“Also, mention when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good news of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary – distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near to Allah. He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous. “She said, “My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?” The angel said, “Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is. (Qur’an 3:45-47)
﷽
“Also, mention, in the book the story of Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east and she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, so leave me, if you should be fearing of Allah. He said, “I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you news of a pure boy. “She said, “How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste? “He said, “Thus it will be; your Lord says, ‘it is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed.” (Qur’an 19:16-21)
As Shaykh Ahmed Deedat (r) has mentioned in his Pamphlet “Is the Bible God’s Word?” page 11:
We do not have the time and space to go into the tens of thousands of — grave or minor —defects that the authors of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) have attempted to revise. We leave that privilege to the Christian scholars of the Bible. Here I will endeavor to cast just a cursory glance at a “half-a-dozen” or so of those “minor” changes.
1. “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14 – AV) The indispensable “VIRGIN” in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase “a young woman,” which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word almah. Almah is the word that has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT bethulah, which means VIRGIN. This correction is only to be found in the English language translation, as the RSV is only published in this tongue. For the African and the Afrikaner, the Arab and the Zulu, in fact, in the 1500 other languages of the world, Christians are made to continue to swallow the misnomer “VIRGIN.”
The argument goes (from the Jews) and the atheists, for that matter, that if the Gospel writer ‘Matthew’ had been inspired and directed by the Holy Spirit, then he (Matthew) would not have relied upon the Jewish Septuagint for the source of his quote.
Technically, the word almah more than not was used for a young woman that could be married. Being a young, unmarried woman, it was often understood that she was not married and thus, a virgin.
However, those who argue against this state that the word ‘bethulah’, which actually does mean virgin, should have been used in place of ‘almah’, which has the possibility of being a virgin.
The website: Jews for Jesus has the following to say:
We as Muslims could agree with our Christian apologist and say look, ‘almah’likely means ‘virgin’ and that is good enough.
The reason that it is not good enough is that the author of the ‘Gospel According to Matthew’ had made some huge blunders when being reliant upon the Greek Septuagint.
We will give a clear example: Believe us, there are many!
“When they drew near Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tethered, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them here to me. And if anyone should say anything to you, reply, ‘The master has need of them.’ Then he will send them at once. “This happened so that what had been spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled: Say to daughter Zion, ‘Behold, your king comes to you, meek and riding on an ass, and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.’ “The disciples went and did as Jesus had ordered them. They brought the ass and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them. The huge crowd spread their cloaks on the road, while others cut branches from the trees and strewed them on the road. The crowds preceding him and those following kept crying out and saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; hosanna in the highest.” And when he entered Jerusalem the whole city was shaken and asked, “Who is this? “And the crowds replied, “This is Jesus the prophet, from Nazareth in Galilee.” (Matthew 21:1-11)
This is disastrous. It is disastrous on several accounts. Whoever wrote the Gospel according to Matthew couldn’t have known the original Hebrew text. Instead, the Greek Septuagint was relied upon resulting in the mistaken belief that the so-called “prophecy” was about Jesus riding upon two donkeys!
Again, look at what Christian scholars have had to say about the matter.
4-5] The prophet: this fulfillment citation is actually composed of two distinct Old Testament texts, Isaiah 62:11 (Say to daughter Zion) and Zechariah 9:9. The ass and the colt are the same animal in the prophecy, mentioned twice in different ways, the common Hebrew literary device of poetic parallelism. Matthew takes them as two is one of the reasons why some scholars think that he was a Gentile rather than a Jewish Christian who would presumably not make that mistake (see Introduction).
7] Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy.
So why could this be a Jewish contention against the Qur’an?
The Core of the Critique.
The criticism, as we’ve laid out, follows this logic:
The Christian Doctrine is Based on a Mistranslation: The Christian belief in a virgin birth prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 relies on the Greek Septuagint’s translation of the Hebrew word almah (young woman) as parthenos (virgin), rather than the more precise Hebrew word for virgin, bethulah.
Matthew’s Error Demonstrates Human Authorship: The author of the Gospel of Matthew (who used the Septuagint) further demonstrates his human fallibility by misreading Zechariah 9:9, thinking it describes two animals (an ass and a colt) instead of one animal described with poetic parallelism.
The Qur’an is Therefore Derivative and Human: Since the Qur’an also affirms the virgin birth, the critic argues that its author simply borrowed this “mistaken” Christian doctrine, which itself is based on a Greek mistranslation of a Hebrew text. This, they claim, proves the Qur’an is a human document from the 7th century, not a divine revelation.
The assumption that the Jew could make is that because Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Mary (May Allah honour her) that the “author of the Qur’an” simply copied the Christian doctrine — which in turn is based upon the Greek Septuagint and has no knowledge of the Hebrew text. Presumably, this makes the Qur’an all too human and not of divine authorship.
The Qur’an is Independent and Authoritative, Not Derivative. This is the most critical point. The Qur’an does not seek to prove the virgin birth by referencing the Hebrew Bible. It does not say, “And this happened to fulfill what was said by the prophet Isaiah…” as Matthew does.
Instead, the Qur’an narrates the event as a direct, fact revealed by Allah.
We as Muslims have a straightforward response to this. That is that whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ was quote-mining the Jewish sacred text to get legitimacy for Jesus as the Messiah. Whereas, for us as Muslims, the Qur’an stands independent of any justification for the miraculous birth of Christ Jesus.
Muslims could agree with Christian apologists that almah can imply virginity. However, the Islamic position is stronger: We have no theological need to enter that debate. Our belief is not contingent on the interpretation of a single word in a text that could have been altered. Our belief is based solely on the clear, unambiguous words of the Qur’an:
“She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, ‘Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me…””(Qur’an 19:20-21)
The Qur’an uses the phrase “while no man has touched me” (وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ), which is an explicit, clear statement of virginity that avoids the ambiguity of the Hebrew almah altogether
In other words, Christ Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. This is our belief as Muslims who believe in the words of the Qur’an.
This was a real event that took place. Where we part with the Christians is this:
The Christians in particular whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ felt a need to justify this event by reference to the Hebrew scriptures albeit reliance upon the Greek Septuagint.
Conclusion:
The mistakes of Matthew highlight the human process of trying to fit Jesus into Old Testament prophecies, sometimes through forced interpretations and errors from using a translation.
The Qur’an, by contrast, displays none of this. It is entirely self-contained and authoritative. It does not make interpretive errors about Zechariah or Isaiah because it does not reference them in the first place. It simply states the truth of the event as revealed by Allah.
Therefore, the argument that the Qur’an “copied” a mistake actually proves the opposite: its independence from the textual corruptions and human errors that affected the previous scriptures. The Qur’an’s account of the virgin birth is not evidence of its human origin but rather of its divine origin, as it provides a pristine, uncorrupted narrative free from the dilemmas of biblical scholarship.
As Muslims, our belief in this stands apart from needing any proof text or citation from previous scriptures. With Allah is the success!
May Allah (swt) guide the sincere among them so that they do not perish in ever lasting hellfire!
“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?
“We strengthened his kingship, and gave him wisdom and sound judgment.” (Qur’an 38:20)
﷽
These verses are a case study that strengthen the position of the Ibadi school that Muslims should not rely upon the Israʼiliyyat material to provide further points of elucidation on any matter of our faith.
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur’an) which has been revealed to Allah’s Messenger (saw) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!”
Because this hadith is from Ibn Abbas (ra). Ibn Abbas (ra) is clearly telling us not to rely upon the People of the Scripture while we have the Qur’an.
*Note* Ibn Abbas (ra) according to the hadith clearly states:
“Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything?“
“(And hath the story of the litigants come unto thee?) Then came to you the story of the opponents of David. (How they climbed the wall into the royal chamber…”
“How they burst in upon David, and he) David (was afraid of them. They) i.e. the two angels who entered in on David (said: Be not afraid (We are) two litigants, one of whom hath wronged the other, therefore judge aright) justly (between us; be not unjust) do not be partial and transgress not; (and show us the fair way) show us what is right.”
“(Lo! this my brother hath ninety and nine ewes) meaning 99 wives (while I had one ewe) i.e. one wife; (and he said: Entrust it to me, and he conquered me in speech) this is a similitude which they struck for David in order for him to understand what he did to Uriah.”
“((And it was said to him): O David! Lo! We have set you as a vicegerent in the earth) We appointed you a prophet king for the Children of Israel; (therefore judge aright between mankind) judge justly between people, (and follow not desire) that as you did regarding Bathseba, the wife of Uriah, who was also David’s cousin (that it beguile you from the way of Allah) from the obedience of Allah. (Lo! those who wander from the way of Allah) from the obedience of Allah (have an awful doom, forasmuch as they forgot the Day of Reckoning) because they forsake working for the Day of Reckoning.”
So now we are in a conundrum. Here are some propositions that require reflection.
The above hadith is not true because Ibn Abbas (ra) apparently is relying upon information that neither the Qur’an nor the Blessed Prophet (saw) provides.
The above hadith is true and this tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas (ra) needs to be put under a microscope and further scrutiny.
Ibn Abbas (ra) used to believe the statement in the hadith, but later changed his opinion, thus we have the bizarre Israʼiliyyat material in his Tafsir.
The bizarre Israʼiliyyat material in Ibn Abbas (ra) tafsir is about an earlier position he held and the hadith captures a latter position in which he corrected the error of his ways.
“We strengthened his kingship, and gave him wisdom and sound judgment. Has the story of the two plaintiffs, who scaled the sanctuary, reached you? When they came into David’s presence, he was startled by them. They said, “Have no fear. We are merely two in a dispute: one of us has wronged the other. So judge between us with truth—do not go beyond it and guide us to the right way. This is my brother. He has ninety-nine sheep while I have one. He asked me to give it up to him, overwhelming me with his argument.” David’s ruling was: “He has definitely wronged you in demanding to add your sheep to his. And certainly many partners wrong each other, except those who believe and do good—but how few are they!” Then David realized that We had tested him so he asked for his Lord’s forgiveness, fell down in prostration, and turned in repentance. So We forgave that for him. And he will indeed have closeness to Us and an honourable destination! “O David! We have surely made you an authority in the land, so judge between people with truth. And do not follow whims or they will lead you astray from Allah’s Way. Surely those who go astray from Allah’s Way will suffer a severe punishment for neglecting the Day of Reckoning.” (Qur’an 38:20-26)
We will give our argument that of the questions that are put forward the position of Ibn Abbas (ra) is either position 2 or 4. The Tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas (ra) has some bizarre assertions.
In order to believe in either proposition 1 or 3 we would need solid answers to the following questions:
A) Why would angels need to: “climb a wall into a royal chamber?” They are angels why do they need to climb or scale anything?
B) Since when did Prophets serve as a litigant in a dispute with angels?
C) Since when did angels have sheep?
D) Where did Ibn Abbas (ra) get the idea that the sheep are actually women? Why would the Arabic text, which clearly states sheep, be seen as a metaphor for women unless one was reliant upon Israʼiliyyat.
As regards what some commentators think, this is a reference to let me remind the readers of the Biblical account that accuses the Prophet.
Regarding the incident of King David and Uriah, it is alluded to in the Qur’an (38:21-25) in the Parable of the Ewes. It becomes evident that King David did commit some mistake with regard to taking Uriah’s wife. But, of course, we don’t say he committed adultery with her.
Allegedly Prophet David (as) commits adultery and is culpable in murder according to the Bible.
“Brothers, I can tell you with confidence that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne.” (Acts 2:29-30)
Next, we have the story of Prophet David (as)
Apparently, if we are to believe the testimony in the Bible concerning David, we find that he was a man who led a woman to commit adultery and committed adultery himself. He lusted after another man’s wife, watched her bath naked. He then had this woman’s husband killed. He tried to hide the fact he made this woman pregnant out of wedlock. This is the same David that, according to Christians, writes all the prophecies concerning Jesus in the 22 Psalms and throughout the Psalms. Even accordingly, David wrote evil things like the following:
“In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it, he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”
If I was to measure the Prophets of the Bible-based upon how some Christians measure the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) I could never become a Christian. I would have to reject the testimony concerning the “prophecies” concerning Jesus in the Psalms.
“One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof, he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.)
Then she went back home. The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.” “So David sent this word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent him to David. When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were, and how the war was going. Then David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master’s servants and did not go down to his house.”
“David was told, “Uriah did not go home.” So he asked Uriah, “Haven’t you just come from a military campaign? Why didn’t you go home?” “Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents, and my commander Joab and my lord’s men are camped in the open country. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and make love to my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!”
“Then David said to him, “Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. At David’s invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master’s servants; he did not go home.”
” In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it, he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.” “So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David’s army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died.”
“Joab sent David a full account of the battle. He instructed the messenger: “When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, the king’s anger may flare up, and he may ask you, ‘Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn’t you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? Who killed Abimelek son of Jerub-Besheth? Didn’t a woman drop an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?’ If he asks you this, then say to him, ‘Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.’”
“The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. The messenger said to David, “The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance of the city gate. Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king’s men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.” “David told the messenger, “Say this to Joab: ‘Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.’ Say this to encourage Joab.”
“When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeased the Lord.”(2nd Samuel 11:2-27)
What does the displeased Lord do with David?
“This is what the Lord says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes, I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”
“Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” “Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord,the son born to you will die.” “After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.” On the seventh day, the child died.”
David’s attendants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they thought, “While the child was still living, he wouldn’t listen to us when we spoke to him”. How can we now tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate.” “David noticed that his attendants were whispering among themselves, and he realized the child was dead. “Is the child dead?” he asked.” “Yes,” they replied, “He is dead.”
“Then David got up from the ground. After he had washed, put on lotions, and changed his clothes, he went into the house of the Lord and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request, they served him food, and he ate.” “His attendants asked him, “Why are you acting this way? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept, but now that the child is dead, you get up and eat!”
“He answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The Lord may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” “Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba, and he went to her and made love to her. She gave birth to a son, and they named him Solomon. The Lord loved him; and because the Lord loved him, he sent word through Nathan the prophet to name him Jedidiah.” (2 Samuel 12:11-25)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
So the Lord (Jesus The Son, The Father, and that third wheel, aka- The Holy Spirit) was displeased with David’s actions. So what do they ultimately do? What do THEY DO to David?
They kill David’s infant son! Imagine David saying to his son: “Sorry, son but Daddy got into a fling with some other dudes wife and now well lil tyke you’re going to have die for that!”
They make a decree that David will have his wives taken from him and made to commit adultery in broad daylight. God of the Bible via Prophet Nathan: “What you did displeased me. You know I don’t like it when people commit adultery. To prove my point I am going to decree to have your wives go and commit adultery in broad daylight just to show you how much I dislike adultery!”
Lastly, they reward David with a son through the wife who cheated on her husband and gave her Solomon who in return became a King of Israel and a Prophet! God of the Bible via Prophet Nathan: “David what you did was very bad and even though I killed your son who did not have anything do with your sexual proprietaries but that is water under the bridge, lesson learned. Thus, I am going give you another son through the same women that cheated on her husband.”
What in the Cinnamon Toast Crunch kind of justice is this?!
Notice the above text states:
” I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives.”
Such a notable threat, but we don’t hear anything of that kind. The text says that I will take your wives and take them to one who is close to David, and he will sleep with your wives. Which begs the question. How certain can we be that this child that Bathsheba had with David was his child at all?
We have no idea how much time has passed since the death of Uriah and although the text goes out of its way to make it seem that he never had intimacy with her for some time, we can’t be entirely certain. Not only that, but apparently, according to the threats issued by the God of the Bible to David that he would take his wives and give them to someone who will commit adultery with them, how certain can we be that this individual is not the father?
Anyway, this is the depiction of the deity of the Bible and the “justice” of that deity. There is absolutely no justification to think that the passage of the (Qur’an 38:20-26) had anything to do with that, at all!
Not only this but the above text is in major contradiction with the above.
“But the children of the murderers he did not execute, according to what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses, in which the Lord commanded, saying, “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; but a person shall be put to death for his own sin.”(2 Kings 14:6)
Note that the children of the murderers were not executed. But the above text has:
“You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord,the son born to you will die.”
Shaykh Dr. Khalan Al Kharousi (H) has an explanation for this. All praise be to Allah (swt).
Dr. Khalan Al Kharousi (h) mentions a very important point. That here and there a particular mufassir (exegete) would look at the Qur’an through the lens of the Israʼiliyyat material. Which brings us that unfortunate bit about Uriah and David. The text of the Qur’an is far, far from this.
Now that is the explanation given by Shaykh Dr. Khalan (h).
There is another explanation given by our teacher, Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani (h) of Algeria.
Shaykh Dawud’s explanation is very straight forward. He focuses on the following text:
So judge between us with truth—do not go beyond it and guide us to the right way.
David’s ruling was: “He has definitely wronged you in demanding to add your sheep to his.
Then David realized that We had tested him so he asked for his Lord’s forgiveness, fell down in prostration, and turned in repentance
We have surely made you an authority in the land, so judge between people with truth. And do not follow whims or they will lead you astray from Allah’s Way
So the straight forward explanation given by Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani of Algeria is that the hakim should hear both sides of the story. David (as) upon hearing that one brother had the bulk of the sheep, gave in to his whims and was hasty in coming to a decision. However, he immediately realized this. As if he was going to turn to the second brother and say (now you speak) but by than David (as) already showed himself not to be impartial. Thus, David (as) was quick to turn in repentance to Allah (swt).
For those of you who understand Arabic, do not miss out on this gem of the Ummah, Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani (h). Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan attended his lecture series in Oman.
Here is a 7 hour Qur’anic course contains seven chapters dealing with the foundations of faith and the practical rules that a Muslim should follow in order to meet his Lord with a blank page free from the traces of sins and sins!
“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.” (Qur’an 4:157)
﷽
As mentioned before we do a tight textual analsysis of the Qur’an in order to reach the correct understanding. This is done by comparing a word with all other instances of that word in the Qur’an. This is done by also comparing the context of verses with their surrounding verses. This is known as Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an)
In a discussion on Blogging Theology titled: “Jesus was not crucified: the evidence with Dr. Ali Ataie.” Dr. Ali Ataie made some very interesting assertions. Assertions which move him closer to our position.
@40:28 Dr. Ataie states: “But I do believe that myth and legend has probably soo permeated the gospel accounts of Jesus passion narratives that it is not at all beyond reason to dismiss them completely as historical fiction!”
Prima-Qur’an comments: Allahu Akbar! there you go Dr. Ataie now that is the ticket! Than the idea that someone was “crucified” is likely based upon what? Myth and legend.
Dr. Ataie gets into his understanding of: Qur’an 4:157 “It was made to appear to them so.“
@53:38 “They did not have information. It did not come from a reliable source.” @54:11 “Jews and Christians ended up following hearsay reports about some crucifixion event from non eye-witnesses….”
Prima-Qur’an comments: Dr. Ataie state: ” “Jews and Christians ended up following hearsay reports about some crucifixionevent from non eye-witnesses….”
I would replace some words in the above sentence: “Jews and Christians ended up following hearsay reports about some imaplement event from non eye-witnesses….
“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), (Galatians 3:13)
Paul is quoting from a text that mentions a post mortem suspension punishment. The individual is killed first and while dead then supsended. Christians understand the Crucifixion as an ante mortem suspension punishment where the person is killed via asphyxiation while alive and being suspended.
This is exactly what shubbiha lahum means. It is not shubi ha alayhim!
In fact because we love you the readers insh’Allah I will give you a sneak peak at one of the slides that Shaykh Hilal and I are working on.
No pay wall and no gate keeping information!
This is the critical linguistic and contextual refinement. This is a far more precise reading of the phrase شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ (shubbiha lahum) and the verses that follow.
From the Ibadi perspective and reading of the verse the point fundamentally shifts the understanding of the verse from a narrativeabout a visual illusionin real-time toa critique of a historical claim based on unreliable transmission. Let’s integrate this correction.
The Correct Understanding of Point 4:167
The phrase وَ لٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ (“but it was made to appear so to them”) does not describe a miraculous event witnessed by onlookers in real time. Instead, it critiques the oral tradition and historical narrative that the Jewish community subsequent to the event had come to believe and propagate.
The Qur’an’s own subsequent words completely invalidate the possibility of this being an eye-witness account:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ – “Indeed, those who differ over it are surely in doubt about it.” (4:157)
Doubt (شَكٍّ – shakk) is impossible for someone who witnessed an execution firsthand.
مَا لَهُمْ بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ – “They have no knowledge of it.” (4:157)
Knowledge (عِلْمٍ – ‘ilm) is exactly what an eye-witness would claim to have.
Assumption (الظَّنَّ – al-ẓann) is the antithesis of eye-witness testimony.
A Hadith that is classified as الظَّنَّ (al-ẓann), meaning “conjectural” or “of presumptive status,” and comes from a lone narrator (or a single strand of transmission) is known as a Khabar al-Āḥād (خبر الآحاد).
Here’s a detailed breakdown:
Definition: A Khabar al-Āḥād is a report (Hadith) that does not reach the highest level of mass transmission (Mutawātir). It is narrated by one or a few individuals at any stage of its chain of narration (isnad), such that the number of narrators does not generate absolute, certain knowledge (ilm al-yaqīn) in the listener. Instead,it generates presumptive knowledge (ilm al-ẓannī), which is sufficient for action but is theoretically open to doubt.
Therefore, the Qur’an is not describing a supernatural trickery of the senses that happened in the past. It is describing the state of the received narrative in the present tense of its revelation.
The chain of meaning, according to this corrected interpretation, is:
The Claim: A specific Jewish community (contemporary to the Prophet Muhammed or just prior) boasts, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” This is their historical claim.
The Denial: The Qur’an flatly denies this: “And they did not kill him, nor did they impale him (وَ مَا صَلَبُوهُ).”
The Explanation for the False Claim: How did this false claim arise? The event was “made to appear to them (شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)” in their oral traditions and historical accounts. The truth was obscured within their own narrative.
The Proof of the Falsehood: The proof that this claim is a baseless tradition and not established fact is that those who argue over it are in doubt, devoid of certain knowledge, and following only assumptions about what truly happened. True eye-witnesses to a capital punishment would not be in a state of doubt and conjecture; they would be certain.
“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.” (Qur’an 4:157)
﷽
This is a recent e-mail sent to Todd Lawson an Emeritus Professor of Islamic thought at the University of Toronto.
I sent this inquiry as I am genuinely curious as to why he or anyone for that matter think that the Qur’an 4:157 seem to be interacting with anything that the Romans have done, or that the text is talking about a historical event known as the “Crucifixion” or that the Qur’an is denying/or affirming anything about a Cross at all.
Greetings Professor Lawson
I hope this email finds you in the best of health.
I had read your book “The Crucifixion and the Qur’an: A Study in the HIstory of Muslim Thought.”
It was certainly an interesting read.
You have noted how extraneous material has influenced the Sunni Tafsir tradition and popular interpretation of Qur’an 4:157.
So to this point I am curious as to why you think the Qur’an engaged with an historical event popularly known as “The Crucifixion” at all?
The reason I ask this is because when one looks at the immediate text of the Qur’an 4:157 there does not seem to be any mention of Romans or Roman involvement at all.
I am deeply interested why your good self or anyone would feel that the Qur’an 4:157 engages with an historical event popularly known as “The Crucifixion” at all. I believe that a reading of the text without extraneous material tells us that the text is interacting with certain Jews who were making certain claims about Jesus.
When we read Qur’an 4:155 for example:
“They have incurred Allah’s wrath for their breaking the covenant, and their rejection of the signs of Allah and for slaying Prophets without right, and for saying: ‘Our hearts are wrapped up in covers-even though in fact Allah has sealed their hearts because of their unbelief, so that they scarcely believe.”
I believe we both concur that it would seem out of place for that text to address the Romans of the time of Jesus.
Furthermore the Qur’an 4:157 has a double denial in the text. They did not kill him nor did they (salabu). The initial denial is general and it can easily accommodate any understanding of a possible demise of Jesus.
It is immensely curious to follow up a general denial that can accommodate any particular understanding of any possible demise of Jesus with a particular denial immediately after.
Is it not more sensible in keeping with the immediate text and surrounding text to see this as the Qur’an interacting with particular claims made by Jews about Jesus? Rather these claims are based upon any historical event, document or even oral transmissions in certain circles that the Qur’an would be familiar with?
Given that this seems to be the very obvious case, how do you propose somehow Romans, and a “Crucifixion” is posited upon the text of Qur’an 4:157?
It is peculiar because Jews do not crucify people in their law. It is not a part of the Torah nor of the Talmud of which I am sure you are aware.
They do have laws about killing people and then impailing them. They do have assertions about those impaled being cursed by God.
Equally curious is the idea that (salabu) would translate to a Latin Cross, or the Tau Cross.
Given that the Qur’an in (7:124); 20:71; & 26:49) all describe cutting off the hands and the feet and given what we know about supporting the body weight on an ecclesiastical “Cross” it is it not presumptuous of us to assume Latin Cross, Tau etc?
The two noun forms in Qur’an 86:7 & Qur’an 4:23 which relate to the loins and the lumbus region seem to forcefully argue with a type of punishment that would involve impalement rather than anything to do with being tied to a patibulum and affixed to a crux or stake and than having nails driven in ones hands and feet.
When we look at the text of Qur’an 5:33 on page 31 of your book you state:
“the criminal was killed by a separate means before their corpse was publicly displayed on a pike or cross.”
This does not seem to correlate to what Christians have in mind when they invoke the “Crucifixion” of Jesus. They seem to think this is a death on a cross and not a death prior to a cross.
I also felt that pike was more appropriate than cross given what we know about the Islamic legal schools. None of the legal schools, Ibadi, Zaydi, Zahiri, Shafi’i, Imami, Maliki, Hanafi or Hanbali make it a requirement to put someone on a patibulum and affix that patibulum to a crux or stake and than proceed to drive nails in the hands and feet.
Much more can be said. Again I believe my initial inquiry is that if we do a plain reading of Qur’an 4:157 or even invoke the immediate context where are we drawing upon the idea that this is interacting with something the Romans are said to have done to Jesus?
Thank you for your time.
Have a blessed weekend ahead.
If you would like to read more on this subject I invite you to read the following:
“They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.”(Qur’an 61:8)
﷽
When it comes to Christians and Islam there are a few scenarios that take place.
a) Either they begin a serious study of Islam and end up seeing that Islam is a more cogent faith and world view than Christianity ever could be. They convert to Islam as I have.
b) They remain convinced of their own faith but develop a deep admiration and appreciation for Islam and Muslims (rather they admit it publicly or not)
c) Their hearts become diseased and their spiritual ailments are amplified and this becomes obvious in time. Greed, avarice, lust, anger, hate, racism begins to drip from their writings and public statements. Without fail repeatedly these people end up being humiliated publicly in this life. The hereafter is a painful and everlasting torment for them.
This article will focus on group C. Where better to start than with Zionist Evangelist Phil Arms and Phil Arms ministries? These are just some of the books that are Anti Islam and filled with pro-Israel Platitudes.
Is Fanatic Islam a Global Threat? by Phil Arms
Light in the Shadow of Jihad by Phil Arms
Unholy War-America, Israel and Radical Islam by Phil Arms
However, what we do not know is this, just like Robert Morey who was removed from his Church and asked to leave F.I.R.E (an Evangelical Christian Outreach) Phil Arms too was removed from his church! The full story follows. I am sure that sooner or later sincere Christians are going to get real tired of these Evangelist, and Pastors and Apologist who claim to be fighting ‘the good fight’ against Islam but instead are busy embezzling funds, and robbing the congregation of their hard-earned money, and molesting members of the body of Christ both physically and spiritually!
“Phil Arms grew up in West Texas. His dynamic Christian mother raised her six children in the local church. However, Phil did not commit his life to Christ during his younger years and chose to join himself with the sub-culture of the sixties and seventies in Houston, Texas. After experiencing one dead end after another, running from the love and voice of God, he began to search for reality and gave his life to Christ on a street corner in 1972. Immediately after his conversion, he began a ministry on the streets of Houston, Texas, witnessing to those in need of Jesus. Within a short time, God began to open wide the doors for Phil to minister in churches, schools, and evangelistic rallies.” Source: http://www.lifereachministries.com/aboutus.aspx
The interesting part above is that it says that Pastor Phil “chose to join himself with the sub-culture of the sixties and seventies in Houston, Texas.” Anyone who knows about the 60s and 70s knows that the sub-culture referred to at that time was one of drugs, drugs and you guessed it more drugs…
No amount of lawyering could have placated Jim Miller, who rose from his seat in the crowd and said, “I will not stand for more lies.” Taken aback, Arms threatened to have the dissenter removed. In a passively resistant protest, Miller threw himself on the green-carpeted steps below the pastor and prayed for him to repent. When Arms had finished his speech, he crawled down onto the steps with Miller and spoke to him harshly under his breath, like a parent scolding a child in public. “Now, God’s told me to wash your feet,” Arms said. “I want you to get up here right now.”
But the forced foot-washing did little to bring Miller back into the fold. From the altar, he pointed out that Arm’s repayment of the money didn’t negate the fact that he stole it, and this sparked shouts for truth and repentance throughout the congregation. Finally, Suzanne Arms took the stage to try to help her husband defend himself, but she ended up just giving the crowd more of the blood they wanted. “Yes, he took too many drugs, he’s confessed that,” she said. “Yes, he took the money, and he shouldn’t have — it was drug-driven.”
Apparently, he has been wrestling with the drug hydrocodone. The following picture is taken from one of his publications, “The Man Who Would Be God.”
If you take a hard look at the picture it makes you wonder what goes through the minds of people who conjure up such images. In fact, the image looks like one person who is two different beings, a split personality, or someone who maybe wrestling with something (drugs) or someone (Jinn or evil spirits). Personally looking at it gives me the creeps, and I do not know why Christians are not spiritually guided as not to have books with such images in reach of their children. The book itself, though a polemic against the Anti-Christ, does an excellent job of subliminally projecting satanic imagery. Also, it says “PHIL ARMS” underneath. For those with a discerning spirit if you get chills I think its time you pick up the Qur’an and stop listening to the lies spread by Satan’s minions. If I wrote a book I would put ‘By Phil Arms’. Why would you have such a controversial image and then just put your name at the bottom? Is Allah trying to tell us something?
In Conclusion: We as Muslims should make du’a and pray that Allah guides Phil Arms, his ministries, and those duped by his drug charades and lies so that they can understand the truth and simplicity of Islam. I invite everyone who ever listened to Phil Arms ministries to take the time to rethink some of the statements he may have made about Islam while under the influence of narcotics. Repeatedly we see those who direct their energies against Islam are exposed for their nefarious agendas and inwardly shallow spirits groping in darkness and being used as pawns of Satan. May Allah guide him and his family to Islam and may Allah give him a job that provides him with sustenance and makes things easy upon him. Next up is Assemblies of God’s very own Jimmy Swaggart.
Reverend Jimmy Swaggart (Assemblies of God) World famous televangelist and firebrand preacher will always be remembered by the world for his fiasco with the prostitute(s) in Louisiana. Jimmy Swaggart preached what he thought to be the Gospel of Christ Jesus to over 132 countries around the world! This all changed one fateful evening when his fall from grace came.
The interesting thing surrounding this event from the Muslim perspective is his well-known debate with Shaykh Ahmed Deedat.
In the debate “Is the Bible God’s Word” the two titans of Christianity and Islam, the Reverend Jimmy Swaggart and Shaykh Ahmed Deedat had finally met.
The background of the debate seems to have ignited after Jimmy Swaggart appeared on television claiming the Qur’an to be “incantations of frail men”. The Muslims of course did not take too kindly to the statement and thought that a debate between Reverend Jimmy Swaggart and Shaykh Ahmed Deedat should be arranged.
During the opening of the debate Reverend Jimmy Swaggart made an interesting remark on polygyny to the effect that he said:
“I was just talking to Mr. Deedat this afternoon I should say this evening really, and he’s one of the gentlemen whom you meet and you like him instantly. He was teasing my wife and I and said Islam allows four wives. He just corrected me he said, ‘up to four’ and I said, “Well Christianity only allows one so I had to get the best on the first shot”.
The link to the debate: “Is the Bible God’s Word” is as follows…
My review of the debate: I thought that Reverend Jimmy Swaggart was able to maintain his composure in the debate which was quite important. The most glowing comment as a true follower of Christ Jesus was his statement, “I want to say that every true Christian loves the Muslim people and I mean that with all of my heart.” His reference to a person crying out in the name of Muhammed for a demon to come out of a possessed individual Is a questionable assertion. I thought Shaykh Ahmed Deedat did an excellent job of dealing with the issue of miracles and just how important they are.
What happened subsequently after the debate will soon not be forgotten. Reverend Jimmy Swaggart was caught being defiled with prostitutes.
The link to Reverend Jimmy Swaggart’s confession of being with prostitutes is as follows…
Now, this is very interesting because of his attack on Islam’s position of polygyny. Now it would be very awkward for me as a man to say that a man should marry another woman simply to gratify his sexual desires; however why a man chooses to take a second wife is not my concern. Muslims simply point out that time and again we get attacked for polygyny while many people practice polygamy and polyandry in the form of sexual freedom with no strings attached.
Islam is simply saying to the Christians and Jews nowhere does the Bible stipulate not to have more than one wife. It is simply a modern norm that has been adopted by most Christians. Jesus, John, and Paul were never married so they cannot be examples of monogamy.
Reverend Jimmy Swaggart’s plea to ‘ship the Muslims back home’.
The Reverend Jimmy Swaggart made the recent outburst that every single Muslim in the United States college campuses should be shipped back to where they came from. Source: (https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Beliefs/story?id=130008&page=1)
This outburst is very disheartening on two accounts.
1) If every Muslim is shipped back to where they came from, what would happen to the Muslims who are born right here in America? So I am not sure his statement was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
2) Why would we want to ship Muslims back to countries that deny the Gospel of Christ Jesus? Why not keep them right here in America where they can still be reached through the Campus Crusade for Christ? This also makes me hesitant to believe the statement was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
In Conclusion: I think Muslims and people of all faith persuasions should take a step back and examine this debate and what happened before the debate and subsequently. We pray that the Reverend Jimmy Swaggart, whom otherwise a cordial man, may reconsider his comments that all Muslim students should be made to leave the United States. We also pray that Allah opens his heart to the truths and beauty of Islam.
Next up is Ted Haggard. He was the head of the 30 million-strong National Association of Evangelicals. In the end, he was a man who struggled with his Gay Sex and Methamphetamines.
Somehow, this doesn’t surprise me coming from Ted Haggard who was the former head of the 30 million-strong National Association of Evangelicals. The following article taking from a website that also supports Pat Robertson (the peaceful Christian who says we should kill Hector Chavez, president of Venezuela, is a shareholder of Coors Beer, and has shady ties to blood diamond mines in Africa). This man Ted Haggard was also a spiritual adviser to George Bush Jr. if that says anything! He was in the popular DVD the Jesus Camp video and in this video, he was bashing homosexuals.
However, as one will see after this short article of his attacking Islam, Ted Haggard had to step down from the National Association of Evangelicals for being caught doing Homosexual acts with another man and for his abuse of Methamphetamine.
I appreciate that he did some research on the issue of abrogation but it’s still skewed. In the end
Any way a sample of his anti-Islamic diatribe is as follow
The first picture is very telling. Imagine Muslims engrossed in prayer and some Christian says this to his son, “They’re praying to their moon god son.” He obviously must be saying that so loud as in the cartoon the one Muslim hears him and abruptly stops his prayer. So what Robert Morey is doing here is saying that Christians should come across as people who have no class. I can’t imagine a Muslim witnessing a Christian in prayer and saying to his son, “They are worshiping their FALSE GOD CHRIST.” So loud as to hope the worshipers would hear him. That would be absolutely tactless.
The Rise and Fall of Robert Morey: It’s O.K To Tell Lies!
Probably one of the best places to start with Dr. Robert Morey would be his view on truth.
Five Point Calvinist and “Saint of God” Robert Morey (who was on the run from legal prosecution in California) and was rumored to be trying to mount some kind of come-back in the Pennsylvania area made a living off the good people of America by peddling lies to the unwary masses about Islam.
Robert Morey (One of God’s Elect in Reformed Theology) made a claim to fame with his bizarre and now-debunked claim ‘Allah is the Moon-God’ theory.
Listen to what God’s Elect has to say…
“Well that’s the whole point is that the word, ‘Lie’ needs to be defined. Uh sometimes not telling the truth, all of the truth is your Moral Obligation. And you have a moral obligation to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth at all times to anyone who asks you. You would say, ‘That’s not in the Bible’. The moral thing to do is for me not to tell you. You ain’t getting nothing out of me. Those issues relating to rather you have a moral obligation to tell the whole truth at all times to everyone. That needs to be answered by pointing out you don’t. You do not owe them the truth. See that’s another fallacy. People run around thinking ‘life is just’ and they run around thinking you owe the truth to everyone. You don’t! That’s what the Bible teaches.”-Robert Morey.
Think about that! Oh and did Robert Morey not only stretch the truth he outright lied again, and again and again.
Reformed Christians believe that God is a deceiver and that God in his sovereignty can lie to you. They believe you can be given an evanescent grace (in which you may think you are saved but in actuality, you are not). More on that in future post-Allah-willing.
In this debate with Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al Mansour, Morey makes the outlandish claim that Muslims killed 100 million Armenians! Then he changes the number and says it has been going on ‘since the 1st century’! The Muslims of the Prophet Muhammed (saw) was not even around during the 1st century! Then he made some claim about variant readings and Dr. Abdullah challenged him to produce a single one, his best one. Dr. Morey was so embarrassed by this debate he didn’t want it to be published or circulated at all!
Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al Mansour.
Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al-Mansour is an internationally esteemed attorney, author, and lecturer whose views have garnered worldwide attention; and serves as a special advisor to HRH Prince Alwaleed Bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud of Saudi Arabia.
Dr. Al-Mansour is an International Attorney and Businessman. His college education was obtained at Howard University, where he majored in Philosophy and Logic, and at the University of California School of Law at Berkeley where he received his Doctor of Jurisprudence degree. His web site is at the following address: http://www.world-hi.com/AAPressHome.html
Dr. Robert Morey also declined to debate Muslim apologist Hamza Abdul Malik on the issue: “Is Allah the true God?”. Morey and his camp declined that offer. Dr. Morey claimed to have a doctorate in “Islamic Studies” but neither he nor anyone else could find out where it came from.
Robert Morey also claims a Ph.D. in Islamic Studies from Louisiana Baptist University (LBU). This is an unaccredited institution that is not recognized by the U.S. Department of Education or by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). LBU is a “distance learning program” (teaching via the internet), with one alumnus boasting that “the LBU program may be completed 100% via distance learning” while noting that “I did spend one week on campus”. In other words, the Ph.D. is “earned” over the internet, not the classroom.
LBU is listed in Steve Levicoff’s Name It and Frame It?: New Opportunities in Adult Education and How to Avoid Being Ripped Off by “Christian” Degree Mills as a “degree mill”, a term used to refer to groups that issue bogus degrees for a fee. Outside his book, Levicoff put it bluntly: “LBU is a joke.” Perhaps LBU’s website words it best: “LBU has both the experience and reliability to provide an efficient quality degree program tailored to your needs.” Indeed! This is a case of “PhD-for-a-fee or your money back.”
In 1998, the Louisiana Board of Regents (a government agency responsible for overseeing higher education) issued a unanimous ruling to deny LBU an operating license for its business education programs and ordered the school to cease admitting students and cease advertising. LBU was later exempted based on the religious institution exemption and was allowed to operate as a religious institution.
Once again, things go from bad to worse for Morey when the matter is investigated further. Morey claims on his bio that he has obtained a Ph.D. degree in “Islamic Studies”. The only problem? LBU does not offer any such degree. As the OC Weekly noted:
Morey also claims to have received a doctorate from Louisiana Baptist University. Two problems: LBU is unaccredited by the United States government, which means no serious academy would recognize it. Then there’s this: LBU doesn’t offer a Ph.D. in Islamic studies.
He says this “research” was done at the Library of Congress where he read every book they had available on Islam written in English. He fails to tell anyone how many books are available at the Library of Congress on Islam at the time of his “research” (documentation reveals there were close to 2000 books available yet Morey’s small book only lists 130 references in the bibliography, with many of these coming from standard reference works – including nonstandard reference works like the American Tract Society). Robert Morey also made the outrageous claim that he could read 20 to 25 books an hour!
Another Christian evangelist had to call out Dr. Robert Morey for not double-checking his reference and worse still not admitting to error when shown he was wrong. You can watch that here: Robert Morey
Robert Morey was thrown out by his own denomination.
Robert Morey, instead of spending time teaching and sharing the Gospel of Christ Jesus, was getting himself rich off his own congregation. It is regrettable that Christians continue to trust such men who claim to be protecting them from their so-called “enemies”. As the old saying goes: “Who will police the police?”
To give people a typical example of something that Morey’s people would be doing is the following:
“The Research and Education Foundation has done more groundbreaking research, written more materials, produced more tapes, and debated more Muslims than any other organization of its kind… …and now they’re asking for YOUR help in the FIGHT AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM! Dr. Morey needs to raise $1,212,000 to mount a NATIONAL CRUSADE to educate the public about radical Islam and its JIHAD against the American people. The REF needs to supply education books and audio & videotapes to be used on university campuses and in the Federal and State prison system, to launch a massive challenge to the elements of radical Islam in America:….”
Robert Morey is also the same person who advised the U.S government to ‘bomb Mecca and Madinah’. So much for Christian love!
So here good Christian people across America were paying good money to make sure that ‘America was safe from radical Islam’. But then came the questions…
Where are all these videos of him debating Shabir Ally, Jamal Badawi, and Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al Mansour? Where can we find the complete list? Why have the so-called honest Calvinist Christians hid the videos of him ‘exposing the Qur’an and Islam for the lies that they are?’
How come Morey’s own church was being neglected financially?
Where did Morey actually get his self-proclaimed academic credentials in Islam?
The above people link has people asking where did some of this money raised to fight ‘radical Islam’ go to anyway?
Ironically Larry Wessels wasn’t getting his cut of the “bash Islam get paid” type of money. So there was a falling out between Larry Wessels of www.muslimhope.com and Robert Morey. The man in the videos above exposing Robert Morey is either Larry Wessels or closely associated with Larry Wessels. It is ironic because these people are also closely associated with individuals that have dubious knowledge about Islam as well as fake “Ex-Muslim” converts. Will come to that shortly insh’Allah.
That is proof that Reformed Christian theology beliefs include that the elect can backslide into grievous sins, and can for a time continue in that respect, have hardened hearts and scandalize others. Again, that is their version of a real Christian.
Conclusions: We Muslims should pray for the Christians of Robert Morey’s former church. My sincere advice to them is this. If Robert Morey has been dishonest to you and to others about your finances and Anti-Christ like in his mannerisms and treatment towards you then you should also realize that it is highly likely that he was misleading you about Islam as well. Robert Morey has to be the most dishonest Christian to come from camp “TULIP”.
T= Totally depraved U=Utterly helpless in the face of real scholarship L=Limited knowledge of the facts I=Irresistible temptation to lie P=Poorly trained academia
Robert Morey has since died. Now he will stand before a Sovereign and Just God, May Allah have mercy on your soul Robert Morey! Next is Dr. Anis Shorrosh
Dr. Anis Shorrosh was perhaps the one the Christian evangelist had been waiting for. He was Arab (or so he claims) and he was born and raised as a Christian in Palestine (or so he claims).
There are some anomalies about Shorrosh. First, of all, his name is not an Arab name. It appears to be Persian actually. Possibly he is a descendant of Armenians or Persians who settled in Palestine. Secondly, for someone born in Nazareth (as he claims), as an Arab by birth (yet in his debate with Dr. Jamal Badawi) he struggled to recite the Qur’an properly and the manner of his speaking Arabic is not as a native-born person but someone who had learned the language much latter. Especially if he was born in 1933 and served as a Pastor and an Evangelist from 1959-1966 that would put him at age 33 before he left the Middle East. Certainly, he should have a strong command of the Arabic language.
For example, you can see Anis Shorrosh struggle to read a few simple lines of the Qur’an in Arabic here:
The brother made an excellent point. In this debate between Anis Shorrosh and Jamal Badawi, Shorrosh claimed that there were mistakes in the Arabic grammar of the Qur’an. He claimed that certain words should have been other words instead. So this is quite a tall order. Yet Shorrosh claims he is not a scholar of the Arabic language! So the speaker asked Shorrosh to read a few lines of the Qur’an in Arabic of which Jamal Badawi noted were no less than 4 big mistakes let alone his struggle to even read the text!
Shorrosh also uses bait and switch tactics during debates. Observe his trickery here.
That ended up costing him the debate with Shabir Ally, which Dr. Shabir exposed him for it. Shorrosh is part of a deceptive evangelical missionary project that is called “The True Furqan” or also known as “The 21st Century Qur’an”. It has been distributed in places like Kuwait in private English schools. It contains 77 surahs which include Al Fatiha, “Al Jana” and “Al Injeel” Instead of the standard Bismillah it is replaced with a longer version that incorporates the Christian belief of three spirits. (Shabir Ally exposes this and also teaches Dr. Shorrosh that he actually ends up promoting Sabellianism! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19a30uFvghI)
The 21st Century Quran opposes Islamic teachings by stating that having more than one wife is fornication (A teaching not even found in the Bible!), that divorce is not being permissible (poor Christians stuck in abusive marriages). This book is being targeted to children in English schools were often many upper-middle-class Muslim families send their children. Lastly, after all the deceit and bluster from Anis Shorrosh what sticks out most in our minds is his arrest for burning tax records and in the process almost setting his building on fire.
Now Christians were embarrassed by this and tried to say Shorrosh acted erratically after having a stroke and a heart attack and put a medication known as statins. Yet, this apologetic response meant to save face for one of their own doesn’t account for why Shorrosh tampered with security cameras and why of all the things he burned, he burned 20 years of tax returns. Sounds like his cognitive skills were working just fine to me.
Shorrosh has since died. May Allah (swt) have mercy on your soul!
One thing that Shorrosh certainly did was to tickle the minds and the dark hearts of many Evangelical Christians involved in polemics against Islam and Muslims. This can be seen in their repeated attempts to re-create Shorrosh or Shorrosh like characters. There was something appealing in an Arab Christian debating Muslims.
So these Christian think-tanks got together and their dark hearts and imaginations began to whisper. What if we could get an ex Muslim convert to Christianity who could expose Islam? Or even better than that, not just any ex Muslim, how about an Arab ex Muslim!!! Or even better how about an Arab ex Muslim from Saudi Arabia (gasp, the heartland of Islam!). It started to sound better and better. The case of “Ex Muslims” Ergun Caner and Emir Caner”.
Look at the darkness in this man’s eyes. This particular controversy really became heated in the Evangelical Christian world, bringing in such notable Christian apologists such as Norman Geisler. Battle lines were drawn up between Calvinist and Arminians and it was the beginning of the rift between James White and former protege Sam Shamoun. Listen to this Evangelist, this man who has been “saved by the blood of Jesus” tell bald-faced lies about Islam and Muslims.
Listen to him poor out lie after lie after lie…
Look at his claims that he knows the Arabic language here…
Ergun Caner was defended by Norman Geisler here:
Some more lies of Ergun Caner…If you want a complete catalog of videos exposing this mans lies and deceit I would highly suggest this YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/mokhan247/videos
Calling the saum (fasting) pronounced as Psalm as Swan (a species of bird) is also awful.
One of the most awful lies is his claim in the following video: ‘One of our leaders Shabir Ally ….the debater is often famous for saying before he died….’ …https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uZvMX68QPg alhamdulillah!
By the way that the brother was able to recover the YouTube videos. Because initially, these dishonest and hateful Christians tried to censor the truth!
Now watch this ‘expert’ on Islam give the Shahadah the testification of faith… He says it is “Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem Muhamdulillahir rahman ir raheem… WHAT!?!
Now if you of you people doubt that this is not the Shahadah here is a simple straight forward challenge to you. You can verify it in one of two ways. 1) You can go down to your local Masjid (Mosque) and simply ask one are the words a person has to say to become a Muslim.) You can go to youtube and type up people converting to Islam. You will see them say the following words:
“Ash Hadu An La Ilaha il law lah WA Ash Hadu Anna Muhammed ar Rasulullah”. (I bear witness that there is no God except God and I bear witness that Muhammed is the Messenger of God)
By the way, a “devout X Muslim” like Ergun Caner should have known the Shahadah. It is only said 9 times during the five obligatory prayers. Once in the morning prayer. Twice in the afternoon, mid-afternoon, sunset, and night prayers. That’s only for the obligatory prayers let alone the optional devotional prayers.
This mix up on his part is a huge blunder! Mohammed Khan makes a good point that Ergun Caner throws in the hard KH sound so you get KHaadeth, rather than hadeeth.
Also in Islam, the question ‘Who is Jesus’ is not a difficult question at all. Jesus is the word of God, Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus is the Messenger of Allah. Jesus was born of the virgin Mary.
Again Ergun Caner’s blatant ignorance of the teachings of Islam is manifest. He mentions that he has the courage to go in front of a Masjid (Mosque) and tell us all day long that Jesus is the Messiah. We would simply reply Ameen (Amin).
When the angels said: “O Mary! Allah gives you the good news of a Word from Him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus (Esau) son of Mary (Mariam) who is illustrious in this world and the hereafter, and who is one of those brought near (to Allah).” (Qur’an 3:45)
What is so hard to answer?
Notice when he mentions about the Church that doesn’t exist anymore? He crosses his arms please also pay close attention to his eyes. Why do they look away after the soft chuckle?
If this is not devilish and arrogant I don’t know what is.
There are also ways to find out if that Church existed remember he said it was not far from a Mosque (Masjid).
What mosque is it that he said he attended? Umm Google map and yellow pages anyone???As you know already as well, the clever and crafty John Ankerberg has also moved to have the videos removed from YouTube?
Why? Why would John Ankerberg a man who has held open debates between various views and religions on his television program do this? Why? Simple $$$$
Which Christian was it that said everybody who bought the books above should come together sign a petition and demand a complete 100% refund for the garbage books they bought thinking that it was done by scholars and people who had great insight into the religion of Islam!
Where was Ergun Caner born? In Stockholm Sweden or in Istanbul Turkey?
Note that he mentions he was a ‘sand monkey’ How much sand is there in Turkey? Again google map anyone? Or simply ask Christian missionaries who have been in Turkey.
Again the pejorative term ‘sand monkey’ makes you wonder what his true feelings are about Black people in America? I mean the term ‘sand monkey’ is a derogatory term used to disparage Arabs.
So even if he is of Turkish ancestry it was a racist remark to make about Arabs.
Then watch the end of the clip where he comes and speaks Arabic to his Turkish father in excitement he says ‘Isa bin Allah’ (Jesus son of God) why would you speak Arabic to your Turkish father? But even more revealing and the part where is where he follows that up with his gibberish. He is making you people out to play the fool.
Christians wake up! You have missionaries that go to Turkey and Arab countries and speak Farsi, Turkish, and Arabic. How about you do the following: You get one of these people who speak Turkish, or Arabic to play this video in front of Ergun and ask him what he was saying.
Then it’s game over! Unless he was going to claim that he was speaking in tongues out of ecstasy which would not surprise me. However, I would have to say that Christian credibility seems to wear thin as the days go by why this man is running the show at Liberty University. I have sent e-mails to Muslims asking that we stop engaging in any inter-faith dialogues of debates with any representative of the SBC until Ergun Caner is brought to justice.
I also have friends in high places and I think that it’s possible you could see the SBC missionary activities cease completely in all areas of operation in every Muslim country across the globe. You can laugh if you want to but once it is shown that Christians will stoop to any level to bring “the truth” this will alarm Muslims who do allow Christians to preach in their countries openly and will show that the Christians are not people who play by the rules.
Would the SBC like the news of waking up one morning and finding there was a joint decision by 57 member states of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) to halt all missionary activity? Not just the SBC because Christian indecision in the United States would reflect poorly upon Christians in general. I am sorry if you think it’s not fair. Welcome to my world where actions are done and taken by a few people in the name of Islam reflect poorly upon Muslims as a whole!
Did Ergun Caner Covert to Christianity in 1982? Did the brothers both convert in 1982 or did one of them convert a year prior?
Also the view that the Shi’a and the Sunni believe that the “Khalif” actually word should be Imam disappeared into ‘the caves’ is not factual. The belief in the Mahdi still alive and waiting to reappear is a belief held among the Shi’a but not among Sunni Muslims. Look at this book and look at the names on there. This book was quite a little cash cow for Ergun “FETHI” Caner and his brother Emir.
Only Allah (swt) knows what that young man was facing while growing up with someone as repulsive and vulgar as Ergun. Very heartbreaking indeed. Before he died Ergun’s son Braxton was posting pictures of him making out with girls and vulgar words.
We as Muslims should pray for Ergun Caner and his family. We pray that Allah (swt) removes the darkness from his heart and brings him into the light of a loving relationship with our Merciful Creator. May Allah (swt) make it easy on him and his family during this time of distress.
Next Is Hassamo Shamoun, Sam Shamoun.
He was a big part of the premier Christian apologetic website interacting with Islam and Muslims. answering-islam.org Shamoun’s stomping grounds was a social media platform called, “Paltalk”.
Paltalk would be used by Hassamo as a place where he could ‘field test’ his arguments. However, when he would come across knowledgeable Muslims, Sam would revert to screaming, yelling, and hurling all kinds of vulgar obscenities. It was clear that this was not a man who found peace but someone who was disturbed mentally.
These are just some of the small samples of Sam Shamoun interacting with other Christians (let alone Muslims) Hassamo loves to attack the character of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Ironically this distasteful attack on the Blessed Messenger (saw) marriage backfired on Hassamo “Sam” Shamoun when his wife divorced him. Not following the principles of God’s guidance Hassamo thought it was morally acceptable for his wife to be alone with a strange man in the house and so forth.
sam_shamoun_divorce_papers_due_to_long_abuse_to_his_wife Usually, most sensible people will do their level best to hide their character flaws. Not Hassamo he was an open book. He would crush, humiliate, destroy, vex, accost, assail, brutalize, assault, hurl abuse, and vitriolic all for the glory of Christ. His whole apologetics career was ended when the U.S court system stated:
Michelle requested that a two-year order of protection prohibited Sam from harassing, stalking, or physically abusing Michelle. Granting Michelle sole possession of the parties’ marital residence, and prohibiting Sam from entering the residence of Michelle’s place of employment.
Now what I find sad is that many Christians even after being aware of Hassamo’s vile behavior will come to his defense. Yet you have to keep in mind that Hassamo’s ex-wife Michelle is also a Christian.
So why take the testimony of a Sam Shamoun (who is clearly under the bondage of demons) over the testimony of his Christian wife? Not only that but it is a small world and there is much more than Michelle could have disclosed in regards to the very sick and disgusting behavior of Hassamo. What’s also interesting is that Sam Shamoun has burned so many bridges in the Christian community in the United States. As a person who believed in Reformed Theology, it certainly did not make him many friends across the aisle. Whereas James White has exposed Sam Shamoun’s courtship of Rome and Sam’s continuing march toward Roman Catholicism. That move makes sense for Sam Shamoun because his $$$ is drying up and Rome has plenty of $$$. Hassamo “Sam” Shamoun is attacking Protestants more and more particularly Calvinist and Reformed Theology. Sam recently admitted that for years he was worshiping a false god and inviting Muslims to believe in a false god, the ‘god of Calvinism’. Sam currently is gearing up for a conflict with Orthodox Christians (who cannot offer the same amount of cash infusion) that Roman Catholic Church can.
James White goes discusses this in the above video. Shamoun’s march towards Rome. The interesting thing is once Sam makes it official you have to wonder about all those evangelicals who cheered Sam on with his filthy language and vulgar methodology, will they support him when he crosses the Tiber river?
Conclusion: Muslims should pray for Hassamo Shamoun and his family. Pray that they can pick up the pieces of their lives and move forward. That Hassamo will find it in his heart to be a loving father to his two daughters and support them financially. That he will consider his vulgar speech that is all over the internet and hope that Allah will guide him not to speak like that anymore.
It is my hope that Sam Shamoun will one day find fulfillment and peace in loving willful submission to Allah (swt). However, and I say this not as an adversary but as someone genuinely concerned. I believe that he is in need of Ruqya. I can’t believe that any discerning Christian has not seen that the man is clearly in spiritual bondage. He constantly talks about others ‘manifesting’ which is the biggest projection ever. He often has weird body movements and jerks, which coupled with his vulgar language (towards Christians) let alone Muslims one can only imagine what ever entity resides him it certainly is not aligned to the light.
Next, we have David Wood.
David Wood is best known for being 1/2 of team ‘Atheist-Christ’. That is he teams up with an Atheist to attack Islam. This dynamic team of ‘Atheist -Christ’ has left many Christians puzzled. If Jesus is good enough for the Muslims why is he not good enough for his Atheist partner? David has his blog, ‘Answering Muslims’, and ‘Acts 17 apologetics’.
In the picture below he is wearing his wife’s gown (showing disrespect to his wife and not guarding her own privacy) while he was mocking Islam & Muslims.
Also, while doing this he blatantly ignored what God said stating the matter:
“A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.” (Deuteronomy 22:5)
I have often noticed when watching David Wood speak you can hear even until today the dry monotone in his speech. There is a lack of voice inflection. There is the twitching of the left eyebrow when he talks about uncomfortable subjects. So what has David Wood been up to lately?
David Wood has recently made a video with two ex Muslims. Can you imagine a Christian who hopes that Muslims hear the gospel of Christ shares a platform with two ex Muslims (Atheist) and does not spend anytime on the program sharing the gospel of Christ Jesus with them?! The only platform that brought those three together was HATRED for Islam. David Wood switched off evangelization mode and went into a complete debauched and depraved meltdown. See for yourself:
So this is what Christian apologetics has come to. David Wood in the video above suggests that he will create a domain name “pissonthequran.com”. Is this what Christianity is all about? You people keep telling the world that Islam is this and that and yet you go and make statements like this. No Muslim would ever even dare to make a website ‘pissonthebible.com”, only a perverse person who is in spiritual bondage would suggest things. That is the huge disadvantage that we Muslims have in debates with Christians. They can hurl all kinds of insults at the Blessed Prophet (saw), and yet we cannot say in kind about Christ Jesus (upon whom be peace) because he is a Prophet of Allah, he is the Messiah, and we believe in him. To lambaste Jesus or insult Jesus would take one out of Islam.
Another person doing the rounds is an individual by the name pseudonym of “Christian Prince”. I have listened to some of his “debates” with “Muslims” and they seem staged to me. Sure enough, my suspicion was confirmed. This “Christian Prince” was recently busted in a huge way when he lied about having a debate with a Muslim teacher, our beloved and kind brother Sabeel Ahmed. Mash’Allah Sabeel Ahmed has a beautiful disposition and a great deal of patience when outing this charlatan.
Mash’Allah Sabeel Ahmed has a beautiful disposition and a great deal of patience when outing this charlatan. This Anonymous “Christian Prince” has been called out to have a public moderated debate. Yet, he does not believe that God can protect him like he did here: “Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spoke, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire.” (Daniel 3:26)
Next is “Al Fadi”
This is the “Al Fadi” that you see pictured above going around the speaking circuit (much like Ergun Caner did). Now I am going to post his presentation of his testimony. (and if it gets deleted or removed) no worries because I have downloaded it.
So I have listened to the whole presentation. I have heard him say the word “MOZLUM” no less than 5 times in his presentation. Now there is absolutely no way on Earth that this guy is from Saudi Arabia and pronouncing ‘Muslim’ as ‘Mozlum’. He says @5:45 “Most my life in Saudi I memorized a book called the Qur’an.” “Half by age 12,” He says he went to an “Islamic University in Mecca” (doesn’t tell us the name of it). He went to study shariah to become a shariah scholar and judge later. He claims to have studied at the Local University pursuing an Engineering Degree at the U of A. Then he latter changed his major and went to ASU. He claims in the video that he was training to be a ‘jihadist’ (remember Ergun Caner gave the same story), and he (Al Fadi) was going to go to Afghanistan. Suddenly was abruptly stopped by his mother. What is interesting is that by his own modus oprendi has admitted that Allah (swt) is worth dying for and Jesus is not. Why do I say this? The fact that he uses a ‘pseudonym’. He uses a false name. T
o his credit and unlike (Christian Prince) at least he has given us a face. He hasn’t remained anonymous like “Abdul Saleeb” However, his name “Al Fadi” means the Redeemer. So that is obviously not his Muslim name.
This name is prevalent among Jordanian Christians in particular. Now, this is the new-look for “Al Fadi” So here we have “Al Fadi” going for the traditional Arab look (pictured left) and why not? The last person to try that was Dr. Anis Shorrosh pictured on the right. A live conversation with “Al Fadi” with someone talking to him a bit about his background would certainly yield some eye-opening inconsistencies.
Look at the end of the day both Muslims and Christians are convinced that one of us is upon the truth and the other is upon error. Yet, the number of Christians involved in Muslim and Islamic apologetics has been outed again and again for lies, deceit, deception, and a complete lack of concern for truth and transparency.
As I have said at the beginning of the article and I will say here again any Christian that encounters Islam one of three things happens:
a) Either they begin a serious study of Islam and end up seeing that Islam is a more cogent faith and world view than Christianity ever could be. They convert to Islam as I have.
b) They remain convinced of their own faith but develop a deep admiration and appreciation for Islam and Muslims (rather they admit it publicly or not)
c) Their hearts become diseased and their spiritual ailments are amplified and this becomes obvious in time. Greed, avarice, lust, anger, hate, racism begins to drip from their writings and public statements. Without fail repeatedly these people end up being humiliated publicly in this life. The hereafter is a painful and everlasting torment for them.
The truth is that many Christians are in spiritual bondage. Many of them have real trouble with marital fidelity, trouble erasing racism from their hearts, trouble with loving money, gambling, a predilection for the same sex, wrestling with drug addiction, and more. Many of them also find many Christian teachings problematic. chief of the more practical ones is the issue surrounding divorce. Many of them find are uncertain of their salvation and many of them who take time to seriously study Christian concepts of the Creator realize that it is not cogent at all.
What else explains the reason they feel they have to cheat and lie about Islam and Muslims? Why do they have to lie to their own congregations and people of their own denomination? Why do they need to use these types of tactics if they are certain of their beliefs?
It is my hope that this article will reach those people who have been lied to and duped by Christian missionary deceit. That you will take time to go to a Mosque yourself. That you will read the Qur’an yourself. That you will sit with learned Muslims and ask them about the questions that you have in your heart and mind.
“They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.” (Qur’an 61:8)
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized as the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)
“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 they who rely upon other than or associate partners with Allah dislike it.” (Qur’an 9:33)
﷽
Ali Erbaş Turkish Islamic scholar and President of Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) in Turkey says Jesus is dead and will not return. He also has stated that there is no Mahdi that will come. This is quite a huge deal because Ali Erbas is in essence the Mufti of Turkey.
These positions (especially concerning the Mahdi) are part of a de-shificiation process we see happening among Sunni Muslims.
It is interesting that more and more learned scholars around the round are coming to the Ibadi school’s position on these points. I wonder how many more actually hold such views but are not so bold as to proclaim them for fear of reprisal?
In the comment section you see threats, emotions and not proofs and evidences.
Here we look at the verse in the Qur’an 43:61 often quoted and used to affirm the second coming Jesus (as).
The following examines the word ‘tawaffa’ Yet, the Qur’an itself offers no cause for confusion. Tawaffā appears in twenty-five passages in the Qur’an, and twice in relation to Christ Jesus (Q 5:117 and Q 3.55).
For twenty-three of those passages the Muslim commentators generally follow the standard definition of this term, that is that Allah (swt) separates the soul from the body or makes someone die.
Think about this Muslim brothers and sisters. For those passages that are not tied into ahadith about Jesus(as) coming back they are translated and understood as per usual.
What about all those hadith that speak about some second coming of Jesus? Aren’t they tawatur?
Al Ma’rij Imam Abu Muhammed Abdulllah Al- Salimi (r) Volume 1. It is actually is a fiqh book. Many times in our school when our scholars write a book about fiqh they will start with a short section on aqidah.
The coming of Isa Ibn Maryam 1) There is no Prophet after Muhammed (saw). 2) That which is narrated from the people (Ahl Sunnah) about Jesus (as) coming back it is not sound. 3) Even if it was sound, the time of Isa Ibn Maryam has already passed. 4) Same have said that Khidr and Elias (as) they are still alive then their status would be like angels. Their live would be veiled from the seen world. They would not eating drinking indulging. These things are not correct with our school. 5) If he comes he will come in the Shari’a of the Prophet (saw), which Ahl Sunnah has conceded. They have conceded he cannot come back as a prophet.
Source: (The Ascents of Hope in the Stages of Perfection, in the Introductions by Imam Abu Muhammed Abdullah Al-Salimi -may Allah have mercy on him)
Prima Quran 