Showing posts with label Quran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quran. Show all posts

Thursday, 7 December 2017

Christian Polemicists on Love, Quran 3:32, John 3:16 and Romans 5:8

It’s commonplace for Christians to exaggerate the Christian view of love. For the most part this is probably just due to an ignorance on their part and a Westernised liberal mindset rather than the product of some sort of wilful effort to misinform. This is why you get Westernised “Christian” evangelical organisations making such comments on social media:

Thank God for christianity. For a God that loves us even while we were yet sinners, For a God that loves us enough to come down to earth, for a God that just doesn't just create but wants relationship with his Children. It sometimes takes learning about a religion such as Islam to appreciate what we have in Christ. Allah HATES DISBELIEVERS #Surah 3:32 # John3:16#Romans 5:8 [DCCI Ministries via FB]

RC Sproul says: I think there are few things more dangerous than preachers out there preaching that God loves everyone unconditionally

Do Christians really believe God loves everyone unconditionally? No.

Here are three points to think about in this regard.

1. The Bible teaches that God HATES sinners/wrongdoers (sinners would include unbelievers, right?)

4 For you are not a God who is pleased with wickedness; with you, evil people are not welcome.
5 The arrogant cannot stand in your presence.You hate all who do wrong
Psalm 5:4-6


Pslam 11:5 is in a similar vein. Additionally, Christians believe God is angry with the wicked (I assume this includes unbelievers)

11 God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
[Psalm 7:11]

2. Common sense. Christians believe those who do not accept Jesus will be in eternal damnation (Hell) for eternity. Can you seriously tell me you believe God and Jesus love these people?

3. Paul of Tarsus curses anybody who does not preach his version of Jesus. Paul seems to hate these people. If you believe Paul in Galatians is inspired by God then how can you believe God curses those who he loves? Here’s Paul of Tarsus in his own words Galatians 1:

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you,let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

Love of God in Christian and Muslim views

God, according to Muslim and Christian beliefs, has a beneficient, providential and benevolent love for everyone regardless of belief/disbelief. The rain falls on the just as well as the unjust. Both the wicked and the righteous have oxygen to breath and both groups receive wealth, health etc..

Likewise, both groups believe God loves the world so much so that He gives a salvific message and thus humans have the potential to be saved.

The love God has for the redeemed (Love of complacency) is not extended to the unbelievers according to Christian tradition. Likewise, love of complacency (or love conditional love) is not extended to disbelievers according to the Islamic tradition either.

God abhors the wicked according to the Bible. In Christianity God sends the sinner to Hell, not the sin. Clearly, for the Christian preacher, it would be contradictory to the Bible to say God loves unbelievers the same way he loves the “saved” – Christians will believe God abhors those who he sends to Hell. Christians believe TCVO Jesus will send Muslims, Sikhs, Atheists and Unitarian Christians to Hell. To say TCVO Jesus loves all these “unbelieving” groups would be difficult to reconcile with the aforementioned.

Christian groups who are more into simplistic slogans like the one we are responding to are being a hindrance to a deeper and more healthy understanding of religious traditions.

Quran 3:32, Romans 1:18 and sound reasoning

The Christian group cite this Verse in their social media post (above) yet they have not applied thought to the context, The Verse is talking about those who reject God’s message and do not obey God. Obviously these people ultimately reject God’s love, Quran 3:31-32:

 Say, [O Muhammad], "If you should love Allah, then follow me, [so] Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Say, "Obey Allah and the Messenger." But if they turn away - then indeed, Allah does not like the disbelievers.


Christians believe the same thing with respect to their tradition. Those who reject the message of God, effectively reject God and are ultimately cut off from the love of God. This has been outlined in the Bible verses we have presented previously. To re-emphasise this we can additionally cite Romans 1:18 which is essentially teaching the same thing as Quran 3:32 with respect to the Christian tradition

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness [Romans 1:18]

Again, even if you did not have access to the Bible, the fair-minded Christian would conclude the same thing as Quran 3:32 with respect to Christianity by thinking about the doctrine of hell. Why else do Christians believe disbelievers go to hell if it is not for the rejection of God and ultimately the rejection of God’s love?

Christians who peddle simplistic and shallow polemics dishonour their Church traditions.

RC Sproul in his criticism of Christians who preach unconditional love explains the motivation behind their thinking: “We want to so much win people to Christ that we’ll do everything we can to hide from them the wrath of God”

Mark Driscoll says the Bible says, on multiple occasions, that God hates those who are sinners. He says, all the ways the Bible speaks about the wrath of God are greater than the number of times the Bible speaks of the love of God.

Driscoll’s candid admission explains why folks at small Westernised evangelical outfits preach the way they do. It’s because their churches are afraid of speaking about the wrath of God for the fear of losing congregants, potential new members and donations. They are essentially being told what they want to hear. Driscoll sums this attitude up by mentioning the Old Testament:

The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof? Jeremiah 5:31

Theologian John McArthur says “preaching that God loves you unconditionally is the wrong message. The sinner needs to be terrified about his condition”.

Jesus and the Sword

Tooting’s St Nicholas Church’s Elizabeth Schofield has taken to telling Muslims that Jesus will come for them with a sword if they don’t worship him (a man!). How can you truly believes Jesus loves everyone when you believe he will come back with a sword for those who do not want to worship Jesus ( man!) and then ultimately put them in Hell for eternity?

In addition, CJ Davis and St Nicholas Church in Tooting, on paper, accept the Thirty Nine articles derived from Thomas Cranmer’s Forty Two Articles which not only talk about hell but also teach that God chose the believers (saved ones) before time (predestination). For academic honesty, this does not necessarily mean Calvinism’s Unconditional Election but it does seem to leave the door open for that theology to be a valid theological view within the CoE paradigm. How do St Nicholas Church folks who endorse or are part of DCCI Ministries parse this part of their teaching as well as the belief that Jesus will come back in condemnatory judgement for the unbelievers - do they think these views are consistent with the idea expressed in the social media post that Jesus loves unbelievers?

John 3:16 and Romans 5:8 and Islam’s equivalent

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.[John 3:16]

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. [Romans 5:8]

These verses are not about universal salvation, they simply express the idea that God offered mankind a way for salvation. Christians do not believe everyone will have eternal life, Christians (with a focus o Arminianism) believe God has offered mankind a route to salvation and it is ultimately down to people to decide to accept this offer of salvation (i.e. via the killing of Jesus for their sins).



Islam has the same general teaching in that God (Allah) offers a route to salvation to mankind. He sent messengers to every nation so people can know God personally, worship Him and obey Him in a relation of love with Allah. In Islam as well as Judaism, God is perfectly forgiving so does not need to have somebody or Himself killed in order to forgive us. The final message and route for salvation God (Allah) gives to humankind is Islam – those who accept the message to submit their will to God will be those who are saved. Interestingly, this message of submitting to God’s will seems to be presented in a purported quote of Jesus in Mark 3:35 too

35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”

Once we scrape away the emotional harrumphs and fluff certain, unhelpful, Christians add to proceedings we see very much that in Islam, God loves the world enough to offer mankind a way to Him. Likewise, the same is taught with respect to the Christian tradition in John 3:16.

Summary
Let’s call for obscurantist Christians to be more fair-minded and stop clouding matters with unhelpful emotional accretions (fluff).

Now you know all this, you (the truth-seeker) can start to look deeply into both religions and decide which one carries more truth.

I think it’s counterproductive for anybody who believes in Heaven and Hell to state God loves everyone (unconditionally) and condemn teachings of other faiths which teach the view that is compatible with common reasoning, that God does not love unbelievers (why else would He put them in hell for eternity?).

Do you really think TCVO Jesus loved those he ordered to be killed in 1 Samuel 15:3?

Come on DCCI and Tooting’s St Nicholas Church folks, you’re looking contradictory. My advice to DCCI Ministries, move beyond shallow and inconsistent polemics – you do not honour Paul of Tarsus, your churches or even sound reason. You simply serve to get people’s backs up and ultimately become an obstacle to sound dialogue between Christians and Muslims



Advice For Muslims On Dealing With Christian Anti-Muslim Sentiment...

A Difficulty On the Christian Idea of Salvation and Forgiveness

How Jay Smith, Nabeel Qureshi, Sam Shamoun and David Wood Contribute to the Apostasy of Christians

Geza Vermes on How Jesus Would Have Reacted to Trinitarian Christians

Is Limited Atonement Doctrine Taught Clearer than the Trinity Doctrine in the New Testament?

For Christians who say Allah is a Deceiver- a Message from James White


 
 
 
 

Sunday, 10 September 2017

Notes and Thoughts on Carl Ernst's "How to Read the Quran"


How to Read the Quran –Carl W Ernst – Edinburgh University Press – 2012
Image result for carl ernst quran

Carl Ernst theorises based on a literary approach underpinned by a non supernatural foundation so it’s important to note this if you come across anything he says which goes against the traditional Islamic narrative. Ernst uses  a chronological, literary and historical approach – which is a post orientalist and cosmopolitan approach. Literary investigation includes structural composition and principal themes of suras.
He’s not doing devotional reading nor is he reading the Quran in the way a Muslim would thus he will say things which are not in line with Islamic thought. Be wary of this.

However he does make some points which may be of interest for Muslim apologetics, some of which I will share here.

Unfair treatment of Islam and the Quran by hostile readers (this would include Islamophobes and Christian missionaries)

“Hostile readers of the Quran use a literary approach that is the equivalent of a blunt instrument. They make no attempt to understand the text as a whole; instead, they take individual verses out of context, give them the most extreme interpretation possible and implicitly claim that over 1 billion Muslims around the world robotically adhere to these extremist views without exception. This is, in effect, a conspiracy theory that has virally multiplied in significant sectors of modern Euro-American society. It is irrational, it is paranoid, and it is out of touch with the realities of the lives of most Muslims around the world today. It ignores the existence of multiple traditions of interpreting the Quran in very different fashions. Unfortunately, a small minority of extremists, who quote the Quran in support of terrorist violence, have been magnified by the media into a spectre that is now haunting Europe (and the United States) more intensely than Marxism ever did. In part because of these contemporary anxieties, it is difficult for most Europeans and Americans to read the Quran” 2

“Muslims are all too familiar with condescending Christian missionaries who propose to tell them what the Quran should actually mean” 210

“Most European intellectuals, even at the time of the Enlightenment, took it for granted that Mohammad was an impostor and the Quran a fabrication and a derivative work. There was theological prejudice and negativity in earlier studies of the Quran. “

Reliability and Revisionist Theories

“In comparison with the Bible, the Quran exhibits much greater textual stability, and variant readings found in different manuscripts are largely trivial in pronunciation or vocabulary.  A number of theories have been advanced in recent years by European writers, questioning the traditional account of its composition. Some have proposed that the Quran was actually assembled as long as two centuries after the time of Prophet Muhammad. This hypothetical argument has not gained much traction, because of a lack of supporting evidence. Other more bizarre theories have been advanced, claiming that the Quran is really based on Christian text, or that it is not written in Arabic at all, but in a form of Syrian that is badly understood. Scholars of biblical studies (and readers of The Da Vinci Code) are certainly familiar with breathless exposes that claim to overturn all of the history of Christianity. This kind of radical revisionism probably gets more of a hearing when it concerns Islam, in part because most people are less familiar with the subject, but also because of fantasy expectations about debunking the Quran, otherwise it is hard to understand why such eccentric publications would be featured on the front page of the New York Times”. 4

“The Quran is the source of enormous anxiety in Europe and America, for both religious conservatives, who are alarmed about a competitive postbiblical revelation...” 1

“In practice today, a single reading (that of Hafs via Asim) is predominant, because of the widespread acceptance of the 1924 printing of the Quran by the Egyptian government using that standard, though other readings are occasionally available in print or audio recordings. In general, it is widely assumed that the text of the Quran has remained remarkably stable and that it has been more or less free from scribal insertions of the kind that crept into the manuscripts of the New Testament.”29
Arabic language
“When one turns to the nature of the assembled Quranic text , the first point to be addressed is the character of the Arabic language and the script in which it is couched. Arabic is considered a West Semitic language, and it belongs to the family of languages with alphabetic scripts (such as Hebrew, Aramaic and Ethiopic), which all ultimately descend from ancient Phoenician. Old written forms of the Arabic language are found in rock inscriptions throughout the Arabian Peninsula, which employ several different scripts ultimately derived from South Arabia. Arabic speakers also used the Nabatean script from the second century BCE, notably in the city of Petra (in modern Jordan), and that became the basis for the distinctive Arabic script that emerged in Syria and northwest Arabia in the sixth century CE, sometimes in multilingual inscriptions that included Greek or Syriac.” 26-26
Some notable revolutionary approaches and the media
“But the most revolutionary approach to the Quran in recent scholarship came in the work of John Wansbrough, a literary specialist, who argued that the text of the Quran could not have been compiledin the present from, as the traditional account has it, shortly after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. He proposed that the oral sayings on which the Quran is based were in circulation for as much as a couple of centuries before they were assembled as a book. The codification of the Quran, in his view, was part of a larger historical process in which an originally Jewish-Christian religious movement outside of Arabia eventually turned into an Arab-Islamic polity, which then retrospectively created a fictional account of its origins n Arabia. Wansbrough’s  revisionist work was an extremely learned and complicated argument, and unsupported by direct external historical evidence. Parallel revisionist studies also emeerged  at the same time in the area of early Islamic history, in which Patricia Crone and Michael Cook argued that Muslim sources were completely unreliable and that therefore one can only reconstruct the early history of Islam through foreign sources. A couple of even more radical studies then appeared, which maintained that the text of the Quran was originally a Christian work later revised along Islamic lines (G. Lulling) or that it was originally written in Syriac and then completely misunderstood as an Arabic text (Christopher Luxenberg, a pseudonym). Both of these authors took the bold (and highly questionable) step of making significant alterations in the Arabic text of the Quran in order to make it fit their arguments. In literary terms, these later efforts overstate their case, by calling for the rejection of over a millennium of textual history and proposing completely new explanations previously unsuspected by anyone else. From a quite different perspective, John Burton also challenged the traditional account of the Quran, arguing that it was fully completed during the life of the Prophet. It is remarkable that all these revisionist theories of the origins and history of the Quran share a strong confidence in overturning centuries of the Islamic tradition yet offer dramatically different conclusions that clearly are in conflict among themselves.”  30-31
“A Wall Street Journal reporter published a lurid front-page account, strongly hinting that all the German scholars had been Nazis and suggesting that scholarly study of the Quran would provide shocking challenges to the Muslim faith in the authenticity og the Quran. In response Michael Marx, director of Corpus Coranicum Research Centre, wrote a scathing reply, poking fun at the newspaper article. Marx argued that this article was an example of the modern tendency to believe in vast conspiracy theories like that in The Da Vinci Code, imagining fanciful scenarios of romantic historical research (a la Indiana Jones) that would  call into question the entire history of a major religion, and which have certainly produced entire industries of publishing, film, and tourism. More seriously, Marx challenged the notion that all the German scholars were Nazis and also questioned the tendency of journalists to focus only on revisionist theories of the origins of Islam.”  30
Use of “We” in the Quran for Allah
“Some scholars have even suggested that the use of “We” implies a plurality of speakers, that is, the angels alongside God, but on closer inspection this proves to be a weak argument loosely based on biblical analogies. The Quran does not provide any example of angelic participation in the creation. Instead of overlaying such a simplistic theological interpretation onto the text, a literary approach will take seriously the different contexts and forms of expression of its different voices and personas found throughout the Quran. The shift from “I” to “We” for the principal speaker is very characteristic of the Quranic discourse, and the use of the plural is widely accepted as an example of the “plural of majesty” or the” royal we”, where the plural is used for respect.” 49-50
Tafsir
Tawil: more esoteric interpretation
“The commentary  al-Tabari (d. 923) is a milestone in the detailed explanation of the Quran in terms of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. Another important early interpreter is al-Thalabi (d. 1035), whose (still unpublished) commentary has drawn recent attention as a masterful achievement of intellectual synthesis. Other major commentaries were produced by theologians such as al-Razi (d. 1210), from a Sunni perspective, and al Tabarsi (d. 1153), from a Shi’i point of view.”  64
Why Saudi Arabia is not keen on Archeological investigation
A highly conservative religious establishment sees no reason why the traces of Judaism and Christianity should be celebrated in the homeland of Islam, and its views digging up and displaying pagan idols as even more repugnant. 84
On this topic see my notes on Ziauddin Sardar’s Book Mecca: http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/notes-and-select-quotes-from-book-mecca.html
Stylistic based claims that the Quran has undergone stages of revision are mere speculation
“Obviously the notion that the Quran has gone through stages of revision raises questions about how, and whose authority, later additions could be made to the text. Admittedly, this observation is speculative, since it is based entirely on internal stylistic evidence rather than on any external proof; there are no manuscripts  that contain any earlier versions of these Quranic texts.” 97
Sleepers of Ephesus
“As usual , the Quran does not provide a fully detailed version of the story , assuming instead that listeners are familiar with it..” 123
[This is interesting as the Quran does not go into much detail about other people and events in the Quran, I would assume Carl Ernst believes the immediate audience or some of the people amongst the immediate audience of the Quranic Revelation were familiar with these topics – such as the virgin birth, Jesus’ life and miracles, the life events of Abraham and Moses]
Surah 116-117
“The interrogation of Jesus by God forms a dramatic parallel with the interrogations of Jesus by his opponents in the New Testament, where he is asked to declare whether he is “the Christ. The son of God” (Mathew 26:63) or “the king of the Jews” (John 18:33). In this case, Jesus firmly denies making any claim of divinity for himself or his mother Mary. While this charge does not precisely state Christian theological positions, since Mary is not technically considered divine, it does represent the logical consequences for monotheism of calling her “Mother of God” as was common in the Eastern Church. Moreover Jesus also refuses to claim to have any divine knowledge, saying, “You know what is in me, but I do not know what is in You” (5:116). He presents his teaching as the pure monotheism commanded by God, to which he is witness for humanity (5:117).” 198
Ernst is looking at this from a Protestant viewpoint rather than looking at it from the viewpoint of all known Christian understandings and practices with regards to Mary. There were people who worshipped Mary and in the minds of some Protestants Mary is worshipped/prayed to by Catholics as highlighted by the quote from James White and Taylor Marshall's citation of an ancient prayer found written on papyrus manuscript (p470), this manuscript is dated is dated to 250 CE.

 Brewer's dictionary on Mariamites:

Worshippers of Mary, the mother of Jesus. They said the Trinity consisted of God the Father, God the Son, and Mary the mother of God.
 
Why it’s difficult for non Muslims to read the Quran:
-Media inflated claims
-Nearly complete lack of acquaintance with the text itself
-Cultural barriers
“Given the blank slate of sheer unfamiliarity with the Quran among Americans and Europeans, it is perhaps inevitable that certain cultural habits have become obstacles to an understanding of it. In the mood of anxiety and fear of the post-9/11 era, it is perhaps understandable that one of these habits would be the temptation to find quick answers in this ancient text, to provide simple solutions to an urgent modern political problem. Unfortunately, nervous haste all too readily leads to serious problems or misrepresentation, as isolated phrases are made to stand in for a whole text, a single text is made o stand for an entire religion, and extremist individuals magnified by the media are taken to be representative of hundreds of millions of people in dozens of different countries. These are not trivial mistakes; weighty and unfortunate consequences flow from any distorted prejudice that substitutes real knowledge.” 4

Tidbits
Mid 1800s a newer approach emerged – chronological readings.
Printing did not take place on a large scale until the mid nineteenth century.
According to a tradition preserved by the Egyptian scholar al-Suyuti (d. 1505), no less a person than Ali had in his possession a copy of the Quran with the suras in some kind of chronological order. 73
Relying on appeals to authority is hardly a solution given the multiple authorities available today
Fairminded and reasonable approaches help understand the religious well springs of others
 


Wednesday, 14 June 2017

The Book Without Doubt - The Quran

Why is the Qur'an the only religious book in history to have been flawlessly preserved to the present day? Whether it's preservation of its content, the recitation style or the meanings of its words, God has made sure that the Qur'an is the book about which there is no doubt.

Muslims Have Least Sex Outside of Marriage (Least Fornication and Adultery By Muslims)

Thursday, 25 May 2017

Qur'an Seminar 2017: Learn about Quranic Preservation

The Muslim Apologetics Podcast's Qur’an Seminar featuring speaker Ustadh Adnan Rashid today.

Sunday, 20 November 2016

What Does Quran 9:111 Say Is Mentioned in the Gospel and Torah?


It appears a Christian, Richard Zetter,  has had an oversight here and misunderstood the Verse. He contends the Verse teaches there's a promise of Paradise in the Gospel and the Torah for those who kill and are killed for Allah. He states:

This verse promises Paradise for those who kill and are killed, fighting in the cause of Allah. It claims that such a promise is to be found in the Gospel.

I've looked into this and I don't really see this as a theme in the commentaries. In fact the translators don't seem to indicate this either. They seem to indicate the Verse teaches God promises Paradise to those who shun the ephemeral (by submitting one's will to God).

It is explicitly stated in Maulana Muhammad Ali's commentary that the Promise mentioned in the previous Scriptures is not concerning fighting/killing for God:

It should be borne in mind that the words they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain, are not a part of the promise, but are expressive of the condition of the Companions, and show that they were true to their promise. The promise to spend one’s person and property may be carried out in various ways under different circumstances, and the Companions of the Holy Prophet were as true to this promise during the thirteen years at Makkah as during the ten years at Madinah.” [Source]

The Study Quran also appears to teach the Promise refers to the purchase by God of the souls and wealth of the believers (it does not talk about killing or being killed).

Nouman Ali Khan states the Promise includes all Muslims and is not specifically concerning those who kill or are killed for God - again indicating he would not be expecting the previous Scriptures contain a Promise of Paradise for those who kill and/or kill for God but rather a Promise for those who have given up the world for devotion to Allah. Concerning those who kill/killed for God in just warfare, Nouman Ali Khan states this is the highest manifestation of this Promise but every Muslim is included in the Promise thus it is not confined to people on the battle field fighting for what is right.

Richard used the Sahih International translation and perhaps got a little confused but I will furnish other translations which are perhaps discern the Promise (underlined) from the statement concerning those who kill or are killed thus indicating they do not believe the Verse teaches the part about killing and being killed for God is in the Torah and the Gospel:

BEHOLD, God has bought of the believers their lives and their possessions, promising them paradise in return, ,[and so] they fight in God's cause, and slay, and are slain: a promise which in truth He has willed upon Himself in [the words of] the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Qur'an. And who could be more faithful to his covenant than God? Rejoice, then, in the bargain which you have made with Him: for this, this is the triumph supreme! [Muhammad Asad trans of Q 9:111]

GOD has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus, they fight in the cause of GOD, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran - and who fulfills His pledge better than GOD? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph. [Rashad trans. of Q 9:111]

God has purchased from the believers their persons and their goods, for (in return) theirs is the Garden. They shall fight in the cause of God, and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise that is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel, and the Qur’an. Who can fulfill a promise better than God? Rejoice then in the bargain you have made, for that is the Supreme Triumph. [Shabir Ahmed trans. of Q 9:111]

There's extra significance to Shabir Ahmed's translation as it carries a footnote in which he does offer Biblical verses which he believes Q 9:111 references. Interestingly enough he does not try and offer anything about killing or being killed for Paradise but rather verses about willingly submitting one's will to God. He cites Deut 6:4-5:

4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a] 5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.

In addition to this there are other reference I reckon he cites from the NT, Matthew. I can't be 100% here as the formatting leaves it uncertain but you can check it for yourself. I think it's reasonable to assume he refers to Matthew 6:32-33 which I think is an instruction to prioritize God and the Hereafter over everything worldly.

32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

Here's another I think he references. This seems to be close to the money, a Promise to compensate, with Paradise, those who have sacrificed this world for God. Matthew 19:29:

29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

I also think he refers to Matthew 10:39 which I believe Christians would interpret as whoever shuns this life will get the Hereafter (ever lasting life):

39Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

Syed Abul A'ala Maududi in his commentary talks about what the Promise is (again note the absence of talk concerning being killed/killing):

In this verse that aspect of the Islamic faith which determines the nature of the relationship between Allah and His servants has been called a transaction. This means that faith is not merely a metaphysical conception but is, in fact, a contract by which the servant sells his life and possessions to Allah and in return for this accepts His promise that He would give him the Garden in the life after death

Then he discusses parts of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament which allude to the Promise (notice he's not looking for verses about fighting or martyrdom) but rather a renouncement of the lower life in submission to God for the Eternal Life:

Some critics say that the statement of promise in the Torah and the Gospel is not confirmed by these Books. Their objection in regard to the Gospel is obviously wrong for even in the existing Gospels there are sayings of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) that confirm this verse. For instance:

“Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (MAT. 5: 10).

“He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” (MAT. 10: 39).

“And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold and shall inherit everlasting life.” (MAT. 19: 29).

It is, however, true that the matter of this transaction is not confirmed in its entirety by the existing Torah. For instance, there is a mention of the first part of the bargain at several places in one forth or the other: “Is not He thy father that hath bought thee? hath He not made thee, and established thee?" (DEUT. 32: 6).

"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." (DEUT. 6: 4-5).

But as regards the other part of the bargain, that is, the promise of the Gardens, they applied it to the land of Palestine:

“Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as the Lord God of thy fathers hath promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey.” (DEUT. 6: 3).

This is because the Torah does not give any conception of the life-after-death, the Day of Judgment, rewards and punishments in the Hereafter, though this creed has always been an inseparable part of the right way. This does not, however, mean that the Torah did not originally contain this creed. The fact is that the Jews had become so materialistic during the period of their degeneration that they had no other idea of a reward from God than the wellbeing and prosperity in this world. Therefore they perverted all the promises made by God in return for man’s service and obedience to Him and applied those to the land of Palestine.

In this connection, it should also be noted that the above mentioned changes became possible because the original Torah had been tampered with in several ways. Some portions were taken away from it and others were added to it. Thus, the Torah in the existing form is not purely the word of God but also contains the comments, etc. of the Jewish scholars mixed up with it. So much so that at some places it becomes difficult to distinguish the word of God from the Jewish traditions, their racial prejudices, their superstitions, their ambitions and, wishes, their legal interpretations, etc. all of which have gotten mixed with the word of God. (See E.N. 2 of Aal-Imran).

Abdullah Yusuf Ali's commentary also indicates the Promise (that was in the Torah and the Injeel) is that concerning the covenant of redemption: one must surrender oneself completely in exchange for ever lasting life (Paradise). He goes on to say this surrender may include fighting for the cause, but again he does not seem to think the Promise mentioned in the previous Scripture was that concerning killing or being killed for God

C1362. We offer our whole selves and our possessions to Allah, and Allah gives us Salvation. This is the true doctrine of redemption: and we are taught that this is the doctrine not only of the Quran but of the earlier Revelations, -the original Law of Moses and the original Gospel of Jesus.

Any other view of redemption is rejected by Islam, especially that of corrupted Christianity, which thinks that some other person suffered for our sins and we are redeemed by his blood. It is our self-surrender that counts, not other people's merits.

Our complete self-surrender may include fighting for the cause, both spiritual and physical. As regards actual fighting with the sword there has been some difference in theological theories at different times, but very little in the practice of those who framed those theories...

...The monkish morality of the Gospels in their present form has never been followed by any self-respecting Christian or other nation in history. Nor is it common-sense to ignore lust of blood in unregenerate man as a form of evil which has to be combated "within the limits, set by Allah" (9:112). (R). [Source]

I think there's a lot here for Richard to consider, I trust he is sincere enough to look into this and make the relevant corrections if he is convinced by the evidence to do so.

There is no statement in Scripture that says, “God is three Persons in one being"

Notes from Sean Finnegan's interview with Patrick Navas: Is the Trinity Biblical


Saturday, 23 January 2016

Flat Earth Polemic - Yasir Qadhi


I was in a discussion yesterday with a young Muslim struggling with his faith. He mentioned that he had read from sources critical to Islam that the Quran clearly contradicts known facts and represents the world-view of its time (7th century CE). And of the most blatant examples, according to him, was that the Quran clearly preaches that the world is flat. Now, I have said and firmly believe that the genre of 'scientific miracles in the Quran' that we all grew up reading is in fact a dangerous genre, because it reads in 'facts' where no such facts exist, and because it posits one's faith on a purely scientific basis (so that when 'science', which is ever-evolving, might seem to contradict the Quran, this will lead to a weakness of faith). Nonetheless, to claim that the Quran preaches that the world is flat is an outrageous claim. In fact there is unanimous consensus amongst medieval Muslim scholars to the contrary.

Ibn Hazm (d. 1064 CE), wrote over a thousand years ago in his book al-Fisal, "I do not know of a single scholar worth the title of scholar who claims other than that the earth is round. Indeed the evidences in the Quran and Sunnah are numerous to this effect" [al-Fisal, v. 2 p. 78].

Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328 CE), someone who is typically accused of literalism, wrote that there is unanimous consensus of all the scholars of Islam that the world is round, and that reality and perception also proves this, for, as he writes, it is well known that the Sun sets on different peoples at different times, and does not set on the whole world at the same time. In fact, writes Ibn Taymiyya, it is truly an ignorant person who claims that the earth is not round. [Majmu al-Fatawa, v. 6, p. 586]. And there are many others scholars, such as al-Razi, who wrote on this subject, and I do not know of any medieval scholar who held another view.

All of this shows the necessity of gaining Islamic knowledge from reputable sources, and from verifying anything you read from the people of knowledge.

From Dr Yasir Qadhi's FB


Thursday, 17 December 2015

The 'Inlibration' and Incarnation Fallacy of False Comparison


This is something which seems to be pervasive in Christian apologetics. It's nothing to be proud of, it's a fallacious argument.

Argument: Muslims believe in a similar concept to the incarnation concerning the Quran - 'inlibration' (the eternal words of God having two natures, a created nature and an uncreated nature).

This is a foundation stone claim where the Christian debater uses this argument to build his/her overall argument which generally is used in responses to arguments against the notion of a 100% finite and 100% infinite being. So here the argument is an equivocation between the Quran and the Christian incarnation belief concerning Jesus.

This is replete with fallacies. The obvious one; it's a straw man argument. The argument actually misrepresents Muslim belief concerning the Quran due to their conflation between the Quran and the Mushaf. The two are not the same as we shall see later.

The incarnation is the belief God took on human flesh ( a human nature).The hypostatic union is a concept which expresses the belief he was fully God and fully human simultaneously (at the same time) and the two natures are inseparable.

We do not believe the act of scribing the Quran onto any object renders the said object as having two natures - regardless of whether the object is a book, stone or whatever else. The incarnation states a man (Jesus p) had two natures - a divine nature and a human nature (a created and uncreated nature).

The book (paper and ink) which the words of the Quran are scribed are called a Mushaf, it's not the Quran.

Louay Fatoohi explains the difference:

In other words, the term “Qur’an” refers to the specific “revelation that was read to Prophet Muhammad” whereas the term “mushaf” denotes the “written form” of that revelation.

For those who are struggling to follow, the book we read the Quran from in our mosques is a Mushaf. We have many of these in the mosque. Nobody in the mosque says the 'Qurans' are over there but rather they say (or should say) the Mushafs (or use the Arabic plural Masahif) are over there.

The two aren't the same - thus it's a fallacy to even try to draw a comparison between the scribing of the Quran and the Incarnation belief.

Use common sense - are they saying a hafiz is a like their concept of Jesus too?

Think about it logically, are they saying your iPhone has a 'phone nature' and a 'divine nature' because you have the words of the Quran saved on it (either audio or written). What about a CD, are they saying the CD now has two natures too? What about a Hafiz (somebody who has memorised the Quran), are they saying these humans have two natures akin to the way Christians view Jesus?!


The argument is inconsistent, what of the Bible?

What about the Bible? Christians can testify themselves to the fallacy of this argument as they don't view the Bible as having a dual nature nor do they view each book in the Bible in such a way. Christian theology teaches the words of God are eternal, I've not only heard this from a pastor but it's actually written in the Psalms:

Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens. [Psalm 119:89 NIV]

Would they say a person who has memorised the Bible, or even parts of it, is akin to their belief in Jesus - ie he/she has an eternal and human nature? Or their phone/PC which has the Bible stored on it has a created and uncreated nature?

I doubt it. The reason why, it's a misrepresentation (a straw man) and the fallacy of false equivocation as the Christians recognise the book (paper and ink) is distinct from the words which they believe to be eternal.

Louay Fatoohi's article on the Differences between the Mushaf and the Quran


Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

WHAT IS THE POSITION OF THE HOLY QUR’AN ON THE PREVIOUS SCRIPTURES AND THE PRESENT DAY “BIBLE”? By Aqil Onque


 IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE MOST GRACIOUS THE MOST MERCIFUL

Salutations of Peace and Blessing forever be upon the Prophet Muhammad,  upon Jesus, upon Moses, upon Abraham, upon Noah and all of God’s Elect


WHAT IS THE POSITION OF THE HOLY QUR’AN ON THE PREVIOUS SCRIPTURES AND THE PRESENT DAY “BIBLE”?

Much talk and confusion by many who are not fully aware of the Qur’an’s position as it relates to the previous Scriptures is taking place. As a result, much conflict is arising, since the true position of the Qur’an and Islam seems to be misrepresented and distorted. The Holy Qur’an, which is believed in wholeheartedly by the adherents of the Islamic faith, is considered to be the undisputed final revelation of God Almighty, ALLAH that was revealed to the seal of all Prophets and Messengers, Muhammad  peace be upon him (S), from God Almighty.

The Prophet Muhammad (S) was born in the late sixth century (570 CE) in the Arabian Peninsula, in the city of Makkah.  After living a normal life amongst his people, he was elected to prophet hood at the age of forty. At that time, he began to receive the revelation of God Almighty, ALLAH, through the Angel Jibril. The revelation of the Qur’an from ALLAH to Muhammad (S) would continue over the next twenty-three years until its completion and then, the completion of the life of the Prophet (S) himself in this world.

Throughout  this time, Prophet Muhammad (S) would encounter some serious challenges and opposition to his prophetic mission.  It even occurred that the height and severity of this opposition caused him to have to send many of his followers out of the country to the Christian ruled land of Abyssinia, and eventually, the remaining had to migrate from their homeland of Mecca to a welcoming asylum in the city of Madinah. 

It was in Madinah that the prophetic mission took on a new shape and emphasis, as the Prophet (S) assumed a head of state status alongside the role of prophet hood. This demanded that not only was the Prophet (S) responsible for the spiritual and religious realities of those who accepted and followed his call, but now, he was also to assume a legislative role and authority over his followers. Given this nature, the state, along with defending its security and existence, also met with expansion.  In so doing, it began to encounter a larger concentration of peoples, cultures and faiths.  It was also here where the Prophet (S) first encountered a Jewish community, who resided in the city. Given this back drop, we witness an array of verses pertaining to people of previous Scriptures and the role and belief of the Muslims towards them.

On the one hand, there was, at times, an antagonistic Jewish community in Madinah, and then a curious Christian community in Abyssinia and other areas. The prophetic mission was already into its fourteenth year and the word of Islam was becoming popular.  Makkah was already a very popular and central city, so the news of a new religion and Scripture from God Almighty stirred up the religious curiosity of the people.

Given this novel phenomenon, locals and foreign delegations began to arrive and question the Prophet (S) about certain beliefs as it related to the Qur’an and its positions on their respective faiths. The following is the explanation of several verses of the Qur’an and their implications and positions referring to the earlier communities as a whole, and those amongst the Prophet (S) as well.  Let us hear what the Qur’an says and see what the true position of the Qur’an is on the People of the Book (Jews & Christians) as they are termed.

Also, we would like to introduce here two points of interest that are grossly misunderstood by Christians.  Namely, the Qur’an as it relates to Mary, the mother of Jesus and her title as, “The sister of Aaron” and the other point of contention being, Mary mistakenly understood to be part of the trinity. These two points will be dealt with in a separate article, but they are similar in nature in that they are points that the Christians, either ignorantly or arrogantly, prove themselves to be unfair and inconsistent when it comes to looking at the Qur’an and its message.

Before we actually cite the relevant verses, it needs to be understood that the Qur’an has a threefold purpose in addressing the People of the Book.  Firstly, it is to acknowledge and inform those who were unaware of the previous Scriptures of what ALLAH has revealed.  Secondly, to inform the People of the Book and remind others from amongst them of their covenant that was made with God Almighty, ALLAH, to accept and support the prophets prophesized in the Scripture, and in particular, the Prophet Muhammad (S). Thirdly, it is to correct the People of the Book concerning foreign beliefs that crept into their Scripture and message through physical editing, verbal twisting of the Scripture, and complete rejection of some parts of it.  This occurred in some of their beliefs, as well as their denial of the Prophet (S), though they find him clearly described in their books.

We see the proof of this last point as one of the main reasons why we find a Jewish community residing in Madinah. The Jews never had any religious connection to Madinah, so why were they there?  They were present because they were awaiting a prophet to come out of the Arabian Peninsula, as described in their books.  But many of them denied what they found in their own scripture, by one way or another.

This is the essence of why ALLAH revealed verses about the People of the Book in the Qur’an. These verses, as often times grossly misunderstood by Christian apologists and ignorant laymen, are not designed for Muslims to try and prove that the Prophet Muhammad (S) is found in the Bible in order to authenticate his prophet hood.  Not at all!  ALLAH has already authenticated that. These verses are primarily to expose the People of the Book for their denial of the Prophet Muhammad (S), as it is clear that he is in their books. These verses are to expose them for their denial and the breach of the covenant that was made regarding him.

Understanding these reasons for the verses being revealed about the People of the Book in the Qur’an should clear up much of the confusion amongst the Christians, who have irresponsibly attempted to interpret many of these verses in their favor, as to imply that the Qur’an unequivocally confirms and authenticates the inspiration, preservation and authority of their present day scripture. For certainly, the Qur’an DOES NOT! Rather, quite the opposite, as we will now see.

In the following verses of the Qur’an (ayahs), we will see how beautifully the Qur’an highlights the relationship between the previous scriptures.  If one can understand these verses, then they will understand all other verses related to the People of The Book.  ALLAH begins with the Torah and concludes with the Qur’an, showing how clear ALLAH makes His signs, for those who reflect and understand.

Qur’an Ch. 5, verses 44, 46-48: 

“Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers…” (5:44). 

“And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous” (5:46).


“And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient” (5:47).

“And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return altogether, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ” (5:48).

In a large section dealing with the People of the Book, ALLAH begins with the Jewish community and part of their scripture called the Torah.  He stated that it contained light and guidance and was used by their prophets, Rabbis and scholars to judge by.  Note that ALLAH states here that they were ENTRUSTED with their scripture and witnesses thereto. This is a fundamental belief here because ALLAH makes it clear that He revealed the Scripture to them, and entrusted them with it and to be witnesses thereto and over it.  So, it was for the Jewish community to bear their scripture and assure its application and preservation. This is expressed clearly in another part of the Qur’an, where ALLAH says:

“The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]. Wretched is the example of the people who deny the signs of Allah.  And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people” (62:5).

Ibn Kathir, in his footnote on this ayah, says that they were even worse than donkeys since they corrupted, changed and distorted the Torah, and donkeys don’t have that ability. But, the point here is that they were ENTRUSTED WITH IT.

Next, ALLAH mentions that He sent Jesus, the son of Mary, following in their footsteps and confirmed that which came before him in the Torah, and that ALLAH gave Jesus the Injil (Gospel).  Again, affirming that it contained guidance and light and that it confirmed what came before it, i.e. the Torah.  ALLAH continues and states, “…And let the People of the Injil (Gospel) judge by what ALLAH has revealed therein…” (5:47). What is the meaning of this?  Remember that ALLAH is highlighting the succession of scripture and prophets and how one relates to the other and confirms the other.  So, just as ALLAH revealed the Torah, it was for the people of the Torah to judge by it as it relates to the people of the Injil (the coming of Jesus) and likewise, ALLAH commands the people of the Injil to judge by what ALLAH revealed in their book as it relates to the advent of the Prophet Muhammad (S).  This is clearly the case, as stated in the following ayah where Allah says:

“Say, ‘O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, AND what has been revealed to you from your Lord.’  And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people” (5:68).

This is the explanation of the aforementioned verse about the people of the Injil judging by what ALLAH revealed therein. This judging has everything to do with the acceptance of the Prophet Muhammad (S), just as the judging of the Jews, in the general sense, had everything to do with the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah.  If the Christians are to blame the Jews for not believing in the Messiah, although mentioned in their books, then they are as well to be blamed for not believing in the Prophet Muhammad, who was mentioned in their books.  This is made clear and seals the case shut in the following two verses, where ALLAH says:

“And [mention, O Muhammad], when Allah took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture, [saying], ‘You must make it clear to the people and not conceal it.’ But they threw it away behind their backs and exchanged it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased” (3:187).

“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book” (5:15).

Clearly again, ALLAH is reminding the People of the Book of their covenant, which was to accept and support the Prophet Muhammad as described in their books, while blaming them for trying to hide that fact and rejecting him.

Consider the following quote from the scholar, Professor Abdul Ahad Dawud in the foreword of his great work titled, Muhammad in the Bible, where we can find an in depth look at the Prophet Muhammad (S) in the previous scriptures. He states:

We read the following words in the Book of Deuteronomy chapter xviii, verse 18: ‘I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put my words in his mouth.’ If these words do not apply to Prophet Muhammad, they still remain unfulfilled. Prophet Jesus himself never claimed to be the Prophet alluded to. Even his disciples were of the same opinion: they looked to the second coming of Jesus for the fulfillment of the prophecy. So far, it is undisputed that the first coming of Jesus was not the advent of the "prophet like unto thee," and his second advent can hardly fulfill the words. Jesus, as is believed by his Church, will appear as a Judge and not as a law-giver; but the promised one has to come with a "fiery law" in "his right hand." In ascertaining the personality of the promised prophet the other prophecy of Moses is, however, very helpful where it speaks of the shining forth of God from Paran, the mountain of Mecca. The words in the Book of Deuteronomy, chapter xxxii, verse 2, run as follows: ‘The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints; from his right hand went a fiery law for them.’

In these words the Lord has been compared with the sun. He comes from Sinai, he rises from Seir, but he shines in his full glory from Paran, where he had to appear with ten thousands of saints with a fiery law in his right hand. None of the Israelites, including Jesus, had anything to do with Paran. Hagar, with her son Ishmael, wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba, who afterwards dwelt in the wilderness of Paran (Gen. xxi. 21).

He married an Egyptian woman, and through his first-born, Kedar, gave descent to the Arabs who from that time till now are the dwellers of the wilderness of Paran. And if Prophet Muhammad admittedly on all hands traces his descent to Ishmael through Kedar and he appeared as a prophet in the wilderness of Paran and re-entered Mecca with ten thousand saints and gave a fiery law to his people, is not the prophecy above-mentioned fulfilled to its very letter?

The words of the prophecy in Habakkuk are especially noteworthy. His (the Holy One from Paran) glory covered the heavens and the earth was full of his praise. The word "praise" is very significant, as the very name Muhammad literally means "the praised one." Besides the Arabs, the inhabitants of the wilderness of Paran had also been promised a Revelation: "Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory unto the Lord, and declare His praise in the islands. The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man, he shall stir up jealousy like a man of war, he shall cry, yea, roar; he shall prevail against his enemies" (Isaiah). In connection with it there are two other prophecies worthy of note where references have been made to Kedar. The one runs thus in chapter lx of Isaiah: "Arise, shine for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee ... The multitude of camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; all they from Sheba shall come. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on mine altar, and I will glorify the house of my glory" (1-7). The other prophecy is again in Isaiah "The burden upon Arabia. In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge, O ye travelling companies of Dedanim. The inhabitants of the land of Tema brought water to him that was thirsty, they prevented with their bread him that fled. For they fled from the swords and from the bent bow, and from the grievousness of war. For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year, according to the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail: And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty of the children of Kedar, shall be diminished" Read these prophecies in Isaiah in the light of one in Deutero- nomy which speaks of the shining forth of God from Paran. If Ishmael inhabited the wilderness of Paran, where he gave birth to Kedar, who is the ancestor of the Arabs; and if the sons of Kedar had to receive revelation from God; if the flocks of Kedar had to come up with acceptance to a Divine altar to glorify "the house of my glory" where the darkness had to cover the earth for some centuries, and then that very land had to receive light from God; and if all the glory of Kedar had to fail and the number of archers, the mighty men of the children of Kedar, had to diminish within a year after the one fled from the swords and from the bent bows - the Holy One from Paran (Habakkuk iii 3 ) is no one else than Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Muhammad is the holy offspring of Ishmael through Kedar, who settled in the wilderness of Paran. Muhammad is the only Prophet through whom the Arabs received revelation at the time when the darkness had covered the earth. Through him God shone from Paran, and Mecca is the only place where the House of God is glorified and the flocks of Kedar come with acceptance on its altar.

Prophet Muhammad was persecuted by his people and had to leave Mecca. He was thirsty and fled from the drawn sword and the bent bow, and within a year after his flight the descendants of Kedar meet him at Badr, the place of the first battle between the Meccans and the Prophet, the children of Kedar and their number of archers diminish and all the glory of Kedar fails.

If the Holy Prophet is not to be accepted as the fulfillment of all these prophecies they will still remain unfulfilled. "The house of my glory" referred to in Isaiah lX is the house of God in Mecca and not the Church of Christ as thought by Christian commentators. The flocks of Kedar, as mentioned in verse 7, have never come to the Church of Christ; and it is a fact that the villages of Kedar and their inhabitants are the only people in the whole world who have remained impenetrable to any influence of the Church of Christ. Again, the mention of 10,000 saints in Deuteronomy xxx 3 is very significant. He (God) shined forth from Paran, and he came with 10,000 of saints. Read the whole history of the wilderness of Paran and you will find no other event but when Mecca was conquered by the Prophet. He comes with 10,000 followers from Medina and re-enters "the house of my glory." He gives the fiery law to the world, which reduced to ashes all other laws.

The Comforter – the Spirit of Truth - spoken of by Prophet Jesus was no other than Prophet Muhammad himself. It cannot be taken as the Holy Ghost, as the Church theology says. "It is expedient for you that I go away," says Jesus, "for if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart I will send him unto you." The words clearly show that the Comforter had to come after the departure of Jesus, and was not with him when he uttered these words.

Are we to presume that Jesus was devoid of the Holy Ghost if his coming was conditional on the going of Jesus: besides, the way in which Jesus describes him makes him a human being, not a ghost. "He shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak." Should we presume that the Holy Ghost and God are two distinct entities and that the Holy Ghost speaks of himself and also what he hears from God? The words of Jesus clearly refer to some messenger from God. He calls him the Spirit of Truth, and so the Qur'an speaks of Prophet Muhammad,

"No, indeed, he has brought the truth, and confirmed the Messengers." Ch.37:37”

Now, this article is not about trying to prove the Prophet Muhammad (S) in the Bible, but rather, to show those who don’t understand the reason behind the command in the Qur’an for the People of the Book to JUDGE by their respective scripture.  If this understanding is lost, they will continue to misinterpret the verses of the Qur’an.  When ALLAH states for them to judge by their scripture, it is in fact telling them to honor their covenant and accept and believe in the Prophet Muhammad (S).  

Well, one may ask, how about the fact that the Qur’an says that it confirms the previous scriptures?  Doesn’t that mean that the Bible is true? How or why would ALLAH confirm a scripture if the scripture is not true? This is a very good point to consider.  And in fact, the Qur’an does attest to the veracity of the previous scriptures, but it does so in its principle and in their original form, as Allah states in the following verse, “O you who have believed, believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His Messenger and the Scripture which He sent down before. And whoever disbelieves in Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day has certainly gone far astray” (4:136).

However, the Bible that is possessed today, although it does contain some of the original message to a certain degree, has unfortunately, undergone serious and gross manipulation and distortion. There have been additions and deletions, so much so that the Bible now consists of the words of God, along with the words of prophets, wise men, historians, and even unscrupulous men, claiming to represent God.  As such, it is nearly impossible to decipher on one’s own what is actually from God and what is from other than God.  For this reason, in the first series of verses quoted above, we see that ALLAH commands us to believe also in the Qur’an, as it is a preserver and guardian over the previous scriptures.  It is by the Qur’an that we know what is from God and what is not in the scriptures that we have at our disposal now.  So yes, the Qur’an confirms the previous scriptures, even in their distorted form, because that cannot be taken away from the reality of that book, but it also clearly states that the Qur’an is the revelation from God that will make clear what is from God and what is not in the former scriptures. And this is another meaning of the verse in which ALLAH tells the People of the Book that they have nothing unless they, not only believe in their book, but also believe in what was sent in the final revelation to the Prophet Muhammad (S).  If not, then belief in their book alone is not enough. It is, in fact, the Qur’an that comes to not only confirm the previous Scriptures, but also to safeguard the true teaching  therein and to serve as a detailed explanation of it, as ALLAH states in another verse in the Holy Qur’an:

“And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds” (10:37).

So, if we find, for example, the stories in the Bible about previous prophets committing major crimes and breaches of even the commandments, while we find those same prophets being honored and shown to be examples to follow in the Qur’an, then we disregard the Biblical stories about those prophets and dismiss them and its content as not being from ALLAH, God Almighty. Similarly, if we read passages that seemingly allude to the worship of any other than God Almighty, while in the Qur’an we see a strict monotheism presented, we disregard those verses in the Bible and dismiss them and their content as not being from ALLAH, God Almighty. This is what is meant here, and there is no doubt in it (i.e. the Qur’an).

Let us now turn our attention quickly to the fact concerning the historical preservation, or the lack thereof, of the previous scriptures.

 In the book of Jeremiah, Ch. 8:8-9, it reads, “How can you say, we are wise, for we have the law of the Lord, when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped, since they have rejected the word of the Lord, what kind of wisdom do they have?”

In Galatians, Ch. 1:6-7, Paul clearly shows his disdain for other gospels when he says, “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – which is really no gospel at all.  Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the Gospel of Christ.”

The above are very interesting quotes from the Bible itself.  One need not be a doctor of law to understand that some manipulation, distortion and conflicting sources are pressing upon the Biblical text.  Again, this article is not designed to explore this point extensively, but we hope that the above mentioned citations are helpful in pointing to the lack of historical preservation as it relates to previous scriptures.

Now, let us turn to what the Qur’an says about this matter.  In the following verses, Allah says:

“But those who wronged, changed [those words] to a statement other than that which had been said to them, so We sent down upon those who wronged, a punishment from the sky because they were defiantly disobeying” (2:59).

“So woe to those who write the scripture with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah,” in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn” (2:79).

“And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know” (3:78).

“So for their breaking of the covenant, We cursed them and made their hearts hard.  They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded.  And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.  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.  O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book” (5:13-15).

The above verses are emphatically clear to the fact that the People of the Book, those of the former scriptures, have misappropriated and distorted their book, in different ways and times.  And it is for this fact and others that ALLAH followed up their scripture with the final scripture, the Qur’an.  This, He Glorified and Exalted be He, made clear that the Qur’an is to be a correcting agent over the previous scriptures.  Moreover, ALLAH guaranteed the safe keeping and preservation of this final revelation, as He stated in the following verse:  

“Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian” (Qur’an, 15:9).

Wait, just a minute! What about those verses in the Qur’an where ALLAH states emphatically that none can change His Words? How could ALLAH state this and at the same time, say that His previous revelations were changed?  Would that not be a contradiction?

This is a great question, essential to understanding this subject and as such, clarification here is paramount.  So, let us look at some of the verses in which ALLAH mentions that none can change His words and see how that relates to the previous scriptures and their being tampered with and changed.

In the Qur’an, Allah says: 

"And certainly were messengers denied before you, but they were patient over [the effects of] denial, and they were harmed until Our victory came to them. And none can alter the words of Allah.  And there has certainly come to you some information about the [previous] messengers” (6:34).

“And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing” (6:115). 

“For them are good tidings in the worldly life and in the Hereafter. No change is there in the words of Allah. That is what is the great attainment” (10:64).

“And recite, [O Muhammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no changer of His words, and never will you find in other than Him a refuge” (18:27).


Now, there are two points to note here.  Firstly, in all of the above mentioned verses, the context shows that there is a promise that ALLAH’S Words cannot be changed.  But, how do we reconcile this fact with the reality that the previous scriptures have been changed and distorted?  As we will see, the relationship can be found in the very essence of God’s promise!

It is His very command or promise or threat that ALLAH is stating cannot be changed.  In other words, the DECREE of ALLAH cannot be changed! Once ALLAH says that a thing will be like this, in the form of a promise, threat, or the like, that is what it is and none other than ALLAH can change that fact.  If ALLAH stated that He will reward a people, give victory, forgive, or guide and so on, then none can alter what ALLAH has decreed therein.  Likewise, if ALLAH stated that He will punish, deprive, send astray, or the like, then none can change what He decreed in the matter. In all of the verses above, we find this to be the case.  Moreover, the word that is under discussion is a very particular word, as is found in the following hadith, or saying of the Prophet Muhammad (S), which further strengthens this point:

“Then there is sent to him the angel who blows his soul into him and who is commanded with four matters (decrees/words). 
 
This word that we are focusing on here is the word “kalimaat” (كَلِمَاتٍ) and it literally means words in a plural sense.  But this word, as seen in all the examples above refers to a decreed word, not revelation, which takes us to our next point.

In all the cases in the Qur’an where ALLAH mentions His Revelation, meaning scripture, this word kalimaat is NEVER used!  That is because this word is never associated with revelation or scripture.  ALLAH uses words like kitab, wahi, tanzeel, thikr or the proper names of each respective revelation – i.e. Suhuf, Torah,  Zabur, Injeel, Qur’an, or Ath Thikr – in reference to revelation.  On the other hand, the word kalimaat has never been used to describe any of the Revelations sent by ALLAH.  So, the point here is that, when ALLAH states that His Words in the plural form (kalimaat) cannot be changed, He is not referring to His Revelation, but rather, He is referring to His Decreed Word!  This is clear to anyone who is familiar with the Qur’an.  But, as is seen, when one has no idea of the Qur’an, then gross errors will be made in trying to interpret it!

In closing on this point, it behooves us to examine the understanding of those earliest Muslims from the time of the Prophet Muhammad (S) as it relates to their view of the previous scriptures.  Since they were receiving the understanding directly from the Messenger of ALLAH, their views would be very revealing on this matter.

In a very decisive hadith found in Sahih Bukhari, it states the following:

“Narrated Ubaidullah: Ibn 'Abbas said, ‘Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle 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!"  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461). Thus, the matter is clear for those who reflect.

Now, let us look at one more verse from the Qur’an that is often misinterpreted.   Often times, the following verse is used to promote the idea of the Qur’an granting some kind of stamp of approval regarding the present day Bible’s preservation and authority and this couldn’t be further from the truth.  It is unfortunate how disingenuous people will be to try to promote their estranged beliefs.  In the verse under question, Allah states:

“So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammad], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters” (10:94).

So, here we have a clear proof that when one’s heart is closed, the truth will have no impact on it.  Our zealot Christian brothers insist that this verse is proof that the Qur’an authenticates the Bible.  As they exclaim, “How can your ALLAH command the Prophet Muhammad (S) to ask the People of the Book if their scripture is corrupt?  Indeed, this is a very deceptive question, and if one just reads the context, it becomes quite clear what is being stated here.

Let us examine the very beginning of the verse in question. The very first letter in the verse 10:94, is the letter “FA”. Now, “FA” is a letter of conjunction, meaning, that it follows a thought and can NEVER begin a thought! It is the equivalent of the word “therefore” or “so” in the English language.  Now, if you ever see the word “therefore” in a sentence, what is the first thing that comes to mind?  One would first want to know what was said before.  Why?  Because that’s how we will understand why “therefore” was being used.  Now, what happens when one neglects to see what came before the “therefore,” even though the word is screaming at you to read what preceded it?  Of course, one will most certainly misunderstand the statement.  And this is exactly what happens and is the case with the zealots! They are so anxious to find something against the Qur’an that they will violate any and all principles of grammar to manipulate texts in order to suit their agenda.

Now that we have cleared that up, let us see what was being said before so we can fully understand why ALLAH is exhorting the Prophet Muhammad (S) to even ask the People of the Book.  It goes up about four verses to verse ninety, so let us start from there - chapter 10, verses 90-93.

“And We took the Children of Israel across the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them in tyranny and enmity until, when drowning overtook him, he said, ‘I believe that there is no deity except that in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of the Muslims.’  Now? And you had disobeyed [Him] before and were of the corrupters?  So today We will save you in body, that you may be to those who succeed you, a sign.  And indeed, many among the people, of Our signs, are heedless.  And We had certainly settled the Children of Israel in an agreeable settlement and provided them with good things.  And they did not differ until [after] knowledge had come to them. Indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ” (Qur’an, 10:90-93).

Given the proper context, one clearly sees that ALLAH is narrating an event that took place involving the Children of Israel, who are termed the People of the Book in the Qur’an, along with the Christians, in order to bring about a historical lesson.  ALLAH is making this event known to the Prophet Muhammad (S) and those around him, and in that context, using an expression of emphasis, ALLAH exhorts the Prophet (S), and any after him by extension, to ask those who are familiar with this event from their scriptures if doubts occur.

If I may indulge the point with an example, it is akin to me telling my wife about a childhood story of mine. Then, when I conclude the story, I say (as we hear many people say when trying to emphasize the point), “Ask so & so if you don’t believe me!”  This is most common.  And such an expression does not, in any way, imply that so & so is free from lies or anything of the like. Nor does it make so & so a sole authority on my life.  Rather, it is an expression to reiterate the narration and appeal to someone that in fact is acquainted with the event.  If you don’t know about something, then ask those who are familiar with it.


Now, let’s return to the verse at hand.  Right afterwards, ALLAH exhorts the Prophet Muhammad (S) to ask those who are familiar with the narrations of the earlier events. He concludes by saying that certainly the Truth has come to you from your Lord, so never doubt!


Does this sound like God is trying to convey, in some way, that the previous scriptures are preserved and authoritative? Rather, the scriptures are not even a subject in this context.  It was mentioned as an appeal to a historical narration, as one might appeal to a newspaper, for example.  Would that mean that if I appeal to a newspaper to confirm an event of the past, that I am somehow implying that everything in that newspaper is authentic and authoritative?  How absurd a conclusion!  Yet, we have the same line of reasoning amongst Christian apologist zealots.  But as we now see, it is nothing more than a ploy on their behalf.  

 
In closing, I would like to remind us of the verse from the Qur’an in which ALLAH confirms the previous scriptures but makes it absolutely clear to the People of the Book that although you have in your possession a scripture from God Almighty, you still have nothing if you don’t accept and uphold the Qur’an.


“Say, ‘O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.’  And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people” (5:68).

And all praise is for ALLAH, Lord of all that exists.
By Aqil Onque of Radush Shubuhaat @