April 16, 2026 · 10:18 am

Never the Only God: How the Bible Preserves Henotheism and the Qur’an Protects Monotheism

“O People of the Book! Now Our Messenger has come to you, revealing much of what you have hidden of the book and disregarding much. There certainly has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book. through which Allah guides those who seek His pleasure to the ways of peace, brings them out of darkness and into light by His Will, and guides them to the Straight Path. (Qur’an 5:15-16)

﷽ 

Henotheism is the worship of a single, supreme deity while acknowledging or accepting the existence of other, lesser gods.

Monotheism is the belief in the existence of only one god, or the oneness of God, distinguishing it from polytheism (many gods) and atheism.

The cypher of The Tetragrammaton revealed.

Tetra =4.

Gramma= letter.

Aton (Aten).

The Bible claims that their god used to be called ‘Baal’ by them.

“And in that day, declares the LORD, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’ (Hosea 2:16)

Ba’al (בעל) is the most commonly used in modern Hebrew for husband.

“Eluzai, Jerimoth, Bealiah, Shemariah and Shephatiah the Haruphite…” (1 Chronicles 12:5)

Bealiah which means Jehovah is Baal.

However, because the name Baal had become so associated with the Canaanite deity, there becomes a prohibition that commands Israel to stop using that title for Him altogether . This also proves that Israelites were using the same name for God prior to this prohibition.

Barnes’ notes on the Bible has the following commentary:

“God says, “so wholly do I hate the name of idols, that on account of the likeness of the word Baal, “my Lord,” I will not be so called even in a right meaning, lest, while she utter the one, she should think on the other, and calling Me her Husband, think on the idol.”

Source: (https://biblehub.com/commentaries/hosea/2-16.htm)

Think of it like this. Maybe there was a woman married to a man named Thomas. This woman received a divorce from Thomas. Now this woman is married to you and your name happens to also be Thomas. So, during intimacy, it is possible that you would not want her to call out your name as it could be awkward.

In the Qur’an Allah (swt) has never once been identified with Baal.

In fact, the two are contrasted and never conflated.

“When he said to his people, “Will you not fear Allah ?”Will you call upon Baal and forsake the Best of Creators.” (Qur’an 37:124-125)

The Qur’an presents clear monotheism.

“Allah! There is no god except Him, the Ever-Living, All-Sustaining.” (Qur’an 2:255)

Say, He Allah is Absolute.
That which is independent of all but which all things are dependent upon.
He does not bring for like kind nor was he from like kind
And there is no equivalent to His being Absolute. (Qur’an 112:1-4)

This powerful surah is absolutely uncompromising.

We need to explain the reasons why we translate the text as we do.

Say, He Allah is Absolute.

We make a crucial distinction that most English translations obscure. Wāḥid appears throughout the Qur’an (e.g., 2:163, 5:73, 14:48) and means “one” in a numerical, countable sense. Aḥad, by contrast, appears in this surah and carries a different weight.

  • Wāḥid = one as opposed to two or more (quantitative oneness)
  • Aḥad = absolute, unique, singular without composition or peer (qualitative oneness)

Our translation of Aḥad as “Absolute” is therefore more precise than “One,” which conflates Aḥad with Wāḥid. The standard “One and Only” tries to bridge this but still leans on number. “Absolute” correctly captures the mode of oneness rather than the count.

On Al-Ṣamad. That which is independent of all but which all things are dependent upon.

Standard translations (“Eternal,” “Absolute,” “Self-Sufficient,” “The Uncaused Cause”) each capture one facet. Our full clause—“That which is independent of all but which all things are dependent upon”—is arguably the most complete English rendering possible. It combines:

  • Negative theology (not dependent on anything)
  • Positive theology (all depend on Him)
  • Causal primacy (uncaused cause)

Implication: This is not a liability but an advantage. It sacrifices brevity (the Arabic Ṣamad is one word) but gains clarity. For a translation intended for study rather than liturgical memorization, this is defensible.

Why we do not render the text as “begets not nor is begotten”. He does not bring for like kind nor was he from like kind.

  • If Allah came from something else (was begotten): He would share a genus with that something else (both would be “things that originated from a prior cause”).
  • If something like Him came from Allah (begets): That something would share a genus with Allah (both would be “beings that produce likenesses”).

Either scenario destroys absoluteness. A truly absolute being has no genus. Genus implies shared properties, limitations, and comparability. An absolute being is sui generis in the literal sense: of its own kind.

Therefore, “does not bring for like kind nor was he from like kind” is theologically superior to “begets not nor is begotten” because:

  • It explicitly targets category membership, not biological process.
  • It avoids the English word “beget,” which confuses modern readers.
  • It closes the door on Neoplatonic emanation (where lower realities come from higher ones “like kind” in a chain of being) as well as Christian Trinitarian generation.

Implication: Our translation is a more universal negation of ontological continuity between Allah and creation than the conventional one. It addresses Christianity, Neoplatonism, certain Hindu cosmologies (e.g., prakriti giving birth to purusha-like realities), and any emanationist or filial model.

And there is no equivalent to His being Absolute.

Absoluteness is a maximal property. If two things were both absolute, each would limit the other’s absoluteness (each would fail to be absolute relative to the other). Absoluteness entails uniqueness necessarily, not accidentally.

Our final line—“no equivalent to his being absolute”—thus correctly implies that the property itself cannot be instantiated in any other subject. The property is self-uniquifying.

It is clear that Islam is monotheistic.

Paul being the henotheist that he is says:

“For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)

“And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in them that perish: in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them.” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)

Paul concedes that there’s a “god of this world” separate from his God. He acknowledges that there are many gods. He just simply says that for him and his sect, they only worship one God, whom they call, ‘The Father’.

The TNCH or what the Christians call the Old Testament is replete with henotheistic passages. The Children of Israel went through different phases worshipping different gods at different times and even had a massive civil war over the matter.

You will notice when studying that you will several names pop up several times. These names are often conflated with the various deities that the Children of Israel worshipped.

Perhaps the most damning evidence is as follows:

“When the Most High gave the nations thier inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For the Lord’s portion is his people, Jacob his alloted inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 32:8-9)

Source: (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2032%3A8-9&version=NIV)

In the source above there is a note that states:

“Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scrolls (see also Septuagint) sons of God.”

How did the transition from “bene Elohim” (sons of God) to “bene Yisrael” (sons of Israel) occur in Deuteronomy 32:8? The timing remains unknown. Whether this change took place during the intertestamental period or at the time of the text’s standardization around 100 AD — we simply do not know when it happened. But this much is certain: a scribe altered the text. Someone deliberately replaced “sons of God” with “sons of Israel.” The exact date of this change is unknown, but the fact that it occurred is beyond dispute. We know this because the Masoretic Text contains the altered reading, while the Dead Sea Scrolls preserve the original. And the Dead Sea Scrolls predate the Masoretic text by a full millennium. Israel is not even in existence when the nations are divided!

A scribe removed the three letters you see in green and added the two letters you see in red.

How does the New Revised Standard Version render the reading?

“When the Most High gave the nations thier inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the gods; For the Lord’s portion is his people, Jacob his alloted inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 32:8-9)

Source: (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2032%3A8-9&version=NRSVA)

What does this mean?

Elyon was to be the god of Jacob and his people. The sons of Elyon. Or the other gods were to be for the other nations. In other words the main God (Elyon) divided Earth up among regional deities.

We this in the following text:

“ Will you not possess whatever Chemosh your god gives you to possess? So whatever the Lord our God takes possession of before us, we will possess.” (Judges 11:24)

It mentions that Chemosh is the god of the Ammonites, just as Israel has their own god.

“You shall have no other gods before/beside me.” (Exodus 20:3)

“You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,” (Exodus 20:5)

“Do not worship any other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.” (Exodus 34:14)

“You shall have no other gods before/beside me.” (Deuteronomy 5:7)

These text are not a denial of other gods or deities. In fact, the above text describe this god as a jealous God.

This understanding of jealousy is a complex, often unpleasant emotion stemming from fear, insecurity, or a perceived threat to a valued relationship or status. It arises when someone feels threatened by a rival.

The way the Bible portrays this jealousy its as if the god of the children of Israel is in a genus. Even though this god acknowledges that he is superior there is a sort of pathological jealousy at play here.

“God stands in the congregation of the mighty; he judges among the gods.” (Pslam 82:1)

This verse indicates a superior deity presiding over lesser beings. A god among gods.

The Qur’an never describes Allah as a god among gods. Rather it negates any other deity except him.

Insh’Allah we will come back to (Pslam 82:1)

There is an interesting connection between Moloch and the god that the Children of Israel worshipped.

“Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, and he blessed Abram, saying, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And praise be to God Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand.Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything.” (Genesis 14:18-20)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

  1. Melchizedek is said to be a priest of God Most High, (Elyon). In other words the chief god.
  2. Melchizedek needs to clarify who the (Elyon) Most High is. He is the Creator of heaven and earth.

“The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek'” (Psalm 110:4)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

Notice that this does not identify or equate the priest as Melchizedek but that he would be priest in his order.

“Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.” (Hebrews 7:3)

Whoever wrote the book of Hebrews must have had some access to extra Biblical data about Melchizedek that we do not know about.

What is interesting is the word translated as Melchizedek: Righteous King can easily be translated as Righteous Moloch.

(Moloch) is a god satiated by human suffering. In particular the sacrifice of innocent children.

He is a god of holocaust. However, anyone who is a Christian will understand a deity who is satiated through the suffering of children, in particular one of his own.

“A divinity worshipped by the idolatrous Israelites. The Hebrew pointing Molech does not represent the original pronunciation of the name, any more than the Greek vocalization Moloch found in the LXX and in the Acts (vii, 43). The primitive title of this god was very probably Melech, “king”, the consonants of which came to be combined through derision with the vowels of the word Bosheth, “shame”. As the word Moloch (A.V. Molech) means king, it is difficult in several places of the Old Testament to determine whether it should be considered as the proper name of a deity or as a simple appellative. The passages of the original text in which the name stands probably for that of a god are Lev., xviii, 21; xx, 2-5; III (A. V. I) Kings, xi, 7; IV (II) Kings, xxiii, 10; Isaiah 30:33; 57:9; Jeremiah 32:35. The chief feature of Moloch’s worship among the Jews seems to have been the sacrifice of children, and the usual expression for describing that sacrifice was “to pass through the fire”, a rite carried out after the victims had been put to death. The special centre of such atrocities was just outside of Jerusalem, at a place called Tophet (probably “place of abomination”), in the valley of Geennom. According to III (I) Kings, xi, 7, Solomon erected “a temple” for Moloch “on the hill over against Jerusalem”, and on this account he is at times considered as the monarch who introduced the impious cult into Israel. After the disruption, traces of Moloch worship appear in both Juda and Israel. The custom of causing one’s children to pass through the fire seems to have been general in the Northern Kingdom [IV (II) Kings, xvii, 17; Ezech. xxiii, 37], and it gradually grew in the Southern, encouraged by the royal example of Achaz (2 Kings 16:3) and Manasses [IV (II) Kings, xvi, 6] till it became prevalent in the time of the prophet Jeremias (Jerem. xxxii, 35), when King Josias suppressed the worship of Moloch and defiled Tophet [IV (II) Kings, xxiii, 13 (10)]. It is not improbable that this worship was revived under Joakim and continued until the Babylonian Captivity.”

Source: (https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10443b.htm)

“Aaron answered them, “Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me.” So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods,[b] Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”  When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, “Tomorrow there will be a festival to the Lord.” So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry. Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt.  They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’” (Exodus 32:2-8)

Prima Qur’an comments:

  1. Prophet Aaron is claimed to have made an idol in the shape of a calf.
  2. The people also said: These are your gods (plural) that brought you (Israel) out of Egypt.
  3. The god that is speaking to moses reaffirms the above two points. Especially: “These are your gods,Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”

Notice the translation is not sure if the word should be gods or god. However, it is clarified in what was said to Moses by the god that spoke to him. That the people were claiming gods (plural) brought them out of Egypt.

Is it not very odd that it is claimed a prophet and servant of the One True God who witnessed miracles would so quickly go and do something like this in the absence of his brother (Moses)?

No one seems to the object to the idea that gods (not god) brought them out of Egypt.

During the civil war of Israel the following happened.

“After seeking advice, the king made two golden calves. He said to the people, “It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem. Here are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”  One he set up in Bethel, and the other in Dan. And this thing became a sin; the people came to worship the one at Bethel and went as far as Dan to worship the other.” (1 Kings 12:28-30)

Jewish Rabbis have debates about what type of worship of Molech is acceptable and what is not.

The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 64a):

“HE WHO GIVES OF HIS SEED TO MOLECH INCURS NO PUNISHMENT UNLESS HE DELIVERS IT TO MOLECH AND CAUSES IT TO PASS THROUGH THE FIRE. IF HE GAVE IT TO MOLECH BUT DID NOT CAUSE IT TO PASS THROUGH THE FIRE, OR THE REVERSE, HE INCURS NO PENALTY, UNLESS HE DOES BOTH.”

Source: (https://www.sefaria.org/English_Explanation_of_Mishnah_Sanhedrin.7.7.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

Observation: The rabbis are parsing the precise act that constitutes a capital offense. Both elements are required: (1) delivering to Molech’s priests, and (2) causing the child to pass through fire.

The Gemara Discussion:

“R. Abin said: Our Mishnah is in accordance with the view that Molech worship is not idolatry. For it has been taught, whether to Molech or to any other idol he is liable. R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon said: If to Molech, he is liable; if to another idol, he is not.”

This is striking. Some rabbis consider Molech worship not to be idolatry — or at least different in kind from other idol worship. Why?

“R. Hanina b. Antigonus said: Why did the Torah employ the word Molech? To teach that the same law applies to whatever they proclaimed as their king, even a pebble or a splinter.”

Molech is not necessarily a specific deity — it is any deity to whom one transfers sovereignty (“king”) over oneself. The rabbis are working hard to define the boundary.

The Critical Question the Rabbis Are Avoiding

If a Jew offered his child as a burnt offering to Yahweh, would that be permitted?

The rabbis do not address this directly. But their silence is telling.

Jephthah in Rabbinic Literature:

The Talmud (Ta’anit 4a) and later rabbinic commentary do address Jephthah — and they are highly critical of him. The general rabbinic view is that Jephthah should have sought to annul his vow through a sage, and that his failure to do so resulted in tragedy. Some rabbis even say he was punished for his foolishness (losing parts of his body, dying unnaturally).

However — and this is crucial — the rabbis never say that what Jephthah did was inherently impossible or categorically forbidden. They criticize his failure to seek annulment, not the act of human sacrifice itself. They also note that his daughter (like Isaac) was willing.

The Nakdimon Connection

One of the most revealing texts appears in the Babylonian Talmud (Nedarim 37a) and is cited in the Soncino commentary on Sanhedrin 64a. Rabbi Dr. Freedman, the translator, notes:

“The offering of children to Molech was not regarded as ordinary idolatry, but as a distinct offence. One reason is that it involved the destruction of one’s seed — an act of cruelty which even pagans normally did not practice. Another is that it was sometimes done in the name of the Lord, as in the case of Jephthah.”

Read that again: “It was sometimes done in the name of the Lord, as in the case of Jephthah.”

The rabbis knew that child sacrifice had been performed in Israel in the name of Yahweh. They were not condemning the practice universally — they were trying to regulate it, to distinguish between “legitimate” (Yahwistic) and “illegitimate” (pagan) contexts.

There is an entire discussion about it here:

https://come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_64.html#64a_20

The god of Israel (Yahweh) is apparently satiated by human suffering. In particular the sacrifice of innocent children.


In (2 Samuel 21), David is king over Judah. A famine oppresses the land; King David learns that LORD God is punishing Israel for King Saul’s sin (Saul attacked the Gibeonites in violation of Joshua’s treaty (Joshua 9:15). Therefore, in order to relieve the famine, David must appease the Gibeonites. On negotiation, the Gibeonites demand to be given seven descendants of Saul to be hanged “unto the LORD.” David picks two of Saul’s sons and five of Saul’s grandsons. Coincidentally, the five grandsons are the children of Michal, the woman David had wanted to marry (see 1 Samuel 18:25). David gives these Israelites to the Gibeonites so the Gibeonites can hang them.

“Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David inquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites.
And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.) Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD? And the Gibeonites said unto him, We will have no silver nor gold of Saul, nor of his house; neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Israel. And he said, What ye shall say, that will I do for you. And they answered the king, The man that consumed us, and that devised against us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel, Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD in Gibeah of Saul, whom the LORD did choose. And the king said, I will give them. But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of the LORD’s oath that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul. But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite: And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning of barley harvest.” Source: (2 Samuel 21:1-11)

Prima Qur’an Comments: The God (Elyon) did not explicitly request the hangings. But The God (Elyon) imposed an insufferable famine on the Israelites, The God (Elyon) named the Gibeonites as the people to be appeased, and the Gibeonites named the penalty. When it was done, The God (Elyon) apparently found the human sacrifice to be satisfactory: the chapter continues with accounts of battles, and the famine is not mentioned further. This sequence — an angry god causes a natural disaster, innocent life is slain to appease the god’s anger, and the hardship ceases — this is the same sequence of events found in the human sacrifice rites of other primitive religions.

The God (Elyon) of the Bible did not stop Jephthah from burning his small daughter if the God (Elyon)gave him victory over his enemies.

“Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: “If you give the Ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.” Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon. When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh no, my daughter! You have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.” “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. But grant me this one request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry.” “You may go,” He said. And he let her go for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin. (Judges 11:29-39)

Prima Qur’an Comments: Now there is major major copium from Christians and Jews regarding this.

Copium # 1. They try and put a spin that the sacrifice is to dedicate his daughter to the Lord as a virgin (meaning temple service) and Jephthah bemoaned that due this he would never have any descendants.
Response: and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering & After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed The emphasis on her being a virgin is so she would be an unblemished sacrificed.

Copium #2. The God (Elyon) commands against sacrificing Children in the Bible.

    Response. No, no he doesn’t!

    “You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the Lord.” (Leviticus 18:21)

    “I will also set My face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given some of his offspring to Molech, so as to defile My sanctuary and to profane My holy name.” (Leviticus 20:3)

    “You shall not behave thus toward the Lord your God, for every abominable act which the Lord hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.” (Deuteronomy 12:31)

    As well as the related practice of passing the children through the fire and not consuming them by the fire:

    “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer.” (Deuteronomy 18:10)

    “You shall also say to the sons of Israel: ‘Any man from the sons of Israel or from the aliens sojourning in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Molech, shall surely be put to death; the people of the land shall stone him with stones.” (Leviticus 20:2)

    Offering your children up as a burnt offering is not against the Torah teachings of the Jews. Nor was it something unacceptable to God. The offence in question was offering them up to Molech and NOT THE GOD (ELYON) OF ISRAEL!

    “For I the Lord your God am a jealous God.” (Daniel 5:9)

    This god that they worshipped is not against sacrifice or burnt offerings as we have already shown above. Their god

    There is no issue with offering up children as a holocaust (burnt offering) to their god. The issue is doing it to false gods.

    “They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molek, though I never commanded—nor did it enter my mind—that they should do such a detestable thing and so make Judah sin.” (Jeremiah 32:35)

    Because the Elyon, The High God of the Bible is jealous.

    Did we forget?

    “After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Genesis 22:1-2)

    The Angel of the Lord as Satan and one of the gods among gods in the Bible.

    In the Hebrew Bible, ha-satan (הַשָּׂטָן) is not a proper name but a title: “the Adversary” or “the Accuser” . This figure appears in the divine council — the assembly of elohim (divine beings) over which Elyon presides as supreme. Ha-Satan is not a rival god or a fallen angel — he is a subordinate being within Elyon’s administration. As one scholar puts it: “The Satan is a member of the divine council, serving as a sort of prosecutor or royal spy” (Peggy L. Day, An Adversary in Heaven).

    “I was further shown Joshua, the high priest, standing before the angel of GOD, and the Accuser (Satan) standing at his right to accuse him. But [the angel of] GOD said to the Accuser (Satan), “GOD rebukes you, O Accuser; GOD who has chosen Jerusalem rebukes you! For this is a brand plucked from the fire.”

    Source: (https://www.sefaria.org/Zechariah.3?lang=bi (Zechariah 3:2)

    Here you have Ha-Satan standing at the right hand of the Angel of the LORD to accuse Joshua the high priest. Elyon (the Most High God) rebukes Ha-Satan.

    “One day the divine beings presented themselves before GOD. The Adversary came along with them to present himself before GOD. GOD said to the Adversary, “Where have you been?” The Adversary answered GOD, “I have been roaming all over the earth.” GOD said to the Adversary, “Have you noticed My servant Job? There is no one like him on earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and shuns evil. He still keeps his integrity; so you have incited Me against him to destroy him for no good reason. The Adversary answered GOD, “Skin for skin—all that the man has he will give up for his life. But lay a hand on his bones and his flesh, and he will surely blaspheme You to Your face.” So GOD said to the Adversary, “See, he is in your power; only spare his life.”The Adversary departed from GOD’s presence and inflicted a severe inflammation on Job from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head.”

    Source: (https://www.sefaria.org/Job.1.22?lang=bi (Job 2:1-7)

    Here you have Ha-Satan appearing among the bene ha-elohim (sons of God) and acting as a prosecuting attorney, testing Job’s righteousness with Elyon’s permission. He is not an enemy of Elyon but a member of His court.

     The Angel of the LORD as a Satan in Numbers 22

    This is a fascinating and often overlooked passage.

    The Narrative: Balaam is hired by Balak of Moab to curse Israel. He consults God (Elyon) who tells him not to go. Balak sends more prestigious messengers; Balaam asks again; God (Elyon)permits him to go but with conditions. On the way:

    “But God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the Angel of the LORD stationed himself in the road as an adversary (satan) against him.” (Numbers 22:22)

    Analysis:

    • The Hebrew word used for “adversary” is precisely לְשָׂטָן (l’satan) — “as a satan.”
    • The Angel of the LORD — generally understood as a manifestation of God (Elyon) Himself (since the Angel speaks as God and is worshipped as God elsewhere) — functions as an obstructor or adversary to Balaam.
    • This same Angel later permits Balaam to continue (Numbers 22:35).

    What this means: God (Elyon)through His Angel) acts as both a guide and an adversary. The same being who permits Balaam to go also stands in his way as a satan. This shows that the role of “adversary” is not a separate being but a function that even God(Elyon) can perform.

    As one commentary notes: “The Angel of the LORD acts as Balaam’s ‘adversary’ (satan)… This is the only place in the Old Testament where the Angel of the LORD is explicitly called a satan” (Gordon Wenham, Numbers).

    “O Lord, you have deceived me, and I was deceived; you are stronger than I, and you have prevailed.” (Jeremiah 20:7)

    Henotheism is the worship of one primary deity while accepting the existence of other gods within a pantheon. It is sort of a pantheon.  As a middle ground between polytheism and monotheism, it allows followers to focus devotion on a single “king god”—such as Zeus, Odin, or in some forms of Hinduism—while recognizing other divine beings.

    This is why we can have text like the following:

    Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.” (2 Samuel 24:1)

    “Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.” (1 Chronicles 21:1)

    This would seem to be a contradiction but when we realize that they are basically one and the same it makes sense from a henotheistic worldview.

    The biblical divine council — with its bene ha-elohim, ha-satan as prosecutor, and the Angel of the LORD as a distinct yet divine figure — is not compatible with Islamic tawhid (radical monotheism). Whether the figure in question is called Baal, Molech, Yahweh, or Ha-Satan, the Qur’an would reject any theology that places other divine beings beside Allah.

    Qur’an Surah 112 has been shown to absolutely demolish this framework.

    Yahweh seems to be a sort of tribal war deity or war angel as presented in the TNCH. The part of the Bible the Christians call: ‘The Old Testament.’

    The term Tzva’ot refers to armies or hosts. (Hebrew: Yahweh Tzva’ot) is a divine title in the Bible appearing over 200 times, primarily in the Old Testament, designating Yahweh as the god over all heavenly and earthly armies.

    “Yahweh of Armies is with us. The God of Jacob is our refuge. “ (Pslam 46:7)

    “Each year Elkanah would travel to Shiloh to worship and sacrifice to the LORD of Heaven’s Armies at the Tabernacle. The priests of the LORD at that time were the two sons of Eli—Hophni and Phinehas.” (1 Samuel 1:3)

    “The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name.” (Exodus 15:3)

    You even have henotheistic views put in the mouth of the One True God’s Prophets!

    “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God (τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεόν), and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3)

    Here he could have simply said “only God.” By adding “true” (ἀληθινός), he leaves open the possibility that other beings exist who could be called “gods” (elohim) — but they are not the true God.

    The Jehovah’s Witness have translated John 1:1 as:

    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1)

    https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/bible-verses/john-1-1/

    Source: (https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/bible-verses/john-1-1/)

    They make Moses say the following:

    “Who among the gods is like you, Lord?” (Exodus 15:11)

    “For the Lord is the great God, the great King above all gods.” (Pslam 95:3)

    This is far from monotheism. This is far from what is presented in the Qur’an.

    Is it little wonder we those socities that succumb to these beliefs ridden with demonic forces? Even the innocent among them they have no idea what they are even worshipping! May Allah Guide these people to the truth before the burn in hellfire.

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    April 15, 2026 · 2:43 pm

    Osmanlı İmparatorluğu, Hz. Muhammed’in (sav) sözdesoyundan gelenler tarafından ihanete uğratıldı.

    “Bilin ki dünya hayatı, bir oyun, bir eğlence, bir gösteriş, aranızda bir övünme, mal ve evlâtta bir çokluk yarışından ibarettir. Tıpkı bir yağmur gibi ki bitirdikleri çiftçileri imrendirir, sonra kurumaya yüz tutar, bir de bakarsın ki sararmıştır, ardından da çerçöp haline gelmiştir. Âhirette ise ya çetin bir azap yahut Allah’ın bağışlaması ve hoşnutluğu vardır. Dünya hayatı sadece aldatıcı bir yararlanmadan başka bir şey
    değildir.” (Hadîd, 57/20) — Kaynak: Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı Meali.

    “Ey insanlar! Şüphesiz sizi bir erkek ile bir dişiden yarattık, tanışasınız diye sizi kavim ve kabilelere ayırdık, Allah katında en değerli olanınız O’na itaatsizlikten en fazla sakınanınızdır. Allah her şeyi hakkıyla ilmektedir, her şeyden haberdardır.” (Hucurât,49/13) — Kaynak: Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı Meali.

    ﷽ 

    Bu makaleye “Peygamber’in (sav) sözde soyundan gelenler” başlığını verdik; zira Peygamber’in (sav) doğrudan devam eden bir nesep hattı yoktur. Allah’ın Resûlü’nün (sav) erkek çocukları—Kāsım, Abdullah ve İbrahim (Allah onları rahmetiyle kuşatsın)—henüz küçük yaşta vefat ettikleri için, onun doğrudan baba tarafından gelen soy çizgisi (nesep) sona ermiştir.

    İslâm geleneğinde nesep, esas itibarıyla baba üzerinden takip edilir.

    Nesep Erkekler Üzerinden Devam Eder: İslâm geleneğinde nesep, baba üzerinden belirlenir. Peygamber’in (sav) bütün erkek çocukları küçük yaşta vefat ettiğinden, onun doğrudan biyolojik soy hattı sona ermiştir.

    Soy Kızları Üzerinden Devam Eder: Kızlarının çocukları olan Hasan ve Hüseyin gibi isimler, doğru şekilde kendi babalarına, yani Ali b. Ebû Tâlib’e nispet edilir. Onlar Peygamber’in (sav) ailesindendir (Ehl-i Beyt); ancak onun doğrudan nesebinden değildir.

    Yahudi kimliğinin belirlenmesinde anne soyu esas alınır (rabbanî hukukta). Bu, soyun anne üzerinden takip edildiği Rabbanî Yahudiliğin yerleşik uygulamasıdır.

    İslâm Hukuku ile Karşılaştırma

    İslâm’da:

    Nesep baba üzerinden takip edilir. Annenin kimliği her zaman bilinir; ancak hukukî nesep babaya bağlanır.

    Farkın Özeti

    Nesep, doğrudan baba tarafından gelen kan bağı yahut soydur. Babalar üzerinden takip edilen resmî ve hukukî soy çizgisidir.

    Torun/soyundan gelen kişi ise belirli bir atadan türeyen kimsedir. Bu, hem baba hem de anne hattı üzerinden olabilir. Dolayısıyla “sözde soyundan gelen” dediğimizde, bunun göz önünde bulundurulması yerinde olacaktır.

    Buradaki kritik ayrım şudur: Klasik İslâm hukukunda, bir kimse Peygamber’in (sav) kızları aracılığıyla—Hasan ve Hüseyin örneğinde olduğu gibi—onun soyundan gelen biri sayılabilse de, nesep baba üzerinden takip edildiği için onun doğrudan nesebinin bir parçası kabul edilmez. Aksine, bu kişiler kendi babalarının soyuna, yani Ali b. Ebû Tâlib’in nesebine nispet edilirler.

      Nesebin Korunması

      İslâm hukukunda açık ve belirli bir nesep, hukukun temel amaçlarından biri olarak kabul edilir (makāsıdü’ş-şerîa kapsamında). Kur’an, kişilerin babaları üzerinden tanımlanmasına güçlü bir vurgu yapar.

      Bu husus, Müslüman erkeklerin birden fazla eşle evlenebilmesine karşılık Müslüman kadınların birden fazla kocaya sahip olamamasının niçinlerinden biri olarak ileri sürülen temel argümanlardan biridir.

      “Onları babalarına nisbet ederek çağırın. Allah yanında en doğrusu budur.” (Ahzâb, 33/5) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali.

      Ahzâb sûresinin 33/5. âyeti çerçevesinde, bir kişi babasına nispet edilerek anılır. Peygamber’in biyolojik erkek evladı bulunmadığından, bu özel ve hukukî anlamda “Muhammed’in oğlu” diye adlandırılabilecek hiç kimse yoktur.

      Allah, sevgili Peygamberimize Kevser’i lütfetmiştir.

      “(Resûlüm!) Kuşkusuz biz sana Kevser’i verdik. Şimdi sen Rabbine kulluk et ve kurban kes. Asıl soyu kesik olan, şüphesiz sana hınç besleyendir.” (Kevser, 108/1-3) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali.

      Kur’an’dan delil: Makale, Kevser sûresini ve bu sûrenin klasik tefsirini, yani İbn Kesîr tefsirini, Peygamber’in çağdaşlarının onu, hayatta kalan erkek evladı bulunmadığı için “ebter” diye niteleyerek alaya aldıklarını göstermek üzere kullanmaktadır. Allah’ın cevabı, gerçekte soyu kesik olanın ona hınç besleyen kimse olduğunu bildirmek şeklinde gelmiştir. Allah’ın cevabı, mübarek Peygamber’in vârislerinin bulunduğu
      yönünde onların iddiasını reddetmek biçiminde olmamıştır.

      İbn Kesîr Tefsiri’nden: Kevser sûresinin 1-3. âyetlerinin nüzul sebebi

      Peygamber’in düşmanı, asıl soyu kesik olandır. Allah Teâlâ şöyle buyurur: “Asıl soyu gelmeyecek olan, sana karşı nefret duyandır.” (Kevser, 108/3) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali. Bunun anlamı şudur: Ey Muhammed! Sana kin besleyen, senin getirdiğin hidayete, apaçık hakikate, kesin delile ve açık nura düşmanlık eden kimse; gerçekte en çok itibarsızlaşan, en aşağı düşen ve adı sanı anılmayacak olan kişidir.

      İbn Abbas, Mücâhid, Saîd b. Cübeyr ve Katâde şöyle demiştir: “Bu âyet, Âs b. Vâil hakkında nazil olmuştur. Allah Resûlü onun yanında anıldığında o, ‘Bırakın onu; çünkü o, nesli devam etmeyen bir adamdır. Öldüğünde artık hatırlanmayacaktır’ derdi. Bunun üzerine Allah bu sûreyi indirdi.”

      Şemir b. Atıyye şöyle demiştir: “Bu sûre, Ukbe b. Ebû Muayt hakkında nazil oldu.” İbn Abbas ile İkrime de şöyle demiştir: “Bu sûre, Ka‘b b. Eşref ve Kureyş müşriklerinden bir grup hakkında nazil oldu.” Bezzâr’ın İbn Abbas’tan rivayet ettiğine göre, Ka‘b b. Eşref Mekke’ye gelmiş, Kureyş de ona şöyle demişti: “Sen onların efendisi ve önderisin. Halkından kopmuş bu değersiz adam hakkında ne düşünüyorsun? O,
      kendisinin bizden üstün olduğunu iddia ediyor; oysa hac mekânının hizmetini gören, Kâbe’nin bakımını üstlenen ve hacılara su temin eden biziz.” Ka‘b da, “Siz ondan daha hayırlısınız” diye cevap verdi. Bunun üzerine Allah Teâlâ şöyle buyurdu: “Asıl soyu gelmeyecek olan, sana karşı nefret duyandır.” (Kevser, 108/3) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali. Bezzâr bu olayı böyle rivayet etmiş ve isnadının sahih olduğunu belirtmiştir.

      Atâ’dan nakledildiğine göre şöyle demiştir: “Bu sûre, Allah Resûlü’nün oğullarından birinin vefatı üzerine Ebû Leheb hakkında nazil oldu. Ebû Leheb müşriklerin yanına gidip, ‘Muhammed bu gece nesli kesilmiş biri hâline geldi’ dedi.” Bunun üzerine Allah Teâlâ şu âyeti indirdi: “Asıl soyu gelmeyecek olan, sana karşı nefret duyandır.” (Kevser, 108/3) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali.

      Süddî şöyle demiştir: “Bir adamın erkek çocukları öldüğünde insanlar, ‘Onun soyu kesildi’ derlerdi. Allah Resûlü’nün oğulları vefat edince de, ‘Muhammed’in soyu kesildi’ dediler. Bunun üzerine Allah Teâlâ şu âyeti indirdi: ‘Asıl soyu gelmeyecek olan, sana karşı nefret duyandır.’ (Kevser, 108/3) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali.” Böylece onlar, kendi cehaletleri içinde, oğulları öldüğünde onun adının ve
      hatırasının da silineceğini zannettiler. Hâşâ! Aksine Allah, onun zikrini bütün âlemler boyunca kalıcı kılmış ve bütün kullarına onun şeriatine uymayı gerekli kılmıştır. Bu durum kıyamet gününe ve âhiretin başlangıcına kadar sürecektir. Allah’ın salât ve selâmı, toplanma gününe kadar ebediyen onun üzerine olsun. Kevser sûresinin tefsiri burada sona ermektedir. Hamd ve nimet Allah’a mahsustur.

      Kaynak: Qur’anx, İbn Kesîr Tefsiri, 108:1.

      Dikkat edilirse, bu kişiler Mübarek Peygamber’in kızları bulunduğunu gayet iyi biliyorlardı: “Bırakın onu; çünkü o, nesli devam etmeyen bir adamdır.”

      Gerçekte babanız olmayan birini baba olarak ileri sürmek küfürdür.

      Ebû Zerr’den rivayet edildiğine göre Allah Resûlü şöyle buyurmuştur: Kendi babası olduğunu bildiği hâlde bir başkasını bilerek babası olarak ileri süren hiçbir kimse yoktur ki bu davranışı küfür sayılmasın. Kendisinde bulunmayan bir şeyi iddia eden kimse bizden değildir; artık cehennemdeki yerini hazırlasın. Her kim bir başkasını kâfir veya Allah’ın düşmanı diye nitelendirir de o kimse gerçekte böyle
      değilse, bu söz dönüp kendisine yönelir.

      Kaynak: Müslim, Îmân, 61. Diyanet yayınlarında, kişinin kendisini babasından başkasına nispet etmesi ağır biçimde yasaklanan fiiller arasında zikredilir.

      Sa‘d şöyle rivayet etmiştir:

      Allah Resûlü’nün şöyle buyurduğunu işittim: “Kendi babası olmadığını bile bile, babası dışında bir kimsenin oğlu olduğunu iddia eden kişiye cennet haramdır.” Ebû Bekre’ye bunu söylediğimde o da, “Bunu kulaklarım işitti ve kalbim Allah Resûlü’nden ezberledi” dedi. — Kaynak: Buhârî, Ferâiz, 29; Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı yayını Hadislerle İslâm.

      Bir kimseye nesebi sebebiyle kin beslemeyiz. Aynı şekilde, bir kimseyi sırf nesebine dayanarak da övmeyiz.

      Bu son derece güçlü bir vurgudur. Çünkü Mübarek Peygamber’in mirası, çok sayıda nesil bırakmış olmasına dayanmaz; zira Allah bu imkânı ondan almıştır. Onun mirası manevî bir mirastır. İslâm’a gelen herkes, bu kaynaktan nasibini alır. Mübarek Peygamber’i kabul eden kimse kopmuş değil, bilakis bu mirasa eklemlenmiş olur.

      İslâm toplumu, falan ya da filan kişiden geldiğini iddia eden birinin yönlendirmesine açık olmamalıdır. Bilakis, İslâm toplumuna en takvâ sahibi, en diğerkâm ve en âdil kimseler önderlik etmelidir.

      Ebû Hüreyre’den rivayet edildiğine göre:

      Peygamberimiz şöyle buyurmuştur: “Allah, câhiliyenin kibir ve atalarla övünme duygusunu sizden uzaklaştırmıştır. İnsan ya takvâ sahibi bir mümindir yahut bedbaht bir günahkârdır. Sizler Âdem’in oğullarısınız. Âdem ise topraktandır. Bir kısım insanlar var ki, cehennem kömüründen başka bir şey olmayan adamlarla övünür. Bunlar ya bu övünmeden vazgeçer ya da Allah nezdinde, pisliği burunlarıyla
      yuvarlayan mayıs böceklerinden daha değersiz olurlar.” Kaynak: Ebû Dâvûd, Edeb, 120; Ahmed b. Hanbel, Müsned, II, 161.

      Müslüman ümmet içerisinde yaygın olan bazı değerlendirmelere göre, İslâm tarihinin en büyük ve en güçlü Sünnî hilafetlerinden biri olarak kabul edilen Osmanlı Devleti, zaman içerisinde çeşitli iç ve dış dinamiklerin etkisiyle zayıflama sürecine girmiştir. Bu bağlamda, Muhammed b. Abdülvehhâb hakkında sıkça ileri sürülen iddialardan biri, onun Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’na karşı bir isyan hareketi başlattığı yönündedir.

      Bununla birlikte, söz konusu iddiaya karşı geliştirilen yaklaşımlara göre, Muhammed b. Abdülvehhâb Osmanlı idaresi altında bulunan bir bölgede yaşamamıştır. Zira Arap Yarımadası’nın iç kesimlerinde yer alan Necid bölgesi, ilgili dönemde farklı Arap kabileleri tarafından yönetilmekte olup doğrudan Osmanlı merkezi idaresine tâbi bir bölge niteliği taşımamaktaydı.

      Bu çerçevede öne çıkan bir diğer husus, Osmanlı Devleti’nin son döneminde meydana gelen siyasî ve askerî gelişmelerde, Britanya İmparatorluğu ile iş birliği içinde hareket eden ve kendisini Hz. Peygamber’in soyundan gelen bir şahsiyet olarak takdim eden Hüseyin b. Ali’nin oynadığı roldür.

      Bu yaklaşım doğrultusunda, Osmanlı yönetimine karşı çıkan unsurlar arasında Eş‘arî/Şâfiî çizgisine mensup çevrelerin yanı sıra, Resûlullah’ın soyundan geldiklerini ileri süren bazı şahısların da bulunduğu ileri sürülmektedir. Bu durumun, Matürîdî/Hanefî karakter taşıyan Osmanlı yönetimine karşı belirgin bir siyasî ve toplumsal ayrışma sürecini beraberinde getirdiği değerlendirilmektedir.

      Nihayetinde, söz konusu iş birliğinin en dikkat çekici figürleri arasında Şerif Hüseyin b. Ali ile Arabistanlı Lawrence’ın yer aldığı ifade edilmektedir. Hüseyin b. Ali, Britanyalıların hilesine kapıldı. Bu da, bugün birçok Müslüman ülkede gördüğümüz kaosun tetikleyicilerinden biri hâline geldi.

      Büyük ihtimalle Britanyalılar, Hüseyin b. Ali’ye Türk hilafetinin yerine bir Arap hilafeti kurulacağına dair birtakım vaatlerde bulundular. Ne var ki bu, Britanya’nın yerine getirmeyi hiçbir zaman düşünmediği bir vaatti.

      Onlar birbirlerinin koruyucuları, destekçileri ve müttefikleridir.

      Britanya ile Fransa arasında yürütülen ve 1916 tarihli Sykes-Picot Anlaşması’yla sonuçlanan gizli müzakereler, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun bütünüyle iki güç arasında fiilen yeniden paylaştırılmasına yol açtı. Bunu daha sonra, Britanya’nın Filistin’de Yahudi halkı için bir millî yurt kurulmasına verdiği desteği güvence altına alan Balfour Deklarasyonu izledi. Esasen bu, İşgal Altındaki Filistin’in yaratılmasıdır; bazı
      çevrelerde buna “İsrail” de denilmektedir.

      Buna karşılık Hüseyin, anlaşılan Britanya desteğine yeterince ikna olmuş olacak ki, Haziran 1916’da Osmanlılara karşı Arap İsyanı’nın başlatıldığını ilân etti. Britanya kuvvetlerinin Arap güçlerini desteklemesiyle birlikte, Hicaz bölgesi, Arap Yarımadası, Akabe ve Şam üzerinde hâkimiyet kurmayı başardılar.

      1918’in sonlarında Hüseyin’in oğlu Faysal Şam’a girdi ve orada, Britanyalılarla babası arasında var olduğuna inandığı mutabakata uygun bir idarî yapı kurmaya başladı. Mart 1920’de Büyük Suriye’nin —Suriye, Transürdün, Filistin ve Lübnan’ın— yabancı güçlerin yönetiminden bağımsız olduğu ilân edildi ve Faysal’ın kral olduğu meşrutî bir monarşi kuruldu. Bu adım, Fransa’nın bölgedeki çıkarlarına doğrudan meydan okuyordu. Nisan 1920’deki San Remo Konferansı’nda Fransa’nın Suriye üzerindeki hak iddiası resmîleştirildi ve Suriye Fransız mandası altına alındı. Bu karar ve Faysal’ın anlaşma şartlarını kabul ederek boyun eğmesi, şiddetli karışıklıklara yol açtı. Temmuz ayında Fransız kuvvetleri bu karışıklıkları kolay bir zaferle bastırdı ve Faysal’ı sürgüne gönderdi.

      Daha fazla bilgi için Hüseyin-McMahon yazışmalarını, San Remo Konferansı’nı ve Balfour Deklarasyonu’nu okuyabilirsiniz. Böylece Müslümanların, hangi toprağın kime ait olacağı konusunda gayrimüslimler tarafından nasıl yönlendirildiğini bütün yönleriyle görmüş olursunuz.

      Mübarek Peygamber’in sözde üç torunları. Bunlardan biri Britanya’nın bir vekiline dönüşmüştü.


      Peygamber Muhammed’in (sav) sözde soyundan gelen bu kişilerden ikisi, yani Faysal b. Hüseyin b. Ali el-Hâşimî ile Ali b. Hüseyin, Britanyalılarla iş birliği hususunda ihtiyatlı olunmasını tavsiye etmişti.

      Peygamber Muhammed’in (sav) sözde soyundan gelen bir diğer isim ise Abdullah b. Avval b. el-Hüseyin’di. Abdullah, kardeşi Faysal’a—yani Peygamber’in (sav) sözde soyundan gelen bir başkasına—Fransızlara karşı yardım etmek yerine, Winston Churchill’den bir “çay daveti” kabul etti. Churchill, Abdullah’ı kardeşine küffara karşı yardım etmemesi yönünde ikna etti.

      Abdullah, Müslümanların aleyhine olacak şekilde Britanyalılarla iş birliği yapılmasını tavsiye etti. Britanyalıların desteğiyle büyük ölçüde mükâfatlandırıldı; bu süreçte Yarbay Frederick Peake ile John Bagot Glubb da ona yardımcı oldu.

      Nitekim “Arap Lejyonu”nu onlar kurdular. Gayrimüslimlere gösterdiği sadakat ve elini geri çekmesi karşılığında, 1946’da kendisine bağımsızlık görünümü veren bir statü verildi ve “Kral” Abdullah ilân edildi.

      Kral Abdullah ayrıca, Filistin’in daha küçük Yahudi devletçiklerine bölünmesini öneren “Peel Komisyonu”nu da destekledi. 1947’de Filistin ikiye bölündüğünde, Britanya’nın vekili olan “Kral” Abdullah bunu destekleyen tek kişi oldu.

      Britanya’nın vekili olan “Kral” Abdullah suikasta uğradı; ardından oğlu Talâl b. Abdullah, Britanya’nın vekil devleti olan Ürdün’ün yeni hükümdarı oldu. Ancak bu hükümranlığı yalnızca 13 ay sürdü; zira şizofreni nedeniyle tahttan çekilmeye zorlandı.

      O meşhur “güvenilir” Britanyalı diplomatlar, onu psikiyatrik tedavi bahanesiyle ülkeden uzaklaştırmada rol oynadılar. Kral olduğunda Cenevre’de bir akıl hastanesinde bulunuyordu.

      Allah en iyisini bilir; o hastanede ona neler yapmış olabilirler. Allah en iyisini bilir; o zavallı ruh çocukluğundan itibaren neler yaşadı. İslâm düşmanlarını kuşatan karanlığın sınırı yoktur.

      Tahttan çekilmesinin ardından, arzusunun aksine Suud idaresindeki Hicaz’da yaşamasına izin verilmedi; bunun yerine ömrünün son dönemini İstanbul’daki bir sanatoryumda geçirmeye gönderildi ve 7 Temmuz 1972’de orada vefat etti.

      Hüseyin dört ayrı evlilik yaptı ve aralarında Ürdün Kralı II. Abdullah ile Dubai hükümdarıyla evlenen Prenses Haya’nın da bulunduğu on bir çocuk sahibi oldu.

      1967 Altı Gün Savaşı, Ürdün’ün Batı Şeria’yı kaybetmesiyle sonuçlandı. Bazıları, bu savaşın, Ürdün’ün bazı çevrelerde “İsrail” olarak anılan işgal altındaki Filistin’e toprak devretmesini sağlamak amacıyla kurgulandığını ileri sürmektedir.

      1970 yılında Hüseyin, daha sonra Kara Eylül olarak anılacak süreçte ülkenin güvenliğini tehdit etmelerinin ardından Filistinli savaşçıları Ürdün’den çıkardı.

      “Krallık” makamını taşıyan bu kişi, Filistin Kurtuluş Örgütü uluslararası alanda Filistinlilerin tek temsilcisi olarak tanındıktan sonra, 1988’de Ürdün’ün Batı Şeria ile bağlarını kesti. Böylece Filistinlileri fiilen kendi başlarına bıraktı.

      “Kral” Hüseyin’in Lisa Halaby ile evliliği.

      Mübarek Resûl’ün soyundan geldiklerine inanan ve bu sebeple kendi soylarının diğer bütün soy çizgilerinden üstün olduğunu düşünen kimseler açısından gerçekten şaşırtıcı olan şudur: El-Hüseyin b. Talal, evlenebileceği onca sözde şerife kadın arasından Toni Avril Gardiner’a yönelmiştir. Nasıl tanıştıkları yahut ilk teması kimin kurduğu kesin olarak bilinmemektedir. O, Londra’da bir büro çalışanıyken Ürdün’ün “kraliçesi” konumuna yükselmiştir.

      Bu tür istisnalara tekrar tekrar rastlarsınız. Sözde şerif erkeklerden oluşan “üstün bir soy” anlayışını benimseyenlerin gayrimüslim kadınlara yönelmesi böyle bir istisnadır. Güneydoğu Asya’da ise bu durum, çoğu zaman, sözde şerife kadınlar açısından hayal kırıklığı doğurmaktadır; zira onlara, şerif olmayan Müslüman erkeklerle evlenme imkânı dahi tanınmamaktadır. Bunun yerine kendilerine ya akademik bir
      hayat sürmeleri ya da bekâr kalmaları telkin edilmektedir.

      Toni, Hüseyin’den Abdullah es-Sânî b. el-Hüseyin’i dünyaya getirdi; bu kişi “Kral” II. Abdullah olarak da bilinmektedir. Nihayetinde 1971 yılında boşandılar.

      Devam edecek olursak, “Kral” II. Abdullah üçüncü kez evlenmişti ve bu eşi 1977 yılında öldü. Onun ölümünden çok kısa bir süre sonra, 1978’de Amerikalı Lisa Halaby ile evlendi. Nasıl tanıştıkları yahut ilk teması kimin başlattığı kesin olarak bilinmemektedir. Lisa Halaby, sıradan bir Amerikalı kızdan Ürdün’ün “kraliçesi” konumuna yükseldi.

      Argüman: Bağnazlık Değil, Tutarsızlık

      Bu, şahsı hedef alan bir saldırı değildir.

      Biz, “Gayrimüslim bir kadınla evlenmek her durumda yanlıştır ve yozlaşmışlığın delilidir” demiyoruz. Aksine, bu evlilikleri, soy temelli üstünlük anlayışının mantığı içindeki bir ikiyüzlülüğü ortaya koymak için gündeme getiriyoruz.

      Argümanın yapısı şöyledir:

      İddia: Haşimîler ve onları destekleyenler, toplumsal ve siyasî otoritelerini, üstün ve mübarek bir soyun parçası oldukları düşüncesine dayandırmaktadır; yani Hz. Muhammed’in kızı Fâtıma ve onun eşi Ali üzerinden gelen doğrudan soy mensupları oldukları iddiasına.

      Bu iddianın gerektirdiği sonuç: Eğer bu soy gerçekten onların kendilerine has değer ve asaletlerinin kaynağıysa, o hâlde bu soyun korunması ve ona hürmet edilmesi en yüksek derecede önem taşımalıdır. Bu “mübarek soy” içinde evlenmek, onun saflığını ve merkezî konumunu muhafaza etmenin
      mantıkî yolu olurdu.

      Gözlemlenen fiil: Biz, Haşimî kralların —Hüseyin b. Ali’nin oğulları, Kral Hüseyin ve Kral II. Abdullah’ın— yalnızca Haşimî olmayan değil, aynı zamanda Batılı ve gayrimüslim olan kadınlarla (Toni Gardiner, Lisa Halaby) yahut bütünüyle ilgisiz aile çevrelerinden gelen kişilerle yaptıkları tekrar eden
      evliliklere dikkat çekiyoruz.

      Tutarsızlık ithamı: Sorulan soru, “Bir Müslüman erkek nasıl olur da bir Hristiyan kadınla evlenir?” değildir. Asıl soru şudur: “Kimliğiniz ve iktidar iddianız, özel ve seçkin bir gruba mensup olmanıza dayanıyorsa, fiilleriniz neden bu grubun sınırlarını böylesine hiçe saydığınızı göstermektedir?” Bizim söylediğimiz basitçe şudur: Onlar kendi propagandalarına kendileri inanmamaktadır. Soylarını, diğer Müslümanlar üzerinde güç elde etmek için siyasî bir araç olarak kullanmakta; fakat onu, korunması için kendi içinde
      evlenmeyi gerektiren mukaddes bir emanet olarak görmemektedirler.

      “Kral” Abdullah’ın dördüncü “kraliçesi”nin başlıca icraatlarından biri, hımarı, yani takvâ ve salâh elbisesini terk etmesi oldu; oysa bu, dindar Müslüman kadınlar arasında yaygın olan bir örtünme biçimidir. Bugün “Kraliçe Nûr” adıyla anılan Lisa Halaby, dünyanın dört bir yanındaki genç Müslüman kadınlara, eğer kendisi takvâ ve salâh elbisesini giymeyi gerekli görmüyorsa, onların da bunu gerekli görmemeleri
      gerektiğini göstermede başarılı olmuştur.

      Bu gelenek, Ürdün’ün yeni “kralı”nın eşi “Kraliçe Rania” ile de sürmüştür. Takvâ ve salâh elbisesi dışında her şeyle sportif ve şık görünme eğilimi devam etmiştir.

      Şüphesiz bunun, kolay etkilenebilen birçok Müslüman genç üzerinde bıraktığı tesir şu olmuştur: “Vay canına! Demek ki Müslüman kadınların başörtüsü takması gerekmiyormuş!”

      İşte böyle. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun tabutuna çakılan son çivi, Peygamber Muhammed’in sözde soyundan gelenler tarafından çakılmıştır. Bu sözde soy mensupları da ardından, işgal altındaki Filistin dâhil olmak üzere—bazı çevrelerde “İsrail” diye anılan yer de buna dahildir—Müslüman beldelerinin ve topraklarının parça parça bölünmesine yardımcı olmuşlardır.

      Ayrıca Prenses Haya’nın, bugün Dubai’nin yöneticisiyle evli olduğunu da biliyoruz; bu kişinin işgal altındaki Filistin karşısında kayıtsız bir tutum sergilediği görülmektedir.

      Mübarek Peygamber’in sözde doğrudan soyundan gelenler, gerçekte herkes gibi sıradan insanlardır. Onlar da yüksek bir saadet ve doğruluk mertebesine ulaşabilirler. Takvâ ve iyilik alanındaki amelleri hayranlık uyandıracak derecede olabilir. Fakat onlar da herkes gibi beşerî zaaflara, tutkulara, şehvete, arzularda ve ihtiraslarda düşebilirler.

      Onlardan bir kısmı sâlihtir, bağlılık ve yakınlığa lâyıktır; bir kısmı ise habistir, onlardan uzak durulması ve reddedilmesi gerekir.

      Biz, Ali neslinden gelenlerle zahirde görünen hâllerine göre ilişki kurar ve muamele ederiz. Sırf nesep sebebiyle onlara boyun eğmeyiz. Bizi, rehber olarak Kur’an’ı ve Sünnet’i esas alan her Müslüman gibi görebilirsiniz.

      Ey araştırmacı, ey hakikat arayıcıları; size, şimdiye kadar okuyabileceğiniz en tehlikeli kitaplardan birini paylaşacağız.

      Haşimîler, Ehl-i Beyt adına Müslümanları sayılamayacak kadar çok öldürdüler; en doğrusunu Allah bilir. Bu kitap Arapça. Suçlarını ayrıntılarıyla anlatıyor.

      القبيلة-الهاشمية-الطبعة-الرابعةDownload

      “De ki: Ey mülkün gerçek sahibi olan Allahım! Mülkü dilediğine verirsin, dilediğinden çekip alırsın; dilediğini yüceltirsin, dilediğini alçaltırsın. Her türlü iyilik senin elindedir. Şüphesiz sen her şeye kādirsin.” (Âl-i İmrân, 3/26) — Kaynak: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Meali.

      Türk dilinde Ibadi mezhebi

      Allah ümmete hidayet versin. Allah ümmeti affetsin.

      Leave a comment

      Filed under Uncategorized

      Tagged as , , , , ,

      April 14, 2026 · 2:00 am

      Lone narrator reports are not proofs in theology -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al Miqbali

      “And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart – about all those [one] will be questioned.” (Qur’an 17:36)

      ﷽ 

      For the school of the Muslims, the People of the Truth and Steadfastness, for us, the lone narrator reports are not proofs in theology. As for belief the majority of the Ummah (nation) does not accept if for issues of theology.

      However, that being said it should be clearly understood that the entire of the Ummah (nation) of The Blessed Messenger (saw) use the lone narrator reports (ahad) for ahkam/rulings/jurisprudence.

      May Allah (swt) bless the translator. Yet, again another important video for those who are looking into the school of the Muslims, and our beliefs.

      The teacher is Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al Miqbali (h). May Allah continue to benefit the Ummah by him.

      Here is the transcription of the above into English.

      “As for the solitary report (khabar al-wāḥid), we do not build a belief upon it. I will not prolong the discussion on this issue—the issue of not establishing belief on the basis of solitary reports—for it is a matter that is settled from the very first encounter and requires no lengthy exertion.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al Miqbali

      “With a sharp tongue, and the speech of those who argue for its authority, they become entrenched. For when I debated a certain scholar among them during a journey to Egypt on this very issue, I said to him: “O Shaykh—it is astonishing that you do not build a creed upon a ḥadīth whose authenticity you affirm.” We replied: “Yes, a ḥadīth may be authentic, and yet we do not build a belief upon it. Just as a Qur’anic verse is for us certain in its transmission, but we do not build a belief upon it because it belongs to the ambiguous (mutashābih). Regarding the ambiguous, our Lord, may He be glorified and exalted, said: ‘As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow what is ambiguous in it’ — even though it is the Qur’an, yet those who follow it are described as having deviation. So what about ḥadīths and narrations? A ḥadīth may be authentic, with a sound chain of transmission, but no belief is built upon it. Why? Because you yourselves, O noble Shaykh, unanimously hold that the authentication and weakening of a solitary report is a matter of probability (ẓann), not certainty. Is it not so?” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al Miqbali

      “He said, “Indeed.” I said: “If authentication is a matter of probability, and one builds upon probability—cease.” The Shaykh’s donkey stopped at the door of the impasse. He thought and reflected—how he reflected! Then he frowned and scowled. Then he returned with another principle to escape this grip, saying: “Yes, except what is narrated by Bukhārī and Muslim—because the ummah has received them with acceptance.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al

      “I said to him: “This issue requires a separate debate—but you have conceded that the authentic solitary ḥadīth, its authenticity is based on probability, therefore no belief is built upon it. We have agreed on this much, praise be to Allah. As for what remains—what the two Shaykhs (Bukhārī and Muslim) narrated—we will come to that later in the debate.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al

      “When the debate took place, and I confronted the Shaykh with the texts of his own predecessors and imams, that the majority of jurists and ḥadīth scholars had criticized—indeed, they did not equate, they did not distinguish between Bukhārī, Muslim, and others—he said: “Do not bring me al-Nawawī, nor Ibn ‘Abd al-Shakūr, nor these others. Bring me imams whom I regard as authorities.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al

      “I said: “Do you regard Ibn Taymiyyah as an authority?” He said, “Yes.” I said: “Ibn Taymiyyah weakened ḥadīths of Bukhārī in Majmū‘ al-Fatāwā—he weakened more than one authentic ḥadīth. Is this true or not, O our Shaykh?” He said, “It is true.” I said, “Praise be to Allah, you are trapped.” Every preacher says: “This is an imam you regard as an authority. He weakens ḥadīths of Bukhārī.” Is it lawful for you, but forbidden for others? It is forbidden for the birds of every kind, but permissible for you? He says: “Weakened ḥadīths in Bukhārī and Muslim.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al

      “Then the Shaykh said: “This is an issue I will investigate seriously. I will leave you now and close the dialogue to examine the matter thoroughly. Then we will meet again—a serious investigation. A creedal issue requires reconsideration and serious research. This is not strange, because one of the fruits of adopting solitary reports is that some will establish a belief based on a ḥadīth they consider authentic, while another comes, based on the weakness of that same ḥadīth, and demolishes that belief. Therefore, do not be surprised if you find in the books of these people their statement that on this issue—a creedal issue—there are up to thirty opinions. And this is a creedal issue! They say: ‘There is disagreement on the matter’—disagreement over creed.” -Shaykh Massoud bin Mohammed Al

      Prima Qur’an Comments:

      What Shaykh Massoud said is one of our founding principles for establishing a clear belief is to base our faith upon that which is certain.

      “Yes, a ḥadīth may be authentic, and yet we do not build a belief upon it. Just as a Qur’anic verse is for us certain in its transmission, but we do not build a belief upon it because it belongs to the ambiguous (mutashābih).”

      “He it is Who has sent down the Book upon you; therein are verses determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7)

      We have certainty in the transmission of the Qur’an. Yet, Allah (swt) is telling us that the Qur’an has verses that are symbolic (ambiguous) or not fixed upon one understanding.

      Many misunderstand our rejection of an understanding of a hadith as a rejection of the hadith itself. This is an error.

      You may wish to read more about that here:

      Conditions of Takfeer/Excommunicating in the Ibadi School

      May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

      May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

      Leave a comment

      Filed under Uncategorized

      April 13, 2026 · 2:59 am

      Are the prophets and messengers infallible and protected from error? -Shaykh Kahlan bin Nabhan al-Kharusi.

      “That Allah may forgive (liyaghfira) for you (Oh Muhammed) what preceded of your (dhanbika) sins and what will follow and complete His favor upon you and guide you to a straight path.” (Qur’an 48:2)

      ﷽ 

      Title: Are the prophets and messengers infallible and protected from error?

      Attribution: His Eminence Shaykh Kahlan bin Nabhan al-Kharusi

      The translation is from the following video.

      Brother Badr asks: Are the prophets and messengers infallible and protected from error? Adam (as), as he says, made a mistake by eating from the tree. Moses (as) made a mistake by killing the Coptic man. Jonah (as) made a mistake by leaving his village without Allah’s permission. So how do we reconcile what we hear — that the prophets are infallible — with these mistakes?

      Shaykh Kahlan bin Nabhan al-Kharusi responds:

      Questioner: What was the original question?

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Are the prophets and messengers infallible and protected from error?

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Regarding clarification of certain matters: what one finds among scholars on the issue of prophetic infallibility is that their intent in this matter pertains to sins and transgressions, not to mistakes in general.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Sometimes some scholars use the word “mistake,” but they mean sins and transgressions. This must be clear. The discussion on prophetic infallibility relates to committing sins and transgressions.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: This is the first point.

      The second point: There is agreement among Muslim scholars — or the majority of Muslim scholars — on the issue of prophetic infallibility from sins and transgressions. Regarding anything connected to revelation and conveying the message, they are infallible and protected from error or mistake in that.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: And anything that could involve shirk (associating partners with Allah), whether apparent or hidden, they are infallible from it. Likewise, they are unanimously protected from major sins.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: These matters are points of agreement among all scholars.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Among the vast majority of scholars, any opinions to the contrary are anomalous and not given weight.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: The remaining discussion concerns minor sins. Scholars have differing views.

      1. Some hold that minor sins could occur from prophets.
      2. Others say minor sins could occur before prophethood but not after;

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: and some deny the occurrence of minor sins from them altogether.

      Questioner: Yes. May Allah’s prayers and peace be upon them all.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: These are the various positions. According to our scholars, they are free from minor sins both before and after prophethood.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: However, the view that minor sins could possibly occur from them — without persistence in them and without them being left unaddressed — is also a well-known view. Some even report that this is the position of the majority of scholars.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Regarding minor sins without persistence and without being left unaddressed.

      Questioner: Yes. So they do not persist in them, nor do they remain upon them, nor are they left unrebuked.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: And no sin or punishment results from them.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Yes.

      As for those who hold that minor sins are impossible for prophets, both before and after prophethood, how do they interpret what is mentioned in the Book of Allah or authentically reported in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) that appears to involve a sin? They interpret it as doing what is contrary to what is better and more appropriate for the station of prophethood. This station is the highest and most perfect of stations. Therefore, something that is contrary to what is better — inconsistent with the station of prophethood — could occur from them. This is a good interpretation, as it shows proper etiquette toward the prophets of Allah (may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon them all) and interprets their actions in a good and acceptable manner.

      Now we come to some examples that scholars mention: what occurred from Adam (as), what happened with Moses in that incident when he struck the Coptic man and killed him —

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: and what happened with Dhul-Nun (Jonah) when he fled to the laden ship —

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: and some other examples. I say that each of these has an interpretation.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Regarding Adam and his wife eating from the tree, the correct view is that that stage was not a stage of religious obligation (taklif). Yes.

      This has been reported by several exegetes, and it was greatly relied upon by Imam al-Tahir ibn Ashur in Al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir. He reported it, as did others before him, and they mentioned that it is the view of the majority: that stage in Adam’s preparation, training, and upbringing was not a stage of religious obligation but rather a stage of discipline.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Therefore, what occurred from him that appears to be error and disobedience was actually a violation of the discipline of training — violating what was required for his preparation and development. Ibn Ashur gave an example: like the head of a household training his children. When they disobey his command — even if the act itself is not inherently sinful or described as a sin —

      Questioner: Yet it is disobedience to the head of the household’s command, a deviation from his path.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: For example, he tells them, “Do not enter this room,” and they enter.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: So this falls under violation of discipline because it was not a stage of religious obligation. That was not a stage of legal responsibility.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: This is a good interpretation that brings together various points made about the story of Adam and his eating from the tree. Moreover, the noble Qur’an explicitly describes Adam as having forgotten — “And Adam disobeyed his Lord and erred” (Qur’an 20:121) — but he forgot, and no firm resolve was found in him. So it occurred as an oversight and forgetfulness on his part, not as a deliberate intention to disobey Allah’s command.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi:  As for what occurred with Moses (as) — for you asked about it —

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: That was not a sin on Moses’ part but rather an error. Yes.

      He intended to defend the Israelite from the Coptic man because the Coptic man was transgressing.

      Questioner: He was an aggressor.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: So Moses intended to push him away, and he struck him. But Allah decreed that he died from that blow.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: This is accidental killing. Therefore, it is not described as a sin. However, due to the station of prophethood, Moses sought forgiveness from his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed I have wronged myself” (Qur’an 28:16). He sought forgiveness from his Lord because he did not intend that, nor did he want it to happen. It occurred from him while his intention was to forbid evil.

      Questioner: But God decreed what happened.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Yes.

      Thus, what is mentioned in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah(saw) regarding this matter is interpreted in this way.

      In summary, it is important to pay attention to the following: matters related to conveying revelation, shirk (whether apparent or hidden), and major sins — the prophets are infallible in these.

      Questioner: Infallible.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Infallible, peace be upon them.

      As for minor sins, there is a difference of opinion, and the various views have been mentioned. As for errors — those things that are not sins and not within the scope of religious obligations — their situation in this regard is like that of all human beings: they may make a mistake in some matter that is not a sin, for which no legal obligation had been established. And Allah knows best.

      Questioner: Or for which no obligation had previously existed. “May Allah pardon you — why did you give them permission?” (Qur’an 9:43) — for example.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: Yes. This, as I said, is interpreted as doing what is contrary to what is better.

      Questioner: Yes.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi: This is a matter of proper etiquette. It has been said that it was left to their own judgment, and they exercised ijtihad. So the matter is clear. As for those who hold that an error occurred, they describe it as doing what is contrary to what is better. And Allah knows best.

      Questioner: Yes. O my hope, O my hope.

      Prima Qur’an comments.

      Thus, on prophetic infallibility there are four points.

      The discussion on prophetic infallibility relates to committing sins and transgressions.

      1. Regarding anything connected to revelation and conveying the message, they are infallible and protected from error or mistake in that.
      2. And anything that could involve shirk (associating partners with Allah), whether apparent or hidden, they are infallible from it.
      3. As for errors — those things that are not sins and not within the scope of religious obligations — their situation in this regard is like that of all human beings: they may make a mistake in some matter that is not a sin, for which no legal obligation had been established. And Allah knows best
      4. Likewise, they are unanimously protected from major sins.

      Summary:

      1. They are protected from making any mistakes or errors in conveying the revelation.
      2. They do not do anything that involves shirk.
      3. They are not protected from making errors or mistakes in personal ijtihad like all human beings.
      4. They do not commit major sins.

      An example of point 3.

      Musa b. Talha reported:

      I and Allah’s Messenger (saw) happened to pass by people near the date-palm trees. He (the Holy Prophet) said: What are these people doing? They said: They are grafting, i. e. they combine the male with the female (tree) and thus they yield more fruit. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (saw) said: I do not find it to be of any use. The people were informed about it and they abandoned this practice. Allah’s Messenger (saw) (was later) on informed (that the yield had dwindled), whereupon he said: If there is any use of it, then they should do it, for it was just a personal opinion of mine, and do not go after my personal opinion; but when I say to you anything on behalf of Allah, then do accept it, for I do not attribute lie to Allah, the Exalted and Glorious.

      Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:2361)

      The discussion concerns minor sins. There are three views.

      1. Some hold that minor sins could occur from prophets.
      2. Others say minor sins could occur before prophethood but not after.
      3. Some deny the occurence of minor sins from them altogether.

      Shaykh al-Kharusi pauses and corrects himself.

      He says: “According to our scholars, they are free from minor sins both before and after prophethood.”

      Then he corrects himself: “However, the view that minor sins could possibly occur from them — without persistence in them and without them being left unaddressed — is also a well-known view. Some even report that this is the position of the majority of scholars.”

      Some examples from the Qur’an.

      Adam-alayhi salam

      “And We had already taken a promise from Adam before, but he (fanasiya) forgot; and We found not in him determination.” (Qur’an 20:115)

      فَنَسِيَ (fa-nasiya) = “but he forgot” (or “then he forgot”)

      This word for forget or negligence is the wording used to describe the Christians who received the wrath of Allah (swt). However, notice the verse above says: ‘We found not in him determination.’ Meaning persistence in his sin.

      “And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they (fanasu)forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)

      فَنَسُوا (fa-nasū) — “but they forgot” (or “they neglected” / “they abandoned”)

      “Dhu’n-Nun” (the Man of the Whale) and “Sahib al-Hut” (the Companion of the Fish) or Jonah.

      “And [mention] the man of the fish, when he went off in anger and thought that We would not decree [anything] upon him. And he called out within the darknesses, “There is no deity except You; exalted are You. Indeed, I have been of the (l-ẓālimīna) wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 21:87)

      “Then the fish swallowed him, while he was (mulīmun)blameworthy.” (Qur’an 37:142)

      That same word is used in the Qur’an to describe the state of Pharaoh when he was cast into the sea.

      “So We took him and his soldiers and cast them into the sea, and he was blameworthy.” (Qur’an 51:40)

      It should be noted that Pharoah is in the barā’ah ḥaqīqah. One truly cut off from Allah (swt).

      Then there is this verse where Allah (swt) addresses the Blessed Prophet (saw).

      “That Allah may forgive (liyaghfira)for you what preceded of your (dhanbika) sins and what will follow and complete His favor upon you and guide you to a straight path.” (Qur’an 48:2)

      When addressing Pharaoh a word from the same Arabic root is used.

      “[Theirs is] like the custom of the people of Pharaoh and those before them. They denied Our signs, so Allah seized them for their (bidhunūbihim)sins. And Allah is severe in penalty.” (Qur’an 3:11)

      In classical Arabic, Dhanb literally means:

      1. A fault or shortcoming like human oversight or “leaving the better option” (tark al-awla).
      2. A sin, crime, or offense

      Also note that the verse above says: That Allah may forgive (liyaghfira) Forgiveness is only for that which needs forgiveness. Which doesn’t necessarily entail a moral sin. A guest spills a drink and stains someone’s carpet. The guest says: “Please forgive me.”

      Some Muslim translators were embarassed by this because the text is a direct assault upon their contrived beliefs.

      This is why as Muslims we follow the evidence. We do not follow our desires.

      Observe:

      https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/48/2/translations/

      *Mohammed Tahir-ul-Qadri*has translated the above as:

      “So that Allah forgives, for your sake, all the earlier and later sins (of all those people) of your Umma ([Community]* who struggled, fought and sacrificed by your command), and (this way) may complete His blessing on you (outwardly and inwardly) in the form of Islam’s victory and forgiveness for your Umma (Community), and may keep (your Umma) firm-footed on the straight path (through your mediation).”

      * Note:  We understand the people of Sufism to be lovers of Al-Haqq (The Truth) and not people who manipulate the religion.

      It is rather obvious why people would interpret the text like this. Because when you have a Pir-Murid (master-disciple) culture where people are expected to pledge fealty to the Pir, then it becomes impossible for the Pir to commit even the smallest infraction or mistake.

      The following lecure by Shaykh Hilal Al Wardi (h) is also very eye opening:

      The methodology of the Prophets in dealing with sins. Shaykh Hilal Al Wardi.

      You may also enjoy reading the following:

      Prophet David (as) and the dispute between the two men.
      Do not belittle the single sin. Adam (as) was removed from paradise for a single sin.

      May Allah Guide the Ummah.

      May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

      Leave a comment

      Filed under Uncategorized

      Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      April 12, 2026 · 12:25 am

      According to Islamic teachings does Allah have attributes such as teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur?

      “O humanity! Eat from what is lawful and good on the earth and do not follow Satan’s footsteps. He is truly your sworn enemy. He only incites you to commit evil and indecency, and to claim against Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 2:168-169)

      ﷽ 

      According to Islamic teachings does Allah have attributes such as teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur?

      First, let it be clear that we are not aware of any sects among Muslims today who does affirm such things for Allah (swt). 

      However, we need to understand something. 

      If someone asks us does Allah have attributes such as teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur we can answer absolutley not. We can negate these for Allah (swt). This is because of our holistic approach to the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

      We have dealt with that in the following articles:

      The Attributes of Allah and the Way of the Salaf.
      You deny that Allah has a hand, shin or face, yet you claim he is the All Seeing and All Hearing. Is this not a contradiction?

      However, there is another vocal group among the Muslims who would not be able to deny that Allah (swt) has attributes such as teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur.

      The best they can do is to say: We have no revealed texts in regard to these attributes. We can neither affirm nor deny.

      They could quote the following:

      “Although they have no knowledge of this. They follow nothing but assumptions. And surely assumptions can in no way replace the truth.” (Qur’an 53:28)

      The text is warning us not to speculate about that which we have no certain knowledge of. Howver, according to the appraoch of these Muslims the above text does not negate those possible attributes for Allah (swt).

      Likewise, we may outright reject the idea of Allah (swt) having attributes such as teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur by quoting the following: 

      “To those who disbelieve in the Hereafter belong all evil qualities, whereas to Allah belong the finest attributes. And He is the Almighty, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 16:60)

      But to those who interpret otherwise, they would claim that there is nothing inherently evil to Allah (swt) having teeth, biceps, 66 thumbs, 17 hooves, a tail, gills, or fur.

      Other examples:

      Say: “Take on Allah’s colour.” And whose colour is better than Allah’s? It is Him that we serve.” (Qur’an 2:138)

      The Arabic Term: The word used is Sibghah (صِبْغَةَ), which literally means dye, tint, or color.

      The Meaning of “Colour of Allah”: It refers to the true faith of Islam that permeates a person’s inner and outer life, just as dye changes the color of a cloth entirely. It represents purity, sincerity, and the adoption of divine characteristics in behavior and worship.

      Examples are: justice, forbearance, patience, forgiving, loving, kind, restraint.

      However, some Muslims may understand from the above verse that Allah (swt) has a colour! Though accordingly, Allah (swt) has not revealed what colour he is it leaves some to wonder rather Allah (swt) is white (in a way that befits his majesty) or rather Allah (swt) is black (in a way that befits his majesty).

      Those Muslims do not seem to understand or appreciate that the Qur’an and Sunnah has Majaz.

      Majaz (مجاز) in Arabic has a few related meanings depending on the context, but the most common and important one — especially in language, literature, and Islamic studies — is figurative language or metaphor/trope.

      Kindly see our articles here:

      The use of Majaz in the Qur’an by Shaykh Juma Mazrui
      The use of Majaz in the Sunnah by Shaykh Juma Mazrui

      Another example:

      “Such as took their religion to be mere amusement and play, and were deceived by the life of the world.” That day shall We forget them as (كَمَا) they forgot the meeting of this day of theirs, and as they were wont to reject Our signs.” (Qur’an 7:51)

      The Arabic word كَمَا (transliterated as kamā or kama) is a very common conjunction and particle. Its primary meaning is “as”, “like”, or “just as” (indicating similarity, manner, or comparison).

      We know that it is a huge error to say that Allah (swt) forgot anything.

      “He replied, “That knowledge is with my Lord in a Record. My Lord neither falters nor forgets.” (Qur’an 20:52)

      Another way to translate Qur’an 7:51 would be:

      “Those who took this faith as mere amusement and play and were deluded by worldly life.” “Today We will ignore them just as they ignored the coming of this Day of theirs and for rejecting Our revelations.” (Qur’an 7:51)

      You can see multiple translations of the above verse here:

      https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/7/51/translations/

      While Allah (swt) does not forget anyone, He may leave those who are arrogant and refuse to repent, or those who commit sins against others without seeking forgiveness, to face the consequences of their actions. This can be interpreted as a form of divine abandonment.

      This is why translating as ignoring makes more sense in light of the other verses of the Qur’an that clearly state that Allah (swt) is All Knowing.

      It also make sense in regard to human beings. No human being really forgets that they will die or ultimately meet their fate. However, they put this issues off. Proof of this is how many people who believe in the afterlife have not even made a will?

      There is Majaz in the hadith as well.

      Narrated Abu Huraira:

      Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “Allah said, ‘I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine. And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil (praying or doing extra deeds besides what is obligatory) till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection (Refuge), I will protect him; (i.e. give him My Refuge) and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him.”

      Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari/81/91)

      So to say that Allah (swt) becomes something means he was not that before. This means that Allah (swt) changes based upon a believer’s particular state at any given moment.

      The outward reading of the hadith leads to unacceptable positions such as:  incarnation (hulul) or union (ittihad).

      “Say “Each is waiting, so keep waiting! You will soon know who is on the Straight Path and is guided.” (Qur’an 20:135)

      May Allah Guide the Ummah.

      May Allah Forgive the Ummah.




      Leave a comment

      Filed under Uncategorized

      Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

      April 11, 2026 · 2:14 am

      Paul The Anti Christ

      “Say: Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel-for he brings down the (revelation) to your heart by Allah’s will, a confirmation of what went before, and guidance and glad tidings for those who believe. Who is an enemy to Allah, and His angels and His messengers, and Gabriel and Michael! Then, lo! Allah (Himself) is an enemy to the ungrateful.”(Qur’an 2:97-98)

      “But though we, or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)

      ﷽ 

      Note: The Angel of revelation is none other than Gabriel. Paul here is foreshadowing the coming of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) who is the culmination of the ‘Good News‘.

      The Ibadi school is the earliest school to warn the people about Paul

      8th century Ibāḍī theologian ʿAbd Allāh al-Fazārī writes:

      “Every nation after its prophet has a Sāmirī to misguide it and a Paul to deceive it like the Sāmirī of the Jews and the Paul of the Christians, Allāh curse them.”

      First, we need to remove two contentions that Christians raise against us as Muslims.

      The first is to quote the following verse:

      “Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will raise you up to Me and shall purify you of the ungrateful, disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

      “Those who follow you” is a reference to the believers who followed Jesus in his time and then to the Muslims with the coming of the Prophet Muhammed (saw).

      “O believers! Stand up for Allah, as Jesus, son of Mary, asked the disciples, “Who will stand up with me for Allah?” The disciples replied, “We will stand up for Allah.” Then a group from the Children of Israel believed while another disbelieved. We then supported the believers against their enemies, so they are apparent.” (Qur’an 61:14)

      The first question to ask is: How did Allah (swt) support the believers against their enemies?

      The same way he did Jesus (as).

      “Indeed, We gave Moses the Book and sent after him successive messengers. And We gave Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the holy spirit. Why is it that every time a messenger comes to you ˹Israelites˺ with something you do not like, you become arrogant, rejecting some and killing others?” (Qur’an 2:87)

      So Allah (swt) supported Jesus with the Angel Gabriel and with clear proof.

      The second question is what does the word ẓāhirīna actually mean?

      zahrina (apparent) who is it speaking about? alladhina amanu (those who believed).

      What became apparent? Those who believed vs those who disbelieved.

      The word actually means apparent. That those true followers of Jesus (as) it became apparent that they were upon the truth. How? By means of the clear proofs that Allah (swt) supplied them with by their Prophet and Teacher, Jesus — alayhi salam.

      Not that they became dominant or victorious. This is contrary to the reality. They were killed, wiped out.

      What does False or Anti-Christ mean?

      Answer: “Antichristos can mean either “against Christ” or “instead of Christ” or perhaps, combining the two, ‘one who, assuming the guise of Christ, opposes Christ” (Westcott)

      Pseudo Christos — “one who falsely lays claim to the name and office of the Messiah”

      Source: (VINES concourse dictionary of the biblical words W.E. Vine pg.13 and pg.54)


      Note: The term ‘Anti‘ is sinister in that it does not necessarily mean opposed to as it means in place of.

      THE ANTICHRIST WILL BE A CHRISTIAN ACCORDING TO JESUS

      “For many will come in my name, saying, I am (Χριστός) Christ; and shall deceive many.” (Matthew 24:5)

      Χριστός literally means annointed one.

      Source: (https://biblehub.com/greek/5547.htm)

      “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of lawlessness ‘” (Matthew 7:21-23)

      Prima Qur’an comments:

      Do Hindus make prophecies in the name of Jesus?

      Do Buddhists drive out demons in the name of Jesus?

      Do Muslims do mighty deeds in the name of Jesus?

      The only religion on this planet that does anything in the name of Jesus are Christians!

      The Anti-Christ will come in the guise of a follower of Christ.

      “For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you . They are godless men who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign Lord.”(Jude 1:4)

      Was Paul historically ever Anti-Christ himself?

      Answer: Yes!

      “For at the very beginning I was determined that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.” (Acts 26:9-10)

      Note: “contrary to the name of Jesus” (Contra-Christ /In place of Christ/ Anti-Christ)

      “On that day, a great persecution broke out against the church of Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. But Saul(Paul) began to destroy the church . Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.” (Acts 8:1-3)

      “Meanwhile, Saul (Paul) was still breathing out murder threats against the Lord’s disciples.” (Acts 9:1)

      “And Saul (Paul) was there, giving approval to his (Stephen’s) death.” (Acts 7:61)

      Common misconceptions about Anti-Christ

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Some common misconceptions about the Anti-Christ are that there is only one anti-Christ. The other misconception is that the anti-Christ will only show up at the end of time. The following text clears this up.

      “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that The ANTICHRIST is coming, even now , many antichrist have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.” (1 John 2:18)

      Note: We can see that there will be many false Christ, and we can see that even in the time of Jesus’ disciples there were antichrist.

      Paul’s Unconfirmed “Conversion”.

      Question: Did Paul convert to the teachings of Jesus?

      Answer: No!

      The only testimony we have that Paul is a ‘disciple’ of Jesus is Paul’s own contradictory accounts in Acts chapters 9, 22 and 26.

      Acts 9:7 says:

      “The men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.”

      Acts 22:9 says:

      “And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spoke to me.”

      Acts 26:14 says:

      “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul Saul why persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the pricks.”

      Prima Qur’an Comment: All these instances in which Paul speaks about Jesus speaking to him for the first time are obviously flat lies.


      Not only that, but in Acts 22:9 it says the same people traveling with him “saw indeed the light.”

      This is very strange because Paul also says in Acts 26:23

      “At midday, O King, I saw in the way a light from heaven, Above the brightness of the sun, shining around me and Them which journeyed WITH me.”

      Besides the above contradictions, Paul said this light was brighter than the sun and that those with him “saw indeed the light” yet read the following:

      “And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened he saw no man, but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.” (Acts 9:8-9)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Now this light was “brighter than the sun” yet his companions were fine! Paul’s whole “conversion” story is a fabrication.

      Establishing testimony for yourself according to Christ Jesus.

      “But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more that in the mouth of two or three witness every word may be established.” (Matthew 18:16)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: According to the criteria set by Christ Jesus, Paul’s testimony of conversion is blatantly false. The only record we have of Paul’s so-called conversion is from the writer Luke. There is no testimonial from the men who traveled with Paul.

      The above contradictory accounts of Paul’s conversion in Acts chapters 9,22 and 26 render his account baseless!

      Two important points about Paul.

      1) Paul never met the historical Jesus.

      2) Paul only claimed to have met Jesus in a vision of light.

      Paul’s ‘vision of light’ was none other than Satan?

      “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ And little wonder; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:13-14)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul transformed himself into an apostle of Christ Jesus. Because Paul’s conversion story is not confirmed and it is contradictory.

      The being of light who was speaking to Paul in the vision was Satan.

      Satan is the one who made the seeing blind in the instance of Paul.

      Christ Jesus as a prophet of Allah never once made anyone blind! Jesus made the blind to see!

      “And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of revelations, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, the MESSENGER OF SATAN, to buffet me lest I should be exalted above measure.” (2 Corinthians 12:7)

      Question: What does the word messenger mean in 2 Corinthians 12:7 ?

      Answer:

      Angelos, “a messenger, an angel, one sent,” of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh,” “a messenger of Satan.”

      Source: (VINES concourse dictionary of the biblical words W.E. Vine pg.239)

      Comment: Paul keeps talking about this revelation that he is getting from this being of light he met. Yet he also interestingly lets the cat out of the bag by speaking of the ‘angel of Satan‘ sent to him.

      Paul’s Gnostic Anti-Christ teachings.

      Paul’s belief that we are saved through hidden Gnosis.

      What is Gnosis?

      Answer:

      Gnosis=knowledge

      Who are the Gnostics?

      Answer:

      The Gnostics, headed by Valentius, who lived in Rome for almost 30 years until ca.165 claimed fresh revelations and added to the scriptures. In their antimaterial scheme of things, spiritual knowledge, or gnosis, meant that the pneumatics or people of higher spirit were already saved, the psychics or people of the psyche or living soul could be redeemed, whereas the hylics or people of matter were incapable of deliverance from matter and so remained beyond or rather below redemption.

      “My brothers, I could not talk to you as a spiritual people, but as fleshly people , as infants in Christ. I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were unable to take it. Indeed, you are still not able, even now. For you are still of the flesh. While there is jealousy and rivalry among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving in an ordinary human way? Whenever someone says “I belong to Paul,’ and another, “ I belong to Apollos,” are you not merely human?” (1 Corinthians 3:1-4)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: The New American Bible had the following to say in its footnote above.

      “Spiritual people…fleshly people: Paul employs two clusters of concepts and terms to distinguish what later theology will call the natural and the supernatural. The natural person is one whose existence perceptions and behavior are determined by purely natural principles. The psyche and the sarx ( flesh) a biblical term that connotes creatureliness. Such person are only infants; they remain on a purely human level(anthropo) On the other hand, they are called to be animated by a higher principle, the pneuma, God’s spirit. They are to become spiritual(pneumatikoi) and mature in their perception and behavior. The culmination of existence in the Spirit is described.”

      Note: Paul, in the above passage 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 clearly expresses Gnostic belief. He also clearly shows that those he called “brothers” were not on a spiritual (pneumatik) level and therefore not saved because they were not initiated into Paul’s secret doctrines.

      Irenaeus insisted on salvation being mediated through the flesh; this cohered with the missions of the Holy Spirit and the Son. “Human beings,” he wrote, are made “spiritual” not by the abolition of the flesh “but by outpouring of the Spirit: (ibid., 5.6.1). Renewal in the image of God comes about “:not by getting rid of the material body but by sharing in the Spirit.” (ibid., 5,8.1)

      Paul, himself being a Gnostic, taught that the only way people would gain true salvation was if secret knowledge (gnosis) was imparted to them.

      “This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.” ( 1 Corinthians 2:13 )

      “Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect, yet not wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to naught: But we speak of the wisdom of God in a mystery ,even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory.” ( 1 Corinthians 2:67 )

      The apple was a gift of gnosis.

      Remember that the apple Satan gave Adam and Eve was a form of hidden gnosis.

      “Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the Lord God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?” The woman answered the serpent: “ We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; It is about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, “ You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.” But the serpent said to the woman: “ You certainly will not die! No, God knows well that the moment you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods who know what is good and what is bad.” The woman saw that the tree was good for food, pleasing to the eyes, and desirable for gaining wisdom. So she took some of it’s fruit and ate it; and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves.” (Genesis 3: 1-7)

      What is the hidden wisdom Paul wants to share with you?

      “Undeniably great is the mystery of our devotion; which was manifest in the flesh, vindicated by the spirit seen by angels proclaimed to gentiles, believed throughout the whole world and received up into glory.” (1 Timothy 3:16)

      The mystery and secret gnosis that Paul is talking about is his concept of a risen crucified Christ revealed in him! That this risen crucified Christ is Paul himself! For those of you unable to see this or recognize it as the truth, well, we will just borrow the words of Paul…

      “My brothers, I could not talk to you as a spiritual people, but as fleshly people , as infants (babies that have little comprehension or reasoning skills )in Christ.”

      Again, what Christ he is talking about is questionable.

      “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son IN me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:” (Galatians 1:15-16)

      Paul denied Christ Jesus as coming in the flesh.

      “Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus,

      Who though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found in humanappearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5-11)

      Note: Contrary to what others may have told you or statements written in the name of Paul, this is Paul’s concept of Jesus.

      Paul claims, in true Gnostic form, Jesus was found in human likeness, not that he was human. Paul claims Jesus was found inhuman appearance, not that he was human.

      “Consequently, from now on we regard no one according to the flesh; even if we once knew Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know him so no longer.”(2 Corinthians 5:16)

      Note: Bishop Irenaeus also rejected both the Marcionite separation of the NT God the Father from the OT Creator who made all things, and the Gnostic denial of the Son of God being truly made flesh for our salvation.

      PAUL’S CRYPTIC GNOSTIC CLAIM TO BEING CHRIST.

      Question: Did Paul claim that he was Christ?

      Answer: Yes!

      “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; YET NOT I, BUT CHRIST lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20)

      Prima Qur’an Comment:

      Paul says it is not really “him” that you see, the “he” was crucified, and it is “not I but Christ” living in his body. He is claiming that he is essentially Christ, and for this reason he is superior to all of Christ’s disciples who opposed him at every turn.

      “And my temptation which was in my flesh you despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus” ( Galatians 4:14)

      Prima Qur’an Comment People received Paul as if he was Jesus Christ himself!

      “Even as Christ Jesus” This is interesting as Paul is saying that people received him as a person would receive Christ Jesus himself; on that very same level.

      Jesus is speaking about bearing a record of one’s self.

      “If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.” (John 5:31)

      Yet Lo, and Behold Paul says:

      “I am become a fool in glorying; you have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chief apostles, though I be nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.” (2 Corinthians 12:11-12)

      Note: Paul is bearing testimony of himself. Also, the very thing which Paul says makes him someone worthy of being listened to are his signs and wonders the very thing Jesus warned about in the following:

      SIGNS AND WONDERS

      Jesus warned about signs and wonders

      “For there shall arise false Christ and false prophets, and show great signs (miracles) and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Jesus said that when the false christ come they will deceive you by way of signs and miracles. The very thing that Paul uses as a sign of a true apostle, ” signs and wonders”.

      Jesus warning about “Signs and Wonders”

      Speaking of Paul and other false Christ, Jesus said:

      “For there shall arise false Christ and false prophets, and show great signs (miracles) and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

      Note: This is exactly what Paul did in front of the “very elect” at the Jerusalem council!

      “Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.” (Acts 15:12)

      “And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brothers, Listen to me!” (Acts 15:13)

      Note: Paul and Barnabas (son of the Father) were busy trying to fool the “very elect” with signs and wonders. When James (the very brother of Christ Jesus) saw what was happening, he said, “Listen to me”!

      Jesus said as well,

      “I come to you in my Father’s name, and you receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive.” (John 5:43)

      “And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, I kept them in your own name those whom you have given me, that they may be one, as we are.” (John 17:11)

      Again, Paul bears witness of himself, even claiming that God revealed Jesus in him!

      “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son IN me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:” (Galatians 1:15-16)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul once again referring to himself. Paul did not immediately consult with James, the brother of Jesus (flesh and blood), i.e. other disciples of Christ Jesus.

      Paul’s gnostic teaching that God’s plan was revealed through Gnosis (secret knowledge) to him is worthy of note.

      Paul and his divisions: sowing tears among the wheat.

      “Beware of false prophets, which come in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” (Matthew 7:15)

      “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tears among the wheat, and went his way.” (Matthew 13:24-25)

      The Gospel of Christ Jesus vs. the Gospel of Paul.

      “And there had been much disputing, Peter rose up , and said unto them, Men and brothers, you know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should heard the word of the gospel, and believe.” (Acts 15:7)

      “But contra wise, when they saw that the gospel of the un circumcision was committed unto me (Paul), as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter.” (Galatians 2:7)

      Prima Qur’an Comments: Here we are confronted with a major contradiction because Peter teaches that he was to go and teach to the gentiles. However, Paul teaches that he actually was to go to the uncircumcised (Gentiles), and Peter was to go to the circumcision (Jews).

      Not only that, but here we can plainly see there were two gospels! So which one is true? The gospel of circumcision or the gospel of uncircumcision?

      Paul continues bashing Peter…

      “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I rebuked him to his face! He was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he width drew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If you, being a Jew,live in the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compel you the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 2:11-14)

      Note: Paul is not shy in writing that he rebuked Peter to his face for being a hypocrite. Paul is clearly distinguished from James (The brother of Jesus) and the Jerusalem council in the above remarks!

      “Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers, ” Unless you are circumcised according to the law of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Because there arose little dissension and debate by Paul and Barnabas (Son of the Father)with them, it was decided that Paul, Barnabas and some of the others should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and presbyters about this question.” (Acts 15:1-2)

      “And Barnabas was determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus:” (Acts 15:37-39)

      The “Great Commission”

      Paul’s great commission is a forgery and a lie.

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Jesus came only for the Jews. Jesus mission was to “seek and to save that which was lost”: namely the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus foretold the coming of Ahmad who was to be a universal messenger.

      We have established this in our article here:

      The Mission of Jesus: To Whom Was He Sent?

      Paul, who wanted to destroy the teachings of Christ Jesus, at first went to the Aramaic Christians, who turned away from him and his theology.

      Little wonder Paul made the following comment,

      “This, you know, that all those who are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Germogenes”. (2 Timothy 1:15)

      The Aramaic Christians knew of Christ Jesus warning of anti-christ. The early Christian community turned away from Paul and his secret gnosis teachings. Paul, in his frustration, turned to the Greek-speaking Gentiles.

      “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: But seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, Lo, We turn to the Gentiles.” (Acts 13:46)


      Note: Paul was upset that the early Aramaic Jews were turning from his theology. So he and Barnabas (the son of the Father) ‘waxed bold’, and clearly stated that their mission now was to win over the gentiles to his theology. The Mediterranean world that Paul lived in was full of tri-theistic theologies, inundated with Greek philosophy, in particular Neoplatonic thought, and gods who incarnated for the salvation of mankind. Paul definitely had an audience.

      The Gospel of Jesus was the gospel of circumcision

      In Matthew 15:24 we have Jesus saying:

      “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24)

      Luke 22:29-30 He says to his apostle:

      “And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my father has appointed unto me: “That you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit in thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Luke 22:29-30)

      Note: What Paul did was a direct violation of the commandments of Jesus. (MATTHEW 15:22-24), and (MATTHEW 10:5-6) quoted above.

      Jesus commissioned his 12 apostles:

      These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5-6)

      Note: There was no admitting even a Samaritan into the kingdom, much less uncircumcised gentiles. Being with a gentile was often considered as sinful behavior.

      “You worship what you know not: we know what we worship: For salvation is of the Jews.” (John 4:22)

      Note: Jesus, when he tells the woman that “salvation is of the Jews”

      He is insisting on the right of the Pharisaic Sanhedrin to legislate for all Israelites, including descendants of the ten northern tribes.

      “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost”. (Matthew 18:11)

      The Healing of the Canaanite Girl:

      “And Behold, A Woman of Canaan came out of the same coast, and cried unto him, saying have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David: My daughter is grievously vexed with the devil. “But He (Jesus) answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, send her away; for she cries after us.” “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:22-26)

      Note: In verse 24 Jesus’ response was to his apostles.

      “Then she came and worshipped him, saying, Lord Help Me.”

      “But he answered and said, It is not suitable to take the children’s bread and cast it to the dogs.”

      Note: Verse 26 was Jesus’ response to the woman with the Jewish custom of referring to gentiles as “dogs” is reflected in the reaction of Jesus to the Syrophoenician woman who requested help from Jesus.

      “But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not suitable to take the children’s bread and to cast it unto the dogs.” (Mark 7:26)

      Note: The woman was a Greek, a Syrophoenician by nation. Again Jesus says in

      “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under your feet, and turn again and rend you.” (Matthew 7:6)

      “But contra wise, when they saw that the gospel of the un circumcision was committed unto me (Paul), as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter.” (Galatians 2:7)

      Christians tell us that the parting command of Jesus to his apostles was:

      Mark 16:15 & 20:

      “Go you into the world and preach the Gospel to every creature…”

      “And they went forth and preached everywhere…”

      This is totally irreconcilable with early church history; for some ten years after Jesus, Peter is accused and condemned by the apostles and brethren because they had heard that Gentiles had also received the word of God:

      Acts 11:1-19

      1. “And the apostles, and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.

      2. “And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him.”

      3. “Saying, you went unto men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.”

      4. “But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them saying,”

      5. “I was in the city of Joppa praying: And in a trance I saw a vision, a certain vessel descended, as it had been a great sheet, let down from the heavens by four corners; and it came even to me.”

      6. “Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered and saw four footed beasts of the Earth, and wild beast, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.”

      7. “And I heard a voice saying unto me, arise Peter slay and eat.”

      8. “But I said, not so, Lord: For nothing common or unclean has at any time entered into my mouth.”

      9. “But the voice answered me again from heaven, what God has cleansed, do not call common.”

      10. “And this was done three times: And all were drawn up again unto heaven.

      11. “And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea to me.”

      12. “And the spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man’s house:”

      13. “And he showed us how he had seen an Angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, send me to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;”

      14. ” who shall tell thee words, whereby you and all your house shall be saved.

      15. “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.”

      16. “Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with the Holy Ghost.”

      17. “Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?”

      18. “When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God saying, then has God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”

      19. “Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen traveled as far as Phenice and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but the Jews only.”

      Consider also Peter’s statement in Acts 10:28

      “You know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;…”

      Prima Qur’an Comment: If Christ Jesus really gave the command above in Mark 16:16 to preach to the whole world all would have known about it.

      It would not be unlawful for a Jew to be with a Gentile. Thus, to have the Jerusalem council say, “You went into men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.” would be a very strange thing indeed!

      Not only this but the concept that Christ Jesus came to die for the sins of mankind is also a doctrine of Paul.


      If Christ Jesus’ mission was to die for the sins of all mankind as Paul and his followers teach, then the following comment would be quite strange as well:

      “When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, then has God also to the Gentiles, granted repentance unto life.”

      Paul’s method of deception is exactly like the snake in the garden.

      “But I fear, lest by any means as the serpent BEGUILED Eve, through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that comes preach another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not received, you might as well bear with him.” (2 Corinthians 11:3-4)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Here Paul is worried people will be beguiled into accepting another spirit (prophet). They will accept another Gospel. They will accept another Jesus.


      It is likened to being in the very presence of God and hearing things explicitly stated by God and then turning around and doing something in place of that.

      In this case, something Anti Christ because Christ teachings came from God.

      Question: Could this be an analogy of what Paul did with Jesus’ teachings? By initiating Greeks into a secret doctrine concerning Christ Jesus.

      Answer: Yes!

      Paul beguiled the early followers of Christ Jesus.

      Question: What does the word Beguile or Guile mean?

      Answer: (Greek) – Dolos means Evil, cunning, treachery, deceit.

      Source: (VINES concourse dictionary of the biblical words W.E.Vine pg.167 )

      A Look at how the word Guile/Beguiled is used in the Bible.

      “Jesus saw Nathaniel coming to him and said, Behold an Israelite indeed in whom is no GUILE” (John 1:47)

      “Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord, imputed not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no GUILE.” (Psalms 32:2)

      “For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no GUILE.” (1 Peter 3:10)

      “Now the SERPENT was more CRAFTY than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made.” (Genesis 3:1)

      “For our exhortation was not in deceit nor of uncleanliness, nor in GUILE” (1 Thessalonians 2:3)


      Note: Paul was speaking above, yet, lo and behold, what he says now…

      “But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being CRAFTY, I caught you with GUILE.” (2 Corinthians 13:16)

      Prima Qur’an Comment:

      So this beguiling Paul was afraid people would fall into, is the same beguiling he used. Paul, who was receiving secret revelations from an unidentified ‘being of light’, was using craft to ensnare people with his theology.

      Paul didn’t burden people with laws, he caught them with DOLOS (GUILE) -treachery, deceit, evil etc…

      THE CHARACHTER OF PAUL.

      Paul: The Scriptural distorter

      “Wherefore he says, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men.” (Ephesians 4:8)

      “You have ascended on high, you have led captivity captive: you have received gifts for men; yes, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them.”(Psalms 68:18)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul misquoted the scripture by saying that God “gave gifts to men” when it says that God has “received gifts for men”.

      Paul: The thief

      “I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.” (2 Corinthians 11:8)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Where do all these Christian evangelists get their inspiration from when they steal money from the masses? They get it from Paul, of course!

      Paul: Mocks commands of God for his own theological points.

      “For it is written in the Torah, You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treaded out the corn. Does God really take care of oxen?” (1 Corinthians 9:9)

      “You shall not muzzle the ox when he treaded out the corn.” (Deuteronomy 25:4)

      Prima Qur’an Comment:

      “A righteous man regards the life of his beast: but he that follows vain persons is void of understanding”. (Proverbs 12:10)

      Paul: The Liar

      “For if the truth of God has more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Romans 3:7)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul was accused by others of doing “evil that good may come“. For example above he claims he ‘robbed churches’ to do people service. He also claimed that he didn’t burden anyone but caught them with guile. Paul’s concept of lying for the greater glory of God to advance his theology is anything but noble.

      Paul: Calls Jesus accursed.

      “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.” (Galatians 3:13)

      “Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:3)

      Note: I wonder what spirit motivates Paul to say that Jesus is a curse?

      Paul: The not so sure

      “But if she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think I have the Spirit of God. (1 Corinthians 7:40)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: If Paul was a man of God he would know.

      Paul’s uncertainty is quite interesting and disturbing.

      Paul: The hypocrite

      “Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” (Galatians 5:2)

      However, look at what Paul did in the following verses…

      “Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.” (Acts 16:3)

      “Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for everyone of them.” (Acts 21:26)

      Paul Above the law

      “Because the law works wrath: for where no law is, there is notransgression.” (Romans 4:15)

      “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.” (1 Corinthians 6:12)

      “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.” (1 Corinthians 10:23)

      THE ANTICHRIST TEACHINGS OF PAUL.

      Remember what the term anti/false christ means….

      Antichristos can mean either “against christ” or “in place of Christ”

      Christ Jesus verses Paul the false Christ: Mono Y Mono.

      Question: Are we to live by faith (a feeling) or by our faith (a code set of laws)?

      What Christ Jesus teaches:

      “But Jesus turned him. about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.” (Matthew 9:22)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Jesus didn’t say that faith made the woman whole. He said that her faith made her whole.

      What Paul teaches:

      “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is WRITTEN, The just shall live by faith.” (Romans 1:17)

      Paul directly misquoted from where this was WRITTEN in Habakkuk 2:4

      “Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.” (Habukkuk 2:4)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus and the TNCH teach that we are to live by our faith (set code of laws).

      However, Paul’s antichrist teaching is that we are to live by faith(feeling).

      Question: Who is our Father according to Christ Jesus?

      What Jesus teaches:

      “And do not call anyone on earth ‘father’ for you have one Father, and he is in HEAVEN.” (Matthew 23:9)

      What the TNCH teaches:

      “Have we not all one father? Did not one God create us?” (Malachi 2:10)

      What Paul teaches: 

      “Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.” (Corinthians 4:15)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus teaches that only one should be called father and that is ‘God in heaven’. However, Paul’s Antichrist teaching is that he(Paul) is now a father!

      Question: Can we eat any type of food?

      What Christ Jesus teaches:

      “Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the teachings of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by “eating food sacrificed to idols, and by committing sexual immorality.” (Revelation 2:14)

      “It seemed good to the HOLY SPIRIT and to US not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.” (Acts 15:28-29)

      What Paul teaches:

      “As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean itself.” (Romans 14:14)

      Note: Paul should have known better than to say, “I am fully convinced no food is unclean” when he was at the Jerusalem council when James The Brother Of Jesus gave the edict.

      Comment: Christians in every country EAT BLOOD PRODUCTS and things such as ‘blood puddings‘ and pork meats. Why? Because of this anti christ teaching of Paul’s. However, there is a group of Christians called the ‘Seventh day Adventist” that are a little more sensible in the way they approach food.

      Question: Can you call people fools? (Greek: Moron)

      What Christ Jesus teaches:

      “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother Raca is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone of you who says, ‘you fool!” will be in danger of the hell fire.”  (Matthew 5:22)

      What Paul teaches:

      “But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” “You Fool, What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.” (1 Corinthians 15:35-36)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Apparently Paul was the fool, because if a seed does indeed die there can be no sprouts and thus no plant life.

      “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified.” (Matthew Galatians 3:1)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus taught that to call someone a fool would put them in danger of ‘hell fire‘. However, Paul’s anti christ behavior taught him to call people ‘fool’ in a most unhumble manner!

      Question: Is it important for one to be circumcised?

      What Christ Jesus teaches:

      “Think not that I have come to destroy the laws of the Torah or what the prophets said: I am not come to destroy, but to observe. For verily I say unto you. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in on wise pass from the Torah, till all be fulfilled, Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17-19)

      “And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.” (Luke 2:21)

      “And God said unto Abraham, Thou shall keep my covenant therefore, you , and your seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your seed after you, Every man child among you shall be circumcised, And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you , every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of your seed. He that is born in your house, and be that is bought with your money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an EVERLASTING COVENANT.” (Genesis 17:9-13)

      What Paul teaches:

      “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you ,whosoever of you are justified by the law; you are fallen from grace.” (Galatians 5:2-4)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus observed the Torah and taught the everlasting covenant of circumcision. However, Paul’s anti christ teaching is that it will ‘profit you nothing’. Remember he said, “I Paul say unto you”

      Question: Is the Law (Torah) a curse?

      What Christ Jesus teaches:

      “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, You shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (5:20)

      “Then spoke Jesus to the multitude and to his disciples, Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not you after their works: for they say , and do not.” (Matthew 23:1-3)

      “But the people who know not the law are cursed.” (John 7:49)

      What Paul teaches:

      “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continue not in all things which are written in the Torah to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident : for, The Just shall live by faith.” (Galatians 3:10-11)

      “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree:” (Galatians 3:13)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul above mentions that the law is a curse. However’ Jesus said that EXCEPT our piety is more than that of scribes and Pharisees we will in NO CASE enter heaven. Jesus also pointed out before Paul made this statement, “” That there will be such hypocrites but it does not take away that they SIT IN MOSES SEAT, so be not like them for they SAY, AND DO NOT.

      Question: Is it fine to be without works of the law?

      James, the brother of Jesus says:

      “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? See you how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect.” (James 2:21-23)

      What Christ Jesus says:

      “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of LAWLESSNESS (anomian).'” (Matthew 7:21-22)

      What Paul teaches:

      “But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.” (Galatians 3:11)

      Priam Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus taught that we should follow the scribes and pharisees in that they have knowledge. Christ Jesus also taught that he would tell the Christians on the day of judgment to depart from him for being workers of lawlessness. James, the very brother of Jesus, also wrote that Abraham was justified by works. However, Paul’s anti Christ teaching is that this new Christ he is preaching is the Christ of grace and thus being justified by the law is not necessary.

      Question: Do we need a blood sacrifice to forgive our sins?

      What Christ Jesus taught

      “But go you and learn what that means, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (Matthew 9:13)

       Jesus quotes from:

      “For I desire mercy and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” (Hosea 6:6)

       “By Loving kindness and truth iniquity is atoned for.” (Proverbs 16:6)

      What Paul teaches:

      “And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” (Hebrews 9:22)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus as well as the entire TNCH taught that God desires mercy and not sacrifice that what he really wants is his people to be obedient to him with their heart and not doing outward rituals devoid of spirit.

      Paul’s anti christ teaching is that, contrary to the tnch and Christ Jesus, he believes “without shedding blood there is no forgiveness.”

      What he means by that is that there is no forgiveness of any sins or faults!

      Question: is there anyone righteous?

      What Christ Jesus taught

      “But go you and learn what that means, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (Matthew 9:13)

      “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.” (Luke 1:6)

      What Paul teaches.

      “There is none righteous, no not one.” (Romans 3:10)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Jesus taught that the righteous were on the right track. Jesus came so that the sinners could be called away from their sins. Zechariah and Elizabeth were two great examples of God-fearing righteous people before God. They obeyed “all the commands of God blameless.” However, Paul’s anti christ teaching is that everyone is a sinner and there is no one righteous, including Zechariah and Elizabeth. Paul’s anti christ theology is that everyone is doomed unless they accept his christ of grace teaching.

      Question: Is everyone a sinner?

      Christ Jesus taught

      “And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, neither has this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.” (John 9:1-3)

      What Paul teaches.

      “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Christ Jesus did not teach original sin. Christ Jesus also clearly distinguished that he came for ” sinners and not the righteous”. However, Paul’s anti christ teaching is that all have sinned.

      PAUL: The founder of modern ‘Christianity’.

      Question: Whose Gospel was it that Jesus would raise from the dead?

      Answer: Paul’s

      “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead, according to My Gospel.“(2 Timothy 2:8)

      “I marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you unto 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.” (Galatians 1:6-7)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: Paul is claiming that his gospel is the only true gospel. However, we can see that his gospel radically differs from that taught by Christ Jesus.

      Paul is truly anti christ in that he opposed christ teachings. Paul is also truly anti christ in that he taught things in place of what Christ Jesus came to teach.

      Question: Who wrote the majority of today’s accepted New Testament?

      Answer: Paul

      Out of 27 books of the ‘New Testament’ Paul is said to have written the following 14!

      Romans-written by Paul

      1 Corinthians-written by Paul

      2 Corinthians-written by Paul

      Galatians- written by Paul

      Ephesians-written by Paul

      Philippians-written by Paul

      Colossians-written by Paul

      1 Thessalonians-written by Paul

      2 Thessalonians-written by Paul

      1 Timothy-written by Paul

      2 Timothy-written by Paul

      Titus-written by Paul

      Philemon-written by Paul

      Hebrews-writer disputed but usually said to be Paul

      Question: What does Michael H. Hart in his book-“The 100” say about Paul?

      Answer:

      “Since there are probably roughly twice as many Christians in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammed has been ranked higher than Jesus.

      There are two principal reasons for that decision.

      First, Muhammed played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity.

      Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity(Insofar as these differed from Judaism),

      St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, it’s principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament.“

      Source: (Michael H. Hart “The 100” pages 38-39)

      A bold statement by Paul

      “But though we,or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)

      Note: The Angel of revelation is none other than Gabriel.

      Question: What does the Qur’an say in response to Paul?

      Answer:

      “Say: Whosoever is an enemy to Gabriel- for he brings down the revelation to thy heart by Allah’s will; a confirmation of what went before, and guidance and glad tidings for those who believe, Whoever is an enemy to Allah and His angels and apostles, To Gabriel and Michael-Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who are ungrateful.” (Qur’an 2:97-98)

      Prima Qur’an Comment: What if God wants to send an angel from heaven to the Prophet Muhammad (saw) 700 years after the Gnostic Paul made his comments above? What if that angel came to restore the true good news of Christ?

      Namely, the following:

      “If you love me, keep my commandments, and I will pray the Father, and he shall give you ANOTHER comforter, that HE may abide with you forever”. (John 14:15-16)

      Little wonder Paul made the following comment,

      “This you know, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Germogenes.” (2 Timothy 1:15)

      Prima Qur’an Comment:

      This statement of Paul can not be easily overlooked. Paul is stating the very early Churches of Jesus (those speaking Aramaic) turned away from him. These early Christians knew of the prophecy of Jesus concerning the coming of Ahmed ( Muhammed)

      This is why Paul turns his attention and evangelizes the Greek-speaking Romans!

      “And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)

      You may also wish to read the following:

      The Mission of Jesus: To Whom Was He Sent?
      A Christian Dilemma & How might Jesus have died?

      May Allah Guide the Christians so that they do not burn in the hellfire.

      May Allah Guide the Ummah.

      May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

      3 Comments

      Filed under Uncategorized

      Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      April 10, 2026 · 3:24 am

      Those who left Islam.

      “They regard their acceptance of Islam as a favour to you. Tell ˹them, O Prophet˺, “Do not regard your Islam as a favour to me. Rather, it is Allah Who has done you a favour by guiding you to the faith, if ˹indeed˺ you are faithful.” (Qur’an 49:17)

      ﷽ 

      But if you wanna leave, take good care
      Hope you have a lot of nice things to wear
      But then a lot of nice things turn bad out there

      Such are the lyrics of brother Yusuf Islam. Formely Cat Stevens, in his song, Willd World.

      We recall when a brother said to man who proclaimed: “I have left Islam.” The brother said to him: “You did not leave Islam, rather Islam left you.” Subhan’Allah.

      May Allah cause us to die as Muslims. May Allah grant us a good death.

      “O believers! Be mindful of Allah in the way He deserves, and do not die except in submission.” (Qur’an 3:102)

      There are many reasons why people choose to leave any faith. 

      It could come from reasons we could have empathy for.

      A) Having overbearing parents. It could be from lack of support from the community (in the case of converts to Islam, or that isolated wife who is being abused). Perhaps the person had genuine doubts about questions and did not find competent or compelling answers to the doubts or questions that vexed him/her.

      It could even be that there are those who were born and raised as Muslims and, because they did not get to taste the darkness, they never got an appreciation for the light.

      For them insh’Allah they will make their way back to Islam.

      It could come for reasons that we would have little empathy for. 

      B) It could also be that they are resolved not to submit to Allah. That their needs and desires come first before Allah’s decree.

      For them if they cannot overcome being slaves to their desires how will they be slaves to Allah?

      “Have you seenthe one who has taken their own desires as their god? Will you then be a keeper over them?” (Qur’an 25:43)

      Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:

      I heard Messenger of Allah (saw) saying, “People are like gold and silver; those who were best in Jahiliyyah (Pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance) are best in Islam, if they have religious understanding; and the souls are like recruited soldiers, they get mixed up with those similar with them in qualities and oppose and drift away from those who do not share their qualities”.

      Source: (https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:371)

      Individuals who held high qualities such as honesty, generosity, courage, and leadership during Jahiliyyah are able to redirect these same positive traits toward the service of Islam.

      However, one thing that should not cause us to lose faith is when we find out that someone respected in our community left faith and/or they were involved in heinous things. The reason why we feel this affects people is because they were never taught about walayah and bara’ah, their levels and what it actually means.

      Dissociation or guardianship is always based upon the outward. Even between husband and wife, seemingly best friends, seemingly worst enemies. Those you shun etc. Whereas the inward reality overrides and superceds the outward.

      This is often why works of art, poetry are so precious. It is an outward manifestation of an inward secret. When someone writes poetry or creates art they let the world see what otherwise they would not have known.

      When a person expresses a doubt they are expressing an inward turmoil. When we see this person who is admired by the community suddenly take a turn for the worst this should not cause turmoil with in us as well. Especially if you are properly taught about Walayah, Bara’ah.

      Examples:

      Why is the walayah between a husband and wife only dhahir? Dhahir here meaning the outward or the apparent. You would think a relationship like marriage would be based upon the haqiqah, or upon truth and reality. However, it is not.

      However, husband and wives can betray each other. They can cheat on one another. They can lie or deceive or do great harm to each other. Some people are also part of arranged marriages where they have to put on a show of contentment.

      So in all our dealings with people is always going to be based upon the dhahir (the outward, the apparent).

      So looking at the chart above. You could put someone in bara’ah by their outward actions or beliefs. Even hate that person.

      However, you could simultaneously love that person based upon their reality. You wouldn’t know it because that will ultimately be revealed by Allah. However, because of your declaration of walayah al-Jumlah you would love them.

      So looking at the chart above. You could put someone in wilayah by their outward actions or beliefs. Even love that person.

      However, you could simultaneously hate that person based upon their reality. You would’t know it becauseu that will ultimately be revealed by Allah. However, because your declaration of walayah al-bara’ah you would hate them.

      We also make du’a that we are among the sincere and the truthful. We make du’a that those who lost thier way make their way back.

      What is very intersting and why we absolutely have fallen in love with Allah’s deen is that Allah (swt) himself declares that those who leave Islam is ultimately a win for Islam!

      “O believers! Whoever among you abandons their faith, Allah will replace them with others who love Him and are loved by Him. They will be humble with the believers but firm towards the disbelievers, struggling in the Way of Allah; fearing no blame from anyone. This is the favour of Allah. He grants it to whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Bountiful, All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 5:54)

      Did you read that dear believers?

      Allah (swt) not only replaces those who abandon faith with believers, Allah (swt) declares that many of these new believers are in walayah with Allah! Subhan’Allah. They are wali of Allah.

      The other point to take rejoice in is the fact that the verse affirms that there will never be on this Earth except that it will have believers, those who love Allah and are loved by him! Subhan’Allah.

      “Here you are—those invited to spend in the cause of Allah—but among you are those who withhold [out of greed]. And whoever withholds only withholds [benefit] from himself; and Allah is the Free of need, while you are the needy. And if you turn away, He will replace you with another people; then they will not be the likes of you,” (Qu’ran, 47:38).

      أَفَأَمِنُوا مَكْرَ اللَّهِ ۚ فَلَا يَأْمَنُ مَكْرَ اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْقَوْمُ الْخَاسِرُونَ

      “Did they then feel secure against the plan of Allah? None feels secure from the plan of Allah except the people who are the losers.” (Qur’an 7:99).

      The people of knowledge have said that a servant should remain in state between fear of Allah and hope (in His mercy)―and that he does not allow himself to be overcome by feeling secure from the plan of Allah.

      Likewise, he does not despair of the mercy of Allah―so the servant should always be in between fear and hope. To exaggerate in either fear or hope leads to destruction, whereas Istiqāmah (steadfastness) is to be in between the two.

      The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and so do the believers. They believe in Allah, His angels, His Books, and His messengers. “We make no distinction between any of His messengers.” And they say, “We hear and obey. Your forgiveness, our Lord! And to You is the final return.” Allah does not require of any soul more than what it can afford. All good will be for its own benefit, and all evil will be to its own loss. “Our Lord! Do not punish us if we forget or make a mistake. Our Lord! Do not place a burden on us like the one you placed on those before us. Our Lord! Do not burden us with what we cannot bear. Pardon us, forgive us, and have mercy on us. You are our Guardian. So grant us victory over the disbelieving people.” (Qur’an 2:285-286)

      May Allah Guide the Ummah.

      May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

      Leave a comment

      Filed under Uncategorized

      Tagged as , , , , ,

      April 9, 2026 · 6:31 am

      Face to Face with the Blessed Prophet: How Oman Preserved Pure Islam Through Unbroken Transmission

      “We have sent you only as a mercy for the whole world.” (Qur’an 21:107)

      ﷽ 

      Face to Face with the Blessed Prophet (saw): How Oman Preserved Pure Islam Through Unbroken Transmission.

      This will be a translation of the talk given by Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani (h) below:

      The school of reciters: A starting point in Omani History -Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani (h).

      Allah-Willing this lecture will establish a few key points.

      The Islam of Oman was not a late or secondary arrival. It was taken directly, face-to-face, from the Prophet Muhammed (saw) through multiple delegations (wufud), and preserved through an unbroken, mutawatir (mass-transmitted) chain of transmission. Due to Oman’s geographical remoteness, this Islam remained pure, uncorrupted by foreign influences (Persian, Roman, Greek, Indian).

      The Delegations (Wufud): The Shaykh lists at least 12 delegations from Oman to the Prophet (saw), including:

        • Mazin bin Ghadhub Al-Ta’i (three separate visits: pre-Hijra, 3 AH, 7 AH). The Prophet (saw) famously prayed for Oman: “O Allah, guide them and reward them… grant them chastity, sufficiency, and contentment… do not empower an outsider enemy against them.”
        • Delegations from Bani Nabhan, Bani Tahiyeh (including Ka’b bin Bursha’, who recognized the Prophet’s description in the Torah and Gospel), Bani Al-Haddan, Bani Thamalah, Bani Al-Farahid, Al-Atiq, Abdul Qais, Bani Rasib (Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi), and even a delegation of Omani women who met Aisha (ra).

        Early Mosques and Qiblas: The existence of mosques in Oman oriented toward two qiblas (first Jerusalem, then Mecca) proves that prayer was established before the Prophet’s migration to Medina.

        The School of the Reciters (Qurra’): After the Blessed Prophet’s school at Dar Al-Arqam in Mecca, the “School of the Reciters” was established in Medina. These Qurra’ (who memorized Quran, knew Sunnah, and reasons for revelation) were the elite missionaries, judges, and army leaders. Their tragic martyrdom at Bi’r Ma’unah and later at Nahrawan (alongside Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi) is highlighted.

        Imam Jabir bin Zaid (18-21 AH – c. 93-103 AH): The central figure in preserving Omani Islam. A Tabi’i (Follower), he met 70 Companions who fought at Badr, traveled 40 times for Hajj to collect narrations, and copied the Blessed Prophet’s letter on sadaqat from the sons of Amr bin Hazm. He founded the school of Ahl al-Haqq wal-Istiqamah (People of Truth and Righteousness). His students included Abu Bilal Mirdas, Abdullah bin Ibadh, and Salim bin Dhakwan.

        Codification (Tadwin): The lecture argues that Imam Jabir bin Zaid was the first to codify the Blessed Prophetic Sunnah, before any other school. This codification passed through Abu Ubaidah Muslim bin Abi Karimah → Al-Rabi’ bin Habib → then to Oman (Mahbub Al-Rahil in Sohar, Abu Al-Mundhir in Nizwa, Abu Ali Al-Azri in Izki).

        Al-Khalil bin Ahmad Al-Farahidi (d. 175 AH / 791 CE): An Omani scholar who founded Arabic prosody (‘arud), diacritical marks, grammar (nahw), and authored the first Arabic dictionary (Kitab Al-‘Ayn), all in service of the Quran.

        Reasons for Marginalization: Economic blockades, famine, migration to Africa, lack of enduring institutions (unlike Al-Azhar or Qayrawan), focus on tribal wars, and the burning of libraries by Abbasid forces (e.g., Ibn Bur). Over 12,000 Omani manuscript titles exist but lack publication and institutional support.

          Lost Heritage: The repeated references to lost or unprinted manuscripts (Jami’ Abi Safrah, Musnad of Al-Rabi’, Diwan Al-Muarad, Jabir bin Zaid’s original books) point to a rich but endangered scholarly tradition.

          Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds. We praise Him, the Exalted, seek His help, His guidance, and His forgiveness for all sins, and repent to Him. We send prayers and peace upon our Master Muhammed, and upon all his family and companions. Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, sent him as a mercy to the worlds. He delivered the message, fulfilled the trust, advised the nation, removed distress, and strove in the way of his Lord until certainty came to him. We ask Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, to make us among those who listen to the saying and follow the best of it. So, peace be upon you, and the mercy and blessings of Allah.

          In this pleasant and blessed meeting, in a house among the houses of Allah, and in this gathering, we wish to present some of what concerns us from the history of our nation. That is the period during which the Messenger (saw) was sent, how it happened, and how our forefathers transmitted this Islam to us, and their relationship with the Messenger (saw). This is because historical references need someone to read and review them, and they need someone to study them. Also, much of what was written in the Omani biographical literature (Siyar) has not seen the light of day. Many of these Siyar still need verification, printing, and study.

          Because people have not fully grasped this history, nor have they known it, if someone were to ask them: “How did Islam reach you? From whom did you take the religion? The Messenger (saw) was sent in Mecca and Medina, so how did you (in Oman) receive it? Who transmitted Islam to you from there to here?” In this phase, meaning in this context of historical understanding, we must know about the delegations that came from the people of Oman to the Messenger of Allah (saw).

          And also the second point: the role of the scholars from the people of Oman in establishing the principles of Islam by establishing various schools, the codifications (mudawwanat) they wrote, the books they authored, and through which they preserved Islam. Islam remained with them in a strong context, untouched by alteration, substitution, or distortion. With Allah’s will, I will address two points.

          The First Point: The delegations (Wufud) that came from the people of Oman to the Messenger of Allah (saw).

          Of course, history mentions that a number of people from Oman came as delegations to the Messenger of Allah (saw). I will mention some of these delegations to make it clear to everyone that your fathers and forefathers took Islam through continuous transmission (mutawatir) from the Messenger of Allah (saw), generation after generation, group after group, so that it becomes firmly established in every person’s mind that the Islam our fathers and forefathers preserved was pure and correct, originating from the Messenger of Allah (saw).

          These are the delegations that set out to the Messenger of Allah (saw) when they heard of his mission. As you know, only Mazin bin Ghadhub Al-Ta’i is studied in the school curricula, and his meeting with the Messenger (saw) is studied as if he was an individual who visited the Messenger (saw). However, in history books like the history of Ibn Kathir’s Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah and books on the biographies of the Companions, it is mentioned that Mazin had three delegations.

          It is mentioned in the book Subul Al-Huda wal-Rashad that a narration from Mazin bin Ghadhub says: “We arrived to the Messenger of Allah (saw) in Mecca Al-Mukarramah.” This narration indicates that Mazin met the Messenger (saw) in Mecca before his migration to Medina. He said: “We found Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (RA), and he guided us to the Messenger of Allah (saw.” This indicates that there was a meeting between the people of Oman and the Messenger (saw). This view is supported by the fact that when Prophet Ibrahim (AS) built Mecca, he supplicated to his Lord: “My Lord, I have settled some of my descendants in an uncultivated valley near Your sacred House, our Lord, that they may establish prayer. So make hearts among the people incline toward them…” Thus, visitors to the Sacred House have come since the time of Prophet Ibrahim, so there were necessarily people from the tribes of Oman and the land of Oman who came to Mecca. This is evidence that they met the Messenger before his migration to Medina.

          A second piece of evidence supporting this view is the existence of some mosques in Oman oriented towards the two Qiblas, such as one with us in Ibra, one mentioned in Nizwa, or some other mosques. This also indicates that they established prayer… What? Before the Messenger’s (saw) migration to Medina, and therefore they used to face Al-Aqsa Mosque.

          The third piece of evidence is found in some graves indicating that, before Islam, they used to bury their dead facing Al-Aqsa Mosque, not facing the Qibla of the Kaaba. All these pieces of evidence support the view that the people of Oman met the Messenger (saw) in Mecca before his migration to Medina.

          The second matter: After the migration, it is also narrated that Mazin came to the Messenger (saw). This is mentioned in the books of Companions’ biographies (those who met the Messenger). Mazin met the Messenger a second time in the third year of the Hijra. The books of Companions’ biographies detail this journey: he set out to the Messenger (saw). Of course, as you know, in that past time, it was not possible for a person to travel alone from these remote, distant areas to Medina due to the distance and the danger of the road. Therefore, they would travel in a caravan, a group, or a delegation. Also, as was the custom of the Arabs when meeting with rulers and princes, one would not go alone but rather in a delegation or a caravan with his group and family. So, they set out in a delegation.

          It is also mentioned that among the delegation with Mazin bin Ghadhub in the sixth year was his student and servant, Abu Al-Kathir Salih bin Al-Mutawakkil. They arrived to the Messenger of Allah (saw) in Medina, stood before him, and recited verses found in history books and Companions’ biography books, saying: “To you, O Messenger of Allah, my mount wearily travels, crossing deserts from Oman to Al-Arj, so that you may intercede for me, O best of those who tread the earth, and my Lord forgives me, and I return with success.”

          Out of love, honor, and reverence for the Messenger of Allah (saw), he recited the poem. It is narrated that the Messenger (saw asked him, “Who is this who is with you?” – referring to his young servant. He said, “This is my servant, Abu Al-Kathir Salih bin Mutawakkil.” The Messenger (saw) said, “Take good care of him,” so Mazin set him free in the presence of the Messenger (saw), out of love, reverence, and honor for the Messenger of Allah (saw).

          As you know, when Mazin bin Ghadhub went out the first time he met him, and now the second time with those from Oman, what were they carrying? They were the nation (Ummah), wanting to save the nation from the ignorance (Jahiliyyah) they were upon. Mazin said to the Messenger (saw): “Supplicate to Allah for the people of Oman.” The Messenger (saw) said: “O Allah, guide them and reward them.” Mazin said, “More, O Messenger of Allah.” He said: “O Allah, grant them chastity, sufficiency, and contentment with what You have given them.” Mazin said, “More, O Messenger of Allah. The sea splashes next to us, so supplicate to Allah regarding our sea produce, our footwear (khuff), and our livestock (dhalf).” He (saw) said: “O Allah, increase the good from their sea for them, and bless them in their footwear and livestock.” Mazin said, “More, O Messenger of Allah.” The Messenger (saw) said: “O Allah, do not empower an outsider enemy against them. Say ‘Ameen,’ O Mazin.” So he said ‘Ameen,’ and then the supplication is answered.

          Of course, after that, Mazin requested supplication for himself. The rest of the narration or story is known to you. In it, Mazin said upon returning to Oman, as mentioned in Ibn Kathir’s Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah: “Then my people rebuked me, blamed me, and treated me harshly. They ordered their poet to satirize me. I said, ‘If I satirize them, I satirize myself.’ So I withdrew to one side, built a mosque, and stayed there…” The mosque upon his return in the sixth year after (meeting) the Messenger. He established the mosque and raised the call ‘Hayya ‘ala as-Salah’ (come to prayer) in it, and established the congregation. At that time, in Mecca, the Adhan had not been raised, nor was prayer established. So the Adhan was raised and prayer was established in Oman before Mecca, because Mecca was conquered in the eighth year of the Hijra, while Mazin established the mosque and raised the call to prayer there from the sixth year.

          He says: “Then my people said… This mosque, no one in need would come and supplicate to Allah except that Allah answered him, nor would a sick person come and supplicate to Allah except that He cured him. He says: Then my people blamed themselves and came to me saying, ‘Yours is your religion, and you are the one in charge of our affairs, so return to us.’ So I returned to them.” Then he says: “Then Allah guided a people from Oman, and they entered Islam.” He says: “And in the following year, i.e., the seventh year of the Hijra, those whose souls yearned (for the Prophet) also came, accompanied by people from Oman, when he had told them about the Messenger’s (saw) conduct. They went to the Messenger of Allah (saw), and the Messenger (saw) gave them glad tidings, saying: ‘O pure one from the pure ones, O most generous from the most generous ones, Allah has guided a people from Oman, and they have entered Islam. Allah has made Oman prosperous and increased profits and abundant goodness from the land and sea.’ The Messenger (saw) said: ‘My religion is the religion of Islam, and Allah will increase the people of Oman in Islam. So blessed (Tuba) is he who believes in me and sees me, and blessed is he who believes in me but does not see me, and blessed, and then blessed is he who believes in me but does not see me, nor sees the one who saw me.'”

          So here are three delegations with Mazin: before Mecca, the third year, and the seventh year.

          Likewise, it is also mentioned – and you know that Mazin bin Ghadhub is from Bani Tayy, from As-Sa’di, from Sa’d Tayy in Samail – that there was another delegation. Perhaps it was with Mazin, before, or after – Allah knows best – but history does not mention it. They were from Bani Nabhan of Tayy, led by Khalid bin Sadus bin Asma’ Al-Nabhani, accompanied by Yazid bin Jabir bin Asma’ Al-Nabhani. They came to the Messenger of Allah (saw), embraced Islam, and took Islam directly from him.

          So, how many delegations now? Four delegations. Also, in the sixth year when the Messenger concluded the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, and in the seventh year he began writing to the leaders and kings of the world. The Messenger (saw) sent a letter to Kisra Shiroweih, the king of Persia. When the letter reached the Persian king, he tore it up. He wrote to his governor… so Allah empowered his son Shiroweih over him, who killed his father Kisra and Shiroweih and seized control of the Persian lands. Then Shiroweih wrote to some of his governors in Oman, called the Marzaban, saying: “Select for me a man, Arab-Persian (i.e., fluent in both languages), and send him to investigate the matter of this man (Muhammed).” So he selected Ka’b bin Bursha’ Al-Tahi from Bani Tahiyeh of the desert… So they formed a delegation – as you know, one cannot travel alone – and they came to the Messenger of Allah (saw). This was the first delegation from Bani Tahiyeh.

          Ka’b bin Bursha’ Al-Tahi had read the scriptures of the People of the Book, the Torah and the Gospel, leaving nothing, and recognized what was in them. He knew the descriptions of the promised Prophet who would be sent at the end of time. When he arrived in Medina, he threw down his riding stick (signifying travel gear) before the Messenger (saw), sat with him, and began to learn from him, asking him about Islam and what he calls to. The Messenger (saw) clarified for him. He found those descriptions mentioned in the books of the People of the Book applied to the Messenger (saw). The proof was established for him, he entered Islam, and brought those with him into the religion. He returned to Oman and informed the Marzaban there of the truth of the Messenger’s (saw) prophethood. The Marzaban said, “Give me time until I return to Persia.” Ka’b began to inform the people of the truth of the Messenger’s (saw) prophethood, of the evidence and proofs he saw, and that the descriptions in the Torah and Gospel applied to the Messenger (saw). The souls of the people of Oman, the people of Sohar (Ka’b was sent from Sohar), yearned for the meeting with the Messenger (saw).

          It is narrated that the Messenger, in the sixth year of the Hijra, sent Abu Zaid Al-Ansari (whose name was Thabit bin Qais bin…) to the people of Oman to call them to Islam. He sent Abu Zaid Al-Ansari in the sixth year, and he remained until the eighth year when Amr bin Al-Aas came, calling them to Islam and managing their affairs.

          Also, after the return of the delegation of Bani Tahiyeh, the Messenger (saw) sent Al-Ala’ bin Al-Hadrami as governor over Oman and Bahrain. At that time, Bahrain was part of Oman. He sent him as governor over Oman and Bahrain. When Al-Ala’ Al-Hadrami arrived – and the Messenger (saw) had written a letter for him, a letter that exists in the Omani Sirah, printed but without verification, in the book Al-Muntakhab by the Ministry of Heritage – it is the Sirah of the Messenger of Allah (saw) by Al-Ala’ bin Al-Hadrami, which is the oldest Sirah. So the people of Oman formed a delegation led by Asad bin Yabraḥ Al-Tahi. They came to the Messenger of Allah (saw), met him, and took Islam directly from him, face to face. The Messenger taught them directly, and they took it by word and deed. They stayed with him, studied under him, and were honored by his companionship. When they wanted to return, they said, “O Messenger of Allah, send with us someone to teach us the matters of our religion.” Mukharrib Al-Abd (whose name was Mudrik bin Khowt) stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allah, send me with them, for they have a favor upon me. They captured me on the day of Janoub and then freed me as a favor.” So the Messenger (saw) sent them with him to Oman.

          How many delegations now? Mazin’s three, the delegation of Bani Abban is four, the delegation of Ka’b bin Bursha’ Al-Tahi is five, and the delegation of Asad bin Yabraḥ Al-Tahi is six. All of them were from the desert region. So, six delegations.

          When they came to Oman, Islam began to spread, and they themselves spread Islam. It is said that the Azd of Oman formed a delegation led by Salamah bin Iyadh Al-Azdi. They came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) – these delegations are mentioned in Ibn Sa’d’s Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra – they met with him, learned from him, and took Islam directly from him, face to face. Then, when they wanted to return, they said, “O Messenger of Allah, supplicate to Allah to unite us.” The Messenger (saw) said: “O Allah, unite us.” So they returned to Oman, Islam spread among the people of Oman, and began to spread among the tribes.

          Then the people of Oman formed two more delegations: the delegation of Bani Al-Haddan and the delegation of Bani Thamalah. As you know, there are mountains called the Haddan mountains, belonging to Bani Shams, Ma’awil bin Shams, and Tahi bin Shams, all from the Azd of Oman. The author of Al-Tabaqat says that they had already entered Islam in Oman (meaning they were Muslims when they left Oman, but they wanted to be honored by the company of the Messenger). The delegation of Bani Al-Haddan was led by Musalliyah bin Hazzan Al-Haddani, and the head of the delegation of Bani Thamalah was Abdullah bin Illas Al-Thamali. They came to the Messenger (saw), stayed with him, sat by his side, and sought blessings from his company. The Messenger (saw) wrote a letter for them when they wanted to return to Oman, which included: “In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, from Muhammed, the Messenger of Allah (saw), to the dwellers of the coasts and the valleys of Sohar…” It is a letter regarding charity (Sadaqat), also found in Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, written by Thabit bin Qais bin Shammas, witnessed by Sa’d bin Ubadah and Muhammed bin Maslamah. They came to Oman, established themselves, and Islam spread throughout Oman, and they began teaching the people.

          How many delegations now? With Allah’s will: Mazin’s two (or three), Bani Abban is four, the two Bani Tahiyeh delegations are six, the Azd of Oman delegation is seven, Al-Haddan delegation is eight, Bani Thamalah delegation is nine. Also, the delegation of Bani Al-Farahid.

          Ibn Duraid, who is from Sohar and a famous scholar of the Arabic language, author of Al-Jamharah and Al-Ishtiqaq, lived in the third century (AH). He met Imam Al-Salt bin Malik in Nizwa and stayed with him. Ibn Duraid said: “I went out to Nizwa during days of rain and fertility. Imam Al-Salt bin Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said to me, ‘Listen to us tomorrow, insha’Allah. We will pray two rak’ahs and supplicate to Allah to remove the rain from us,’ due to the heavy rainfall that had damaged houses. So he sat with him. In the morning, Imam Al-Salt prayed two rak’ahs and supplicated to Allah to place it on the mountains, hills, and tree growths – meaning he supplicated to Allah to lighten the rain for them. Ibn Duraid said: ‘The first one from the people of Oman to come to the Messenger of Allah (saw) was my grandfather Hammam bin Jarw bin Wasi’ Al-Farahidi, along with some people from his tribe.’ He said ‘with some people from his tribe,’ indicating it was a delegation, but it’s not specified whether it was before or after these other delegations. He said ‘the first,’ so perhaps it is among the earliest delegations that came to the Messenger (saw), perhaps even in Mecca – and Allah knows best. Because his phrasing is ‘The first from the people of Oman to come to the Messenger of Allah (saw) was my grandfather Hammam… with some people from his tribe.’ So it wasn’t just one individual, but they stayed with him, learned from him, and returned to Oman.

          So, how many delegations now? Ten. The eleventh delegation is the delegation of Al-Atiq, led by Abu Safrah Sarif bin Dhalim from Sohar and also Dibba. He came to the Messenger (saw) wearing a yellow turban dragging behind him by a forearm’s length, with dignity and awe. The Messenger (saw) asked, “Who are you?” He said, “My name is Sarif bin Dhalim” (in one narration, ‘Sariq bin Dhalim’). The Messenger (saw) said… in a narration, ‘Ibn Al-Halqan, Ibn Al-Julanda, Ibn Al-Mustakbir, who seizes every ship by force’… narrations vary. The Messenger said, “Leave ‘Sarif’ or ‘Sariq’ and ‘Dhalim’ (names implying theft and injustice); you are Abu Safrah.” He said, “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that you are the Messenger of Allah, truly, truly. Allah blessed me with 18 children, and the last of them was a daughter, so I named her Safrah.” They stayed with him. However, it is mentioned that this delegation might have been after the eighth or ninth year of the Hijra.

          So, delegations so far: 11.

          The delegation of Abdul Qais: The author of Al-Tahdheeb (in the biography of the Companions) said that the delegation of Bani Abdul Qais came to the Messenger (saw). Their leader or chief was Al-Mundhir bin Al-Harith bin Abdul Qais. He was from Oman. He came to the Messenger (saw) and sat with him, wearing his best clothes. When they sat with the Messenger (saw) and he looked at them, he said: “There are two qualities in you that Allah and His Messenger love: forbearance (Hilm) and deliberation (Anah).” The author of Al-Tahdheeb said he was from Oman.

          So, delegations now: 12.

          The delegation of Bani Rasib, led by Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi. Sheikh Salim bin Hamud (Al-Siyabi) mentions in his book that he came as a delegation to the Messenger (saw) with his group and people from Oman. He stayed with the Messenger (saw), and his companionship was established. It is also mentioned in his biography that afterwards, perhaps they participated in the conquests during the time of Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA). When Umar (RA) wrote to his governor in Oman, Uthman bin Abi Al-Aas Al-Thaqafi, to advance to fight the Persians, crossing the sea, and after they were victorious, Al-Khattab gave them a part of Basra. They settled there. Later, when Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas needed help during the conquest of Persia, he wrote a letter to Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA) requesting assistance, so Umar wrote to Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi to come to him. He was the right-hand man in the conquests of Iraq. He participated twice: with the people of Oman and in the conquest of Iraq.

          Also, the delegation of the women of Oman. As you know, women also used to go for Hajj. In Lawahaq Al-Musnad, Abu Sufyan (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Azwar (the best I met from Oman) told me that some women from Oman entered upon Aisha (RA) during the days of Hajj… They entered upon Aisha (RA), and she asked them, ‘Who are you?’ They said, ‘From the people of Oman.’ She said, ‘I heard my beloved (saw) say: “Many people from Oman will come to my Basin (Hawd).”‘”

          These are some of the delegations mentioned. See, even the women of Oman – from where did we take Islam? From the very heart of the Messenger’s (saw) house. We met the Mothers of the Believers and learned from Aisha (RA). Also, when the Messenger (saw) passed away to the Highest Companion, the news reached Oman. The people of Oman formed a delegation led by Abdul Janda, the ruler of Oman, accompanied by Amr bin Al-Aas. Seventy people from Oman went out with him. They came to Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (RA), expressed their condolences regarding the Messenger (saw), and pledged allegiance to his Caliphate. They accompanied Amr bin Al-Aas and said, “This is a trust that the Messenger (saw) sent to us, and we return your trust to you.” So, see, 70 people from Oman stayed with Abu Bakr, with Al-Khattab, and with the senior Companions. They sat among them and took Islam directly from them, meeting the senior Companions.

          Also, during the time of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (RA), the issue of the Dibba incident occurred. Khalaf bin Ziyad Al-Bahrani (a scholar from Oman around the 2nd century AH) wrote a letter (Sirah) explaining that when the Zakat collector came to Dibba to a woman there, he was supposed to take a mature (Musinnah) sheep, but she gave him a young one (Saghirah). He forcibly took a mature sheep from her. She sought help from her people. Hudhayfah bin Mihsan Al-Ghalfani thought she and her people had apostatized, so he surrounded them, captured them, and took them to Medina. The people of Dibba formed a delegation of three: Al-Hadid, Al-Hamhami… They came to Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA), explained the issue to him, clarified it, and met with senior Companions. Al-Khattab (RA) returned their wealth and offspring to them and gave each of them 300 dirhams.

          The conclusion is that the people of Oman – your forefathers and fathers – had a meeting with the Messenger of Allah (saw). They took Islam directly from the Messenger (saw), face to face. They also took it through continuous transmission (mutawatir), meaning group from group, not individual from individual. Therefore, transmitted knowledge is the most authentic form of transmission – group from group, making it impossible for them to agree on a lie. They preserved it from the time of the Messenger (saw) in their lands. They were far from other civilizations. Because of this, when they preserved it, Roman, Persian, Greek, or Indian ideas did not mix with it. Thus, they preserved it correctly and purely. Consequently, the people of Oman did not have unusual religious rituals like others, because they were not influenced by other civilizations. They were far away and preserved Islam correctly as they transmitted it from the Messenger (saw). So, this removes any doubt: we took it directly from the Messenger.

          This is the first path.

          The Second Path: The matter of codification (Tadwin) and the precise control of codification. (But time is short, the lesson would be long and people might get bored).

          The second phase is the phase of codification. After the Messenger (saw) began his call, every individual entering Islam had to learn the matters of the religion, especially those related to creed and faith in Allah. The Messenger established the first school for them: Dar Al-Arqam bin Abi Al-Arqam. He began to instill Islam and the foundations of the religion in them. In summary, the Messenger instilled in the souls of the Companions that Islam is a complete, integrated reality that does not accept partition, half-solutions, equality (with falsehood), or compromises. The Messenger alone was the ideal model and practical application of Islam. As you know, wealth and status were offered to the Messenger – did he agree? He was asked to compromise on the matter of Islam when they gathered with his uncle Abu Talib. He said his famous statement: “O uncle, by Allah, if they put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left to leave this matter, I would not leave it until Allah makes it victorious.” A firm creed with no compromise, and it affected the Companions.

          Similarly, in the second situation when Utbah bin Rabi’ah came to him and said, “Muhammed, if you want wealth by this matter, we will gather wealth for you; if you want leadership or sovereignty, we will make you our master,” etc. The Messenger recited the beginning of Surah Fussilat to him, and Utbah saw no sign of compromise from him. Then they came with half-solutions, saying, “Alright, you worship your god one day, and we will worship our god one day.” Then Allah revealed: “Say, O disbelievers, I do not worship what you worship…” Finally, they said, “Keep your religion, but stop criticizing our gods.” The Messenger said: “Say, ‘It is not for me to change it on my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed, I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of a tremendous Day.'” He told them all: Islam is a complete, integrated creed that does not accept partition. If part collapses, the whole collapses.

          This creed selected the men who led this nation. Allah tested them. An example of a test: the boycott of Banu Hashim lasted three years. But the Messenger instilled the creed, and it bore fruit; they did not compromise their faith or creed, despite the hardship and suffering during that boycott. Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas (RA) said: “I went out one day to relieve myself. I heard a crunching under my feet. It was a camel hide. I took it, washed it, burned it, ground it, and subsisted on it for three days.”

          In short, the school of Al-Arqam produced in the Companions the correct creed that the Messenger (saw) instilled. They never compromised their religion and sacrificed themselves for Islam. Later, when the Islamic call spread and the number of Muslims increased, and the harm from Quraysh intensified, the Messenger (saw) permitted them to migrate first to Abyssinia, but it was far. Then, after Allah blessed him with the second pledge of Aqabah from the people of Medina, who promised him victory, he permitted the weak Muslims to migrate to Medina. When they migrated, the Companions who graduated from the school of Al-Arqam established a school called the School of the Reciters (Qurra’). At that time, terms like exegetes, jurists, hadith scholars didn’t exist. Anyone who memorized the Quran or part of it, studied under the Messenger, preserved the Sunnah, and knew the reasons for revelation was called a Reciter (Qari’).

          They built a school in Medina called the School of the Qurra’. The Companions would migrate to it and stay. These Qurra’ would go out in the morning, gather firewood, sell it, and bring food to the Qurra’. Every new convert to Islam would come to that school and sit there, and they would teach him the Quran and prayer matters. This school remained a beacon until the Messenger came to Medina and beyond. The Messenger relied on the graduates of this school for calling to Islam (Da’wah). He would send those who were proficient, had memorized the Quran, knew the Sunnah, and knew the reasons for revelation. Many Muslims in Medina, but he didn’t send just anyone. An example is the story of the companions of Ar-Raji’ when the delegations of Adal and Qarah came to the Messenger. They said, “Send with us those who will teach us the matters of our religion.” He sent with them seven or ten of the Qurra’. Also, when Al-Amir (Amr bin Malik) came to the Messenger and asked him to send a group to the people of Najd. The Messenger said, “I fear for them.” He said, “I guarantee their safety.” It is said he sent 40 or 70 of the Qurra’. He used the Qurra’ for Da’wah. They were the ones who led the army, presided over judgments, and upon them revolved the affairs of Islam and the Muslims. But the people of Najd betrayed them and killed them at Bi’r Ma’unah. This is called the Expedition of the Qurra’ or the Expedition of Bi’r Ma’unah.

          The school remained in Medina, and then after the Messenger, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (RA) relied on the Qurra’. In the battle of Al-Yamamah, the Companions said: “When the heat of battle intensified, we would seek refuge with the Qurra’,” as they stood firm on the battlefield because they sought death more than life and loved martyrdom. Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA) came to Abu Bakr and said, “O Caliph of the Messenger of Allah, preserve the memorizers of the Quran, for nearly 70 of the Qurra’ were killed in Al-Yamamah.” Abu Bakr ordered the Qurra’ to review the noble Mushaf written during the time of the Messenger and teach the people, so that the Qurra’ would not all be killed in battle, as they were the ones who stood firm.

          Then came the era of Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA). He relied on them, brought them close in his gatherings, they were his army leaders and callers to Islam. So, during the time of Abu Bakr and Umar, the state was strong by relying on the scholars, the Qurra’. Then came the time of Uthman (RA). In the early years, he relied on them, but in later years, he brought his relatives closer, and the state began to show weakness. A rebellion occurred in Medina against Uthman, leading to his assassination. Then Ali bin Abi Talib (RA) assumed power, and the Qurra’ gathered around him. Some Muslims rebelled against him in the Battle of the Camel, and he defeated them. Then Muawiyah staged a military coup against Ali bin Abi Talib at Siffin. The Qurra’ gathered with him and fought with him, until victory was near for Ali, were it not for the trickery of Amr bin Al-Aas. What happened, happened.

          When the Qurra’ advised Ali bin Abi Talib not to accept arbitration and that Muawiyah was a transgressor, and that he should fight them, but Ali did not listen to their opinion. The Qurra’ withdrew themselves. When the arbitration occurred and Ali was removed from the Caliphate, they said to him: “You have removed yourself from the Caliphate.” So they withdrew from him. Those people who withdrew were called the “Muhakkamah” (those who declare ‘Judgment belongs to Allah’). This Muhakkamah pledged allegiance to Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi as their imam. They considered Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi as the fifth of the Rightly Guided Caliphs after Ali bin Abi Talib. Then what happened between Ali and the Muhakkamah at the Battle of Nahrawan occurred. Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi was killed, along with many of the Qurra’ and those who remained with him. Among them were Abu Bilal Mirdas bin Hudayr, his brother Urwah bin Udiyyah, and others.

          Those who remained gathered around Jabir bin Zaid (may Allah have mercy on him). Discussions took place among them. Imam Jabir bin Zaid established his school. When was that? Imam Jabir bin Zaid was born in 18 AH (or 21 AH). He abandoned fighting and that affair and returned to Da’wah. He began to establish this school, meaning he codified and wrote it down. Imam Jabir bin Zaid (may Allah have mercy on him) began to collect authentic narrations from the Companions from the Messenger of Allah (saw). Abu (?) Jabir bin Zaid traveled from Basra to Medina and Mecca in 40 journeys, during 40 Hajj seasons, to meet as many Companions as possible, ask them about the Messenger (saw), the situations they experienced with him, the events they witnessed, what they heard from the Messenger, and what he told them. It is narrated that Imam Jabir said: “I met 70 of the Badriyyun (those who fought at Badr) and took from their knowledge.” (He meant Abdullah bin Abbas was considered young on the day of Badr…). Imam Jabir bin Zaid would codify what he heard from those narrations. He said, “I met a number of Companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw),” and “A number of Companions narrated to me,” indicating the many he met. It was said to him, “The Messenger (saw) wrote a letter on Sadaqat to Amr bin Hazm Al-Ansari when he sent him as governor over Yemen.” So he traveled specifically from Basra to Medina, went to the house of Amr bin Hazm Al-Ansari, knocked on the door of his sons, and asked them to show him the letter the Messenger (saw) had written to their father. They gave him the letter, he saw it, and he copied it. It is said he wrote it down and transmitted it. Imam Jabir was extremely keen on transmitting these narrations.

          Imam Jabir was not alone; with him were Abu Bilal Mirdas bin Hudayr, Abdullah bin Ibadh, Salim bin Dhakwan Al-Hilali, and Salim bin Hatti. Imam Jabir bin Zaid began to codify the narrations with those with him.

          Firstly, the school of Imam Jabir bin Zaid and his followers was called the School of the People of Truth and Righteousness (Ahl al-Haqq wal-Istiqamah). The founders were some Companions, like Abdullah bin Wahb Al-Rasibi, Zaid bin Husn Al-Ta’i, and other Companions – the Qurra’ who were martyred at Nahrawan. The Followers (Tabi’un) met the senior Companions. Imam Jabir bin Zaid met all the Companions. He met the leaders who participated with Ali bin Abi Talib during the days of turmoil: the Day of the House (siege of Uthman), the Day of the Camel, the Day of Siffin, the Day of Nahrawan, the Day of Nakhlah. He met all of them and asked them in detail. He asked the Companions about these events. It is said that Imam Jabir bin Zaid and Abu Bilal Mirdas bin Hudayr (may Allah have mercy on him) entered upon Aisha (RA) – who was one of the Prophet’s wives well-acquainted with events – sat with her, and asked her in detail about the life of the Messenger (saw), what she heard, about the events, including the era of Abu Bakr, the events of Umar, the Day of Uthman, and the Battle of the Camel (in which she participated). She repented and sought Allah’s forgiveness. Imam Jabir and Abu Bilal had vast knowledge of the complex political events.

          So, the summary: Firstly, the school of Imam Jabir bin Zaid met the Companions who met the Messenger (saw), so their transmission was correct and firmly established from the Messenger (saw). Secondly, they met the leaders who participated in those complex political events and battles, starting from the Day of the House, the Day of the Camel, Siffin, Nahrawan, Nakhlah. They met the leaders and knew who was correct and who was in error, so their understanding of the events was clear. Thirdly, they were residents of Basra, Iraq, and most of these events occurred in Iraq – they were present. So, they had a wide understanding of these matters. For example, Abdullah bin Ibadh wrote a letter (still extant, needing explanation and commentary) in which he says he met Uthman, Ali bin Abi Talib, and Muawiyah, and knew these events in detail. It is one of the oldest Siyar. Also, there is a Sirah by Salim bin Dhakwan Al-Hilali, a contemporary of Imam Jabir bin Zaid. The manuscript still exists, not yet printed, needing verification. There is also a Sirah by Salim bin Hilal, I don’t know if it exists or not. These Siyar were written in the first half of the first century AH or shortly after. They are codifications proving they were correct and on the right path because they witnessed the events, knew those who participated in them, met their leaders, took it directly from the correct sources, had full detail, and codified it. Therefore, their beliefs and narrations are truthful. It is not narrated that they fabricated a single narration attributed to the Messenger (saw).

          Then, after Imam Jabir bin Zaid came Abu Ubaidah Muslim bin Abi Karimah, who further clarified and expanded the school. Then after Abu Ubaidah came Al-Rabi’ bin Habib. Then the school divided: to Oman, to Yemen, and to North Africa. In Oman, during the time of Imam Al-Rabi’ bin Habib, he came to Oman and settled there. He had students of knowledge (or bearers of knowledge) with him. Mahbub Al-Rahil established a school in Sohar. Scholars from the Al-Rahili family and others emerged from Sohar. Upon this school revolved the learning of this family and scholars, as you read in Omani history: the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th centuries AH. Also, Abu Al-Mundhir Bashir bin Al-Mundhir was in Nizwa, established a school, built a mosque (later the Great Mosque), and was given the title ‘Sheikh’ in Omani heritage. He established his school, which continued. Also, Abu Ali Musa bin Ali Al-Azri in Izki. These schools branched from the school of Al-Rabi’. So, the chain connects: Al-Rabi’ from Abu Ubaidah, Abu Ubaidah from Jabir, Jabir from the senior Companions from the Prophet (saw). It is said that the books written by Imam Jabir bin Zaid were transmitted to Oman with Mahbub Al-Rahil, then Muhammed bin Mahbub carried them to Mecca. From Mecca, the people of the Maghrib (North Africa) copied them. But, by Allah, the books of Imam Jabir bin Zaid are still lost. What remains is what the students of Al-Rabi’ recorded from Abu Ubaidah or from some sheikhs from Imam Jabir bin Zaid. These were collected by Maghribi scholars in a book called Al-Diwan Al-Muarad ‘ala Al-Ashyakh (The Anthology Presented to the Sheikhs), consisting of 22 books. It is a compilation authored by scholars of Ahl al-Haqq wal-Istiqamah in the first and second centuries AH.

          Among them is the Jami’ Abi Safrah, which are narrations of Al-Rabi’ from Dhamam from Jabir bin Zaid from the Companions. The second book is the Musnad of Imam Al-Rabi’, which are narrations of Al-Rabi’ from Abu Ubaidah from Jabir bin Zaid. The difference is that the narrations of Al-Rabi’ from Dhamam are one type, and his narrations from Abu Ubaidah are another. This book also contains the Book of Marriage (Nikah al-Shighar) by Imam Jabir bin Zaid, as well as the Fatwas of Al-Rabi’, narrations of his fatwas, his effects (Athar), letters from scholars of Basra, letters from scholars of Medina, Mecca, Mosul, and Kufa. This book is still a manuscript, not printed. May Allah provide someone to review it, publish it, and bring it to light. This is a very brief summary of the codification of this period.

          Thus, we realize fully that the Companions codified it before others. The arrangement of the Noble Quran – the arrangement of the surahs (Alif-Lam-Mim, Al-Baqarah, An-Nisa’, Aal-Imran) – this arrangement according to the narration of Imam Jabir bin Zaid was written down. The first to codify the Prophetic Sunnah was Imam Jabir bin Zaid. Al-Khalil bin Ahmad Al-Farahidi (may Allah have mercy on him), who was from Oman, was the one who established the science of Arabic prosody (Al-Farahidi), the science of diacritical points (dotting), as writing was without dots. He established the vowel marks (fatha, damma, kasra, shadda). He established the dictionary (lexicon) – his first dictionary is Kitab Al-Ayn. He established the science of grammar (Nahw). All of this was in service of the Quran. The people of Oman were the foremost in serving the Noble Quran.

          …Does anyone have a question about the topic? Discussions, comments, or a point not understood? Please, go ahead.

          (The speaker continues)

          The arrangement of the Mushafs (written copies of the Quran)… Al-Aswad. It is said – and Allah knows best – that some books mention this point. I have found references to it. But it is also said regarding Al-Khalil bin Ahmad, though they do not make explicit the favor of the people of Oman. I even found that Al-Khalil bin Ahmad Al-Farahidi (may Allah have mercy on him) used to make this supplication: “My Lord, forgive me and grant me knowledge that no one after me will need, for You are the Bestower.” He always made this supplication, so Allah opened for him the science of the Arabic language; he was the one who founded and established its principles.

          Excellent.

          Glory be to You, O Allah, and with Your praise.

          Questioner: Shaykh, the reasons for marginalizing this history – ancient and modern Omani history – are there reasons that have led to its marginalization among many of the people, in their books or in their Siyar?

          Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani: There are many reasons. The people of Oman themselves neglected it. A period came upon the people of Oman during the days of economic blockade, famine, and drought. They were preoccupied with earning a living. They migrated, and many went to Africa. At that time, so much history was lost because no one studied it or taught it. Also, the neglect of history, lack of reading, lack of study, and no institutions existed for them. For example, if we look at Egypt, they have Al-Azhar, which codified that jurisprudence and took charge of education, teaching, and instruction. It has been like a university since the time of the Fatimids. In the Maghrib (North Africa), the University of Qayrawan also played this role. In Iraq, Karbala and Najaf Al-Ashraf have their own Hawzas (religious seminaries), strong institutions supported by funds, and there are those who take on (the role). All of them have students of knowledge. As for us, we have absolutely nothing. Add to that our love for tribal histories and wars, and so on. It was all lost. And none of our Imams tried, except Imam Al-Arab bin Sultan (may Allah have mercy on him), who built Jabrin Fort as the first university for students of knowledge. But later, due to division and disagreement, it was lost, and no one followed up after that. The hope now is that history is being investigated, the Siyar are being printed, reviewed, and so on.

          Questioner: Shaykh, are there existing (manuscripts) or effects of our companions?

          Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani: In Rustaq? In Nizwa? We mean great libraries. But due to war… due to the Abbasid wars and the (campaigns) of (the Abbasid general) Ibn Bur? They burned these libraries. Our companions truly had large libraries… However, some of them are in the forts. But they were burned. Some remain in the private collections of individuals. For example, in Oman, more than 12,000 titles of manuscripts, documents, and Siyar have been discovered. The Omani Siyar contain more than 300 Sirah (singular of Siyar), which need verification and review – they exist. Many manuscripts exist now, but there is no institution to print them, publish them, review them, nor anyone to support them. Nor are there people to buy them. Even if someone prints the books, no one buys from him. So all circumstances pressure the reality, preventing publication. We truly call upon the Omani people and the scholars to do something, even a small thing, so that people can access it.

          Questioner: (Insha’Allah, we will write, Mr. Shaykh Ahmad?) I understand.

          Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani: Insha’Allah.

          Questioner: Alright.

          Shaykh Hilal Al Barwani: Excellent. Glory be to You, O Allah, and with Your praise. I bear witness that there is no god but You. I seek Your forgiveness and repent to You. O Allah, make this gathering of ours a blessed gathering, and make our dispersal after it a protected dispersal. Do not let there be among us or with us any wretched or deprived person. O Allah, make us doers of good with knowledge and avoiders of indecency. Remove from us the injustice of the oppressors. And may Allah send prayers and peace upon our Master Muhammed, and upon his family and all his companions.

          Well done, may Allah reward you with good.

          Attendee: Well done, (even though it was) long.

          May Allah Guide the Ummah.

          May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

          Leave a comment

          Filed under Uncategorized

          Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

          April 8, 2026 · 10:34 am

          The False Prophecies of Jesus.

          “When the angels proclaimed, “O Mary! Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary; honoured in this world and the Hereafter, and he will be one of those nearest.” (Qur’an 3:45)

          ﷽ 

          This article is to warn people against Jesus the son of the Father. This article invites people to believe in Jesus the Messiah!

          “So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus, who is called the Messiah?” (Matthew 27:17)

          There are two different Jesus here. There is Jesus, the Son of the Father (Bar-Abbas) and there is Jesus who is called the Messiah.

          “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

          “When the angels proclaimed, “O Mary! Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary; honoured in this world and the Hereafter, and he will be one of those nearest.” (Qur’an 3:45)

          “For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.” (2 Corinthians 11:4)

          Jesus, who is called “Son of the Father” in the New Testament. The one that has autobiographies written about him in the so-called Gospels. That one is a Dajjal, a Liar and an impostor. That Jesus is the Anti-Christ. The word Anti-means in place of.

          Jesus, who is known as The Christ, The Messiah, The Word of Allah, The Servant and Messenger of Allah that is captured in the New Testament, that preached the Gospel. That is the Muslim Jesus.

          It is this False Jesus that was known by his many, many failed prophecies.

          The many many false prophecies of Jesus.

          “But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 18:20)

          Now, for Muslims, there is no issue if Jesus died a natural death or was killed by his enemies. As mentioned in the Qur’an, the NT and the TNCH all have no problem with the admission that people have, can and did kill the Prophets of Allah.

          The real dilemma for the Jew, Agnostic, atheists, and other religions (not Muslim) is that Jesus (according to the records of the New Testament) simply made so many false prophecies that one would be hard-pressed to take anything he said seriously.

          We will be quoting the text of the New Testament, which we as Muslims know to be a false Jesus and a false portrayal of who he was. Anything from this point that seems demeaning of the status of Jesus is only directed at the conclusions one would reach if we were to believe the New Testament.

          Jesus gives a three-fold failed prophecy. He made three failed prophecies in one go!

          “They will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” (Mark 16:18)

          This has to be one of the biggest and most embarrassing failed prophecies. It is a three-fold failed prophecies. So this text makes Jesus (as) give three failed prophecy.

          1. You will pick up snakes with your hands, and it will not hurt you at all.
          2. You will drink deadly poison, and it will not hurt you at all.
          3. You will place hands on sick people and they will get well.

          The following is a link to a Christian who put his faith in Jesus false words and paid for it with his life.

          “It will not hurt them at all.” We would say that having your finger amputated because you got bit by a poisonous snake more than qualifies as hurt.

          Not only this but they have died handling snakes!

          https://abcnews.go.com/US/snake-handling-pentecostal-pastor-dies-snake-bite/story?id=22551754

          The Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox dare not to take Jesus up on this prophecy.

          Those Christians who do not hold Mark 16:18 to be inspired scripture breathed a huge sigh of relief. However, the Orthos and Catholics run from it until this very day.

          However, there are a great many Christians who believe that the above text is spurious, non-canonical and, in fairness, we cannot hold them to this challenge, nor would this text prove that Christ Jesus is false—not to them at least.

          Other Christians will say that this is a prophecy of Jesus and not an instruction.

          “Jesus told him, “It is also written: Do not test the Lord your God.” (Matthew 4:7).

          But we say if that is the case, it is a prophecy that is unfalsifiable. Let us say that some mean-spirited individual poured strychnine into the chalice of an Orthodox Bishop or Catholic Priest and his congregation drank from it and all dropped dead. This would only strengthen the faith of other sects of Christians that those who dropped dead were not true Christians anyway. They had no true communion with God.

          Notice the three points.

          1. You will pick up snakes with your hands, and it will not hurt you at all.
          2. You will drink deadly poison, and it will not hurt you at all.
          3. You will place hands on sick people and they will get well.

          If it is meant that all three of these are a means of testing God, then Jesus himself would be guilty of violating point 3. That is because he did put his hands on the sick people and they were healed.

          This is not happening today by any Christian denomination under the sun. Which country on the Earth have Christians put hospitals out of buisness? None.

          The One and Only Sign Jesus Ever Gave That He Was The True Messiah Turns Out To Be A Failed Prophecy.

          “Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.”  He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matthew 12:38-40)

          There has been so much Christian ink poured into trying to save this failed prophecy. Because no matter how you slice it, it does not add up.

          Since Jesus says ‘For as’ and Muslims like Ahmed Deedat, Zakir Naik and others say that ‘as’ is a reference to Jonas being alive whereas Jesus was dead. So now some Christians have wised up and tried another angle. This new angle is not rather Jesus or Jonah being dead or alive, which they (these Christians admit) is not the same. Rather, if we allow metaphor, it references entombment. 

          Rather, this is a reference to the enotmbment or the condition of the body being alive or dead is really irrelevant, as Jesus’ emphasis is on the time factor.

          However, some Christians (Protestants) were ready to stake a stand and kick in the teeth of the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox and the Roman Catholics and show that Jesus did not indeed make a false prophecy. Rather, these traditional churches were not guided by the Holy Spirit and they were false. Thus was born the idea that Jesus died on a Wednesday and not on a ‘Good Friday’.

          No matter the game of cat and mouse the various Christian sects want to play with one another, the embarrassment still stands:

          “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

          “Will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Jesus was actually never put ‘in the earth’ , much less the heart of the Earth!


          Jesus failed the prophecy with regard to how many times the Rooster would crow before he would be betrayed.

          “Jesus answered him, “Will you lay down your life for my sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times.” (John 13:38)

          It is very clear that Peter would not deny him until the rooster crows three times. Mark tells us otherwise. The rooster crowed after the first denial and not the third.

          “Now as Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came.  And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with Jesus of Nazareth.” But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are saying.” And he went out on the porch, and a rooster crowed.” (Mark 14:16-68)

          This whole failed prophecy is a contrived concocted mess!

          Jesus failed prophecy about a man being with him in paradise that day.

          “Then Jesus said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43) What a flat lie and a failed prophecy!

          “Jesus said unto her, “Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to My Father.” (John 20:17)


          Jesus, accordingly, was in the tomb for three days and three nights! So there was no ‘today you will be with me in Paradise’. Furthermore, many Orthos and Catholics believe that Jesus was actually in hell during that time!

          Evidence for Christ’s Descent Into Hell

          Jesus’ false prophecy about the unity of the body of Christ.

          “I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They, too, will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.” (John 10:16)

          This one is a Phat L. Out of all the world’s religions, there is perhaps none on Earth that is so fractious and has done so much violence to those deemed dissenters and heretics, as has the Christian faith tradition. Love thy brother and turn the other cheek went out of style long before bell-bottoms and vhs.

          In fact, the most non-violent Christian groups tend to live in isolation or have the fewest numbers on the planet. Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, Shakers, Society of Friends.

          Contrary to the above failed prophecy, the prophecy of the Qur’an still reigns true.

          “And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)

          Want to prove Islam false? Simple. Unite and become one flock with one shepherd.

          Jesus failed prophecy to the high priest.

          “Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!” (Matthew 26:64-65)

          That is a failed prophecy. It never took place.

          Failed Prophecy of Jesus Promising Followers Immense Wealth By Bribing Them.

          “So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life.” (Mark 10:29-30)

          Which Christian has left his wife and received 100 wives in return?

          Jesus falsely predicted that his followers would outshine him in works.

          “Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.” (John 14:12)

          Which follower of Jesus ever turned water into wine? Which follower of Jesus walked on water? Which Christian was dead supposedly for three days and three nights and came back to life?

          Jesus gives a clear false prophecy about broken promises and shattered dreams that clearly shows that he is a false prophet.

          “And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.  If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.” (John 14:13-14)

          This is easily shown to be divorced from reality. Even if we were to ask in the name of Yeshua, Immanuel, there are millions of requests that go out in the name of Jesus/Yeshua that are simply not answered.

          Jesus either gives a failed prophecy or has a real dark sense of humor.

          “I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.” (Revelation 3:11)

          I am coming soonish…

          At least the Jehovah’s Witnesses got tired of waiting (2000 plus years) and they made Jesus return in 1914.

          Jesus gives a failed prophecy about Christians walking in the light.

          “When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (John 8:12)

          Under Christianity, Europe was literally in what is known as the dark ages. It was not until contact with Muslims and the re-introduction of ancient Greek and Roman archives, coupled with the findings of the Arabs, Persians, Indians, among others, that Europe actually and ironically experienced the renaissance—the rebirth.

          Jesus falsely predicted that his words would endure, but we have evidence that Jesus said things that we do not have records of.

          “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

          We don’t have a record of the questions Jesus asked them. If Christians say that “will pass away” means cease to be true or binding as opposed to preserved, then they have made our argument for us. That Allah’s words can change not in the sense of passing away or being true but in the sense of being preserved.

          This is false because of the following:

          “And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.” (Luke 2:46)

          The failed prophecy that C.S Lewis called this “The Most Embarrassing Verse in the Bible.”

          “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” (Mathew 16:28)

          https://www.behindthegospels.com/p/surprised-by-cs-lewis-the-most-embarrassing

          Jesus made a false prophecy that no sign would be given to ‘this generation’ .

          “He sighed deeply and said, “Why does this generation ask for a sign? Truly, I tell you, no sign will be given to it.” (Mark 8:12)

          But this is also a false prophecy because signs were indeed given.

          “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.” (John 20:30)

          “The apostles performed many signs and wonders among the people. And all the believers used to meet together in Solomon’s Colonnade.” (Acts 5:12)

          “Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.” (Acts 6:8)

          “Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw.” (Acts 8:13)

          They performed signs, so Jesus’ prediction that no sign would be given to that generation proved false.

          “But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 18:20)

          It is precisely all these false and failed prophecies that are attributed to Jesus coupled with the view that his enemies killed him that ultimately give an image of a false Prophet. We seek protection with Allah (swt) from this. We seek protection from those who ascribe false things to the Blessed Prophets Jesus (as) or Muhammed (saw).

          May Allah (swt) guide the sincere Christians to abandon Jesus the Son of the Father and embrace Jesus the Messiah!

          May Allah (swt) guide the Christians to the truth so that they do not burn in the hellfire.

          May Allah Guide the Ummah!

          May Allah Forgive the Ummah!

          Leave a comment

          Filed under Uncategorized

          Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

          April 7, 2026 · 3:44 pm

          You deny that Allah has a hand, shin or face, yet you claim he is the All Seeing and All Hearing. Is this not a contradiction?

          “There is nothing like Him, for He is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

          ﷽

          Some may say that you seem to be inconsistent in your doctrine. You deny that Allah has a hand, shin or face, yet you claim he is the All Seeing and All Hearing. Is this not a contradiction?

          What do we do with a verse that seems to suggest that Allah has a hand?  

          “And the Jews say, “The hand of Allah is chained.” Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended.” (Qur’an 5:64)

          It is clear that the meaning of the word hand in the above text is for authority.

          One could have ask the Jews:

          “Who or what has Allah’s hand chained up?”

          “What is the proof for your claim?”

          “At which place or location is this hand chained up?”

          “Why is his hand being chained up an issue at all?”

          When we look at the verse in full we get our answer.

          “And the Jews say, “The hand of Allah is chained.” Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He bestows however He wills. And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. And We have cast among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. Every time they kindled the fire of war [against you], Allah extinguished it. And they strive throughout the land [causing] corruption, and Allah does not like corrupters.” (Qur’an 5:64)

          The key phrase is: He bestows however He wills.

          In other words they Jews were not saying anything about Allah’s hand they were talking about Allah not being generous or bestowing his bounty upon them.

          We know human beings can also have a hand. Allah’s hand cannot be like a human being’s hand. The proof for this is: “There is nothing like Him, for He is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

          We also say that Allah is Ghafour, Raheem, Wadud, and Kareem. However, even the human being can be ghafour, raheem, wadud and kareem.

          How can you deny a hand to Allah (swt) when you say that human beings are forgiving, merciful, loving and generous and Allah (swt) is also forgiving, merciful, loving and generous?

          “Say, to those who have believed that they [should] forgive those who expect not the days of Allah so that He may recompense a people for what they used to earn.” (Qur’an 45:14)

          “And let not those of virtue among you and wealth swear not to give [aid] to their relatives and the needy and the emigrants for the cause of Allah , and let them pardon and overlook. Would you not like that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 24:22)

          What is the difference?

          “Say, Allah is Absolute.” (Qur’an 112:1)

          “Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Clear Book. Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.”  (Qur’an 12:1-2)

          Allah (swt) has told us that he is Absolute.

          Allah (swt) told us that he sent down the Qur’an in Arabic.

          Let us unpack this.

          When it comes to these attributes, Ghafour, Raheem, Wadud and Kareem, we know that Allah (swt) is absolutely Forgiving, absolutely Merciful, The absolultely Loving and absolutely Generous.

          No one or no thing can match Allah (swt) in this. The human being is not absolutely merciful, absolutely loving, absolutely generous, absolutely kind. The human being receives these attributes whereas Allah did not receive these attributes from anyone or anywhere. They are intrinsic to Allah (swt).

          So, when we talk about hands (Qur’an 5:64) or we talk about eyes (Qur’an 52:48) or we talk about a Shin (Qur’an 68:42) or Hand (Qur’an 39:67) what does it mean to say that Allah (swt) is absolute hands, absolute eyes, absolute shin or absolute hand?

          We do not say that Allah is absolute hand, absolute shin and absolute nose, absolue eyes. These are not attributes of Allah (swt). This is absolutely not intelligible to anyone. Whereas Allah (swt) has told us that he revealed the clear book and that it is in Arabic.

          Using the Arabic language we understand that hand (hands) means power and authority.

          Using the Arabic language we understand that eyes means awareness.

          Using the Arabic language we understand shin means severity.

          By this we know that Allah (swt) is absolutely powerful. Allah (swt) is absolute authority. Allah (swt) is absolutely aware.

          ” Say, “Call upon Allah or call upon the Most Merciful. Whichever [name] you call – to Him belong the best names.” (Qur’an 17:110)

          “Anas bin Malik said:

          “Whenever a matter would distress him, the Prophet (saw) would say: ‘O Living, O Self-Sustaining Sustainer! In Your Mercy do I seek relief (Yā Ḥayyu yā Qayyūm, bi-raḥmatika astaghīth).’” And with this chain, that he said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘Be constant with: “O Possessor of Majesty and Honor (Yā Dhal-Jalāli wal-Ikrām).’”

          Source: (https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3524)

          It was narrated that Jabir bin ‘Abdullah said:

          “The Messenger of Allah (saw) used to teach us Istikharah, just as he used to teach us a Surah of the Qur’an. He said: ‘If anyone of you is deliberating about a decision he has to make, then let him pray two Rak’ah of non- obligatory prayer, then say: Allahumma inni astakhiruka bi ‘ilmika wa astaqdiruka bi qudratika wa as’aluka min fadlikal-‘azim, fa innaka taqdiru wa la aqdir, wa ta’lamu wa la a’lam, wa Anta ‘allamul-ghuyub. Allahumma in kunta ta’lamu hadhal-amra (then the matter should be mentioned by name) ma kan min shay’in khairan li fi dini wa ma’ashi wa ‘aqibati amri, aw khairanli fi ‘ajili amri wa ajilihi, faqdurhu li wa yassirhu li wa barik li fihi. Wa in kunta ta’lamu [O Allah, I seek Your guidance (in making a choice) by virtue of Your knowledge, and I seek ability by virtue of Your power, and I ask You of Your great bounty. You have power, I have none. And You know, I know not. You are the Knower of hidden things. O Allah, if in Your knowledge, this matter (then it should be mentioned by name) is good for me in my religion, my livelihood and my affairs, or both in this world and in the Hereafter then ordain it for me, make it easy for me, and bless it for me. And if in Your knowledge]. Then saying similar to what he said the first time, except: Wa in kana sharran li fasrifhu ‘anni wasrifni ‘anhu waqdur li al-khair haithuma kana thumma raddini bihi (If it is bad for me then turn it away from me and turn me away from it, and ordain for me the good wherever it may be and make me pleased with it).’”

          Source: (https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:1383)

          A’isha reported:

          One night I missed Allah’s Messenger (saw) from the bed, and when I sought him my hand touched the soles of his feet while he was in the state of prostration; they (feet) were raised and he was saying:” O Allah, I seek refuge in Your pleasure from Your anger, and in Your forgiveness from Your punishment, and I seek refuge in You from You (Thy anger). I cannot reckon Your praise. You are as You have praised Yourself!”

          Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:486)

          What has not been established in any sound narrations from the Blessed Prophet (saw) is he or his noble companions calling upon the foot, or the two right hands. No one ask: “Oh Allah by virtue of your hands.” No one ask: “Oh Allah I ask by virtue of your foot!” Never!


          Rather there is an exhuastable amount of evidence from them calling upon The Most Merciful, The Most Compassionate, The Ever Living, The Self Existant.

          To read more on this please see our article here:

          The Attributes of Allah and the Way of the Salaf.
          The Anthropomorphic God of the Bible.

          May Allah Guide the Ummah.

          May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

          2 Comments

          Filed under Uncategorized