“O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Isa, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So, believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.” (Qur’an 4:171)
﷽
The name of God and the name of Jesus are distinctly different.
“The victor I will make into a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will never leave it again. On him, I will inscribe the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God, as well as my new name.” (Revelation 3:12)
Prima Qur’an Comment:
From the above text it can be seen that ‘the name of my God‘ AND ‘my new name‘ are distinctly different.
This becomes obvious from the fact that Jesus is a common name, like John, James, or Peter. The above text of Revelation3:12 was taken from a ‘Red Lettered‘ New Testament, where the words of Jesus are in red.
JESUS IS NOT THE NAME OF GOD…
Many times, our Christians tell us that Jesus is the name of God. It is a name ‘above every name’. After all, how can a person have a personal relationship with God if you don’t know the name of God? I guess that sounds reasonable.
However, what most Christians are not aware of is the fact that the Hebrew language does not have a ‘J‘. So, if the Jews spoke Hebrew, you know they didn’t pronounce Jesus with a ‘J‘.
The other point that is not realized so readily by our Christian sisters and brothers is that Jesus is really quite an ordinary name. It has no power in and of itself. It was a very common name then and it’s still a common name.
In fact, seeing that Spanish is ranked as the number 3 language in the world, Jesus, pronounced ‘Hey Zeus,‘ is a very common name among men in the Latin American community.
So, this is a rather uneventful name. It would be the equivalent of calling someone Chaz, or Lester or Herbert in English.
Feel free to go to Google Translate and listen to how the name ‘Jesus’ is pronounced.
Go to Google Translate and just listen to the name “Jesus” as it is pronounced in Spanish and Greek.
Go to Google Translate and just listen to the name “Jesus” as it is pronounced in Spanish and Greek.
Even more revealing is the fact that Jesus is a ‘bastardized’ (apologies for the terminology) Latin version of the name Yehoshua in Hebrew, or in other words, Joshua.
The name Yeshua appears 29 times in the Tanach.
Yehoshua (Joshua) of Nun is called Yeshua in Nechemyah (Nehemiah) 8:17. Yeshua is the name of the Cohain HaGadol (the high priest) in the time of Zerubavel in Ezra 3:2. It is the name of a Levite under King Hizkiyah (Hezekiah) in 2 Chronicles 31:15. There is even a city called Yeshua in the negev of Yehudah in Nechemyah11:26.
Yeshua is also a shortened version of the word Yehoshua, much like Bill is for William.
Before anyone gets angry with us using the word ‘bastardized’ in relationship to Jesus (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him), one must realize that the word ‘bastardized’ means—to modify, especially by introducing discordant or disparate elements.
After all, you take a very common name, Joshua, which means — ‘God is my salvation’ and turn it into this Latin that sounds a lot like a former Greek god ‘Zeus’.
Remember when the evangelist screams out in the name of ‘Jeeeee zuuus’. Or the Spanish speaker yells out on stage, “In the name of ‘Hey Zeus’.” Jesus /Zeus.
Hey Zeus. Hail Zeus.
HEY ZEUS! HAIL ZEUS!
In the Qur’an the son of Mary is called ‘Isa‘ or ‘Esau‘.
Recall that Hebrew was a dead language for a long time. It was only when Eliezer Ben Yehuda used the Arabic language to help revive Hebrew that it became a vibrant language again.
“One prominent pioneer was Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, the famed Jewish lexicographer widely hailed as the reviver of modern Hebrew, and whose revivalist legacy rested on a genuine recognition of the essential role of Arabic in the rebirth and resurrection of modern Hebrew.“
It is quite possible that some Christians may find it strange to use the name ‘Esau‘ or ‘Isa‘ in place of ‘Jesus‘ as there is a passage in the Bible that says that ‘God hates Esau‘.
“The oracle of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated.” (Malachi 1:1-3)
God hates Jesus but loves Jacob?
Imagine if in place of the word ‘Esau’ you had the word ‘Joshua’. You would have a very interesting passage in the Bible of God saying, “But Jesus, I hate.”
Let’s continue with Eliezer Ben Yehuda.
Since Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic are all based upon the same Semitic vowel system, Eliezer used the Arabic language.
A language that was still living and had wide currency to decipher the pronunciation and understanding of the Hebrew language.
“Jesus” was a common name back in the day. In Acts 13:6 there was a magician named Bar Jesus.
“When they had travelled through the whole island as far as Paphos, they met a magician named Bar-Jesus who was a Jewish false prophet.”
In Colossians 4:11 there was a contemporary of Paul called Jesus-Justus
“And Jesus, who is called Justus, who are of the circumcision; these alone are my co-workers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.”
Another interesting example of two people called “Jesus” side by side in the following text:
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).
So, the people had the choice to have Jesus ‘son of the father‘ or Jesus ‘called Messiah‘ killed.
So, the name “Jesus” was a common name, like John, James or Mary.
This doesn’t sound like a ‘Name Above All Names’ to me. It sounds rather common and uneventful.
Do Christians Feel Power in The Name of Joshua?
We are whether we can call upon the name of Joshua and be saved? It is, however, the same as “Jesus”. Why should only the ‘bastardized‘ form of the Latin version of ‘Yehoshua‘ be the only name for salvation?
In other words, is the Christian mission only done in English? No it is not!
So, if there are Jews, wouldn’t they be screaming out ‘Yehoshua‘ in the congregation?
That being the case, why couldn’t they scream out ‘Joshua‘ as it is the Anglicized form?
Joshua Christ?
Imagine using terms like Joshua Christ! Imagine Christian missionaries asking people to accept faith in Joshua? Imagine Benny Hinn jumping up and down and healing people in the name of Joshua! Or imagine John Hagee being slain in the spirit of Joshua Christ!
What about the name Immanuel?
Immanuel is also a common Jewish name which means ‘God is with us‘.
Maher-shalal-hash-baz was called Immanuel in Isaiah 8:8
“It shall pass into Judah and flood it all throughout up to the neck it shall reach; It shall spread its wings the full width of your land, Immanuel!”
So, for Christians to say, “Hey look, there is a prophecy that says he will be called Immanuel, We can tell them that Maher-shalal-hash-baz was also called Immanuel.”
In Matthew 1:23 we read: “Behold, the virgin shall be with a child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us“.”
That this is an example of a failed prophecy plain pure and simple. It’s amazing the lengths that Christian apologists will go through to make this all add up.
In the end, I think that the position of Islam and the Qur’an is very clear. ‘Isa is an Arabized form of the word ‘Esau’. He was born of a virgin named Mariam (Mary).
There is much to be said about the fact that Christians use a name like Jesus (a common name like John, James, or Mary) when describing the ineffable name of the creator.
Maybe there is a way out of this. Maybe, after all, The Creator is not a person, much less person(s).
Since, after all, the words ‘person’ and ‘personality’ come from the Greek word ‘persona’ which means ‘a mask’. Think about it! Tri-Theist Christians believe in a God that is One Being that wears three masks.
In the end, “Jesus” is just a common name, like Chuck, or Daryl or Lester.
We sincerely hope people will read the Qur’an and learn as much as they can about Islam. We hope that Allah Most High opens the breasts and hearts of humanity and that Allah Most Merciful guides us all to what he loves.
“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)
“For the truth stands out clearly from falsehood.” (Qur’an 2:256)
﷽
Let us see which of you reading this are quick-witted to spot the problem. Given what we know about human reproduction, what is the obvious error in sending brother after brother to impregnate a woman that fails to get pregnant?
Source: (Matthew 22:23-32)
“If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.” (Deuteronomy 25:5)
“Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.”But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also.” (Genesis 38:8-10)
“That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. Finally, the woman died. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?” (Matthew 22:23-28)
You can replace the seven brothers with ten brothers or even 25 brothers if you like.
At what point does one realize that these men are not firing blanks but that this woman is infertile!
The woman has some type of medical condition that is preventing her from getting pregnant. Now if someone wants to raise an objection, stating that in Genesis 38:8-10 Onan was spilling his semen on the ground (coitus interruptus) and that perhaps all the brothers were doing that, it doesn’t help the case either.
Did not have the foresight to realize that people would do this, evading their responsibility?
If the story of Onan was known, the men would realize that God would strike them dead. Thus, the ever looming wrath of God.
Surely the women are not so gullible as to not know whether a man is ejaculating in them or not.
This law was before modern medicine in which we know that both a man and a woman may have issues of fertility. Given the low esteem that women are generally afforded in the Bible, it is not at all surprising to see the power of pro-creation as something that man is responsible for.
If Jesus was God, he would be aware that both men and women have a part to play in human reproduction.
In the majority Christian view, Jesus shares the essence (being) of the Father and the Holy Spirit, which means that He (Jesus) gave those laws to Moses, proving further that he cannot be God and that the sacred text of the Jews and Christians are not free from egregious errors.
Another point to take note of:
The text has Jesus (as) say:
“Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.” “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” (Matthew 22:29-30)
It looks like Jesus is in error for not knowing the scriptures!
However, the scriptures say:
“And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” (Genesis 6:1-2)
Jesus claims people will not marry nor be given in marriage being like the angels. Yet the angels themselves took human women as wives.
Now, watch out for the curveball they (some Christians will throw you) because they will say, “Oh, the text says,” Sons of God” not angels. But angels are the sons of God.
You can see where they are used interchangeably here:
“One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.” (Job 1:6 New International Version)
“Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.” (Job 1:6 King James Version)
Lastly, if they persist that sons of God refer to men, then this shows you it is an appellation referring to mortal human beings without any divine connotation.
The Bible’s treatment of fertility is anthropologically conditioned and not scientifically precise.
From a modern scientific perspective, if multiple brothers fail to impregnate the same woman, it is statistically improbable that all men are infertile (assuming they are fertile with other women). The most logical conclusion is that the woman has a fertility issue. This highlights an ancient misunderstanding of reproduction, where infertility was often attributed solely to the woman. However, the levirate law implicitly places the burden on the man’s lineage to continue, ignoring potential female factors.
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.”(Qur’an 3:44)
﷽
“This is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. Those who believe in the unseen, and perform the prayers, and give from what We have provided for them. And those who believe in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed before you, and are certain of the Hereafter.” (Qur’an 2:3-4)
The Qur’an is a book of which there is no doubt. It is for those who believe in the unseen. It is for those who are certain in the life to come. It is for those who believe in what was revealed before the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Those who are skeptical of those points will quite naturally arrive at different conclusions. So that is of no consequence for the believer.
“As for those who persist in disbelief, it is the same whether you warn them or not—they will never believe. Allah has sealed their hearts and their hearing, and their sight is covered. They will suffer a tremendous punishment.” (Qur’an 2:6-7)
Now, historians and orientalists cannot speak of the supra natural as these are matters of belief. They are beyond their point of historical investigation. However, we are always thrilled when we find historians and Orientalists corroborating the testimony of narratives in the Qur’an by finding manuscripts or parchments of information that, though not ad verbatim, closely mimic what Allah (swt) has revealed before. This is the understanding of the believer.
Do we find some information from various cultures that preceded the coming of the Blessed Prophet (saw) that seems to corroborate the beliefs of Islam? Yes! That is not scary! That is exciting!
Recall what Allah (swt) himself informed us of:
“We surely sent a messenger to every community, saying, “Worship Allah and shun false gods.” But some of them were guided by Allah, while others were destined to stray. So travel throughout the land and see the fate of the deniers!” (Qur’an 16:36)
Remember we are not responsible for the conclusions or perceptions of others.
If we look at the above graph. We can see that in block B the apparent (the dhahir) is that there are parchments, manuscripts, scrolls, oral traditions, inscriptions etc. that come before the Qur’an. However, when we look at block B, the haqiqah (the reality) is that Allah’s knowledge of what really happened precedes the information in B.Because of that reality, what is in C (The Qur’an) actually precedes the information in B. This is precisely why this hobbyhorse of orientalist and those who use the historical critical method is of absolutely no consequence for the believing Muslim.
We Muslims have been the first critics of our own sources. The clash of historical narratives between the Ibadi, Sunni and Shi’a is proof positive of this. The grading of the ahadith and the mention of variants in the transmission of the Qur’an have not come from people who lost faith, agnostics or atheists. They came from us, as believers. Subhan’Allah!
These other Johnny Come Lately types, HCM, etc., welcome to the party!
History and Miracles.
We don’t believe that miracles are historical. This does not mean that we do not believe that miracles did not happen. We just don’t believe that history can capture them.
Case in point. An Indian king, Cheraman Perumal, was reported to have seen the moon split. History can report such data, but it does not necessarily confirm nor interpret the data.
This particular entry is directed towards Christians. It is rather shameful that they have taken the approach that they have in these matters. Given that they too claim to believe in the unseen. They claim to believe in a Creator that can narrate past events that present people were not privy to.
“Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste.”But she pointed to the babe. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?” He said: “I am indeed a servant of Allah: He has given me revelation and made me a prophet; And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I will be and has enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live; (He) has made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable; So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)”! Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.”(Qur’an 19:27-34)
“When Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Pure Spirit and you spoke to the people in the cradle and in maturity; and [remember] when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission, and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from [killing] you when you came to them with clear proofs and those who disbelieved among them said, “This is not but obvious magic.”(Qur’an 5:110)
“And a messenger to the Children of Israel, who will say, ‘Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah. And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead – by permission of Allah. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.” (Qur’an 3:49)
Prima Qur’an comments:
In this article, we will give a response to those Christians who use as a polemic against Muslims the claim that the Qur’an contains apocryphal material in it and therefore cannot be a revelation from Allah (swt).
Now, of course, they will claim that there are more than the three verses of the Qur’an we quoted above as being from apocryphal material. However, we have chosen to focus on these three, as they are most often used by Christian polemicists in debates with Muslims.
Now, personally, we find this particular line of Christian attack against Islam amusing. However, they have to eventually come up with something, right?
Now let’s look at and listen carefully to what these Christians are actually disputing with us about.
*Note*
They are not raising the issue of “healing the blind.“
They are not raising issues against “curing people affected by leprosy.”
They are not raising issues against “give life to the dead.”
They are not disputing these points because they are miracles attributed to Christ Jesus that they find in their accepted canonical text. We will come to the term canonical in a moment.
What they are disputing is:
Jesus speaking as an infant
Jesus creating birds out of clay
Why do they dispute about these miracles?
Because they are not in what they accept to be their canonical text.
So what do the terms apocryphal and canonical mean?
Canonical in relation to Christian scriptures means:
“A biblical canon or canon of scripture is a set of texts (or “books”) which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture. … Believers consider canonical books as inspired by God or as expressive of the authoritative history of the relationship between God and his people.”
Apocryphal in relation to Christian scriptures means:
“Biblical or related writings not forming part of the accepted canon of Scripture; or writings or reports not considered genuine.”
So, if a Christian were to come to us and say that these statements in the Qur’an are found in apocryphal sources, the first thing you have to keep in mind that what they are actually saying isthat it is apocryphal according to their particular sect of Christianity!
The reason that is important is as follows: As we write this to you on 11/4/2024, Christendom has still not settled the issue of what is and is not apocryphal for the whole of Christianity.
Glaring examples are the following:
Depending on how you want to word it, you could say that the Protestants have 7 fewer books in their version of the Old Testament. Or you could say that the Roman Catholics have 7 extra books in their Old Testament that they accept to be inspired and not apocryphal.
Yet the Orthodox Church has additional Old Testament texts (or if you want to be neutral, the Protestants and Catholics have less). The same can be said for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
The same goes for the New Testament.
What is canonical is an issue that is still not settled among them.
The Chaldean Syrian Church does not accept the following as canon:
In fact, many Protestant Christians have declared Mark 16:8-20, & John 7:53–8:11 to not be canonical.
You have to wonder about the Protestant Christian theologians like John Calvin, Martin Luther, and others who most likely held such passages to be canonical. Yet there are Christians who do not agree with the idea that such passages are non-canonical. These Christians very much believe that Mark 16:8-20, &John 7:53–8:11 are inspired scripture.
So what is the point that is being made?
The point is that when a Christian says to us that those verses in the Qur’an are allegedly taken from apocryphal sources, it is important to understand that:
That though it may be apocryphal for that particular Christian, we can’t say for certain that it was apocryphal for the other Christians.
To keep in mind that what is and is not apocryphal has been and continues to be an internal dispute among Christians.
If the Christian is to counter by saying, “Can you name for me any Christian denomination today that accepts such and such text as canonical?”
The answer to that is: “No we can’t.” Many Christian sects and denominations over time have long perished. Most often the information we do have about them comes from their opponents.
What is also interesting, and we hope Muslims reading this bear in mind, is that no Christian committed to a consistent world view in which the supra-natural happens can tell us that:
Jesus did not speak as an infant.
Jesus did not create birds out of clay.
This assertion is also supported by the text they accept as canon. Namely, the following:
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: But these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
Prima Qur’an comments:
Now this writer, apparently inspired by Allah, felt that it was necessary to inform his readers that Jesus did many other miracles that are not contained within this book.
“There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.” (John 21:25)
Prima Qur’an comments: Though we can all agree this statement is hyperbole, yet it is obvious that the writer knew that there was much more information about Jesus that could be shared.
Now, a possible Christian objection to our understanding of John 20:30-31 is that ‘the many other miracles that are not present in this book‘ could only be a reference to the miracles listed in Matthew, Mark, Luke that are not in the Gospel according to John.
The response to this is that it is simply an assumption.
It could be that:
It could be a reference only to the miracles present in Matthew, Mark, Luke that are not in the Gospel, according to John.
It could be a reference to miracles that are not present in any of those Gospel accounts.
It could be a reference to miracles present in Matthew, Mark, Luke as well as those not present in any Gospel accounts.
Christians could well ask: “Why wouldn’t these accounts of Jesus speaking as an infant or making birds out of clay make it into any of the Four Gospels commonly accepted among all of Christendom?”
Well, we have a clue about that from a text we have already mentioned.
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
Prima Qura’n comments: This Gospel writer is telling us that he is informed about other miracles, but the seven particular miracles that he has selected is so that we may believe that Jesus is:
The Christ
The Son of God
Having eternal life through his name.
So, in the example of this Gospel writer, we have the reasons plainly stated why some miracles were chosen over others. Whereas for the other Gospels it’s hard to discern why they may have left out certain miracles.
For example, John’s Gospel includes the story of Lazarus rising from the dead. I’m puzzled why such an awesome event is not recorded by the other Gospels. Or Jesus turning water into wine is only included in the Gospel, according to John.
Equally puzzling is the following awesome account, which is not recorded by any ancient documents outside of Matthew itself.
“And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, ‘Truly this was the Son of God’” (Matthew. 27:51-54).
There are no extra-biblical sources that mention this awesome event. Surely witnessing such an event would have been worthy of mention somewhere. In fact, this particular text created controversy even among conservative Christians when New Testament scholar and associate professor of theology Michael Licona raised questions about this text.
You can read about where Christians have done some damage control concerning this at the following:
So, again, going back to the Christian inquiry into why some awesome and miraculous events are recorded by some sources and not others, we can only surmise as to the motives behind this.
Why is it Jesus speaking as an infant is recorded in some sources and not others?
Why is Jesus making birds out of clay recorded in some sources and not others?
Why is it that the Gospel of Mark is now considered not to have a resurrection narrative, but other sources have it?
Why is it that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead from some sources and not others?
Why is it that Jesus turned water into wine from some sources and not others?
Why is that only the Gospel of Matthew has this narrative about the mass resurrections of people appearing to many in the city?
Another interesting point to note is that, in the case of the Christian tradition that many of us will encounter today, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants of many types, we have 30 years of the life of Christ Jesus that is completely missing altogether!
“Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli.” (Luke 3:23)
So imagine all the people who needed to be healed, those who needed salvation, and what does the current Christian canon tell us about the early life of Jesus? Its silence about the early life of Jesus is awkward, to say the least.
It is honestly both shocking and disappointing that Christians would use these types of arguments against the Qur’an. It absolutely reeks of atheism, smacks of radical skepticism, and is stepped in a worldview bereft of the supra-natural.
For us, as Muslims, we are informed about what happened concerning Jesus through divine revelation. As Allah (swt) says to the Blessed Messenger (saw):
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.” (Qur’an 3:44)
Also, notice that when the Christians make their particular claim about the Qur’an, they more often than not do put up the sources which they claim the Qur’an takes the following from:
Speaking as an infant.
Creating birds out of clay.
We also find it interesting that Muslims don’t ask them for their sources.
The Christian polemicist usually has two sources in mind for this:
Those sources are: The Infancy Gospel of Thomas & The Proevangelian of James
“This little child Jesus when he was five years old was playing at the ford of a brook: and he gathered together the waters that flowed there into pools, and made them straightway clean, and commanded them by his word alone. 2 And having made soft clay, he fashioned thereof twelve sparrows. And it was the Sabbath when he did these things (or made them). And there were also many other little children playing with him.
“And a certain Jew when he saw what Jesus did, playing upon the Sabbath day, departed straightway and told his father Joseph: Lo, your child is at the brook, and he has taken clay and fashioned twelve little birds and has polluted the Sabbath day. 4 And Joseph came to the place and saw: and cried out to him, saying: Why are you doing these things on the Sabbath, which it is not lawful to do? But Jesus clapped his hands together and cried out to the sparrows and said to them: Go! and the sparrows took their flight and went away chirping. 5 And when the Jews saw it they were amazed, and departed and told their chief men that which they had seen Jesus do.”
Source: (Infancy Gospel of Thomas Chapter 2:1-5)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This narrative speaks about Jesus creating 12 birds. The emphasis on the number 12 is there twice. This must relate to the 12 disciples. Whereas in the Qur’an we find no mention of this.
“Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah.” (Qur’an 3:49)
There is no mention of Jesus doing this act on the Sabbath Day. There is no mention of Jesus creating 12 birds. It is interesting to note that the Qur’andoes not name the number of Jesus’ disciples. Christians have not addressed this.
It would be interesting to know where the writer(s) of the ‘Infancy Gospel of Thomas’ got their information from. The earliest possible date of authorship is 80 A. D to 250 A. D. This is also roughly the time that the date of authorship is ascribed to ‘The Epistle to Titus‘, which is considered canonical by Christians today. These scholars date the epistle from the 80 A. D up to the end of the 250 A. D.
Source: (Raymond E Brown An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible, p. 662)
“And when Jesus was five years old, there fell a great rain upon the earth, and the boy Jesus walked up and down through it. And there was a terrible rain, and He collected it into a fish-pond, and ordered it by His word to become clear. And immediately it became so. Again He took of the clay which was of that fish-pond, and made of it to the number of twelve sparrows. And it was the Sabbath when Jesus did this among the boys of the Jews. And the boys of the Jews went away and said to Joseph His father: Behold, thy son was playing along with us, and he took clay and made sparrows, which it was not lawful to do on the Sabbath; and he has broken it. And Joseph went away to the boy Jesus, and said to Him: Why have you done this, which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath? And Jesus opened His hands, and ordered the sparrows, saying: Go up into the air and fly; nobody shall kill you. And they flew, and began to cry out, and praise God Almighty. And the Jews seeing what had happened, wondered, and went away and told the miracles which Jesus had done.”
Source: (Infancy Gospel of James Chapter 4)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This story is very similar to the one in the ‘Infancy Gospel of Thomas’. What becomes apparent is that both of these sources are relying upon some oral tradition–one in which does not have a chain of transmission.
Now here is what is interesting about the Protoevangelion Jacobi or Infancy Gospel of James. One of the Christian polemicists that used this type of attack upon the Qur’anwas himself put in a difficult position in relation to this text.
@19:20 Erhman asks: “What other documents are found in P72 as this is a document that resonates with you?”
James responds, “There are some non-canonical documents in P72 …
Erhman replies, “Right, so I am just wondering about you resonating with this document”. Do you think that the scribe thought what he was copying was scripture?“
James, “Well, I don’t think you can simply jump to the conclusion that, because scribes included books in a single codex that they believed that everything within that codex was necessarily scripture.” There are sorts of works that were considered to be beneficial to people that were included in codices that were not necessarily canonical.”
Erhman, “Yeah, I just think that it was odd that that particular manuscript was one that you resonated with because it’s the earliest attestation that we have of the protoevangelium jacobi.” (The Infancy Gospel of James) ..
Prima Qur’an Comments:
In other words, you can’t know for certain if the scribe who was copying this text (obviously from an even earlier source) was transcribing what he thought was divine writing! Especially in light of the fact that it is in the same genre of manuscripts that are generally described as “the most significant” papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far.
“Now, when the Lord Jesus had completed seven years from His birth, on a certain day He was occupied with boys of His own age. For they were playing among clay, from which they were making images of asses, oxen, birds, and other animals; and each one boasting of his skill, was praising his own work. Then the Lord Jesus said to the boys: The images that I have made I will order to walk. The boys asked Him whether then he was the son of the Creator, and the Lord Jesus made them walk. And they immediately began to leap; and then, when He had given them leave, they again stood still. And He had made figures of birds and sparrows, which flew when He told them to fly, and stood still when He told them to stand, and ate and drank when He handed them food and drink. After the boys had gone away and told this to their parents, their fathers said to them: My sons, take care not to keep company with him again, for he is a wizard: flee from him, therefore, and avoid him, and do not play with him again after this.”
Source: (The Arabic Infancy Gospel of Jesus)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This text has Jesus not only making birdsbut apparently donkeys, oxen, and other (undisclosed) animals out of clay. There is an inquiry about him being the son of the Creator. There is no mention of the sabbath or any mention of the animals being of any number.
It’s thought that this Gospel has its origins in Syriac sources in the 5th or 6th century.
“We find what follows in the book of Joseph the high priest, who lived in the time of Christ. Some say that he is Caiaphas. He has said that Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when he was lying in His cradle, said to Mary His mother: “I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom you have brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to you; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.”
Source: (The Arabic Infancy Gospel of Jesus).
Prima Qur’an Comments:
There is no mention of Mary carrying Jesus as a baby. There is no mention of the people asking Mary where this baby came from. This text has Jesus addressing his mother, the Qur’an has him addressing the people. The text above is filled with Christian doctrine: Jesus is the Son of God, he has a ‘Father’ and he was sent for the salvation of the world.
None of this is found in the account of the Qur’an.
Conclusion:
The attacks that Christian polemicists have leveled towards the Qur’anare the kind one would expect from radical skepticism, and a worldview bereft of the supra-natural.
We can see that these sources the Christians point to have important details and radically different theological statements that we do not find at all within the Qur’an.
More telling is that Christians do not even quote these sources, or give the details of the accounts. Many of the people they speak to will not go and double-check the sources for themselves.
The fact that some Christians find these sources apocryphal is of no concern to us as Muslims. We as Muslims do not rely upon them or accept them as revelation either. Our acceptance of what is stated in the Qur’an comes from our faith in it as divine revelation and in what Allah (swt) himself has stated:
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.” (Qur’an 3:44)
Just as our faith in Jesus as the Messiah, the Word of Allah, and the Son of Mary are not dependent upon any book of the New Testament (even if the whole of Christendom) accepts it as canonical.
Christians themselves cannot totally rule out the possibility of Jesus having spoken as an infant or having given life to the clay birds based upon the following evidence:
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
As well as the fact that the Gospel writers themselves have admitted to leaving out particular miracles that did not suit their desired goals.
“The truth is from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.”(Qur’an 2:147)
“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)
May Allah (swt) guide the truth seekers!
If you enjoyed this article you may enjoy the following:
“And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them.” (Qur’an 4:159)
﷽
The misunderstanding of the verse is used as evidence for them to believe in some ‘Second Coming’ of Jesus (as).
You may look at all the various ways the verse has been translated into English here:
In this article we will focus on the justifications and proofs as they are given by the respected Mufti Zameel Ur Rahman. That is because what he statesis the majority view on the matter.
MUFTI ZAMEEL UR RAHMANS UNDERSTANDING OF QUR’AN 4:159
Let us examine what Mufti Zameel Ur Rahman has put forward:
“These verses then state that the Jews will believe in him before he dies. That is, before ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) dies (after he defeats the Dajjāl), the Jews that are remaining on the earth will all believe in him as the Messiah/Masīḥ about whom they were foretold. This is the dominant interpretation of the concluding verse that reads: “There will be none from the people of the scripture [i.e. Jews] but will believe in him before his death.” This has been recorded authentically from Abū Hurayrah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) (see below).”
“Al-Ṭabarī transmits through two chains from Sufyān al-Thawrī from Abū Ḥaṣīn from Sa‘īd ibn Jubayr from Ibn ‘Abbās that he said “before his death” means “before the death of ‘Īsā ibn Maryam”. (Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī, Maktabah Hajr, 7:664) This is an authentic chain.”
“He also narrates with an authentic chain to the Tābi‘ī, Abū Mālik Ghazwān al-Ghifārī (ca. 25 – 100 H), that he said of this verse: “That is, upon the descent of ‘Īsā ibn Maryam – none from the people of the scripture will remain but will believe in him.” (ibid. 7:665) He also transmits with an authentic chain to the eminent Tābi‘ī, al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī (21 – 110 H), that he said: “Before the death of ‘Īsā. By Allāh! He is now alive in the presence of Allāh; but when he comes down, they will all believe in him.” (ibid.)”
“This is also transmitted from the mufassir of the Tābi‘īn, Qatādah ibn Di‘āmah. Al-Ṭabarī also transmits authentically from ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Zayd ibn Aslam (d. 182), a mufassir from the Tab‘ Tābi‘īn, that he said of this verse: “When ‘Īsā ibn Maryam descends and then kills the Dajjāl, no Jew will remain on the earth but will believe in him.” (ibid. 7:666)”
“Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī explains that this is the most correct explanation. (ibid. 7:672) He explains that thus the meaning of the verse is: “[There is none from the people of the book] but will believe in ‘Īsā before the death of ‘Īsā – and that is about a specific [group] of the people of the book; those intended are the people of one particular time from them, not people of all times, who came after ‘Īsā; and that this will occur after his descent.” (ibid. 7:674)”
“Similarly, Ibn Kathīr says after mentioning this interpretation: “This opinion is the truth,” (Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr, Maktabah Awlād al-Shaykh, 4:342), and further states: “There is no doubt that what Ibn Jarīr said [giving preference to this interpretation] is what is correct, as that is what was intended from the context of the verses.” (ibid. 4:344) As Ibn Kathīr mentions, it is clear from the context that this is what is meant. The verses are talking about the Jews’ claim to have executed ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām). Allāh says they did not kill or execute him but Allāh raised him up to Himself. Furthermore, not one of them will remain but will believe in ‘Īsā before his actual death. Hence, these verses clearly demonstrate that ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) was not killed, but was taken up alive into the sky, and further indicate that he will return and the Jews who remain (after he kills the Dajjāl) will believe in him.”
Notice that Mufti says,
“These verses then state that the Jews will believe in him before he dies. That is, before ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) dies (after he defeats the Dajjāl).”
However, that is not what the verse says, and he knows this! If he was simply reading the traditions into the commentary, that is one thing, but forcing them into the text is altogether dishonest!
“This is the dominant interpretation.” Well, Mufti, on what basis do you say this is the ‘dominant interpretation’ ? Can you tell us the total amount of tafsir literature you studied on this matter to conclude this? Also, if this is the ‘dominant interpretation’, it is by your own admission not necessarily the only one!
Truth vs. Popularity: The truth is not a matter of democratic opinion but of sound evidence from the Quran itself.
Next, Mufti seems to quote from a disparate number of tafsir commentaries (albeit selectively). So let’s keep count, shall we?
Tafsir #1, Ibn Kathir
Tafsir #2, Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari
Tafsir #3, Qatada ibn Di’amah
Looking at the Tafsir of Qatada Ibn Di’amah.
Qatada Ibn Dia’ama has two traditions — disconnected from unknown sources about (Qur’an 4:157-158)
“And it was related to us that the prophet of God, Jesus son of Mary, said to his disciples: ‘Who of you will have my likeness [shibh/shabah] cast upon him and thereby be killed? One of the disciples said, ‘I, Oh prophet of God!’ ‘Thus that man was killed and God protected [mana’a] His prophet as HE RAISED HIM TO HIMSELF.
Concerning his statement: “AND THEY DID NOT KILL HIM AND THEY DID NOT CRUCIFY HIM, BUT IT APPEARED SO TO THEM. Qatada said: ‘The likeness of Jesus was cast upon one of his disciples, and he was killed. Jesus had appeared before them and said: “Whoever of you will have my likeness cast upon him will have paradise.” And one said: “Upon me!”
Prima Qur’an comments:
Qatada Ibn Dia’ama has two traditions from disconnected unknown sources.
This information is from Israʼiliyyat material.
There is a 700 year gap in the chain of transmission!
Also notice how there is no attempt to identify or name the substitute.
Looking at the Tafsir of Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari
Al-Tabari cites eleven traditions all going back to Wahb ibn Munabbih concerning (Qur’an 4:157-158)
Here is the verdict of Al-Tabari:
“Or the affair was according to what ‘Abd al-Samad related (that is the second tradition) from Wahb ibn Munabbih, that is, that the people who were with ‘Isa in the house scattered from the house before the Jews came upon him. ‘Isa remained, and his LIKENESS was cast upon one of his companions, who still remained with him in the house. And ‘Isa was RAISED UP, and one who was changed in the LIKENESS of ‘Isa was killed. And his companions through that the one CRUCIFIEDwas ‘Isa, because of what they saw happens to the one who was made to look like him. And the truth of the matter was hidden from them, because his being RAISED UP and the changing of the one who was killed into his LIKENESS happened after the SCATTERING of his friends. and [because] they [had] heard ‘Isa that night announce his death, and mourn because he thought that death was approaching him. And they related what happened as true, but the affair with God was really quite different from what they related. And those disciples who related this do not deserve to be called liars.”
Source: (Al-Tabari, vol 9, p 374)
Remember that Al-Tabari is getting his information from Wahb ibn Munabbih, so maybe we spend just a little bit of time on him.
Remember that Mufti Zameel ur Rahman had the following to say about Mufti Abu Layth on the matter:
“Recently, an individual has been promoting the misguided belief that the Prophet ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) will not return, claiming that this is an idea that has mistakenly been imported into Islām and the teachings of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) from Christianity.”
Well, let us see if Mufti Zameer ur Rahman would be humble enough to apologize to Mufti Abu Layth concerning Wahb ibn Munabbih:
“It is not known clearly if he converted to Islam from Judaism or that his father is a convert from Judaism. There are various reports.” “He was known for reporting Isra’ilyyat material. -well known.” “He required a reputation from trustworthy to audacious liar.”
Source: (Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Khallikān (d. 1282 CE) and his work Wafayāt al-aʿyān wa-anbāʾ abnāʾ al-zamān (وفيات الأعيان وأنباء أبناء الزمان,) The Obituaries of Eminent Men and the History of the Contemporaries p. 673)
Ibn Khallikān was a renowned Shafi’i jurist, judge (qāḍī), and historian of the 13th century. He is celebrated for his scholarly rigor and intellectual integrity.
Ibn Ishaq used his work for the beginnings of Christianity but did not take from him as a source for the Prophet (saw) biography!
Ibn Khaldun didn’t have a high opinion, mentioning that he frequently told flat lies.
Source: (“Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits,” xx.part 1, p. 461; De Slane, Ibn Ḥallikan, iii. 673, note 2 | Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du Roi et autres bibliothèques.
For the English readers: (Notices and Extracts from the Manuscripts of the King’s Library and Other Libraries. The Citation (xx.part 1, p. 461): This refers to Volume 20, Part 1, page 461. The article claims that on this page, there is a discussion about Wahb ibn Munabbih that references Ibn Khaldun’s low opinion of him.
Companions and scholars like Abdullah ibn Mas’ud warned people not to learn Tafsir from the ‘Ahl Kittab’ and his argument was that they may use it to interpolate their own biblical beliefs, teachings and history replacing the Islamic belief and preaching.
Source: (Dr. Muhammed Husayn al-Dhahabi and his monumental work Al-Tafsīr wa al-Mufassirūn (التفسير والمفسرون, Quranic Exegesis and Its Exegetes Volume 1)
Why Dr. Dhahabi’s scholarship is important.
al-Dhahabi provides a powerful, mainstream Sunni scholarly critique of the very sources that underpin the traditional narrative about Jesus’ death. The reference serves several key argumentative purposes:
Historical Validation of the Problem: Al-Dhahabi meticulously documents how these foreign narratives entered Islamic scholarship. This was primarily through early converts from Judaism and Christianity (like Ka’b al-Aḥbār, Wahb ibn Munabbih, and Abdullah ibn Salam) who, while well-intentioned, began to fill in the gaps in Quranic stories with details from their own traditions. This gives historical credence to the warning from the Companion Abdullah ibn Mas’ud that the article also references.
al-Dhahabi, argues that the classical commentaries on verses like 4:157-159 are contaminated with unreliable material. Al-Dhahabi’s work is essentially a scholarly condemnation of the uncritical acceptance of Isrā’īliyyāt.
So let us take a look again at what Al-Tabari believed:
“Or the affair was according to what ‘Abd al-Samad related (that is the second tradition) from Wahb ibn Munabbih, that is, that the people who were with ‘Isa in the house scattered from the house before the Jews came upon him. ‘Isa remained, and his LIKENESS was cast upon one of his companions, who still remained with him in the house. And ‘Isa was RAISED UP, and one who was changed in the LIKENESS of ‘Isa was killed. And his companions through that the one CRUCIFIED was ‘Isa, because of what they saw happens to the one who was made to look like him.And the truth of the matter was hidden from them, because his being RAISED UP and the changing of the one who was killed into his LIKENESS happened after the SCATTERING of his friends. and [because] they [had] heard ‘Isa that night announce his death, and mourn because he thought that death was approaching him. And they related what happened as true, but the affair with God was really quite different from what they related. And those disciples who related this do not deserve to be called liars.”
Source: (Al-Tabari, vol 9, p 374)
Prima Qur’an comments:
So, basically, in this narrative, Allah (swt) didn’t fool the non-believers, but he actually fooled the believing disciples of Jesus into believing that He (Jesus) was killed—when he wasn’t?!? Also, the 12 disciples couldn’t use logic, deduction and simple basic math and say, (Well, you know Jesus is gone and so is ….such and such disciple) Hey, maybe Jesus didn’t die?! Maybe so-and-so took his place! Notice the obfuscation especially with the quote from Qatada Ibn Dia’ama? We don’t get to know who this legendary disciple is? Who is this masked man? Oh well, you can hear them saying, ‘it doesn’t matter his reward is with his Lord’.
Looking at the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir
So what is the view of Ibn Kathir concerning Qur’an 4:157-158?
“They disobeyed Jesus and tried to harm him in every possible way, until God led His prophet away from them-Jesus and Mary traveled extensively to avoid such persecution. Ultimately, the Jews notified the King of Syria that there was a man in the holy house was was charming and subverting the people. The king wrote to his deputy in Jerusalem to be on guard against this. Moreover, the deputy was instructed to crucify the culprit (Jesus) and place thorns on his head to stop him from harming the flock. The deputy obeyed the order and led a group of Jews to where Jesus was staying with his twelve or thirteen followers. When Jesus was aware that they were after him, he asked for a volunteer to take his place. One stepped forward and was taken by the Jews and crucified, while Jesus was himself raised through the roof of the house. The Jews then announced that they had crucified Jesus and boasted about it. In their ignorance and lack of intellect ,a number of Christians accepted this claim. The fact that the other disciples had seen Jesus raised was ignored. Everyone else though that the Jews had crucified Jesus.”
Source: (Ibn Kathir, ‘Umdat al-tafsir, ed Ahmad Muhammed Shakir, 5 vols located in: vol 4 pp.28-34)
Prima Qur’an comments :
So notice how Ibn Kathir’s commentary is totally different from Al-Tabari on very key points. Again, obfuscation is a common theme. We don’t know if Jesus had 12 or 13 disciples. The brave unsung hero disciple who just jumped at the chance to be killed (we have no idea who he is). However, unlike Al-Tabari, who was ready to accept on face value the claim of Jesus’ disciples — although they were apparently fooled by Allah (swt), Ibn Kathir isn’t ready to pen that on the disciples. Instead, he simply offers that the Christians were ignorant and lacked intellect, so they accepted that Jesus died. The fact that ‘other disciples’ saw what went down was just simply ignored.
Summary of the Tafsir Sources:
The three tafsir sources that Mufti Zameer ur Rahman are all ultimately reliant upon anonymous, disconnected chains and sources that are traceable to the very sources (Ahl Kitab) that Ibn Masud warned us about!
How can Mufti Zameer ur Rahman (and anyone else who holds his position) claim with confidence that they know what (Qur’an 4:157-159) is talking about? This so-called ‘unified tradition’ holds disparate and conflicting perspectives that are frankly all over the place.
The testimony of Ibn Masud (ra)
Al-Barqānī informed me, saying: Abū Bakr al-Ismāʿīlī narrated to us, saying: I heard Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥāfiẓ, and he was asked about tafsīr (Qur’an exegesis): From where should a person begin it? He replied: From the Book of Allah, the Exalted. If that is difficult for him, then he should rely upon the transmitted reports (al-athar). If that is difficult for him, then he should resort to reasoning (al-naẓar). Then he said: It is necessary that above all of this he gives precedence to the Book of Allah. Then he said: I heard Abū al-ʿAbbās Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq al-Thaqafī say: I heard ʿAbdān ibn Aḥmad say: I heard ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak say: ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd used to say: ‘Transmit the Qur’an (faithfully), and do not follow the People of the Book, for indeed they relate to you the most false of narrations, and they burden you with their falsehoods.”
Source: ( Imam Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi Work: Al-Jāmi‘ li-Akhlāq al-Rāwī wa Ādāb al-Sāmi‘ (الجامع لأخلاق الراوي وآداب السامع) – A Compendium of the Ethics of the Narrator and the Etiquette of the Listener. Volume 1, Page 289 )
Chapter: The Qurra from among the Companions of the Prophet (saws)
Narrated Masriq:
`Abdullah bin `Amr mentioned `Abdullah bin Masud and said, “I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: `Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu`adh and Ubai bin Ka`b.’ “
“Waki’ narrated to us, from Sufyan, from Abu Hasin, from Abu Wa’il, from Abdullah (ibn Mas’ud), who said:
‘When the People of the Book narrate to you, do not believe them nor disbelieve them. Rather, say: “We believe in what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to you.”‘”
Source: (Al-Musannaf by Ibn Abi Shaybah, Dar al-Taj, Riyadh (1st ed., 1409 AH), Volume 6, Page 101, Hadith Number 29990.)
The testimony of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah’s Messenger (saw) said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’ “
Conclusion: In the Ibadi school we will take the firm testimony of the Blessed Prophet (saw). We will take the advice of one of the best people to learn the Qur’an from, Ibn Masud (ra). What we will not do is take the testimony of a person who is narrating Israʼiliyyat with a 700-year gap in the chain of transmission. What we will do is disobey the Blessed Prophet (saw) by taking this material from the people of the book as if they inform us about our religion!
You find that the Sunni and the Shi’i get themselves into a huge exegetical mess over this. They somehow imagine that Qur’an4:157 is speaking about something the Romans are claimed to have done to Jesus!
Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness)The Ibadi school and Quran 4:159
How does the Ibadi school understand Qur’an 4:159?
“And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them.” (Qur’an 4:159)
The death mentioned here could refer either to the death of Jesus (as) or to the death of each and every Jew. The text lends itself to both meanings.
It is important to note that from the (Qur’an 4:153-to 4:159) the entire theme is directed towards Jews.
None among the Jews that Jesus preached to but that it is a prerequisite for them to believe in him before their death.
Jesus is a witness against those who witnessed his preaching and rejected him.
If the people died believing in Jesus, then he would be a witness for them, not against them.
This is confirmed by: “I said not to them except what You commanded me – to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when you caused me to die, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness. (Qur’an 5:117)
Who else would he be a witness against?
What is so special about those particular Jews who are alive when Jesus (as) supposedly returns is that they get to witness and see Jesus (as) whereas the Jews who have lived for the last 2000 years simply died upon batil (falsehood)?
If we believe in the interpretation that Mufti Zameer ur Rahman gives (and those like him) they need to answer the following questions:
Why would Jesus be a witness against them if they all died believing in him?
Wouldn’t Jesus be a witness against those who did not believe in him?
If you interpret it, none must believe in him, but before their death, surely thousands of Jews and Christians died without believing Jesus was a prophet.
How can this apply to Christians if they already believe in him?
How do you answer that if it meant to believe in him as a prophet before his alleged return, then he wouldn’t need to be a witness against them anyway.
Prove grammatically that Qur’an 4:159 is a break in theme from 4:153 onwards and refers to some future eschatological event.
Prove grammatically and thematically that the verse in question includes Christians.
Further Proofs:
“And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to You, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, You would indeed have known it; You know what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in your mind, surely you are the great Knower of the unseen things. I did not say anything to them except what you commanded me with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die (Arabic: Tawafaytani), you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things.” (Qur’an 5:116-117)
There are several things to take from the above passage:
1) This dialogue takes place on the Day of Judgment, where Prophet Jesus suggests that he has no knowledge of what has happened since his demise on Earth and after his ministry ended. “I was a witness over them as long as I was among them.”
2) From the discussion, it is clear that Prophet Jesus only came to Earth once, acting as a witness over his people. If indeed there was a ‘second coming‘ before the Day of Judgment, he would have full knowledge of what had happened since his first departure. After all, he abolished the Jizya and forced the Christians to convert to Islam. This conversation with Allah (swt) would make little to no sense.
3) Imagine if the ahadiths that are put in the mouth of the Blessed Prophet (saw) were true for a moment. So now Jesus (as) comes back and everyone becomes a Muslim. The Dajjal is defeated. Jesus (as) gets married. Then Allah (swt) causes Jesus (as) to die.
Then we have Jesus (as) saying after he dies to Allah (swt): “I was a witness over them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die, you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things.”
A rather bizarre understanding, it seems.
Especially if we take the following text into consideration: “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159)
It is clear to all whom Allah has lifted the veils that Qur’an 5:116-117 is talking about Jesus (as) earthly life and ministry.
The very presence of Jesus creates a bizarre redundant time paradox if we are to believe the Sunni position.
Think about it.
Look at the verse again: Imagine that Allah is saying this to Jesus, who came down from the skies, fought the Dajjal, got married and died.
“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)
If Jesus is alive in the heavens, why is he not aware of this already?
Why is he not aware that Allah has already cleared him of falsehood by the Qur’an?
Even if he wasn’t aware after 2000 plus years, then surely he would have access to the Qur’an when he came back to Earth? Would he not be aware of the text that had already cleared him? Can you imagine Jesus (as) attending the tarweeh prayers in Ramadan and hearing Qur’an 5:116-117 being recited?
Whereas if we understand the text (Qur’an 3:55) as a revelation from Allah [swt] to his Prophet Jesus (as) it at the time of his death, it comes across as very comforting and reassuring. That Allah [swt] is the cause of your death, and you will return to your lord as the statement: “Indeed, to Allah we belong and to Allah we shall return.” That he [Jesus] will be cleared of false accusations. That his followers will be superior over the detractors on the day of judgment.
Sunni Muslims begin to take a new approach to Qur’an 4:159
Jesus bin Maryam will come down to them. Their leader will step backwards so that Jesus can come forward and lead the people in prayer, but Jesus will place his hand between his shoulders and say to him: “Go forward and pray, for the Iqamah was given for you.” Then their leader will lead them in prayer. When he has finished, Jesus (as), will say: “Open the gate.” So they will open it and behind it will be Dajjal with seventy thousand Jews, each of them carrying an adorned sword and wearing a greenish cloak. When Dajjal looks at him, he will start to melt as salt melts in water. He will run away, and Jesus (as), will say: “I have only one blow for you, which you will not be able to escape!” He will catch up with him at the eastern gate of Ludd, and will kill him. Then Allah will defeat the Jews, and there will be nothing left that Allah has created which the Jews will be able to hide behind, except that Allah will cause it to speak – no stone, no tree, no wall, no animal – except for Al-Gharqad (the box-thorn), for it is one of their trees, and will not speak – except that it will say: “O Muslim slave of Allah, here is a Jews, come and kill him!“
In our discussion with respected Dr. Shaykh Shadee El Masry (and a recent clash he had with the Ahmadi religion) We were curious as to the way Dr. Shadee translated Qur’an 4:159
We never did get an answer to which Arabic word(s) he used to translate the text into ‘Hardly’. Do you, the reader, the truth seeker, see what is happening here? We Love Dr. Shaykh Shadee Elmasry and if you are in his community, Allah-willing, you are in good hands. However, sometimes people will be tenacious in defending the indefensible.
The Jews and Christians will be at each other’s throat until the day of judgement
“Every one of the People of the Book will definitely believe in him before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159) If you were to take the standard Sunni misunderstanding this would flatly contradict the following:
“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 spends 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. ” (Qur’an 5:64)
“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)
So the above verses do not give one the impression that Jesus (as) is going to come back and sing kumbaya with the Jews and the Christians.
We would not be surprised if some really desperate (clutching at straws) interpretation came that argued. Yes, Jesus (as) will bring the Jews and & Christians together, but they will still have animosity and hatred among them!!
Which begs the question: Why is he coming back?
Those of the Jews and Christians who see the truth and embrace insh’Allah are upon the path of safety. Those of the Jews and Christians who see the truth and reject it will be in hellfire.
“Indeed, that is My Path—perfectly straight. So follow it and do not follow other ways, for they will lead you away from His Way. This is what He has commanded you, so perhaps you will be conscious ˹of Allah˺” Qur’an 6:153)
“O mankind! Surely has come to you a convincing proof from your Lord, and We (have) sent down to you a clear light.” (Qur’an 4:174)
Our final point. We finish where we began.
“This is the dominant interpretation.” Well, Mufti, on what basis do you say this is the ‘dominant interpretation’ ? Can you tell us the total amount of tafsir literature you studied on this matter to conclude this? Also, if this is the ‘dominant interpretation’, it is by your own admission not necessarily the only one!
Truth vs. Popularity: The truth is not a matter of democratic opinion but of sound evidence from the Quran itself.
So dear respected readers which understanding of Qur’an4:159 do you accept as being more cogent?
The Sunni position.
The position of Mufti Zameer ur Rahman, Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah and the mufassirun — whom rely upon hearsay and disconnected chains coming often from anonymous sources.
A position that allows for whispering, speculation, doubt and uncertainty?
A position that ignores the advice of one of the four we are to learn the Qur’an from—none other than Ibn Masud (ra)?
A position that structures a belief that goes against the Sunnah? “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them.”
The Ibadi position.
A position that takes the sincere council of one of the four we are to learn the Qur’an from—none other than Ibn Masud (ra)?
A position that does not go against the clear Sunnah. A position where we do not disbelieve them but we certainly do not build a belief based upon their reports.
A position that ask if it is reasonable to accept a 700 year gap in the chain of transmission as admissible evidence.
A position that is primarily reliant upon Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an).
A position that allows the Qur’an to be interpreted by the use of other passages in the Qur’an, the use of grammar, context and theme?
A position that provides certainty and conviction?
“And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)
﷽
This text also has to be one of the most used and abused texts of the whole of the Qur’an. It is used to assert the so-called “2nd coming” of Christ Jesus. The fact that this is the ‘go to’ verse when anyone is trying to assert that the Qur’an affirms the “2nd coming” of Christ Jesus shows you just how weak their argument is.
Such people are better off using the ahadith to argue their position.
Let us start off with a major problem and contradiction with this understanding.
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
That the Prophet (saw) said: “There are three, for which, when they appear, a soul will not benefit by its faith, if it did not believe before the Signs: Ad-Dajjal, the Beast, and the rising of the sun from its setting place” – or “from the west.”
The majority of Sunni Muslims believe that Jesus (as) is coming a second time. Those who believe that he is coming afterthe Dajjal. Remember, according to the above hadith and many like it faith does not benefit a person anymore!
“Do they wait for anything except that the angels should come to them or your Lord should come or that there come some of the signs of your Lord? The Day that some of the signs of your Lord will come no soul will benefit from its faith as long as it had not believed before or had earned through its faith some good. Say, “Wait. Indeed, we [also] are waiting.” (Qur’an 6:158)
It is very clear that when these signs happen, the faith and belief of those who came before will be rejected. Part of being a believer is to believe in the unseen.
“Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and donate from what We have provided for them.” (Qur’an 2:3)
Those signs spoken of in Qur’an 6:158 will be so clear that after their appearance will neither avail the unbeliever to repent of his unbelief nor the disobedient to forsake his disobedience. So what would the point of Jesus (as) coming back and converting people to Islam (either by sword or by choice) when their belief counts for nothing any way?
Note how the text is being translated from the Qur’an corpus.
Muhammed Asad, Abdl Haleem & Mohamed Shafi translations have the “it” as the passage referring to the Qur’an.
Shabir Ahmed has ‘it’ as a reference to the Qur’an, but unlike Muhammed Asad and Abdul Haleem and Mohamed Shafi, he has the Qur’an talking about an “oncoming Revolution” rather than “the hour”.
Yusuf Ali’s Saudi version just goes all in!
“And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of).”
Prima Qur’an comments: So, according to that translation, not only is it Jesus, but he is a Sign as well!
Safi Kasas has Jesus in brackets but, unlike Yusuf Ali, he puts the [a sign] in brackets as well.
Abdul Hye goes all in with the second coming. “And he (Jesus) is a KNOWN SIGN.”
Dr. Munir Munshey gets carried away with: “In fact he, (and his fatherless birth) is a sign”
Then we have the Mustafa Khattab translation, really overselling it with their translation,
“And his ˹second˺ coming is truly a sign for the Hour. So have no doubt about it, and follow me. This is the Straight Path.”
Muhsin Khan & Muhammad al-Hilah (another Saudi translation) have it as: “And he (Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) shall be a known sign.”
Dr. Mohammed Tahir ul Qadri takes a que from his Salafi opponents and follows their lead with: “And surely (when) he, (Isa[Jesus], descends from heaven), he will be a sign…”
Ali Unai just goes on a tangent: “Surely he (Jesus) (brought into the world without a father, and granted such miracles as reviving the dead) is a means to knowledge of the Last Hour.”
Hamid S. Aziz is more neutral, non-committal in translation:
“And most surely it is (the above events or the Quran or he, Jesus) is a sign of the knowledge of coming of the Hour (of Resurrection and Judgment). Therefore have no doubt about it and follow Me: this is the Straight Way.”
Muhammad Taqi Usmani has it as: (‘Isa)
Syed Vickar Ahamed has it as: “And (Isa)
Farook Malik has it as: He (Jesus)
Maududi has it as: “Verily he [i.e, Jesus)
Rashad Khalifa has a bizarre translation: “He is to serve as a marker for knowing the end of the world, so you can no longer harbor any doubt about it.”
The Monotheist group — taking a que from their former mentor and master, Rashad Khalifa, has it as “He” and this becomes “a lesson for the Hour”
Are those who think the verse is a reference to Jesus justified?
Well, if you look at the surrounding context of the verse, the immediate context is about Jesus.
The verses before:
“Jesus was not but a servant upon whom We bestowed favor, and We made him an example for the Children of Israel.And if We willed, We could have made [instead] of you angels succeeding [one another] on the earth.” (Qur’an 43:59-60)
As well as the text after.
“And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, “I have come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me.” (Qur’an 43:63)
So this could be a reason why some have considered 43:61 to be about Jesus.
However, as you will see when we see the over-arching theme of Qur’an 43 as well as whom the immediate audience is, that justification will quickly disappear.
What about Arabic grammar?
A closer look at the Arabic text. “wa-innahu”, this is the 3rd person masculine singular object pronoun. We have third-person pronouns in English as well. We have object pronouns—me, you, him, her, it.
Secondly, the word “biha” is a 3rd person feminine singular personal pronoun. So this further clarifies how “wa-innahu” should be understood.
“And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)
So, to support their claim, they would have to go against Arabic grammar!
What is the overarching theme of Qur’an 43?
Do not just look at the verses immediately before or after. Read all the verses before and after.
Verses 43:2-5 are references concerning the Qur’an.
43:14 is a reference concerning the resurrection.
43:21 is a reference to the Qur’an.
43:31 is a reference to the Qur’an.
43:35 is a reference to the hereafter.
43:43-44 are both references to the Qur’an.
Yes, Allah spoke about Jesus (as) in the past tense. Just as Allah spoke about Moses (as) in the past tense. Allah spoke about Abraham (as) in the past tense.
Not only this but think about this.Who is the immediate audience of the Qur’an 43:61?
The immediate audience is the pagan Quresh. How is some “2nd coming” of Jesus supposed to be an argument for the oneness of Allah (swt), or the truth of the resurrection to that immediate audience?
What is more sensible?
Understanding A)
“And indeed, he (Jesus) surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it(second coming of Jesus), and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)
How are you asking a group of pagan idolater Quresh to not be in doubt concerning it to believe in some second coming of Jesus (as) that they will never witness?
In what universe does this make sense?
Understanding B)
“And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)
Or, are a group of pagan idolater Quresh being asked to believe in the Qur’an (it) with arguments about the hereafter and resurrection that they can ponder and believe in during their own lifetime?
Which of the two understandings of the verse above is more sensible?
Not only this, we still have to contend with the fact that, as per our other articles, Jesus(as) has died. That Muhammed (saw) is the last and final Prophet. The text of the Qur’an should be in harmony with one another. The supposition that the Qur’an supports the idea that Jesus (as)is not based upon solid evidence.
“Until, when HE reached THE SETTING OF THE SUN, HE found IT SET IN a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: “O Zul-qarnain! ,either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness” (Qur’an 18:86)
﷽
“Until, when HE came to the rising of the sun, HE found IT RISING on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun.” (Qur’an 18:90)
We believe these are the translations most favoured by atheists and skeptics. There are no parentheses around any of the text in English.
For example: he found it [as if] setting in a dark (Safi Kasas translation)
or
he found it [seemed to be] setting into a muddy spring (Abdel Haleem)
So we want to do away with any translation that has parenthesis. As if the authors are aware of the problem of the apparent reading of the English translation. However, we do want to bring another text into the discussion.we will use Arberry, a non-Muslim Christian translation of the Qur’an. We will use this translation because it bolsters the resolve of the skeptic and the atheist. Yet, we will see why insh’Allah
“And the sun — it runs to a fixed resting-place; that is the ordaining of the All-mighty, the All-knowing.” (Qur’an 36:38)
What we have noticed is that Christians and Jews do not use these types of arguments as they once did to attack the veracity of the Qur’an.
Why do Christians and Jews not use these types of arguments against the Qur’an anymore?
Why is that?
“On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel: Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon. So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the Lord listened to a human being. Surely the Lord was fighting for Israel!” (Joshua 10:12-14)
“And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters.” (Revelation 8:10)
Does everyone realize that the smallest star discovered so far is the size of Saturn? We hope people realize that you cannot actually hurl a star down to Earth the size of Saturn because that would do more than fall upon a third of the rivers!
What about this scientific blunder and simply fallacious statement?
“Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so where the river flows everything will live.” (Ezekiel 47:9)
Let’s give some context, shall we?
“He said to me, “This water flows toward the eastern region and goes down into the Arabah, where it enters the Dead Sea. When it empties into the sea, the salty water there becomes fresh.” (Ezekiel 47:8)
Can it be said that the Dead Sea is freshwater? Does salt water become freshwater?
“He put another parable before them, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches (Matthew 13:31-32)
This is not to be condescending, and we do apologize if it comes across as such. However, if you were to talk to the average everyday speaker of the English language, and even those of you who speak it as a second or third language, would you know the following if someone stopped and asked you?
Give me an example of the predicate of the sentence. Give me an example of a lowercase nominative. Even some people would need to pause and think about what a helping verb is! Many people are simply not grounded in the grammar of their own language.
The Qur’an uses metaphors.Example:
“Then your hearts became hardened after that, being like stones or even harder. For indeed, there are stones from which rivers burst forth, and there are some of them that split open and water comes out, and there are some of them that fall down for fear of Allah. And Allah is not unaware of what you do.” (Qur’an 2:74)
We are surprised the atheists and the skeptics have not asked us Muslims for examples of a stone that you can split open and water would come forth. Or anywhere on the Earth where we can find water gushing forth from stones!
The Qur’an uses idioms. Example:
And who say, “Our Lord, bestow upon us from our spouses and offspring that will be the comfort of the eyes, (Literally: the coolness (when) the eyes settle down) and make us an imam (leader) of the pious.” (Qur’an 25:74)
Now the view common to people in the time in which the Qur’an was revealed would be:
That the world/earth is flat.
That the Sun revolves around the earth.
Here is a question you never see Muslims involved in daw’ah, apologetics or polemic ask these skeptics and atheists. Using the Arabic language of the 7th century, how would you construct the sentences of Qur’an in 18:86 and 18:90 that would be palatable to 21st century understanding?
For example, if the Qur’an had used a different way of describing events, we would have been described as flat earthers!
On the flat earth wiki the question is asked:
How do you explain day/night cycles and seasons?
“The sun moves in circles around the North Pole. When it is over your head, it’s day. When it’s not, it’s night. The light of the sun is confined to a limited area, and its light acts like a spotlight upon the Earth.”
Now let us look at the two passages in question again:
“Until, when HE reached THE SETTING OF THE SUN, HE found IT SET IN a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: “O Zul-qarnain! ,either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness” (Qur’an 18:86)
“Until, when HE came to the rising of the sun, HE found IT RISING on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun.” (Qur’an 18:90)
The English translated text “he found it” in Arabic wajadaha.
“And establish prayer and give zakah, and whatever good you put forward for yourselves – you will find it with Allah. Indeed, Allah of what you do, is Seeing.” (Qur’an 2:11)
‘Will find it’ in Arabic is tajiduhu
No one among Muslims believes that a person is going to find their prayers, or purification of wealth, and good actions in a pile somewhere with Allah (swt). It is perceived, as the verse itself says, that Allah (swt) is acquainted with what we do. Our intention behind every action, everything. Now you have to wonder what Zul-qarnain actually found, given his own empirical data about the sun.
The sun is hotter than other days. Even looking at this sentence we used in English, it is problematic. It is not that the sun may necessarily be hotter than other days, it is that the proximity of the sun is closer to the earth during certain times of the year.
The sun appears brighter on some days more than on others.
The sun obviously does not literally set in a murky spring because its light is not doused or put out. If the Qur’an was describing something literal, you would think that the sun being dipped in a murky spring would produce some type of noteworthy phenomena.
Let us look at some other verses in this conversation, Qur’an 21:33.
We will use three orientalist/Christian translations; not necessarily Islam-friendly.
“It is He who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon, each swimming in a sky.” Arthur John Arberry
“It is He who hath created the night, and the day, and the sun, and the moon; all the celestial bodies move swiftly, each in its respective orb.” -George Sale(all celestial bodies) is not in the Arabic text.
“And He it is who hath created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, each moving swiftly in its sphere.” -John Medows Rodwell
Now those are the type of text that flat earthers would just love to use. Do note that one thing that is clear about the three above translations taken together is that the moon and the sun “do something” in their own respective sphere/lane.
Now why I say “do something” is that the Arabic that is used is the same word for ships. So a ship can float and seem stationary and yet a ship can be moving at the same time. A force can move a ship.
Let’s look at another verse: Qur’an 36:40
“It behoves not the sun to overtake the moon, neither does the night outstrip the day, each swimming in a sky.” Arthur John Arberry
“It is not expedient that the sun should overtake the moon in her course; neither doth the night outstrip the day: But each of these luminaries moveth in a peculiar orbit.” George Sale
“To the Sun it is not given to overtake the Moon, nor doth the night outstrip the day; but each in its own sphere doth journey on.” John Medows Rodwell.
The empirical data that people see and observe is that the sun does indeed overtake the moon. The empirical data that people see and observe is that the night does outstrip the day. Yet, Allah (swt) described natural phenomena couched in a language that contradicts the idea that the earth is flat (sunset/sunrise).
All the text taken in their literal apparent sense states that:
The sun sets, the sun rises. This does not happen on a flat earth.
The Sun and the Moon float/move in their own respective sphere, orb. Something that apparent empirical data does not suggest.(different spheres of influence).
The sun does not overtake the moon (as if they were in the same lane-line), something that the apparent, empirical data suggest. (your turn/my turn).
Now one more verse that clearly shows that the sun setting in a murky spring is in accord with the empirical observable data that human beings see and witness. This verse, subhan’Allah, has something very interesting to say.
“And the sun — it runs to a fixed resting-place; that is the ordaining of the All-mighty, the All-knowing.” (Qur’an 36:4) Arberry translation.
Interestingly, the words used in Qur’an 18:86 are taghrubu (setting) and maghriba (The setting of the sun). They are both used to denote the west. Out of our five daily prayers, the fourth prayer is called the ‘maghrib’ prayer. North Africa is known as the ‘Maghreb’—a westernmost place or place where the sun sets.
Whereas in Qur’an 36:4 this verse says nothing about setting in a murky spring. The Arabic here is ‘limus’taqarrin’. The verse is describing the ultimate end of the sun. The choice of ‘limus’taqarrin’ is mind-blowing. After reflecting on this, is it not time to stop typing and do sujudd and thank Allah (swt) that we are Muslim! Al hamdulillah!
To be or become cool, remain quiet, be steadfast, be firm, refresh, be stable, be firm, receive satisfy, affirm, agree, settle, last. qarar – stability, a fixed or secure place, depository, place ahead. qurratun – coolness, delight. aqarra (vb. 4) – to confirm, cause to rest or remain. istaqarra (vb. 10) – to remain firm. mustaqirrun – that which remains firmly fixed or confirmed, in hiding, is lasting, which certainly comes to pass, which is settled in its being/goal/purpose. mustaqar – firmly fixed/established, sojourn, abode. qurratun – coolness, refreshment, source of joy and comfort. qawarir (pl. of qaruratun) – glasses, crystals.
“To be or become cool, remain quiet, be steadfast, be firm, refresh, be stable, be firm, receive satisfy, affirm, agree, settle, last. qawarir-glasses, crystals
“Which is settled in its being/goal/purpose.” This is also interesting because the Arabic that is used indicates a stage that has been fulfilled but not that it does not have any more purpose of use. One purpose has been served and a new purpose awaits.
“Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts? (Qur’an 47:24)
“My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)
﷽
We have absolutely been fascinated by those few individuals who have found there to be controversy surrounding the identity of Dhul-al-Qarnayn. The reason why we are fascinated is that historians and Orientalists are not actually interacting with the Qur’an per se. They are interacting with commentary about the Qur’an.
Historian: We found no evidence that X existed.
Believer: They have yet to find evidence that X existed.
Epistemology matters!
The chart above shows the difference between the different axioms of the believers and the doubters. Agnostics and atheists have a different epistemology than believers.
How The Above Chart Explains the Concept:
The Source (A): Everything begins with the “Original Source” (A), which is the divine, perfect narrative from God.
The Two Paths:
The human traditions (B) are a changed and corrupted version of the original story, having passed through centuries of human transmission (resulting in legends, folklore, and altered scriptures).
The Qur’an (C) comes directly and perfectly from the same original source (A), acting as a “Final Revelation” that restores the original message.
The Optical Illusion (The Core of Our Point):
The Skeptical View (dashed line) looks at the relationship between B and C and mistakenly concludes that C must have copied from B because B appears earlier in history.
The Islamic View (solid arrows) correctly identifies that both B and C draw from a common, older source (A). Therefore, when B contains elements that align with C, it doesn’t mean C copied B—it means B still contains remnants of the original truth (A) that the Qur’an (C) confirms and corrects.
The Verbatum Point: The arrow from C to B, labeled “Corrects & Purifies,” visually explains why you will never find verbatim copying. The Qur’an doesn’t replicate the corrupted narratives (B); it speaks with authority from the original source (A) to rectify them.
For the skeptics and doubters, their findings reinforce their epistemology and their axioms. For the Muslims, the findings of the skeptics and doubters provide corroborating evidence of our own epistemology and axioms.
As a Muslim, we know that a tafsir is not divine revelation.Tafsir is scholarly musings about the text.
1st, it should be noted that Dhul Al-Qarnayn, like Khidr, are simply epitaphs, like Al-Amin. These are not real names they are descriptors.
2nd, it should be noted that not much attention is given to the individuals (Khidr & Dhul Al-Qarnayn) beyond their epitaphs. The attention is given to the events that unfold or surround them.
3rd, the Qur’an only mentions Dhul Al-Qarnayn thrice.
So let us get into the narrative of Dhul Al-Qarnayn in the Qur’an.
“And they will ask you about Dhul-Al Qarnayn. Say: I will recount to you a remembrance of him.” (Qur’an 18:83)
“We established him on earth, and We gave him from everything a way.” (Qur’an 18:84)
“And he followed a way.” (Qur’an 18:85)
“Till, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhul-Al Qarnayn! Either punish or show them kindness.” (Qur’an 18:86)
“He responded, “Whoever does wrong will be punished by us, then will be returned to their Lord, Who will punish them with a horrible torment.” (Qur’an 18:87)
“But as for the one who believes and does righteousness, he will have the best of rewards. We shall require him to do only easy things.” (Qur’an 18:88)
“Then he followed a path.” (Qur’an 18:89)
“Until he came to the rising of the sun. He found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no shade.” (Qur’an 18:90)
“And so it was, Our knowledge encompassed all that happened to him.” (Qur’an 18:91)
“Then he followed a path.” (Qur’an 18:92)
“Until he reached between a barrier, where he found a people who could hardly understand a word he was saying.” (Qur’an 18:93)
“They said, “O Dhul Al-Qarnayn, Gog and Magog are corrupting this land. Can we pay you to erect a barrier between us and them?” (Qur’an 18:94)
“He responded, “What my Lord has provided for me is far better. But assist me with resources, and I will build a barrier between you and them.” (Qur’an 18:95)
“Bring me blocks of iron!” Then, when he had filled up ˹the gap˺ between the barriers he ordered, “Blow!” When the iron became red hot, he said, “Bring me molten copper to pour over it.” (Qur’an 18:96)
“And so the enemies could neither scale nor tunnel through it.” (Qur’an 18:97)
“He said: This is a mercy from my Lord; but when the promise of my Lord comes to pass, He will lay it low, for the promise of my Lord is true.” (Qur’an 18:98)
“On that Day, We will let them surge ˹like waves˺ over one another. Later, the Trumpet will be blown, and We will gather all ˹people˺ together.” (Qur’an 18:99)
The first thing that we found fascinating about this set of texts is the use of twos. Things are in contradistinction to one another. Like two different items, two different scenarios, two things in contrast.
First, being the main focus of the individual in the narrative, is Dhul Al-Qarnayn — the two-horned one, one of two different epochs. The one with two braids. The one with two people.
ثُمَّ أَتْبَعَ سَبَبًا ثُمَّ أَتْبَعَ سَبَبًا
That exact phrase appears twice.
Setting-place of the sun/he came to the rising of the sun (two different scenarios in relation to the sun)
Either punish or show them kindness (two different ways to deal with a particular people).
A people for whom We had provided no shade contrasted with a people who had no protection against tribes.
The tribes in question are two gog/magog. Two tribes.
He met two different types of people; people who could hardly understand a word, contrasted with people he could communicate with readily.
A barrier between you and them-a barrier is a separation between at least two different things.
The barrier they were not able to do two things: neither scale nor tunnel through it.
The barrier itself is made from two different metals: iron and copper.
If we are looking for clues of a historical vestige (remembrance), we would want to note the following:
A)What is the meaning of Dhul Al-Qarnayn in the Arabic language?
B) They will ask you. Who is the ‘they’?
C)How did they respond to the information?
D) Tribes are identified as Gog and Magog.
E) Blocks of iron and molten copper are used to seal an apparent gap/breach in a barrier.
Ea) It is assumed that there is a garrison that defends the area. The purpose of the wall is to prevent being overrun. *note*
Note: This is an assumption on our behalf.
Eb) It is assumed that whoever the Gog and Magog are, that they are either
a) raiders b) expansionists
If we assume they are raiders, this means they have had a foray into these people’s territories before. Though they never established dominion over them.
If we assume that they are expansionists, then the people that Dhul Al-Qarnayn encounter are those who presume expansion is heading in their direction and thus, they want to make preparations.
As regards Qur’an 18:98 we do not see that as connected to Qur’an 18:99 as in events that happen at the same time. For more on this please see:
There is nothing that an individual using the historical critical method or an orientalist has brought that even remotely challenges the narrative of the Qur’an. Nihil ad rem. People having doubts because a tafsir was challenged. That is an absolute nothingburger.
Recall:
“And they will ask you about Dhul-Al Qarnayn. Say: I will recount to you a remembrance of him.” (Qur’an 18:83)
There is nothing in that verse that indicates that the answers to the questions that they posed were matters that concern anyone outside those that asked the questions.
“Nasty women are for nasty men, and nasty men are for nasty women. And virtuous women are for virtuous men, and virtuous men are for virtuous women. The virtuous areinnocent of what the wicked say. They will have forgiveness and an honourable provision.” (Qur’an 24:26)
﷽
This article is written so that the masses can understand the correct understanding of the verse and not the faulty understanding that is widespread among the Ummah.
Shaykh Masoud bin Muhammed Al Miqbali (h) explains the correct understanding of this verse:
This is from the ill understanding of some ayats, actually.
For example: {Nasty ones are for nasty people} (Qur’an 24:26) {good ones are for good peole} (Qur’an 24:26)
What do most people understand from this ayat? What does {good ones are for good people} mean?
Audience: “Means that the pious women is for the pious man.”
Shaykh Miqbali: “He understands that the pious woman is for the pious man, and this is not true, ever.”
{good ones are for good people,} and {Nasty ones are for nasty people,}
{good ones are for good people} and {Nasty ones are for nasty people}
He means the good words and sayings are for the good people, and the nasty words and sayings are for the nasty people.
So the nasty refers to the words and the good refers to the words, not that good women are for good men. Or else, Asia, a woman from the women of Jannah, is the woman of the Pharaoh! The Pharaoh is nasty, and she’s from the people of Jannah. So this can’t be!
And the women of Lut and Nuh are in the fire while they (Lut & Nuh) are prophets. So it’s not meant that women are wives…. No. Words are meant.
This ayat came in surah Al Nur, after mentioning the story of Ifk and the words
that were said to Lady Aisha (ra) and the accusations and false things.
So after that came the saying of Allah:{Nasty ones are for nasty people, and nasty people are for nasty ones, and the good ones are for the good people, and the good people are for the good ones.}
{Those are acquitted of what they…} ??? {…. SAY} (Qur’an 24:26)
Qutb Al A’ima (the centre of Imams) (ra) also mentioned this in his Tafseer Himyan Al Zad. He also said that it’s the view of the majority. And he stated that Ibn Abbas (ra) also went with this interpretation. He’s one of the biggest Imams of the madhab. And he has written more than 300 books!
If the Qutb is not enough, then there’s also the statement of Al Hawari in his tafseer, and it’s one of the earliest Ibadi tafseer books, 3rd hijri century. He also said the same.
For other examples of verses that have been misinterpreted or misunderstood, you may wish to see the following articles:
“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the world view that is based on the truth to manifest it over all other world views, although the mushrik make dislike it.” (Qur’an 9:33)
﷽
The subject of the Mahdi concerns Islamic Eschatology or what is known as end-time events.
First and foremost, it is important to understand that when one speaks of Mahdi, different schools and expressions of Islam have different ideas in mind.
Twelver Shi’a
In Twelver Shi’a theology, the Mahdi is the twelfth and final Imam, Muhammed ibn al-Hasan al-Mahdi, believed to be the direct descendant of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed(saw) through his daughter Fatima (ra). He is in occultation: He is hidden from public view by Allah’s will. He will re appear in some future eschatological event to restore justice.
Isma’ili Shi’a & The Qarmatians & Muhammed bin Isma’il
The person of Muhammed bin Isma’il caused a fracture early on, causing one stream that historians label the ‘Qarmatians’ and the other founding the Fatimid Caliphate.
The Qarmatian View.
Muhammed ibn Isma’il was not just the 7th Imam; he was the Qā’im (the Resurrector) and the Mahdi.
The Ismaili (Later Fatimid) View.
Muhammed ibn Isma’il was the 7th Imam.
He went into hiding (satr) due to Abbasid persecution.
The Imamate continued in his descendants.
They recognized a hidden line of Imams following him, which eventually culminated in Abdullah al-Mahdi Billah, who publicly declared himself Imam in 899 CE and founded the Fatimid Caliphate in 909 CE.
For this group, the Imam was always present on earth, whether concealed or manifest.
The Zaydi Shi’a
For Zaydis, the term “Mahdi” (the Guided One) is not exclusively reserved for a single, predestined, end-of-times figure. Instead, it is a title that can be applied to any rightly guided Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt who rises to establish justice.
There are times when they have referenced their Imams as such. For example: Al-Mahdi Li-Din Allah
While not a core dogma, Zaydi literature does contain some hadith about a future messianic figure from the Ahl al-Bayt, often referred to as “al-Qa’im” (The One Who Will Arise) or “al-Mahdi.”
Sunni View.
The dominant view and position among Sunni Muslims is that Mahdi is a figure believed to be the direct descendant of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed(saw) through his daughter Fatima (ra). He will appear in some future eschatological event to restore justice.
Again, this is the view of the vast majority of Sunni Muslims. As the articles in this entry will clearly demonstrate, there are many in the Sunni tradition that do not share this belief.
Ibadi View. The idea of a Mahdi is not something found in our sources. We have no belief in any coming Mahdi. If the coming of this figure is true, we hope Allah opens our eyes to it. However, it is not a theological principle with us nor something we believe in.
It should be noted to the reader and researcher. Often, the various schools of Islam will have what is known as Shaadh (شاذ) — The Irregular/Anomalous Opinion. These are views that are anomalous or isolated. The Ibadi school has such and other schools do as well. Yet, on the issue of the Mahdi, we have not even come across a shaadh.
We establish the following facts.
The Qur’an has no mention of any Imam Mahdi.
The Ibadi hadith collection has no mention of Imam Mahdi.
There is no hadith about Mahdi in the Al-Jami’i Al-Salih, otherwise known as the Musnad Al-Imam Al Rabii.
The silence of Bukhari & Muslim.
The two great Imams of Hadith, Bukhari and Muslim, neither of them mentions Hadith concerning Imam Mahdi. What’s interesting about this is that both of them are aware of narrations on the subject that meet their criteria, yet they did not include them.
The silence of the Muwatta of Malik ibn Anas.
There is no hadith about Mahdi in the Muwatta of Malik ibn Anas.
What will Ahl Sunnah In the next 56 years and no Mahdi? Witness the genius of Ibn al-Hajr al-Asqalani as he tries to make sense of the data.
Ali Erbaş Turkish Islamic scholar and president of directorate of religious affairs -diyanet in Turkey, believes Mahdi will not come and that Jesus (as) is dead. The Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) is Turkey’s highest official Islamic authority.
The great ibn Khaldūn al-Ḥaḍramī, Ashʿarī in theology, and Mālikī in jurisprudence. Writes in the Muqaddimah (Book 1, Chapter 3, section on the caliphate) about the weakness of the chains concerning narrations of Mahdi.
Shaykh Dr. Muhammed Bin Yahya Ninowy, a descendant of the Blesed Prophet Muhammed (saw) through the line of Imam al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, expreses his doubts about the Mahdi.
“So after the truth, what else can there be, save error? How then are you turned away?” (Qur’an 10:32)
﷽
We were alerted to a fascinating discussion recently between Shaykh Dr. Muhammed bin Yahya Ninowy and Tafhim Kiani on the subject: The Sunni Identity: Can Salafis Be Seen As Sunni Muslim? – Shaykh Ninowy
You may watch the very informative discussion here:
Before we comment further, we feel it is important to give some background information on Shaykh Dr. Muhammed bin Yahya Ninowy .Dr. Muhammed bin Yahya al-Ninowy is widely recognized as a descendant of the Blesed Prophet Muhammed (saw)through the line of Imam al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib
Shaykh Ninowy was featured in ‘The Muslim 500’ as regards those who were deemed to exert a great deal of influence on the Muslim Ummah.
“Sheikh Dr Muhammad Al-Ninowy is a Syrian-American scholar, author, and medical doctor based in Atlanta, Georgia, whose lineage is traced back to the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace be upon him). In addition to a PhD in Islamic studies from the University of Georgia, he holds a Doctor of Medicine degree. He is the founding director of Madina Institute and Seminaries, The Center for Non-Violence and Peace Studies, and the charitable organization Planet Mercy, with campuses in the USA, Canada, the UK, South Africa, Malaysia, and Norway. Al-Ninowy also leads a school that follows the Sufism of Ahl-Al-Hadith. He was appointed by the Sultan of Malaysia in 2020 to serve as a member of the board of directors of the Islamic University. An upcoming book is: Nonviolence; a fundamental Islamic principle.”
In the above exchange, Shaykh Dr. Muhammed Al-Ninowy had some eye-opening statements concerning ahadith in relation to “The Mahdi.”
@1:19:33 “The hadith of the Mahdi is frankly in our Sunni tradition and also in the Shi’a tradition, but let’s say in the Sunni tradition there are one and half hadith that are ambiguous in my view. So, Sahih lilghairihi ghair sahih, the explicit are not authentic; and the authentic are not explicit. So, therefore you see, the earlier scholars did not even put it as part of the… did not put the Mahdi as part of the Aqaid.”
This is a welcome statement. It is welcomed because we can see more and more come to this realization.
Recently even Shaykh Hamza Yusuf made an interesting statement when he said:
The vast majority of Muslims believe in the second coming.
Which means there are Muslims who do not believe in the coming of Jesus (as)
Wonder which Muslims those are?
You can find Shaykh Hamza’s statement in an interview here;
Now, Shaykh Dr. Muhammed Al-Ninowy did have a little blurb about the Ibadi school in the above interview.
@1:16:05 “The Khawarij of today, the Ibadis.”@1:16:52 “Not as verbally violent anymore to be honest with you.” Their tradition is.”
He was rather mild. The important thing is that for him, we are Muslims. Albeit he is clearly in error in terms of understanding our history. We also have to keep in mind that it is claimed he is a descendant of Husayn, the son of Imam Ali, as well as being disciplined in the Shaadhili Tariqah. Thus, given his own admission (in the above interview) of Sufism and its connection to Imam Ali, you can’t expect Shaykh Ninowy to give away the store. Albeit we are hopeful that gaps in information are an opportunity to learn about the Ibadi school. He has access to the Arabic language and resources, and surely he will not be excused on the day of judgement.
“So after the truth, what else can there be, save error? How then are you turned away?” –(Qur’an 10:32).
One of our team members has met him before, and he does not strike us as a person who is egotistical or driven by winning points and debates.
May Allah (swt) continue to support Shaykh Ninowy when he strives to build bridges of mutual trust and cooperation throughout the world. Personally, we feel Muslims who attend his Masjid and his circles of learning are in good hands, and Allah (swt) knows best.
Prima Quran 