The Islamic religion claims that the Qur’an, revealed allegedly by the angel Gabriel to the prophet Muhammad beginning in 610 A.D., is the inspired and inerrant word of God. Such an assertion, however, is highly problematic, and many, many arguments could be given to convincingly refute it. In this article, I am going to offer one of those reasons, which I perceive to be the most damning. In future articles, we will consider some other serious difficulties with the idea that the Qur’an represents the revealed words of God. My argument here can be summarized in syllogistic form as follows:
Premise 1: Either the Bible is the Word of God or it is not.
Premise 2: If the Bible is the Word of God, the Qur’an is not.
Premise 3: If the Bible is not the Word of God, the Qur’an is not.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Qur’an is not the Word of God.
First, a note of qualification. By “the Bible” I refer to the Old and New Testaments as we possess them today and as possessed by Christians at the time of Muhammad in the seventh century. Granted, there are textual variants in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, but the core message of the New Testament remains the same — they are thus immaterial to what I’m attempting to establish here.
Premise 1 need not be defended, since it is self-evident that the two alternatives are mutually exclusive and exhaustive possibilities. Premise 2 is easy to establish, since the Qur’an and the Bible fundamentally contradict one another. The most obvious item of conflict relates to whether Jesus died by crucifixion, denied by the Qur’an (Surah An-Nisa 157-158) but affirmed throughout the New Testament and indeed a cornerstone of New Testament theology. The Qur’an also repeatedly denies the core Biblical concept that Christ is the incarnate eternal Son of God, affirming instead that He is only a messenger or prophet (e.g. Surah Al-Maeda 75). The Qur’an, on multiple occasions, denies the Trinity (e.g. Surah An-Nisa 171; Surah Al-Maeda 73). The Qur’an, of course, repeatedly misrepresents Christian theology on these matters, as I discuss here, but this is immaterial to the issues that concern us here. If, then, the Christian Scriptures are indeed the inspired Word of God, the Muslim Scriptures cannot be, since the Qur’an so fundamentally disagrees with the theology of the Bible.
The Qur’an’s Affirmation of the Christian and Jewish Scriptures
For the Muslim to reject the conclusion of the argument, at least one of the three Premises must also be rejected. As I have shown, Premises 1 and 2 cannot be reasonably denied. What, then, of Premise 3? The Qur’an, over and over again, affirms the Christian Scriptures, claiming consistency with them, and asserting that the Torah and the Gospel (the “Injil”), and also the Psalms, are previous revelations from Allah. Consider, for example, the following verses.
- Surah Al-E-Imran (3) 3: “He has revealed to you the Book with the truth [i.e. the Qur’an], confirming what has been before it, and has sent down the Torah and the Injil.”
- Surah An-Nisa (4) 136: “O you who believe, do believe in Allah and His Messenger and in the Book He has revealed to His Messenger and in the Books He has revealed earlier. Whoever disbelieves in Allah and His angels and His Books and His Messengers and the Last Day has indeed gone far astray.”
- Surah An-Nisa (4) 163: “Surely, We have revealed to you [i.e. Muhammad] as We have revealed to Nuh and to the prophets after him; and We have revealed to Ibrahim, Isma’il, Ishaq, Ya’qub and their children, and to Isa, Ayyub, Yunus, Harun, and Salaiman, and We have given Zabur [i.e. the psalms] to Dawud.”
- Surah Al-Isra (17) 55-56: “Your Lord knows best about all those in the heavens and the earth, and We have certainly granted excellence to some prophets over some others, and We gave Dawud the Zabur (the Psalms). Say, “Call those who you assume (to be gods), besides Him, while they have no power to remove distress from you, nor to change it.”“
- Surah Al-Anbiya (21) 105: “And We have written in Zabur (Psalms) after the advice that the land will be inherited by My righteous slaves.”
The Qur’an even goes so far as to assert that the prophet Muhammad is prophesied in both the Old and New Testaments. Consider the following verses.
- Surah Al-Araf (7) 157: “Those who follow the Messenger, the Ummiyy (unlettered) prophet whom they find written with them in the Torah and the Injil and who bids the what is fair and forbids what is unfair, and makes lawful for the good things, and makes unlawful for the impure things, and relieves them of their burden, and of the shackles that were upon them. So, those who believe in him and support him, and help him and follow the light sent down with him, those are the ones who are successful.”
- Surah As-Saff (61) 6: Remember when Isa, son of Maryam, said, “O children of Isra’il, I am a messenger of Allah sent towards you, confirming the Torah that is (sent down) before me, and giving you the good news of a messenger who will come after me, whose name will be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with manifest signs, they said, “This is a clear magic.”
One will search in vain, however, to find any mention of Muhammad in any Biblical text. This has left Muslim apologists doing hermeneutic gymnastics to inject Muhammad somewhere into the Bible. All such attempts, however, have proven futile. One such attempt is the claim that the coming prophet like Moses, spoken of in Deuteronomy 18:15-19, is, in fact, Muhammad. Here’s the full text:
The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ And the Lord said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.
This argument, like the rest, is fraught with problems. The most damning of those is the context, which limits the word “brothers” of verse 15 and 18 to the Israelites. Verses 1-2 of Deuteronomy 18 clearly reveal who “brothers” refers to:
The Levitical priests, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the Lord’s food offerings as their inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the Lord is their inheritance, as he promised them.
Here, “brothers” can only refer to the Israelites. Since the prophet of verses 15-19 is to come from among the “brothers” of the Israelites, Muhammad is excluded as a contender for its fulfillment.
Another favorite is the Advocate or Helper promised by Jesus to the disciples in John 14 and 16. In John 14:15-16, we read the following words of Jesus:
If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
It is extremely difficult to read Muhammad into this text, since the promised Helper is said to be with Jesus’ followers forever and in them, something not accomplished by Muhammad. The Muslim interpretation also utterly ignores the overall context of the text. Jesus here is speaking to his disciples. If the promise refers to Muhammad, then it was fulfilled six hundred years later. Thus, everything said by Jesus to the disciples would not be relevant to them.
In John 15:26-27, we read more about this coming Helper:
But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.
Was Muhammad sent by Jesus? Does he proceed from the Father? Moreover, the disciples bearing witness is directly linked to the coming of the promised Helper, and thus the fulfillment of this promise must be found in the disciples to whom the promise was made. John 16:7-14 provides yet further difficulties:
Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
This text makes it even more clear that the Helper is sent by Jesus and comes to these specific disciples to whom Jesus is speaking. Muhammad did not come for a further six centuries. We are also told that the Helper will glorify Jesus. Muhammad certainly did not glorify Jesus.
One could proceed to go through all of the passages that Muslims typically cite as alleged prophecies concerning Muhammad. None of them, however, fare any better than these. Indeed, the two I have addressed above are the most often cited texts — the favorites of Muslim apologists.
Confronted with this obvious Qur’anic error about the contents of the Christian Scriptures, Muslim apologists will often attempt to argue that the Christian Scriptures have been corrupted, or that the “Injil” (the Gospel) refers to a special book given only to Jesus (whom the Qur’an calls “Isa”) which has left no record in history. As we shall see, however, neither the historical record, nor the Qur’an, allows for that possibility.
Has the Message of the Injil and Torah Been Corrupted or Lost?
Muslims cannot consistently maintain that the Scriptures delivered previously have been corrupted or lost, since the Qur’an appears to assume that these Scriptures are still with the “people of the book” (Christians and Jews). The case here is strong and the implications difficult to escape. Let’s take a look at some of these texts in the order that they appear in the Qur’an.
- Surah Al-Baqara (2) 91: “When it is said to them, “Believe in what Allah has revealed,” they say, “We believe in what has been revealed to us” — and they deny what is beyond it, whereas that is the truth which confirms what is with them. Say, “Why then have you been slaying the prophets of Allah earlier, if you were believers?””
This verse contends that the Scriptures previously revealed by Allah (i.e. the Torah and Injil) are “with them” (i.e. the people of the Book) at the time of the writing revealing of the Qur’an in the seventh century. If the Jews and Christians that the Qur’an is addressing didn’t have access to these Scriptures, the verse makes no sense. Here is another example which further illustrates this point:
- Surah Al-E-Imran (3) 70: “O people of the Book, why do you disbelieve in the verses of Allah while you are yourselves witnesses (to those verses)?”
Again, Christians and Jews are witnesses to the verses revealed in the previous Scriptures. The “you” of this verse clearly refers to the Christians and Jews of Muhammad’s day. Here’s another example from the same chapter:
- Surah Al-E-Imran (3) 199: “Surely, among the people of the Book there are those who believe in Allah and in what has been sent down to you and what has been sent to them, humbling themselves before Allah. They do not barter away the verses of Allah for paltry (worldly) gains. They have their reward with their Lord. Surely, Allah is swift at reckoning.”
Notice in the above verse the use of the plural personal pronoun “them”. The revelation from Allah was apparently sent not only to Jesus but to them (meaning, the people of the Book). Why, then, do Muslims frequently claim that the Injil was revealed only to Jesus?
Perhaps the most frequently cited verse in connection with this topic is the following text from the fifth chapter of the Qur’an:
- Surah Al-Maeda (5) 43-49: “How do they [i.e. the Jews] ask you to judge while the Torah is with them, having the ruling of Allah? Still, they turn away, after all that. They are no believers. Surely We have sent down the Torah, in which there was guidance and light by which the prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah, used to judge for the Jews, and (so did) the Men of Allah and the Men of knowledge, because they were ordained to protect the Book of Allah, and they stood guard over it. So, (O Jews of today,) do not fear people. Fear me, and do not take a paltry price for My verses. Those who do not judge according to what Allah has sent down are disbelievers. We prescribed for them therein: A life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear and a tooth for a tooth; and for wounds, an equal retaliation Then, if one forgives it, that will be expiation for him. Those who do not judge according to what Allah has sent down, they are the unjust. We sent Isa son of Maryam after those prophets, confirming the Torah that was (revealed) before him, and We gave him the Injil having guidance and light therein, and confirming the Torah that was (revealed) before it; a guidance and a lesson for the God-fearing. And the people of the Injil must judge according to what Allah has sent down therein. Those who do not judge according to what Allah has sent down, they are the sinners. We have sent down to you the Book with truth, confirming the Book before it, and a protector for it. So, judge between the according to what Allah has sent down, and do not follow their desires against the truth that has come to you. For each of you We have made a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made a single community of people, but (He did not), so that He may test you in what He has given to you. Strive, then to excel each other in good deeds. To Allah is the return for all of you. Then Allah shall tell you about that in which you disputed. We order you to judge between the according to what Allah has sent down. Do not follow their desires, and beware of them, lest they should turn away from some of what Allah has sent down to you. If they turn away, be assured that Allah intends to make the suffer for some of their sins. Surely, many of the people are sinners.”
How can Christians and Jews judge by what has been revealed in the Torah and Injil if they do not have access to those Scriptures? Again, the text assumes that the “people of the book” have access to the previously-revealed Scriptures. We go on:
- Surah Al-Maeda (5) 68: “Say, “O people of the Book, you have nothing to stand on, unless you uphold the Torah and the Injil and what has been sent down to you from your Lord.” What has been sent down to you from your Lord will certainly make many of the most persistent in rebellion and disbelief. So, do not grieve over the disbelieving people.”
Not only does this text command the “people of the Book” to uphold the Torah and the Injil (which they must have in their possession for the command to make sense), but they are told of the Scriptures that were previously “sent down to you“. Who does “you” refer to? In context, it can only refer to the people of the Book. This is difficult to square with the popular Islamic notion that the Injil was revealed only to Jesus and was quickly lost without leaving any trace in history. Again, this text assumes that the “people of the book” possess the Torah and the Injil and that they have been neither corrupted nor lost.
As if those weren’t enough, here’s one final example:
- Surah Yunus (10) 94: “So, (O prophet,) even if you are in doubt about what We have sent down to you, ask those who read the Book (revealed) before you. Surely, truth has come to you from your Lord, so never be among those who are suspicious.”
This text again makes no sense unless the Christians and Jews have access to the Books revealed before Muhammad. The Muslim contention that the Christian and Jewish Scriptures have been corrupted beyond recognition is simply without support from the Qur’an.
Was Jesus A Successful Preacher of Islam According to the Qur’an?
Muslims typically maintain that Jesus preached Islam, but was apparently not very successful in winning converts, because His message became quickly corrupted. Such a notion, however, is contrary to the text of the Qur’an. Let’s take a look at some more verses:
- Surah Al-E-Imran (3) 50-52: “I [Jesus] have come to you confirming that (book) which is (sent down) prior to me, that is, the Torah, and to are permissible for you some of what was prohibited to you. I have come to you with a sign fro your Lord So, fear Allah and obey me. Allah is surely my Lord and your Lord. So, worship Him. This is the straight path So, when Isa sensed disbelief in them, he said: “Who are my helpers in the way of Allah?” The disciples said: “We are helpers of Allah We believe in Allah; so be our witness that we are Muslims.”“
According to this text, Jesus was at least somewhat successful as a preacher of Islam and his own disciples themselves, at least some of whom — Peter, Matthew, John — are contributors to the New Testament. If these disciples were Muslims, why is their theology so strongly at odds with the Qur’an?
- Surah Al-E-Imran (3) 55: “When Allah said: “O Isa, I am to take you in full and to raise you towards myself, and to cleanse you of those who disbelieve, and to place those who follow you above those you disbelieve up to the Day of Doom. Then to Me is your return, whereupon I shall judge between you in that over which you have differed.”
In the above text, Allah promises Jesus that He will place those who follow him “above those who disbelieve up to the Day of Doom”. If barely anyone was a true follower of Jesus (i.e. a Muslim), then this text cannot be understood.
- Surah Al-Maeda (5) 110-111: “Call to mind the time when Allah will say “O Isa, son of Maryam, remember my blessing upon you and upon your mother; when I supported you with the Holy Spirit. You spoke to people while you were still in the cradle and when you grew to middle age. I taught you the Book and the Wisdom, the Torah and the Injil. You created from clay something in the shape of a bird, when you blew on it, and it became a bird by My leave. I kept the children of Isra’il away from you when you came to them with clear signs, and the disbelievers among them said, “This is a clear magic.” When I enjoined upon the disciples (of Jesus), “Believe in Me and in My Messenger,” they said, “We believed. Bear witness that we are the submitting ones.”“
This text again attests that the disciples of Jesus were Muslims. Interestingly, the story recounted in the above passage does not appear anywhere in the Bible, but can be traced to the Arabic infancy Gospel (dated to the sixth century) which Muhammad would have had access to. Indeed, I would argue that there is a strong case to be made for literary dependence on this apocryphal book. Here is the relevant text from the Arabic infancy Gospel 36:
Now, when the Lord Jesus had completed seven years from His birth, on a certain day He was occupied with boys of His own age. For they were playing among clay, from which they were making images of asses, oxen, birds, and other animals; and each one boasting of his skill, was praising his own work. Then the Lord Jesus said to the boys: The images that I have made I will order to walk. The boys asked Him whether then he were the son of the Creator; and the Lord Jesus bade them walk. And they immediately began to leap; and then, when He had given them leave, they again stood still. And He had made figures of birds and sparrows, which flew when He told them to fly, and stood still when He told them to stand, and ate and drank when He handed them food and drink. After the boys had gone away and told this to their parents, their fathers said to them: My sons, take care not to keep company with him again, for he is a wizard: flee from him, therefore, and avoid him, and do not play with him again after this.
Notice in particular how this passage ends. Jesus is accused of being a “wizard”. The Qur’an states that “the disbelievers among them said, “This is a clear magic.”” It seems probable that this source is where the author of the Qur’an is drawing from on this point.
We go on:
- Surah Ash-Shura (42) 13-14: “He has ordained for you people the same religion as He has enjoined upon Nuh, and that which We have revealed to you (O prophet) and that which We had enjoined upon Ibrahim and Musa and Isa by saying, “Establish the religion, and be not divided therein.” Arduous for the mushriks (polytheists) is that to which you are inviting them. Allah chooses (and pulls) toward Himself anyone He wills, and guides to Himself anyone who turns to Him (to seek guidance). And they were not divided, in jealousy with each other, but after the knowledge had come to them. Had it not been for a word that had come forth earlier from your Lord (and was effective) until a specified time, the matter would have been decided between them. And those who were made to inherit the Book after them are in confounding doubt about it.”
Who are “those who were made to inherit the Book after them”? Isn’t this referring to those who inherited the books of Abraham and Moses and Jesus (the three prophets listed in the above text)?
- Surah As-Saff (61) 14: “O you who believe, be supporters of (the religion of) Allah, just as Isa, son of Maryam, said to the Disciples, “Who are my supporters towards Allah?” The Disciples said, “We are the supporters of (the religion of) Allah.” So a group from the children of Isra’il believed, and another group disbelieved. Then we supported those who believed against their enemy, and they became victors.”
This text implies that a group from among the Jews believed the Islamic teachings of Jesus. Why, then, did they leave no trace in history? The final sentence (“Then we supported those who believed against their enemy, and they became victors”) is typically interpreted by commentators as being in reference to Christianity becoming the religion of the Roman empire in the fourth century A.D. If this is the case, why does the Christian religion that gained victory over the Roman empire look so different from Islam? The Christianity that became the dominant religion in the Roman empire maintained the deity of Christ and his death by crucifixion, two propositions expressly denied by the Qur’an.
Can Anyone Change Allah’s Words?
The Qur’an states plainly on several occasions that no one can alter or change the words of Allah and that Allah preserves and protects His words. Here’s what the Qur’an says:
- Surah Al-Anaam (6) 34: “Indeed, many messengers have been rejected before you [i.e. Muhammad], but they stood patient against their rejection, and they were persecuted until Our help came to them. No one can change the words of Allah, and of course, some accounts of the Messengers have already come to you.”
- Surah Al-Anaam (6) 115: “The Word of Your Lord is perfect in truth and justice. None is there to change His words, and He is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.”
- Surah Al-Hijr (15) 9: “We, Ourselves, have sent down the Dhikr (the Qur’an), and We are there to protect it.
- Surah Al-Kahf (18) 27: “And recite what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no one to change His words, and you will never find a refuge beside Him.”
Muslims are frequently telling us about the miraculous textual preservation of the Qur’an. As an aside, the notion that the text of the Qur’an as we possess it today perfectly resembles the Qur’an of the seventh century is demonstrably untrue — but that’s a subject for another day. My question for Muslims is thus: If Allah was able to perfectly preserve the text of the Qur’an, why wasn’t he able to do the same with the Bible? Do the above verses not apply equally to the previous revelations of Allah?
What Does The Historical Record Say About Biblical Textual Preservation?
As far as ancient texts go, the New Testament is the best attested of antiquity, based on the sheer volume of manuscripts (between 5 and 6 thousand Greek manuscripts) and the earliness of those manuscripts. Moreover, the earliest manuscripts we have demonstrate the existence not of a single line of corrupt transmission, but multiple lines of transmission with varying levels of accuracy. Multiple lines of transmission defy the possibility of being under the control of any central editing process. The burden of proof lies with the skeptic who asserts corruption of the primitive New Testament texts since the extant manuscripts show multiple lines of independent transmission. In any case, even if no New Testament manuscripts were preserved, we would still be able to construct the vast majority of the New Testament from quotations by early church fathers.
Conclusion
To conclude, the argument developed above represents a formidable challenge to the Islamic religion, and I challenge any Muslim to show me where I have erred. In order to maintain his Islamic faith, a Muslim must reject one or more of the Premises of the syllogism given at the start of this article. If he cannot do so, the conclusion follows necessarily and inescapably.
Excellent article and iron clad logic. Mo, in trying to cover his butt shot himself in the foot!
The “cult” of Jehovah’s Witnesses which is so strong in its condemnation of the orthodox
Trinitarians, for playing with the “Word of God,” is itself playing the same game of semantic gymnastics. In the article under review – “50 000 ERRORS IN THE BIBLE?” – they say: “there are probably 50 000 errors…errors that have crept into the Bible text…50 000 such serious (?) errors…most of those so-called errors…as a whole the Bible is accurate.” (!)
We do not have the time to go into the tens of thousands of – grave or minor – defects that
the authors of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) have attempted to revise. We leave that
privilege to the Christian scholars of the Bible. Here I will endeavour to cast just a cursory
glance at a “half-a-dozen” or so of those “minor” changes.
1. “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a VIRGIN shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14 – AV)
The indispensable “VIRGIN” in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase “a young woman,” which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word almáh.
Almáh is the word which has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT bethulah which means VIRGIN. This correction is only to be found in the English language translation, as the RSV is only published in this tongue. For the African and the Afrikaner, the Arab and the Zulu, in fact, in the 1500 other languages of the world, Christians are made to continue to swallow the misnomer “VIRGIN.”
BEGOTTEN, NOT MADE
“Jesus is the only beggten son of God, begotten not made,” is an adjunct of the orthodox
catechism, leaning for support on the following:
2. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only BEGOTTEN son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John
3:16 – AV)
No priest worth his cloth would fail to quote “the only BEGOTTEN of the Father!” when
preaching to a prospective convert. But this fabrication – “BEGOTTEN” – has now been
unceremoniously excised by the Bible Revisers, without a word of excuse. They are as silent
as church-mice and would not draw the readers attention to their furtive excision. This
blasphemous word “BEGOTTEN” was another of the many such interpolations in the “Holy
Bible.” God Almighty condemned this blasphemy in the strongest terms soon after its
innovation. He did not wait for 2000 years for Bible scholars to reveal the fraud.
The Muslim world should congratulate the “Fifty cooperating denominations” of
Christendom and their Brains Trust the “Thirty-two scholars of the highest eminence”
for bringing their Holy Bible a degree nearer to the Qur-ánic truth.
“CHRISTIAN MES-A-MATHICS”
3. “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER, the WORD, and
the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one.” (1st Epistle of John 5:7 – AV)
This verse is the closest approximation to what you Christians call their Holy Trinity in the
encyclopaedia called the BIBLE. This key-stone of the Christian faith has also been scrapped
from the RSV without even a semblance of explanation. It has been a pious fraud all along and well-deservedly has it been expunged in the RSV for the English speaking people. But for the 1499 remaining language groups of the world who read the Christian concoctions in their mother tongues, the fraud remains. These people will never know the truth until the Day of Judgement. However, we Muslims must again congratulate the galaxy of D.D.’s who have been honest enough to eliminate another lie from the English (RSV) Bible, thus bringing their Holy Book yet another step closer to the teachings of Islam. For the Holy Quŕán says:
THE ASCENSION
One of the most serious of those “grave defects” which the authors of the RSV had tried to rectify concerned the Ascension of Christ. There have been only two references in the Canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and of John to the most stupendous event in
Christianity – OF JESUS BEING TAKEN UP INTO HEAVEN. These two references were obtained in every Bible in every language, prior to 1952, when the RSV first appeared. These were:
4a. “So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was TAKEN UP
INTO HEAVEN, and sat down at the right hand of God.” (Mark 16:19)
4b. “While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was CARRIED UP
INTO HEAVEN.” (Luke 24:51)
You will be shocked to note that Mark 16 ends at verse 8, and after an embarrassing
expanse of blank space the missing verses appear in “small print” as a footnote at the bottom of the page. If you can lay your hand on a RSV 1952, you will find the last six words of 4b above, i.e. “AND WAS CARRIED UP INTO HEAVEN” replaced by a tiny “a” to tell you to see the footnote if you please, where you will find these missing words. Every honest
Christian has to admit that he does not consider any footnote in any Bible as the Word of God. Why should the paid servants of Christianity consign the mightiest miracle of their religion to a mere footnote?
From the Chart – “The Origin and Growth of the English Bible” – appearing on page 20, you will note that all the Biblical “Versions” prior to the Revised Version of 1881 were dependent upon the ANCIENT COPIES – those dating only five or six hundred years after Jesus. The Revisers of the RSV 1952, were the first Bible scholars who were able to tap the “MOST Ancient Copies” fully, dating three and four centuries after Christ. We agree that the closer to the source the more authentic is the document. Naturally “MOST” Ancient deserves credence more than mere “ANCIENT.” But not finding a word about Jesus being “taken up” or “carried up” into heaven in the MOST ANCIENT manuscripts, the
Christian fathers expurgated those references from the RSV 1952.
THE DONKEY CIRCUS
The above facts are a staggering confession by Christendom that the “inspired” authors of the
Canonical Gospels did not record a single word about the ASCENSION of Jesus. Yet these
“inspired” authors were unanimous in recording that their Lord and Saviour rode a donkey into Jerusalem as his mission drew to a close.
“. . . and they sat him thereon.” (The “… and he sat upon him.” (The Donkey)
Donkey) (Matt. 21:7)(Mark 11:7)
“. . . and they set Jesus”… Jesus … sat thereon:” (The Donkey
thereon.” ((The Donkey) (Luke 19:35)(John 12:14)
Could God Almighty have been the author of this incongrous situation – going out of His Way to see that all the Gospel writers did not miss their footing recording His “son’s” donkey-ride into the Holy City – and yet “inspiring” them to black-out the news about His “son’s” heavenly flight on the wings of angels?
NOT FOR LONG!
The hot-gospellers and the Bible-thumpers were too slow in catching the joke. By the
time they realised that the corner-stone of their preaching – THE ASCENSION OF JESUS – had
been undermined as a result of Christian Biblical erudition, the publishers of the RSV had already raked in a nett profit of 15 000 000 dollars! (Fifteen Million). The propagandists made a big hue and cry, and with the backing of two denominational committees out of the fifty,forced the Publishers to re-incorporate the interpolations into the “INSPIRED” Word of God. In every new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was
“RESTORED TO THE TEXT.”
It is an old, old game. The Jews and Christians have been editing their “Book of God” from its
very inception. The difference between them and the ancient forgerers is that the ancient
forgers did not know the art of writing “prefaces” and “footnotes”, otherwise they too would have told us as clearly as our modern heroes have about their tampering, and their glib excuses for transmuting forged currency into glittering gold.
“MANY PROPOSALS FOR MODIFICATION WERE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE BY
INDIVIDUALS AND BY TWO DENOMINATIONAL COMMITTEES. ALL OF THESE WERE GIVEN
CAREFUL ATTENTION BY THE COMMITTEE.
“TWO PASSAGES, THE LONGER ENDING OF MARK (16:9-20) … AND LUKE 24:51 ARE
RESTORED TO THE TEXT.” (Preface – Collins’ pages vi and vii)
“Why ‘restored'”? Because they had been previously expunged! Why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place? The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all. They were interpolations similar to 1 John 5:7 about the Trinity. Why eliminate one and re-instate the other? Do not be surprised!
By the time you lay your hands on a RSV, the “Committee” might also have decided to
expunge the whole of their invaluable Preface. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have already
eliminated 27 revealing pages of their FOERWORD to their “New World Translation of the CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES,” (this is their way of saying – New Testament).
The Rev. C. I. Scofield D. D. with a team of 8 Consulting Editors, also all D.D.’s, in the
“Scofield Reference Bible,” thought it appropriate to spell the Hebrew word
“Elah” (meaning God) alternatively as “Alah.” The Christians had thus swallowed the camel
– they seemed to have accepted at last that the name of God is Allah – but were still straining
at the gnat by spelling Allah with one “L”!
showing the word “ALAH” is preserved here for posterity on page 22). References were
made in public lectures to this fact by the author of this booklet. Believe me, the subsequent
“Scofield Reference Bible” has retained word for word the whole commentary of Genesis
1:1, but has, by a clever sleight-of-hand, blotted out the word “Alah” altogether. There is
not even a gap where the word “Alah” once used to be. This is in the Bible of the orthodox!
One is hard pressed to keep up with their jugglery.
Mrs. Ellen G. White, a “prophetess” of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, in her Bible
Commentary Vol 1, page 14, has this confession to make about the fallibility of the “Holy
Bible.” “THE BIBLE WE READ TODAY IS THE WORK OF MANY COPYISTS WHO HAVE IN MOST INSTANCES DONE THEIR WORK WITH MARVELLOUS ACCURACY. BUT COPYISTS HAVE NOT BEEN INFALLIBLE, AND GOD MOST EVIDENTLY HAS NOT SEEN FIT TO PRESERVE THEM
ALTOGETHER FROM ERROR IN TRANSCRIBING.” In the following pages of her commentary,
Mrs White testifies further: “I SAW THAT GOD HAD ESPECIALLY GUARDED THE BIBLE,” (from
what?) “YET WHEN COPIES OF IT WERE FEW, LEARNED MEN HAD IN SOME INSTANCES CHANGED THE WORDS, THINKING THAT THEY WERE MAKING IT PLAIN, WHEN IN REALITY THEY WERE MYSTIFYING THAT WHICH WAS PLAIN, BY CAUSING IT TO LEAN TO THEIR
ESTABLISHED VIEWS, WHICH WERE GOVERNED BY TRADITION.”
The mental malady is a cultivated one. This authoress and her followers can still trumpet
from roof tops that “Truly, the Bible is the infallible Word of God.” “Yes, it is
adulterated, but pure.” “It is human, yet divine.” Do words have any meaning in their
language? Yes, they have in their courts of law, but not in their theology. They carry a “poetic license” in their preaching.
The most vociferous of all the Bible-thumpers are the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
“IN COPYING THE INSPIRED ORIGINALS BY HAND THE ELEMENT OF HUMAN FRAILTY
ENTERED IN, AND SO NONE OF THE THOUSANDS OF COPIES EXTANT TODAY IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE ARE PERFECT DUPLICATES. THE RESULT IS THAT NO TWO COPIES ARE EXACTLY ALIKE.” Now you see, why the whole “foreword” of 27 pages is eliminated from their Bibles. Allah was making them to hang themselves with their own erudition.
Out of over four thousand differing manuscripts the Christians boast about, the Church fathers just selected four which tallied with their prejudices and called them Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. We will deal with each of them in their proper place. Here, let us go over the conclusion of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ research as recorded in the now expunged Foreword:
“THE EVIDENCE IS, THEREFORE, THAT THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES HAS BEEN TAMPERED WITH, THE SAME AS THE TEXT OF THE LXX HAS BEEN,”
Yet this incorrigible Cult has the effrontery to publish 9 000 000 (Nine Million) copies as a
First Edition of a 192-page book entitled – “Is the Bible REALLY the Word of God?” We
are dealing here with a sick mentality, for no amount of tampering, as they say, will
“APPRECIABLY AFFECT THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE BIBLE” (?). This is Christian logic.
Dr. Graham Scroggie in his aforementioned book, pleads, on page 29, for the Bible:-
“AND LET US BE PERFECTLY FAIR AS WE PURSUE THE SUBJECT, (Is the Bible the Word of God?). BEARING IN MIND THAT WE ARE TO HEAR WHAT THE BIBLE HAS TO SAY ABOUT ITSELF. IN A COURT OF LAW WE ASSUME THAT A WITNESS WILL SPEAK THE TRUTH, AND MUST ACCEPT WHAT HE SAYS UNLESS WE HAVE GOOD GROUNDS FOR SUSPECTING HIM, OR CAN PROVE HIM A LIAR. SURELY THE BIBLE SHOULD BE GIVEN THE SAME OPPORTUNITY
TO BE HEARD, AND SHOULD RECEIVE A LIKE PATIENT HEARING.”
The plea is fair and reasonable. We will do exactly as he asks and let the Bible speak for
itself.
In the first five books of the Bible – Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and
Deuteronomy – there are more than 700 statements which prove not only that God is NOT the Author of these books, but that EVEN Moses himself had no hand in them. Open these
books at random and you will see:
“Andthe Lord said unto him, Away, get thee down…”
“AndMoses said unto the Lord, the people cannot come…”
“Andthe Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people…”
“Andthe Lord spake unto Moses, saying…”
“Andthe Lord said unto Moses, Get down, charge the…”
It is manifest and apparent that these are NEITHER the Words of God NOR of Moses. They indicate the voice of a third person writing from hearsay.
Could Moses had been a contributor to his own obituary before his demise? Did the Jews
write their own obituaries? “So Moses … DIED … And he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM
(Moses) … he was 120 years old when he DIED … And there arose not a prophet
SINCE in Israel like unto Moses …” (Deut. 34:5-10). We will analyze the rest of the Old
Testament presently from other angles.
The question is: “Do you accept that the Bible is God’s Word?”
Let’s begin with the “Douay,” Roman Catholic Version of the Bible I ask, “Do YOU
accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?” For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic
Truth Society have published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form. This
version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today.
The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609.
As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today.
Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the “cults”* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra “books” which they comtemptuously refer to as the “apocrypha,” i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as “Revelation” by the Protestants), it is “revealed”:
“…If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the
plagues written in this Book.” (Revelation 22:18-19)
But who cares! They do not really believe! The protestants have bravely expunged seven
whole books from their Book of God! The outcasts are:
TheBookofJudith
TheBookofTobias
TheBookofBaruch
TheBookofEsther, etc
Sir Winston Churchill has pertinent things to say about the Authorised Version (AV) of the
Protestant Bible, which is also widely known known as the “King James Version (KJV).
“THE AUTHORISED VERSION OF THE BIBLE WAS PUBLISHED IN 1611 BY THE WILL AND COMMAND OF HIS MAJESTY KING JAMES THE 1ST WHOSE NAME IT BEARS TILL TODAY.”
The Roman Catholics, believing as they do that the Protestants have mutilated the Book of
God, are yet aiding and abetting the Protestant “crime” by forcing their native converts to purchase the Authorised Version (AV) of the Bible, which is the only Bible available in some 1500 languages of the lesser developed nations of the world. The Roman catholics milk their cows, but the feeding is left to the Protestants! The overwhelming majority of Christians -both Catholics and Protestant – use the Authorised (AV) or the King James Version (KJV) as it is alternatively called.
First published, as Sir Winston says, in 1611, and then revised in 1881 (RV), and now re-
revised and brought up to date as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952, and now
again re-re-revised in 1971 (still RSV for short). Let us see what opinion Christendom has of this most revised Bible, the RSV:-
“THE FINEST VERSION WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN THE PRESENT CENTURY.” – (Church of England Newspaper)
“A COMPLETELY FRESH TRANSLATION BY SCHOLARS OF THE HIGHEST EMINENCE.” – (Times Literary Supplement)
“THE WELL-LOVED CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHORISED VERSION COMBINED WITH A NEW ACCURACY OF TRANSLATION.” – (Life and Work)
“THE MOST ACCURATE AND CLOSE RENDERING OF THE ORIGINAL” – (The Times)
The publishers (Collins) themselves, in their notes on the Bible at the end of their production, say on page 10: THIS BIBLE (RSV) IS THE PRODUCT OF THIRTY-TWO SCHOLARS, ASSISTED BY AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTING FIFTY CO-OPERATING DENOMINATIONS.” Why all this boasting? To make the gullible public buy their product? All these testimonies convince the purchaser that he is backing the right horse, with the purchaser little suspecting that he is being taken for a ride.
But what about the Authorised Version of the Bible (AV), the “World’s Best Seller?” These
Revisers, all good salesmen, have some very pretty things to say about it. However, their
page iii, paragraph six of the PREFACE of the RSV reads:*
“THE KING JAMES VERSION (alternative description of AV) HAS WITH GOOD REASON BEEN TERMED ‘THE NOBLEST MONUMENT OF ENGLISH PROSE.’ ITS REVISERS IN 1881
EXPRESSED ADMIRATION FOR ‘ITS SIMPLICITY, ITS DIGNITY, ITS POWER, ITS HAPPY TURNS OF EXPRESSION…THE MUSIC OF ITS CADENCES, AND THE FELICITIES OF ITS RHYTHM.’ IT ENTERED, AS NO OTHER BOOK HAS, INTO THE MAKING OF THE PERSONAL CHARACTER AND THE PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES. WE OWE IT AN INCALCULABLE DEBT.”
Can you, dear reader, imagine a more magnificent tribute being paid to the “Book of Books” than the above? I, for one, cannot. Let the believing Christain, now steel himself for the unkindest blow of all from his own beloved Lawyers of Religion; for in the very same breath they say:
YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS.” And, “THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .” This is straight from the horse’s mouth, i.e. the orthodox Christian scholars of “the highest eminence.” Another galaxy of Doctors of Divinity are now required to produce an encyclopaedia explaining the cause of those GRAVE AND SERIOUS DEFECTS in their Holy Writ and their reasons for eliminating them.
Lesson Two :
We Muslims have no hesitation in acknowledging that in the Bible, there three different kinds of witnessing recognizable
without any need of specialized training. These are:
1. You will be able to recognize in the Bible what may be described as “The Word of
God.”
2. You also be able to discern what can be described as the “Words of a Prophet of
God.”
3. And you will most readily observe that the bulk of the Bible is the records of eye
witnesses or ear witnesses, or people writing from hearsay. As such they are the
“Words of a Historian.”
You do not have to hunt for examples of these different types of evidences in the Bible. The
following quotations will make the position crystal clear:
The First Type:
a.will raise them up a prophet…andwill put my words in…and he shall speak unto them that shall command him.” (Deuteronomy 18:18)
b.evenam the Lord, and besidethere is no saviour.” (Isaiah 43:11)
c. Look untoand be ye saved, all the end of the earth: foram God, and there
is non else” (Isaiah 45:22)
Note the first person pronoun singular (encircled) in the above references, and without any difficulty you will agree that the statements seem to have the sound of being GOD’S WORD.
The Second Type:
a. “Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, Lama sabachtani?…” (Matthew 27:46)
b. “And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:” (Mark 12:29)
c. ” And Jesus said unto him, why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God.” (Mark 10:18).
Even a child will be able to affirm that: Jesus “cried,” Jesus “answered,” and Jesus “said,”
are the words of the one to whom they are attributed, i.e. the WORDS OF A PROPHET OF GOD.
The Third Type:
“And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he, (JESUS) came, if haply he (JESUS)
might find anything thereon: and when he (JESUS) came to it, he (JESUS) found nothing
but leaves…” (Mark 11:13)
The bulk of the Bible is a witnessing of this THIRD kind. These are the words of a third
person. Note the pronouns. They are not the Words of God or of His prophet, but the WORDS OF A HISTORIAN.
For the Muslim it is quite easy to distinguish the above types of evidence, because we also
have them in our own faith. But of the followers of the different religions, we are the most fortunate in this that his various records are contained in separate Books!
ONE: The first kind – THE WORD OF GOD – is found in a book called The Holy
Quŕ-án.
TWO: The second kind – THE WORDS OF THE PROPHET OF GOD, (Muhammad,
may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are recorded in the books of Tradition called The Hadith.
THREE: Evidence of the third kind abounds in different volume of Islamic history, written by some of high integrity and learning, and others of less trustworthiness, but the Muslim advisedly keeps his Books in separate volumes!
The Muslim keeps the above three types of evidence jealously apart, in our proper
gradations of authority. We never equates them. On the other hand, the “Holy Bible” contains a motley type of literature, which composes the embarrassing kind, the sordid, and the obscene – all under the same cover – A Christian is forced to concede equal spiritual impor and authority to all, and is unfortunate in this regard.
Before we scrutinize the various versions , let us clarify our own belief regarding the Books of God. When we muslims say that we believe in the Tauraat, the Zaboor, the Injeel and the Quŕán . We already know that the Holy Quŕ-án is the infallible Word of God, revealed to our Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammed Mustapha (Peace be upon him) word for word, through the agency of the Archangel Jibraeel, (known as Gabriel in English), and perfectly preserved and protected from human tampering for the past fourteen hundred years!
The Taurat we Muslims believe in is not the “Torah” of the Jews and the Christians though
the words – one Arabic, the other Hebrew – are the same. We believe that whatever the Holy Prophet Moses (Peace be upon him) preached to his people, was the revelation from God Almighty, but that Moses was not the author of those “books” attributed to him by the Jews
and the Christians.
Likewise we believe that the Zaboor was the revelation of God granted to Hazrat Dawood
(David) (Peace be upon him), but that the present Psalms associated with his name are not that revelation. The Christians themselves do not insist that David is the sole author of “his” Psalms.
INGEEL means the “Gospel” or “good news” which Jesus Christ preached during his short ministry. The “Gospel” writers often mention that Jesus going about and preaching the Gospel (the Injeel):
1. “And Jesus went…preaching the gospel,… and healing every disease among the
people.” (Matthew 9:35)
2. “…but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save
it.” (Mark 8:35)
3. “…preached the gospel…” (Luke 20:1)
The “gospel” is a frequently-used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The
Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel “according” to (St.) Jesus himself! We sincerely believe that everything Christ (May the peace and blessings of God be upon him) preached was from God. That was the Injeel, the good news and the guidance of God for the Children of Israel. In his life-time Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did he instruct anyone to do so. What passes off as the “GOSPELS” today are the works of anonymous hands!
Its a pity that I stumbled on this article as such a late stage, but I am here as a muslims to prove to you that all your verses quoted from the Quraan, has either been taken out of context, misinterpreted or just merely misunderstood, not knowing the whole content of the Quraan.
So I hope my reply will give you some insight and clear up the misconception, however I would like to state that the statement whether the bible is the word of God then Quraan is not and vice versa is the worst conclusion ever created.
Please bare with me its rather long, but informative and lots of hard work in order to have written it. This comment is solely for the creator of this article.
Lesson One :
Open up Deuteronomy, chapter 18, 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; and he shall speak unto
them all that I shall command him.
“To whom does this prophecy refer?”
Jesus ? (like unto thee), – LIKE YOU –
like Moses, and Jesus is like
Moses. “In which way is Jesus like Moses?”
“In the first place Moses was a JEW and Jesus was also a JEW; secondly
Moses was a PROPHET and Jesus was also a PROPHET – therefore Jesus is
like Moses and that is exactly what God had foretold Moses – “Can you think of any other similarities between Moses and Jesus?” “If these are the only two criteria for discovering a candidate for this prophecy of
Deuteronomy 18:18, then in that case the criteria could fit any one of the
following Biblical personages after Moses: – Solomon, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel,
Hosea, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist etc., because they were also ALL Jews
as well as Prophets. Why should we not apply this prophecy to any one of these prophets, and why only to Jesus? “You see, my conclusions are that Jesus is most unlike Moses, and if I am wrong I would like you to correct me.”
In the FIRST place Jesus is not like Moses, because, according to you – ‘JESUS IS A GOD’, but Moses is not God “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses!
“SECONDLY, according to you – ‘JESUS DIED FOR THE SINS OF THE
WORLD’, but Moses did not have to die for the sins of the world. “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses!”
“THIRDLY, according to you – ‘JESUS WENT TO HELL FOR THREE DAYS’, but
Moses did not have to go there. Is this true?”
1) “Moses had a father and a mother. Muhummed also had a father and a
mother. But Jesus had only a mother, and no human father.
“Therefore Jesus is not like
Moses, but Muhummed is like Moses!
(2) “Moses and Muhummed were born in the normal, natural course, i.e. the
physical association of man and woman; but Jesus was created by a special
miracle. You will recall that we are told in the Gospel of St. Matthew 1:18.” ‘.
. . . . . BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER, (Joseph the Carpenter and Mary)
SHE WAS FOUND WITH CHILD BY THE HOLY GHOST.’ And St. Luke tells
us that when the good news of the birth of a holy son was announced to her,
Mary reasoned: ‘. . . . . HOW SHALL THIS BE, SEEING I KNOW NOT A MAN?
AND THE ANGEL ANSWERED AND SAID UNTO HER, THE HOLY GHOST SHALL
COME UPON THEE, AND THE POWER OF THE HIGHEST SHALL OVERSHADOW
THEE: . . . . .’ (Luke 1:35).
“Is it true that Jesus was born miraculously as against the natural birth of Moses and
Muhammed?” “Therefore Jesus is not
like Moses, but Muhummed is like Moses. And God says to Moses in the
Book of Deuteronomy 18:18 “LIKE UNTO THEE” (Like You, Like Moses) and
Muhummed is like Moses.”
(3) “Moses and Muhummed married and begat children, but Jesus remained
a bachelor all his life. Therefore Jesus is not like Moses, but Muhummed is like Moses.”
(4) “Moses and Muhummed were accepted as prophets by their people in
their very lifetime.
No doubt the Jews gave endless trouble to Moses and they murmured in the
wilderness, but as a nation, they acknowledged that Moses was a Messenger
of God sent to them. The Arabs too made Muhammed’s life impossible. He
suffered very badly at their hands. After 13 years of preaching in Mecca, he
had to emigrate from the city of his birth. But before his demise, the Arab
nation as a whole accepted him as the Messenger of Allah. But according to
the Bible – ‘He (Jesus) CAME UNTO HIS OWN, BUT HIS OWN RECEIVED HIM
NOT.’ (John 1:11). And even today, after two thousand years, his
people – the Jews, as a whole, have rejected him. Is this true?: “THEREFORE JESUS IS NOT LIKE MOSES,
BUT MUHUMMED IS LIKE MOSES.”
(5) “Moses and Muhummed were prophets as well as kings. By prophet I
mean a man who receives Divine Revelation for the Guidance of Man and this guidance he conveys to God’s creatures as received without any addition or deletion. A king is a person who has the power of life and death over his people. It is immaterial whether the person wears a crown or not, or whether
he was ever addressed as king or monarch: if the man has the prerogative of inflicting capital punishment – HE IS A KING. Moses possessed such a power. Do you remember the Israelite who was found picking up firewood on
Sabbath Day, and Moses had him stoned to death? (Numbers 15:36). There
are other crimes also mentioned in the Bible for which capital punishment
was inflicted on the Jews at the behest of Moses. Muhummed too, had the
power of life and death over his people. There are instances in the Bible of
persons who were given the gift of prophecy only, but they were not in a
position to implement their directives. Some of these holy men of God who were helpless in the face of stubborn rejection of their message were the prophets Lot, Jonah, Daniel, Ezra, and John the Baptist. They could only deliver the message, but
could not enforce the Law. The Holy Prophet Jesus unfortunately also
belonged to this category. The Christian Gospel clearly confirms this: when
Jesus was dragged before the Roman Governor, Pontius Pilate, charged for
sedition, Jesus made a convincing point in his defence to refute the false
charges: ‘JESUS ANSWERED, ‘MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD’: IF
MY KINGDOM WERE OF THIS WORLD, THEN WOULD MY SERVANTS FIGHT,
THAT I SHOULD NOT BE DELIVERED TO THE JEWS; BUT NOW IS MY
KINGDOM NOT FROM HENCE’ (John 18:36). This convinced Pilate (a Pagan)
that though Jesus might not be in full possession of his mental faculty, he did
not strike him as being a danger to his rule. Jesus claimed a spiritual
kingdom only; in other words he only claimed to be a prophet. “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses but Muhummed is like Moses.”
(6) “Moses and Muhummed brought new laws and new regulations for their
people. Moses not only gave the Ten Commandments to the Israelites, but a
very comprehensive ceremonial law for the guidance of his people.
Muhummed comes to a people steeped in barbarism and ignorance. They
married their stepmothers; they buried their daughters alive; drunkeness,
adultery, idolatry, and gambling where the order of the day. Gibbon
describes the Arabs before Islam in his “Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire”, ‘THE HUMAN BRUTE, ALMOST WITHOUT SENSE, IS POORLY
DISTINGUISHED FROM THE REST OF THE ANIMAL CREATION.’ There was
hardly anything to distinguish between the “man” and the “animal” of the
time; they were animals in human form.
From this abject barbarism, Muhummed elevated them, ‘into torch-bearers of light and learning.’ “TO THE
ARAB NATION IT WAS AS A BIRTH FROM DARKNESS INTO LIGHT.
ARABIA FIRST BECAME ALIVE BY MEANS OF IT. A POOR SHEPHERD
PEOPLE, ROAMING UNNOTICED IN ITS DESERTS SINCE THE
CREATION OF THE WORLD. SEE, THE UNNOTICED BECOMES WORLD
NOTABLE, THE SMALL HAS GROWN WORLD-GREAT. WITHIN ONE
CENTURY AFTERWARDS ARABIA WAS AT GRANADA ON ONE HAND
AND AT DELHI ON THE OTHER. GLANCING IN VALOUR AND
SPLENDOUR, AND THE LIGHT OF GENIUS, ARABIA SHINES OVER A
GREAT SECTION OF THE WORLD . . . . . .” The fact is that Muhummed
gave his people a Law and Order they never had before.
As regards Jesus, when the Jews felt suspicious of him that he might be an
imposter with designs to pervert their teachings, Jesus took pains to assure
them that he had not come with a new religion – no new laws and no new
regulations. I quote his own words: ‘THINK NOT THAT I HAVE COME TO
DESTROY THE LAW, OR THE PROPHETS: I AM NOT COME TO DESTROY, BUT
TO FULFIL. FOR VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, TILL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS,
ONE JOT OR ONE TITTLE SHALL IN NO WISE PASS FROM THE LAW, TILL ALL
BE FULFILLED.’ (Matthew 5:17-18). In other words he had not come with
any new laws or regulations; he came only to fulfil the old law. This is what
he gave the Jews to understand – unless he was speaking with the tongue in
his cheek trying to bluff the Jews into accepting him as a man of God and by
subterfuge trying to ram a new religion down their throats. No! This
Messenger of God would never resort to such foul means to subvert the
Religion of God. He himself fulfilled the laws. He observed the
commandments of Moses, and he respected the Sabbath. At no time did a
single Jew point a finger at him to say, ‘why don’t you fast’ or ‘why don’t you wash your hands
before you break bread’, which charges they always levied against his
disciples, but never against Jesus. This is because as a good Jew he
honoured the laws of the prophets who preceded him. In short, he had
created no new religion and had brought no new law like Moses and
Muhummed. “Therefore, Jesus is not like Moses but Muhummed is like
Moses.”
(7) “Both Moses and Muhummed died natural deaths, but according to
Christianity, Jesus was violently killed on the cross. “Therefore Jesus is not like Moses but
Muhummed is like Moses.”
(8) “Moses and Muhummed both lie buried on earth, but according to you,
Jesus rests in heaven. : “Therefore
Jesus is not like Moses but Muhummed is like Moses.”
so far what I have done is to prove only one point out of the
whole prophecy – that is proving the phrase ‘LIKE UNTO THEE’ – ‘like you’ –
‘like Moses’. The prophecy is much more than this single phrase which reads
as follows: “I WILL RAISE THEM UP A PROPHET FROM AMONG THEIR
BRETHREN LIKE UNTO THEE . . . . . .” The emphasis is on the words –
‘From among their brethren.’ Moses and his people, the Jews, are here
adressed as a racial entity, and as such their ‘brethren’ would undoubtedly be the Arabs. You see, the Holy Bible speaks of Abraham as the “Friend of
God”. Abraham had two wives – Sarah and Hagar. Hagar bore Abraham a
son – HIS FIRST-BORN – ‘ . . . . . . And Abraham called HIS SON’S
name, which Hagar bore, Ishmael.’ (Genesis16:15). ‘And Abraham
took Ishmael HIS SON . . . . . .” (Genesis 17:23). ‘And Ishmael HIS
SON was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of
his foreskin.’ (Genesis 17:25). Up to the age of THIRTEEN Ishmael was the
ONLY son and seed of Abraham, when the covenant was ratified between
God and Abraham. God grants Abraham another son through Sarah, named
Isaac, who was very much the junior to his brother Ishmael.
If Ishmael and Isaac are the sons of the same father Abraham, then they are
brothers. And so the children of the one are the BRETHREN of the
children of the other. The children of Isaac are the Jews and the children
of Ishmael are the Arabs – so they are BRETHREN to one another. The Bible
affirms, ‘AND HE (ISHMAEL) SHALL DWELL IN THE PRESENCE OF ALL HIS
BRETHREN.’ (Genesis 16:12). ‘AND HE (ISHMAEL) DIED IN THE PRESENCE
OF ALL HIS BRETHREN.’ (Genesis 25:18). The children of Isaac are the
brethren of the Ishmaelites. In like manner Muhummed is from among the
brethren of the Israelites because he was a descendant of Ishmael the son of
Abraham. This is exactly as the prophecy has it – ‘FROM AMONG THEIR
BRETHREN’. (Deut. 18:18). The the prophecy distinctly mentions that the
coming prophet who would be like Moses, must arise NOT from the ‘children
of Israel’ or from ‘among themselves’, but from among their brethren.
MUHUMMED THEREFORE WAS FROM AMONG THEIR BRETHREN!
Words in the Mouth
The prophecy proceeds further: ‘. . . . . . AND I WILL PUT MY WORDS INTO
HIS MOUTH . . . . . .’ What does it mean when it is said ‘I will put my
words in your mouth’? if I had asked you
to read, and if you had read: would I be putting my words into your mouth?”If I were to teach you ª language like Arabic about which you have no knowledge, and if I asked you
to read or repeat after me what I utter i.e.
1. SAY: HE IS ALLAH THE ONE AND ONLY;
2. ALLAH, THE ETERNAL ABSOLUTE;
3. HE BEGETTETH NOT, NOR IS HE BEGOTTEN:
4. AND THERE IS NONE LIKE UNTO HIM
(Holy Qur’an 112:1-4)
Would I not be putting these unheard words of a foreign tongue which you
utter, into your mouth?” the words of the Holy Qur’an, the Revelation
vouchsafed by the Almighty God to Muhummed, were revealed.
Dear Sir, please contact this guy called Zakir Naik. Seek him out. You seem to be a person wanting to know the truth. Seek the man I have mentioned. He is an Indian. But he travels extensively. Have a debate with him. Present your questions to him. Detail your responses too. If you want to know the truth about anything, he will try to help you out. Or at least guide you. He happens to be a renowned speaker on the subject of comparative religions.
Michael, from reading your comments in response to this post I´m pretty sure you fail to understand 2 very simple but also very important concepts of the Christian faith.
1- We are saved by trusting in Jesus´s works, not by knowing He exists. This is what faith means
2- !No one! is saved except through faith in Jesus
This post by Jonathan has nothing to do about being against the Muslin faith, but only to show how the tenets of their religion are misleading and opposite in character to the truth that Jesus IS. The same can be said about JWitnesses or Mormons, etc.
I wonder (not truly, your words are clear) if you realise by now that every second you spent “bridging the gap” with you interfaith relationships with the muslin believers, another muslin dies and gets sent to hell because you´re not doing what you were called by God to do: preach the truth of the Gospel and the exclusivity of Jesus of the Christian Scriptures in Man salvation to every living human on this planet.
Michael, please read Mathew 7:21-29. You accuse some of us of insulting Muslins (and I´ve seen nothing of that sort here) but your inaction is actuality insulting to God.
I recommend you to watch for Nabeel Qureshi from RZIM´s videos and see what bridging the gap with muslins means for a former muslin and now a brother in Christ.
God bless you Michael,
Vitor
Greetings and peace to all of you.
May you and your families all continue to receive the blessings of God.
This article about the Qur’an’s view of the Torah and the teachings sent to Jesus (upon him be peace) is inaccurate.
As a Muslim, I believe that much of God’s original guidance is in the Bible but I also believe that the entirety of the original text is not present in today’s Bible.
In addition, I believe that man made works have unfortunately entered the Bible as well.
For example, I believe that the writings attributed to Paul (who was never a disciple of Jesus and who in fact had disputes with the leading disciples) are man made.
I respectfully refer all my Christian brethren in humanity and seekers of truth to see the following link that will, God willing, help clarify the issue.
http://quranmisconceptions.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/does-islam-endorse-the-bible/
Peace to you all and your families.
Premise 1: Either the Qur’an is the Word of God or it is not.
Premise 2: If the Qur’an is the Word of God, the Bible is not.
Premise 3: If the Qur’an is not the Word of God, the Bible is not.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Bible is not the Word of God.
What is the justification for premises 2 and 3?
Not quite, you cannot turn the tables. The Qur’an appeals to the Torah and to the Injil as true and professes to build on that foundation, but not the other way around …
To Michael, Yes, of course it is very possible to speak the truth without love, but there is NOTHING UNLOVING about this article’s tone or its content! It’s simply making an objective argument. There’s nothing “disturbing” or “offensive” whatsoever. Calling another faith wrong is not unloving; in fact, as Christians we’re COMMANDED to critique false beliefs:
“We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 10:5)
Now of course Paul also taught that we must always “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15), but what’s unloving about anything in this article? You’re making vague accusations without any backing whatsoever…I read this article and I just see someone making an objective argument. Nothing wrong with that. Not one bit.
Also, that’s great that you have “interfaith relationships.” As a Christian myself, I’ve had plenty of Muslim friends over the years. I suppose you would call them “interfaith relationships.” My purpose in those relationships was to love my Muslim friends and build a genuine friendship, and to love them by sharing the gospel. BY NECESSITY, this entailed challenging the false beliefs of my Muslim friends, in obedience to 2 Cor 10:5.
If you’re friends with a Muslim, and your end-goal isn’t to challenge their beliefs, then your purpose in the “relationship” isn’t to share the gospel, and it’s not really an “interfaith relationship.” Why? Because your Christian faith isn’t driving your behavior in that relationship. A loving Christian who is in a true “interfaith relationship” must eventually challenge the beliefs of the other person.
In my “interfaith relationships,” I had shown enough deliberate love to my non-Christian friends that I was able to pose hard questions and challenges to them without it being called “unloving” or “offensive.” I might have found an article like this one very helpful in that effort.
So I again ask you: What’s unloving about this article?
I find these very simplistic responses to Muslim Holy Scriptures very disturbing. As a Christian I would not utter such an insult as is the title of this article. Your thesis and ideas do nothing for interfaith relationships, and I would most sincerely wish that you might think of better ways to respond to another Faith’s holy words. I cannot begin to understand why you wrote in this quite disturbing manner.
What is more important: the truth of God, or not offending people? I do agree we should not go out of our way to offend anyone including unbelievers but the Bible says that the unbeliever is in rebellion against God (Romans 1:18-32) and that we are to preach the gospel which will alternatively condemn or save people (2 Corinthians 2:14-16) and that the Holy Spirit is the one who actually brings about salvation (2 Corinthians 4:5-6). The world (those who are outside of Christ) hates Christians and God (John 15:18, 17:14). Does that mean we are to be intentionally rude or hateful when we present the truth? God forbid! We are called to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We were once like them (Ephesians 2:1-9) and are only saved by the grace of God poured out for sinners. How dare we as ambassadors of Christ who is also our righteousness (2 Corinthians 5:20-21) belittle others? This is the gospel, that Christ died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and we now have new life in Him (2 Corinthians 5:17). We must never forget this is a war (Ephesians 6:10-17) and that we are called to be bold (Ephesians 6:18-20) but not because we can change them but because God can. They do not seek for God (Romans 3:10-18) as we did not also (Romans 3:9) but God is reconciling them to Himself (2 Corinthians 5:18-19). Therefore speak the truth in love.
As one engaged in interfaith dialogue I not only find this deeply offensive but also contrary to the ethos of this site. “We must never forget this is a war” is a prime example of a totally erroneous translation of Ephesians. Very poor! This is no where near the concept of Christian love – nothing to do with The Love.
After reading my comment I realized it could have been confusing. When I said this was a war, I meant that it is a spiritual war. We should not be physically fighting anyone in order to convert them. But as 2 Corinthians 10:5 says “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” This is a spiritual war with all unbelievers (not just Muslims) and we are called to fight this war through prayer and proclamation of the gospel. I do want to emphasize again however, that we are not called to be unloving to unbelievers. In Titus 3:1-7 it says “to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men.” However, lest you think that means we should not speak the truth of the whole gospel (the bad as well as the good news), look at the next verse: “For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.” This is who we were and it is who every unbeliever is now. But we dare not stop there. For all we have done at this point is show the unbeliever’s desperate need for a saviour. But in verses 4-7 it says: “But when the kindness of God our Saviour and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” Is that offensive? Absolutely! The offense is in the message though, and not the manner. I would challenge you if you cannot stomach this to carefully read the Scriptures and make sure you actually believe what they say.
Your comment has been forwarded by a friend because I had decided I didn’t wish to continue following this discussion. However …
You make you own correction surrounding the use of the word war. Perhaps it is not enough to recognise how the use of words and the construction of a sentence can not only mislead but offend.
“I wou ld challenge you if you cannot stomach this to carefully read the Scriptures and make sure you actually believe what they say.”
Again, you make a quite offensive statement. After more than 50 years of study and teaching Holy Scripture and theology, ( and a great deal of that time in inter-faith dialogue ), I find this request both arrogant and demeaning.
The original statement does little, if anything at all, to assist sharing God’s love with people of other faiths, and none, nor does it expound true Christian love. Insults, such as that expressed below by Shredcow, do nothing to spread the Love but everything to antagonise the growing bonds between the Abrahamic Faiths.
No quote from Holy Scripture is offensive in itself, but how it is expounded.
Michael: I can’t help but notice that still have not answered my respectful request that you provide a single quote or example from Mr. McLatchie’s article that is offensive or inappropriate. Yet, you have responded to other comments, while avoiding mine. So this is where you are then:
You have made accusations against Mr. McLatchie, but right now they are mere assertions that you haven’t backed up with evidence.
Instead, YOU are using “offensive” rhetoric against the people on this site saying “It is very clear to me that right wing fundamentalists are using this site, and I don’t want a bar of it. So goodbye!”
So you call us names (“right wing fundamentalists”), make unbacked (and false) accusations that you refuse to provide evidnece for, and then refuse to dialogue with us. And then you say you want to tell us about “true Christian love”?
You preach about “true Christian love” but what do you mean by that? Here is what “true Christian love” is: To NOT call names, to lovingly provide evidence for the faith, and to preach the truth–i.e. to do what Mr. McLatchie has done, to point out falsehoods in a “holy book” that help show Islam is a false religion.
Here is what “true Christian love” looks like in an “Interfaith dialogue” with Muslims: You must tell Muslims that if you accept the Koran, then you deny the deity of Christ and you deny that He is the only Savior, and you are not saved. Showing contradictions in the Koran, like this article does, helps make that point to people…
It’s much more disturbing that such a “simplistic response” would not sway Muslims easily. While the Christian stands on solid truth, the Muslim is on a foundation that has already crumbled.
It is very clear to me that right wing fundamentalists are using this site, and I don’t want a bar of it. So goodbye!
You’re either an outright liar (permitted in islam) or not very knowledgeable about Christianity or the Bible. Would you also be all bothered and upset if one disrespected baal?
Simplistic? or a simple answer to the fraud that is islam?