 (page 18): ”The heretics of the East have distorted it.”

The above statement of a great Protestant scholar is enough to confirm that the Jews deliberately changed the Pentateuch and that they distorted it out of their enmity towards thc Christian faith, as is admitted by him in his statement. This leaves no room for denial. The same is admitted by Catholic scholars. This implies that both the Protestants and the Catholics have admitted the presence of deliberate distortion’s in the Pentateuch. Now, in the light of the above admission, we may be allowed to ask what there is to assure us that the Jews might have not changed the Hebrew version which was with them especially when it was not known to the Christian world.

When the above translation, which continued to be in vogue up to the fourth century and was recited in all the Eastern and Western churches, was so daringly changed without fear of censure from other people or punishment from God what was there to stop them from changing the Hebrew version when they had nothing to fear? It makes no difference if this distortion was made by the Jews out of their animosity to the Christian faith, which is the view of Adam Clarke and Horne, in spite of all his partiality, and which is also acknowledged by Augustine, or due to their enmity towards the Samaritans as was decided by Kennicott, or because of their antagonism towards each other. Deliberate manipulation also occurred at the hands of believing Christians simply out of opposition to other Christians who, in their opinion, were not correct. They did it only to spread the “truth”. They had religious permission to modify the sacred texts for religious reasons.

The Witness of a Jewish Scholar Converted to Islam

A Jewish scholar embraced Islam in the period of Sultan Bayazid of Turkey.6[6]

He was given the Islamic name Abode’s-Salam. He wrote a booklet named Risalatu’l-Hidayah (The Book of Guidance) repudiating the Jews. In the third section of this book he said:

The most celebrated of all the commentaries on the Pentateuch (Torah) is the one known as the Talmud, which was written in the period of Ptolemy who reigned some time after the period of Nebuchadnezzar. This commentary contains the following story. It happened that once Ptolemy asked some Jewish scholars to bring the Pentateuch into his presence. The scholars were frightened, because the king disbelieved in some of its injunctions. Seventy scholars gathered together, and what they did was change those things that he did not believe in. Now when they admit to having done this, how can one trust a single verse of such a book?

In the presence of the statement of the Catholic scholar who said that the heretics of the East changed the translation which was in vogue in the churches of the East and the West and was followed by the Catholic churches up to as late as 1500, as is pointed out by Horne, the Catholics cannot save themselves from the accusation of the Protestants that they, the Catholics, have changed the Latin translation which was in vogue in their Church. Do the Catholics have any way to refute this claim?

6[6] Sultan Bayazid of Turkey, son of the famous caliph Mohammad, the conqueror

(reigned from 1482 to 1512 AD)-

Observation No. 20

The Rees Encyclopaedia, under the entry of ‘Bible’ in vol. 4, contains this statement:

Presenting the arguments in favour of those versions of the Old Testament that were written from 1000 to 1400, he said that all the versions written in the seventh and the eighth centuries had been destroyed by the order of the Jewish Council because they were contrary to their own versions. In view of this event Watson also said that the versions which were compiled six hundred years ago are not available and the versions written seven hundred or eight hundred years ago, do not exist al all.

This admission coming from Dr. Kennicott, the most trusted author in respect of the books of the Old Testament, should be noted.

We are quite sure of the fact that the extirpation of the early versions under the orders of the Jewish Council must have happened two years after the appearance of the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

This implies that even at the time of the appearance of the Holy Prophet their sacred books were in a condition, and the environment such, to allow distortions and alterations to be made in them. In fact it was always possible prior to the invention of the printing press. Even after the appearance of printing machines, they made alterations in the text of their books, for we have shown earlier in this chapter that Luther’s translation was changed by his followers.7[7]

7[7] A comparison of Deuteronomy 33:2, in the Urdu version printed in 1958 with any other translation prior to it will sufficiently prove this claim.

Observation No. 21

Horsley said in his commentary (vol. 3, page 282) in his introduction to the book of Joshua:

It is quite definite and beyond all doubt that the sacred text has been distorted. It is evident from the incompatibilities found in various versions. Only one out of many contradicting statements can be true. It is almost certain that sometimes the worst kind of descriptions have been included in the printed text. I could not find any argument to support the claim that the distortions found in the single book of Joshua exceed the distortions found in all the books of the Old Testament.

He also said on page 275 of the same volume:

It is absolutely true that the copies of the Hebrew version possessed by the people after the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar, or even a little before it, were more defective than the ones that appeared after the correction of Ezra.

Observation No. 22

Watson said on page 283 of volume 3 of his book:

Origen complained about these differences and tried to attribute them to various causes like the negligence of the copiers, and the carelessness and ill-intention of the scribes.

Observation No. 23

Adam Clarke, in the introduction to the first volume of his commentary, said:

There were innumerable versions of the Latin translation before Jerome some of which contained serious distortions and had passages alarmingly contradictory with each other, as Jerome had been proclaiming.

Observation No. 24

Ward admitted on pages 17 and 18 of his book printed in 1841.

Dr. Humphrey has pointed out on page l78 of his book that the whims of the Jews have so much distorted the books of the Old Testament that it is easily noticed by readers. He added that the predictions concerning Christ were totally eliminated by the Jews.

Observation No. 25

Philip Guadagnolo, a priest, wrote a book named Khaylat in refutation of the book written by Ahmad Sharif son of Zain’ul-‘Abidin Isfahani printed in 1649. He observed in part 6:

Great distortion is found in the Chaldean version, particularly in the book of Solomon Rabbi Aquila, known as Onqelos, who copied the whole of the Pentateuch. Similarly the Rabbi son of Uziel copied the Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges, the Books of Kings, the Book of Isaiah and those of other Prophets. And Rabbi Joseph, the blind, copied, the Psalms and the Books of Job, Ruth, Esther and Solomon. All these copiers distorted the text of these books. We Christians preserved them, so that the blame for distortion must be laid at the door of the Jews, though we do not believe those false descriptions.

Observation No. 26

Horne said on page 68 of volume 1 of his book:

We must acknowledge that there are verses Present in the Pentateuch which are later additions.

Further on page 445 of volume 2 he observed:

There is a lesser number of distorted places in the Hebrew version.

This number is nine as we have already pointed out

Observation No. 27

A petition was submitted to King James I complaining that the psalms included in the book of prayer were incompatible with those found in the Hebrew version. They are different from the Hebrew version in having additions, omissions and alterations in not less than two hundred places.

Observation No. 28

Carlyle remarked:

The English translators have distorted the sense, obscured the truth, misguided the ignorant and confused the simple text of the books. They prefer darkness to light and falsehood to the truth.

Observation No. 29

Broughton, one of the members of the Church council, suggested that there should be a new translation. According to him, the current translation was full of errors. He declared before the Church that the famous English translator had distorted the text in as many as eight thousand four hundred and eighty places, that he was responsible for making people convert to other faiths, and that he deserved eternal Punishment in the fires of Hell.

Observations nos. 27, 28 and 29 have been borrowed from Ward’s book which contains many more such statements.

Observation No. 30: Horne's View Of Biblical Distortion

Horne explained causes for the presence of the various readings found in the books of the Bible in chapter eight of volume 2 of his book. He said that there are basically four causes of distortion, which are as follows:

The First Cause:

As a result of the copier’s mistake or oversight which includes the following possibilities:

(1) The copier wrote by dictation and at places where he could not understand it properly neglectfully recorded it according to his own understanding.

(2) The similarity of the Hebrew and Greek letters confused the copier and he wrote the one in place of the other.

(3) The copier might have mistaken the signs written above the letters for the letters themselves and included them in the text or misunderstood the text and wrongly made corrections in it.

(4) In the process of writing, the copier realised his error quite late in the process. He did not wish to cancel what he had written and now included what had been omitted without changing what he had already written.

(5) The copier forgot to write something and then, realising what had happened, he included what he had omitted earlier, shifting the passage from one place to another.

(6) The copier overlooked the line he was writing and wrote the next line in its place thus omitting a portion from the text.

(7) The copier misunderstood an abbreviation and elucidated it according to his own understanding.

(8) The main cause of the presence of various readings is the ignorance and carelessness of the copiers who also inserted the marginal notes into the main text through their ignorance

The Second Cause

The second cause of the variation in readings was the shortcomings and deficiencies of the original copy from which the copier prepared a new copy. This too, might have occurred in many forms. For instance, the signs of the letters might not have been completely legible and could not therefore be recorded or the letters of one page might have soaked through the page and become imprinted on another page and then have been taken as part of that page. Sometimes all omitted sentence was written in the margin without any sign and the copier, not knowing where to write it, included it in a wrong place making the text inconsistent.

The Third Cause:

The third cause of various readings of the texts is the correction of certain words based on the assumptions of the copier. This also might have happened in many ways. Sometimes the copier misunderstood the correct text as being defective or grammatically incorrect while it was not wrong being rather the mistake of the author himself. Sometimes the copier not only corrected the text grammatically but also refined its language or omitted words that he thought were not needed or excluded one or more synonyms that, in his opinion, had no distinct meanings to convey.

The most frequent occurrence is of additions in the text caused by mixing the text with the sentences written against them in the margin. This kind of distortion is particularly noted in case of the Gospels and also accounts for the abundance of additions found in the epistles of Paul, so that the passages he borrowed from thc Old Testament might accord with the Latin translation. Some people amended the whole New Testament to correspond with the Latin translation.

The Fourth Cause:

Self-indulgence and egotism have been a main cause of these deliberate distortions, no matter whether the one responsible for them belonged to the faithful or to the heretics. No one has been so much reproached and disapprobated as Marcion among the past heretics. It has also been confirmed that some deliberate changes in the text were made by those belonging to the faithful. Later on, these alterations were accepted as preferable either because they supported some commonly believed conception or because they helped remove some objection.

Horne provided many specific examples of all the above four causes which we leave to avoid prolongation. Some examples of the distortions made by the faithful, however, will be of interest and we include some of them here.

(1) Luke chapter 22 verse 43 8[8] was deliberately omitted, as the faithful thought it to be against Christ’s divinity to be strengthened by an angel.

(2) The words “before they came together” have been omitted from Matthew 1:18, 9[9] and the words, “her first born son”10[10] have been excluded from chapter 1 verse 25 of the same Gospel, in order to remove any possible doubt about the Virginity of Mary.

(3) The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, chapter 15 verse 5 contained the word ‘twelve’11[11] which was changed to ‘eleven’ to free Paul from the accusation of having made a false statement, as Judas Iscariot had died before it.

(4) Some words have been omitted from the Gospel of Mark chapter 13 verse 32. 12[12] Some priests also rejected them as they thought they supported Arian thought.

(5)Some words have been added to Luke 1:35 in its Syrian, Greek and Ethiopian translations.13[13] Words have also been added in the copies of many priests in order to refute the Eutychian sect who denied the deistic nature of Christ.

In short, Horne specified the presence of all the possible forms of distortions in the texts of the sacred books. The above specific examples prove the fact that the texts of the biblical books have been changed through additions, omissions and deliberate alterations by the faithful as well as by heretics. Similarly we may not be wrong if we claim that Christians, who were deeply committed to the trinity and no t willing to ignore it for their interest, might have changed some passages after the appearance of Islam simply because they were in accordance with Islamic teachings as they had done before against different sects of Christianity.

8[8] This verse contains the event of Christ’s visit to the Mount of Olives the night before his crucifixion where he is described! as having been strengthened by angel.


9[9] This verse contains: “As his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.” (Matt. 1:18)


10[10] “And knew her not till she had brought forth her first born son.” (Matt. 1:25). These words still exist in the King James Version.


11[11]. This has been discussed in detail under the error No. 97. The word twelve still


exists in the King James version.


12[12] 1t contains, “But of that day and that how knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the son, but the father.” (Mark, 13:32). This verse refutes the doctrine of trinity which was also rejected by the Arians.


13[13] It contains, ”And the angel answered and said unto her, the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow the; therefore also that Holy thing that will be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35). As this verse also speaks against the doctrine of trinity, it might have been change for this reason.