Christians have begun to respond to Muslim arguments concerning the Song of Solomon 5:16. I was sent an HOUR LONG video on this subject despite it only requiring 5 minutes to say what they wanted to say (i.e. the reference is an adjective)
The Song of Solomon is ripe for picking out allegorical meanings due to its very nature.Many Muslims present it as a direct reference to the Prophet Muhammad and the Christians simply respond by claiming it is an adjective (“full of sweetness”) rather than a name and thus the conversation ends. This is essentially what the Christian show claims; but it takes an hour to do so. There is a response BELOW the video
ABN's James White and Pastor Joseph on Song of Songs 15:6
Ali Ataie takes the conversation further
A few posts ago we unveiled Ali Ataie’s thoughts on the subject – thoughts which go further and keep the argument alive.
In order to respond and keep the discussion alive we shall present Ali Ataie’s defence of the claim. CHRISTIANS PLEASE LISTEN (only 3 mins in duration):
The Christian show fails
The Christians, in the video above, fail to mention the other uncanny resemblances to the Prophet Muhammad within the Song. They had long enough to look into the Song – one hour – for some reason they began speaking about Ahmed Deedat and Pakistan! Stay on topic folks.
Christians invited to think
I’d like to invite Christians to think about this further. You can also see our discussion with a Christian apologist on the internet related to Muhammad in John 1:1. He was struggling to remove ALL intimations of the Prophet Muhammad in the Gospel of John 1:19-21. EVEN Christians began questioning him. Clearly there is something in this pericope involving John the Baptist.
Jesus has Muslim brothers and sisters
Why do you believe in the incarnation?
Do you believe in Original sin?
Come to Islam today:
FEEDBACK: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Hoi Yayha,
ReplyDeleteBesides pointing out that we are dealing with a adjective we must also point out that the same person being described in verse 16 is drinking his wine (i.e. alcohol) in verse 1 :
[1] I am come into my garden, my sister, my spouse: I have gathered my myrrh with my spice; I have eaten my honeycomb with my honey; I have drunk my wine with my milk: eat, O friends; drink, yea, drink abundantly, O beloved.
yet the Quran strictly forbids the usage off alcohol in its later stage (5:90-92) although it was alloud in its earlier stage (16:67)
Do you really maintain the possibility that muhammad use to drink wine (i.e. alcohol)
Second : the 'im' as a plural of respect doesn't work. Why? cause it never uses the 'im' in that fashion. If this was the case why does the Bible not refer to Abraham as Abrahamim or Moses as Mosesim or any other prophet i that fashion.
Third: We are dealing withthe hebrew language here and not the Arabic. Inserting a arabic word or title doesn't work and is a example of eisogesis. For example the same word is used all over the bible. One clear example can be found in 1 kings chapter 20 verse 6
In short, the Muslims really need to drop this argument and stop following the charlatan called deedat.
Rafael:....the same person being described in verse 16 is drinking his wine (i.e. alcohol) in verse 1......yet the Quran strictly forbids the usage off alcohol
ReplyDeleteTaking into consideration what Ali Ataie said about there being various layers of meaning to a verse, I don't see why there would be a problem with alcohol if we construe the latter as a reference to the heavenly drink from Al Kauthar which believers will get to partake in Paradise.
Rafael:Second, the 'im' as a plural of respect doesn't work. Why? cause it never uses the 'im' in that fashion. If this was the case why does the Bible not refer to Abraham as Abrahamim or Moses as Mosesim or any other prophet in that fashion.
The reason why the plural of respect is not affixed to the name of previous prophets is due to the superiority of Muhammad(saw) in terms of being the culmination of all the prophets as well as the final Messenger of God.
Third: the same word is used all over the bible. One clear example can be found in 1 kings chapter 20 verse 6
If a word is used several places in the bible, it does not necessarily mean that the meaning is determinate across all usages.
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me that Christians will begrudge the word Muhammadim in the TNCH but will go to amazing lengths to prove prophecies of Jesus.
Case in point. Matthew 2:15 "I shall call my son out of Egypt" However, you go and see Hosea 11:1 and notice how the Christian conveniently skips verse 2!
Jesus NEVER worshiped idols and he NEVER burned incense to graven images! This is just ridiculous.
But Christian hermeneutic ingenuity never ceases to amaze one.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRafael,
ReplyDeleteHave you bothered to read the post? Or were you so eager to simply regurgitate the standard "Christian apologist" response?
Read the post and listen to the REFUTATION MATERIAL (as well as visiting the other links on offer) before commenting in such a manner as you have not furthered the discussion one iota!
Again, think about the point of typologies. Even you have to admit, when reading the whole chapter you can cite some uncanny resemblances to the Prophet Muhammad. I'm not saying for certain this refers to the Prophet Muhammad. We cannot even be certain who wrote such a chapter. Perhaps it was a scribal addition. That is one of the problems with the bible - we just don't know for certain all of the reliable portions and all of the forgeries and scribal errors.
Essentially, the Bible is reconstrcuted from conjecture and gems of truth. Christians need a Criterion from God to decide what beliefs arising from the Bible are worthy of being maintained and which beliefs should be shunned. Do they have a Criterion? No. They simply have a reconstrcuted book and every morning the serious Christians check the news to see whether an earlier manuscript has been found to abrogate a current pericope/chapter/book/epistle.
Yes, that is to say Christians are relying on archaeologists to help them pluck out the forgeries from the bible. How anyone can serious believe this book is "God breathed" is one for the deep thinkers.
PS Could you stop these bitter digs at the late Mr Deedat? You do realise he was an aged man who researched for himself and built sonme of his arguments and refutations on Christians he experienced. Quite how this makes someone a charlatan is beyond me. If you want to find a real charlatan check the liars we have commented upon (search this blog, names such as Dakdok, Wood, N-Qureshi, Shamoun, etc will come up)
Muslims have and are still building upon Deedat's work. It is time for Christians to start looking in to the new work rather than holding a grudge against the late Mr Deedat.
May Allah bless Mr Deedat and grant him forgiveness and Paradise. Ameen.
James White blames the Muslims of Double standard!!!
ReplyDeleteYahya, can you elaborate further by what you mean - "Even you have to admit, when reading the whole chapter you can cite some uncanny resemblances to the Prophet Muhammad"
ReplyDelete@YFC777
ReplyDeleteSure. See here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/12/ali-ataie-reinvigorates-muhammad-in.html
There are two other resemblances in the same chapter - as pointed out via the link.
Thanks
Muslims have and are still building upon Deedat's work. It is time for Christians to start looking in to the new work rather than holding a grudge against the late Mr Deedat.
ReplyDeleteMay Allah bless Mr Deedat and grant him forgiveness and Paradise. Ameen.
AMEEEN!! YA LATIF! YA RAHMAN! YA RAHEEM!
TEAM ISLAM STAND UP!
More Responses to the ramblings of James White:
ReplyDeleteHis dishonesty, faked degrees and out right non sense exposed!
Ehteshaam Gulam
Like I said, James White never ceases to amaze me. I have recently asked him the following questions:
1) are constatnly dishonest about Bart Ehrman. I don't think you have properly read Bart Ehrman's works.
2) Where the word trinity is in the New Testament. Show me anything un-Jewish about Paul's ideology about Jesus christology.
3) and show me a first manuscript of the New Testament in the first century.
4) Show me where the Quran confirms the Entire Bible
5) Think you know Islam and have obtained our best materials when in fact our best materials are written in Arabic--- a language you don't know anything of?
James White response: Nothing. I gave him an oppurunity to refute me when I am ready--- yet he refuses! This would have been a perfect oppurunity for him to refute me yet he didn't do it. Why is running away from this challegne? This would have been a perfect time to expose me if he was truthful rather he refuses to engage in a proper dialouge with me.
Here is James White response to me:
Sir...stop. I have no interest in your ramblings. You are proving my point over and over again.
james (From: James White )
I laughed and responded:
As you have proven my point, sir. Your dishonest, unscholarly, and don't have the credentials to speak about Islam--- because you don't know Arabic.
Don't worry I am going to make sure everyone sees this email... White refuses to engage in converstations with prepared Muslim apologist.
Good day sir!
Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com (From ehteshaam gulam )
James White made the insinuation that I don't know Bart Ehrman--- yet I gave Dr.White an oppurunity to refute me-- yet he never did! Bart Ehrman agrees with with what a lot of what Muslim apologist say about the New Testament, the Historical Jesus, etc. Yet "Dr" White refuses to be honest when talking about Dr. Ehrman. This proves my point--- that Dr. White is dishonest.
Also The fact that he refuses to answer my questions shows that he is unscholarly, unprofessional and does not have the proper credentials to speak about Islam--- since he doesn't know Arabic.
In other words, the dishonesty and outright lying of James White is starting to annoy me. When it come to checking his facts and honesty---- he doesn't want to do that. But don't take my word for it. Other Muslims have exposed James White academic dishonesty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8p31TmptCc
But it gets more interesting------ because James White faked his degree. As one comment on Youtube said:
"James White is an absolute fraud and an unrepentant liar. His "degree" is fraudulent and bought from a rumor mill called Faraston Theological Seminary (has been renamed since). This "university" is a rented room on the second floor of an office building. Don't take my word for it, look it up; there are websites on it."
Of course I looked up this claim--- it's true. James White does indeed have a fake degree:
http://www.shields-research.org/Novak/james.htm
http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/2006/11/james-white-and-his-strange-doctorate.html
Of course had I known of James White's academic dishonesty and faked degrees I would have never had a discussion with him. In me trying to become a scholar--- I can't put up with cheats like men like him.
In conclusion, James White's arguements about Islam and Christianity are "not worth listening to".
Sir...stop. I have no interest in your ramblings. You are proving my point over and over again.
ReplyDeleteSo true. Just look at the hippocracy of Anonymous. Where the word Trinity in the Bible? lol thts classic.
Shammai literature! what?! Shammai???? ;P you Muslims crack me up. how about a little Zakkai literature?
ReplyDelete'..James White is an absolute fraud and an unrepentant liar. His "degree" is fraudulent and bought from a rumor mill called Faraston Theological Seminary..'
ReplyDeleteIf this is true , you need to address james white (in writing) as 'dR James White' instead of 'Dr James White'. Bro Yahya , pls take note. This is getting to be interesting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Sam,
ReplyDeleteBrother, from what I recall White has put up a defence of his academic institution. I was not so interested back then as I felt it was a load of Catholics just making a fuss over something small but more and more people seem to have made mention of this issue.
Perhaps, most high profile, was brother TGV19. If I'm not mistaken he produced at least one post on the subject and has refused to call him "Dr".
I have not really looked into it in detail. I doubt the bloke just bought his degree.
I think the fuss is over the lack of accreditation of the institute. However, White's opponents always seem to have a dig on that one whenever he blunders. Jordan's video comment section carries one such comment.
I will tell you I received a lengthy email from aCatholic chap complaingin about white and he presented me material about White's sister etc etc.
The Catholics pretty much hate the bloke. I guess his insistence on calling them the "followers of Rome", "Rome's apologists" and refusal to even declare them Christian is grating the Catholics.
I will try to look into this issue. InshaAllah Iwill check on TGV's site.
Peace
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDeleteI am not the first Muslim to call James White out on inconsistency I think that honor goes to 1MoreMuslim (and bravo at that).
However, I am the first Muslim to bring attention to his unaccredited doctorate here: http://www.acommonword.net/2010/02/apologist-james-white-coy-about.html
Brother Ehteshaam Gulam (comes from a pseudo-Islamic sect alled the 'Salafi Manhaj) thus when I informed him and others about it (they decided to circumvent me and go to Calvinist Flyswatter and so forth).
Al hamdulillah which is fine by me as long as the truth gets out to the masses.
By the way I am never shy to back away from having intra-Muslim debate from those among our brothers who follow Muhadith Scholars over Fuqaha. ( I just thought I would throw that out there).
However, I do recognize the tremendous efforts of everyone out there doing the Daw'ah including brother Ehteshaam Gulam who I dubbed 'Iron Man'.
btw I think the main issue really is consistency. We should all try and focus on being consistent.
ReplyDeleteEveryone who does debates should make them available to the public (that includes us as Muslims). It is the epitome of arrogance to think that the edifice of Islam is dependent upon how well any of do as da'iee or debaters.
As far as James White, the fact that he has given allot of attention to defending is unaccredited 'doctorate' is noteworthy.
He mostly does not defend it himself (realizing it will look better to have people in his chat channel to defend it). That way it does not look like a weakness if he dodges the question directly.
I would say that James is an artful debater and researcher which makes one wonder why he didn't opt for a college or university education.
James White's books are not taken seriously in the academic world, in fact in the circles that Bart Ehrman travels if you mention James White ....people will say..WHO?
That's not being mean spirited it's simply speaking the truth.
James White is known in polemical circles and that is where his craft is best among reformed baptist.
"I would say that James is an artful debater and researcher which makes one wonder why he didn't opt for a college or university education."
ReplyDeleteYou are making it sound like White doesn't have accredited degrees at all when in fact he as BA and MA, both accredited. I think he has explained with some detail why he chose the route that he did.
It is also incorrect for Ehteshaam Gulam to say that White "faked" his doctorates. He has been open about the fact that his doctorates (ThD and DMin) are not accredited, but they are not "fake" since the institution he got them from:
1. does not claim to have accreditation
2. operates under the legitimate "religions exemption" status
and
3 required substantial work for the degree.
So I would expect you to either drop that claim or make a reasonable defense for why "fake" would be the right word to describe those degrees.
"Where the word trinity is in the New Testament. "
ReplyDeleteThis is a red herring.
"Show me anything un-Jewish about Paul's ideology about Jesus christology."
In Philippians 2, Paul says that Jesus has been given a name that is above all names (what would that name be in Jewish thought?). Further, he says that every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess that he is Lord (kurios also often refers to God), to the glory of God the Father. A comparison to Isaiah 45:23 gives us pretty good grounds to think that Paul is saying (while alluding to the Jewish scriptures) that to honor and submit to Jesus is to honor and submit to God. The fact that this is done to the glory of the Father is pretty much what a Trinitarian would expect since (as White likes to put it) Jesus wasn't "some renegade deity".
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDelete"YOU are making it sound like White doesn't have ACCREDITED DEGREES AT ALL when in fact he as BA and MA, both accredited. I think he has explained with some detail why he chose the route that he did."
Fair enough, however if you read what I wrote I very clearly said,
"However, I am the first Muslim to bring attention to his unaccredited DOCTORATE here:"
"He HAS BEEN OPEN about the fact that his doctorates (ThD and DMin) are not accredited,"
The point above I'm going to have to disagree with. If we said that White was OPEN about his unaccredited doctorate WHEN was he open about it? Could you please ask him the first entry on this matter at AOMIN.ORG?
Personally, White didn't even make a peep until people did some digging and brought out the issue.
White was NEVER OPEN or transparent until he was cornered with no place to go. His acolytes wanted a response to the allegations.
Like so many times James is not open and transparent until he is put between a rock and a hard place.
Take for example the fake that I called him out on debates that took quite some time to release here: http://www.acommonword.net/2010/06/james-white-withholds-debate-videos.html
Notice as soon as I made mention of that James White sure did start cracking the whip at Camp AOMIN.
I hate to say this but unless White gets a foot up his (_ _ _) from time to time he will drag his feet to get things done.
Since this is a letter about CES, and not about other schools, I will refrain from detailing the easy-degreeism of many other schools. Suffice it to say that while these other schools are easier, their degrees are less valuable as well.
ReplyDeleteOne of our graduates, Rob Myers, enrolled with three years of transfer credit from traditional schools. He had only his last year remaining to earn his Bachelor's degree with us. When he completed that final year, he told me that he had learned more in his one year with CES than he had in all of the previous three years combined.
Th.D. graduate Nils Nilsson shared with me that he had never before seen such academic precision required in doctoral work, and he had earned two doctoral degrees elsewhere before enrolling into our Doctor of Theology program.
taken from ColumbiaSeminary.org
http://www.columbiaseminary.org/aboutus/faculty.html
There is Dr. Whites picture on the faculty page of the Columbia Seminary website, and has been there since at least 2006.
What is your evidence for White not being open about his degree?
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord,
ReplyDeleteAnonymous says,
"One of OUR graduates, Rob Myers, enrolled with three years of transfer credit from traditional schools."
"Th.D. graduate Nils Nilsson shared with me that he had never before seen such academic precision required in doctoral work, and he had earned two doctoral degrees elsewhere before enrolling into OUR Doctor of Theology program."
Since you are carrying yourself as a representative of CES "OUR" why don't you identify whom you are?
What would be the harm in letting people know which representative is now speaking to us about CES "OUR Doctor of Theology program."
If you are unable to do that it know that it does not help James White at all.
It only shows the desperation and continued charade behind very simple and basic questions that were asked of him here:
http://www.acommonword.net/2010/02/apologist-james-white-coy-about.html
You see anonymous your response also looks to be damage control.
If the fact that James White received his Th.D from an unaccredited seminary seems to be a very big deal for you people.
In the article above his defenders say, "Well look at the BOOKS..the DEBATES" basically it's like saying c'mon don't you think he DESERVES a Ph.D?
With this kind of attitude brother Yahya Snow deserves a Master of Arts in journalism based upon his efforts with his blog.
Now we have you(anonymous) who looks like a representative "our" school mentioning that two other gentleman had a pretty good time there.
That's fine and well. But look at the link above. This is not a personal attack on James White.
If I asked Dr. William Lane Craig or Dr. Bart Ehrman many of the questions asked in my entry above they would be able to do so no problem.
Yet, James White doesn't wish to clear the air (how sad). Instead those who dote on him are sent. What happens is nothing gets cleared up it is just more obfuscation at work.
"The point above I'm going to have to disagree with. If we said that White was OPEN about his unaccredited doctorate WHEN was he open about it? Could you please ask him the first entry on this matter at AOMIN.ORG?"
ReplyDeleteAs for being open about it in general, if he lists (and he has listed as far back as I can remember) the institutions where he got his degrees, and presumably has never denied that his doctoral degrees are unaccredited if the issue is brought up, that is enough openness for me. But your question was more specifically about WHEN. I have no idea when his first entry on the issue appeared on his site, but you may be on a bit shaky ground if you assume that the first mention of the issue is the same as the oldest one that is currently available on his site. Actually, the first mention on whatever was the oldest version of his site is may not be the first public mention of the issue by White. (See below.)
"Personally, White didn't even make a peep until people did some digging and brought out the issue."
I vaguely remember him saying (probably on his DL program) that he had explained his reasons for taking the educational route he did after making that decision. Given that he got his Th.M. from Faraston (which later became CES) in 1995, this is likely to have happened before his ministry even had a website. (I think he had a radio program even before he had a website.) But after completing his studies, one would only expect him to list the names of the institutions that he got his degrees from, which he has done. Aside from answering to enquiries, why would you expect him to bring up the issue of accreditation on his website in any other context?
"Take for example the fake that I called him out on debates that took quite some time to release here: http://www.acommonword.net/2010/06/james-white-withholds-debate-videos.html"
This seems like pure speculation on your part. Why on earth would he want to withhold those debate videos? In my opinion, he dominated the debate concerning Muhammad in the Bible and was OK in the other debate as well, and it seems that other Christians have been quite pleased with his performance in these debates as well.
"Notice as soon as I made mention of that James White sure did start cracking the whip at Camp AOMIN."
Your seemingly baseless accusations may indeed have served as an additional motivation for him to want to put pressure on those responsible for publishing the debates.
"The point above I'm going to have to disagree with. If we said that White was OPEN about his unaccredited doctorate WHEN was he open about it? Could you please ask him the first entry on this matter at AOMIN.ORG?"
ReplyDeleteAs for being open about it in general, if he lists (and he has listed as far back as I can remember) the institutions where he got his degrees, and presumably has never denied that his doctoral degrees are unaccredited if the issue is brought up, that is enough openness for me. But your question was more specifically about WHEN. I have no idea when his first entry on the issue appeared on his site, but you may be on a bit shaky ground if you assume that the first mention of the issue is the same as the oldest one that is currently available on his site. Actually, the first mention on whatever was the oldest version of his site is may not be the first public mention of the issue by White. (See below.)
"Personally, White didn't even make a peep until people did some digging and brought out the issue."
I vaguely remember him saying (probably on his DL program) that he had explained his reasons for taking the educational route he did after making that decision. Given that he got his Th.M. from Faraston (which later became CES) in 1995, this is likely to have happened before his ministry even had a website. (I think he had a radio program even before he had a website.) But after completing his studies, one would only expect him to list the names of the institutions that he got his degrees from, which he has done. Aside from answering to enquiries, why would you expect him to bring up the issue of accreditation on his website in any other context?
"Take for example the fake that I called him out on debates that took quite some time to release here: http://www.acommonword.net/2010/06/james-white-withholds-debate-videos.html"
This seems like pure speculation on your part. Why on earth would he want to withhold those debate videos? In my opinion, he dominated the debate concerning Muhammad in the Bible and was OK in the other debate as well, and it seems that other Christians have been quite pleased with his performance in these debates as well.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord...
ReplyDeleteIn light of the evidences that Haecceitas has brought forth I would like to retract my statement of
"White was NEVER OPEN or transparent UNTIL he was cornered with no place to go. His acolytes wanted a response to the allegations."
My statement is baseless and Haecceitas was right to correct me on my error. Guidance is from our Creator and error is from Shaitan.
I also want to appreciate the manner in which Haecceitas reprimanded me.
Thank you.
If only more of us Muslims and Christians had more cordial exchanges.
thegrandverbalizer19, I really appreciate it. Not that I presume my opinion to that significant, but your retraction just raised my estimation of your character by at least 2 notches after it had went down by 1 notch when I perceived some of your comments concerning White to be a bit unfair. I also completely agree with your last line.
ReplyDeleteJust to clarify, the post that I deleted was a partial duplicate of the previous post. I first tried to post the whole thing in its entirety and the system complained about its length. Then I split it into two parts and posted them but it looks like the original post got through after all.
ReplyDeleteTGV said: Since you are carrying yourself as a representative of CES "OUR" why don't you identify whom you are?
ReplyDeleteTGV said: Now we have you(anonymous) who looks like a representative "our" school mentioning that two other gentleman had a pretty good time there.
Did you miss the part when I wrote "taken from ColumbiaSeminary.org"???
His picture has been up on that website for years. What is he hiding from? Your just making stuff up.
http://www.columbiaseminary.org/aboutus/faculty.html
TGV said: My statement is baseless and Haecceitas was right to correct me on my error
Aint that the truth!
TGV said: However, you go and see Hosea 11:1 and notice how the Christian conveniently skips verse 2!
ReplyDeleteJesus is Israel, Jesus' body is the new Temple. Scriptures make it clear.
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said
"TGV said: However, you go and see Hosea 11:1 and notice how the Christian conveniently skips verse 2!"
"Jesus is Israel, Jesus' body is the new Temple. Scriptures make it clear."
Anonymous I think you miss the point I was making.
I am simply saying that interestingly Christians are not rejecting the word Muhammad(IM) in the TNCH.
They are simply saying to us the Muslims (context, context, context).
But I found that rather odd for several reasons.
“When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.
2 But the more they were called,
the more they went away from me.
They sacrificed to the Baals
and they burned incense to images.
Since you say that Jesus is Israel and scriptures make that clear, maybe you could explain to us how in context verse 2 refers to Jesus?
At what point did God call to Jesus and Jesus turned away from him?
At what point did Jesus sacrifice to Baals and burn incense to graven images?
Song of Solomon the context has the masculine "HIS" all through out.
ReplyDelete10 My beloved is radiant and ruddy,
outstanding among ten thousand.
11 His head is purest gold;
his hair is wavy
and black as a raven.
12 His eyes are like doves
by the water streams,
washed in milk,
mounted like jewels.
13 His cheeks are like beds of spice
yielding perfume.
His lips are like lilies
dripping with myrrh.
14 His arms are rods of gold
set with topaz.
His body is like polished ivory
decorated with lapis lazuli.
15 His legs are pillars of marble
set on bases of pure gold.
His appearance is like Lebanon,
choice as its cedars.
16 His mouth is sweetness itself;
he is altogether lovely.
This is my beloved, this is my friend,
daughters of Jerusalem.
What amazes me is the lengths that Christians will go through to make Hosea 11:1-2 fit Matthew 2:15 but will absolutely begrudge that Song of Solomon 5:16 refers to Muhammed (saw) even though the name is clearly there.
continued...
Here is something to consider from a Christian web site...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.searchgodsword.org/com/mhc-con/view.cgi?book=so&chapter=005
Here is commentary on verses 9-16
"Even those who have little acquaintance with Christ, cannot but see amiable beauty in others who bear his image. There are hopes of those who begin to inquire concerning Christ and his perfections. Christians, who are well acquainted with Christ themselves, should do all they can to make others know something of him. Divine glory makes him truly lovely in the eyes of all who are enlightened to discern spiritual things. He is white in the spotless innocence of his life, ruddy in the bleeding sufferings he went through at his death. This description of the person of the Beloved, would form, IN THE FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE OF THOSE TIMES, A PORTRAIT OF BEAUTY OF PERSON AND OF GRACE OF MANNERS; but the aptness of some of the allusions may not appear to us. He shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all that believe. May his love constrain us to live to his glory."
So all of the arguments that are used to say this cannot refer to Muhammed (saw) would easily backfire upon those who claim it refers to Christ Jesus (Esau Ibn Maryam)
This is food for thought for those who reflect.