Who are the Kuffar?
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
Also see the PDF by Shaykh Hamza, by clicking here.
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Category Archives: FAQS
Responses to Common Arguments Christians Use to Claim Jesus’ Divinity
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
In this post we’ll be examining some of the reasons that Christians assert that we should worship Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour. Missionaries and Evangelists usually promote these arguments to the layman in the Muslim community and while there is a bulk of resources out there (for example, see our numerous links) that do try to respond to these arguments, I’ve found them sometimes a bit too in-depth and scholarly for the layman, especially since they are in a more detailed form of English. I’ll be attempting to simplify and to demonstrate some quick counter-arguments in this series of articles. This is not intended to be highly detailed, scholarly argumentation, this is meant to aid the layman in responding quickly, correctly, and decisively to missionary claims. I’ll be updating this frequently, so keep an eye out for new additions.
1.
Argument(s): Jesus is God because He is sinless OR Jesus is God because He is the only one to fulfill the laws of the Old Testament (mitzvot).
Counter Argument: If being sinless is a criteria for being God, then both Zechariah and Elizabeth are considered to be Gods, Luke 1:5-6 reads, “In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron. Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly.” Also, if following all the laws of the Old Testament is a criteria for being a God, then, since this passage states clearly that they fulfilled all the laws of the Old Testament, they too must be Gods.
2.
Argument: Jesus is eternal, He existed from the beginning and has no end.
Counter Argument: Paul claims that Melchezidek, a High Priest is also like Christ in this aspect, does that then mean you have to worship Melcehzidek as well? Hebrews 7:3 reads, “ Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.”
3.
Argument: Jesus is God because only God can raise the dead. (Luke 7:13-15, Matthew 9;25, John 11:43-44, Matthew 27:52-53).
Counter Argument: If being able to raise the dead makes one a God, then Paul, Peter, Elisha and and Elijah are all Gods, we read:
1 Kings 17:17-24.
Some time later the son of the woman who owned the house became ill. He grew worse and worse, and finally stopped breathing. She said to Elijah, “What do you have against me, man of God? Did you come to remind me of my sin and kill my son?” “Give me your son,” Elijah replied. He took him from her arms, carried him to the upper room where he was staying, and laid him on his bed. Then he cried out to the Lord, “Lord my God, have you brought tragedy even on this widow I am staying with, by causing her son to die?” Then he stretched himself out on the boy three times and cried out to the Lord, “Lord my God, let this boy’s life return to him!” The Lord heard Elijah’s cry, and the boy’s life returned to him, and he lived. Elijah picked up the child and carried him down from the room into the house. He gave him to his mother and said, “Look, your son is alive!” Then the woman said to Elijah, “Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of the Lord from your mouth is the truth.”2 Kings 4:3-5.
“Elisha turned away and walked back and forth in the room and then got on the bed and stretched out on him once more. The boy sneezed seven times and opened his eyes.”
This miracle of raising the dead might be interpreted as being greater than Jesus’ raising of the dead, as Elisha who was dead, was able to raise the dead, Jesus only raised the dead while alive:
2 Kings 13:21.
“Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.”Peter in Acts 9:36-42.
In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (in Greek her name is Dorcas); she was always doing good and helping the poor. About that time she became sick and died, and her body was washed and placed in an upstairs room. Lydda was near Joppa; so when the disciples heard that Peter was in Lydda, they sent two men to him and urged him, “Please come at once!” Peter went with them, and when he arrived he was taken upstairs to the room. All the widowsstood around him, crying and showing him the robes and other clothing that Dorcas had made while she was still with them. Peter sent them all out of the room; then he got down on his knees and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, “Tabitha, get up.” She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter she sat up. He took her by the hand and helped her to her feet. Then he called for the believers, especially the widows, and presented her to them alive. This became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord.Paul in Acts 20:9-12.
“Seated in a window was a young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep as Paul talked on and on. When he was sound asleep, he fell to the ground from the third story and was picked up dead. Paul went down, threw himself on the young man and put his arms around him. “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “He’s alive!” Then he went upstairs again and broke bread and ate. After talking until daylight, he left. The people took the young man home alive and were greatly comforted.”
4.
Argument: Jesus is God because He is called God by God (Hebrews 1:8).
Counter Argument:
(a) God also calls men Gods in Psalms 82:6, are we supposed to worship them too?
“I said, ‘You are “Gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’
[Note: Christian translations try to hide this by using ‘gods’, the word used in Hebrew is Elohim, and is more properly translated as ‘God’ as it is the same word used for God in Genesis 1:1, pointing out this inconsistency might aid your argument.]
In Psalms 110:1, we have the same scenario again, the Lord is calling another person, ‘Lord’, which reads, “The Lord says to my Lord”.
[Note: Christian translations try to hide this by using ‘lord’, however see the citation at the end of the page which says, ‘or Lords’.]
(b) For a more detailed article, see this post here.
5.
Argument: Jesus was worshipped (Matthew 8:2, Matthew 15:25, Matthew 28:17).
Counter Argument: Jesus was not worshipped, but bowed to in these verses. The word used is ‘proskuneo’ which means ‘to bow in reverence to’. See Strong’s Lexicon here. Abraham bowed to an entire nation, brothers bowed to kings, mother’s prayed for people to bow to her son in the Old Testament, but for some strange reason, Christians do not consider this bowing to be worship, even though it is the same act:
Genesis 23:7
Then Abraham rose and bowed down before the people of the land, the Hittites.Genesis 23:12
Again Abraham bowed down before the people of the landGenesis 27:29
May nations serve you and peoples bow down to you. Be lord over your brothers, and may the sons of your mother bow down to you. May those who curse you be cursed and those who bless you be blessed.”Genesis 42:6-7
Now Joseph was the governor of the land, the person who sold grain to all its people. So when Joseph’s brothers arrived, they bowed down to him with their faces to the ground. As soon as Joseph saw his brothers, he recognized them, but he pretended to be a stranger and spoke harshly to them.“Where do you come from?” he asked.
6.
Argument: Jesus is God because the Qur’an says he is the only sinless person.
Counter Argument: The verse commonly quoted is Qur’an Surah 19, Ayah 19, which reads, “He replied: “I am only a messenger from your Lord (sent) to bestow a good son on you.” The problem is, Christians assert that the word used means sinless, “زَكِيًّا”. However, the word used is “Zakiyyan”, which according to Lane’s Arabic Lexicon means “pure“. The same word is also used to describe John the Baptist in Qu’ran Surah 19, Ayah 13, which reads, “(We said:) “O John, hold fast to the Book;” and We gave him wisdom right from boyhood, And compassion from Us, and goodness. So he was devout,…”. Since the same word is used to describe John the Baptist, would Christians worship him too?
7.
Argument: Jesus is God because the Qur’an says Allah is the First, the Last, the Truth and the Bible says Jesus is the same.
Counter Argument: That argument takes the form:
Joe is a man.
Jack is a man.
Therefore Joe is Jack.
Seems nonsensical? Let’s apply the Christian argument then:
Jesus is the Truth.
Allah is the Truth.
Therefore Jesus is Allah.
The argument takes the same form as the example above. We can even apply this reasoning to Hinduism:
Jesus is a God.
Lakshmi is a God.
Therefore Jesus is Lakshmi.
Use the above examples in how many ways you want and point out the absurd reasoning of our Christian brethren.
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Punishing the Female Rape Victim in Islam
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
It is unfortunate that for people who profess objectivity and sincerity in their study, research and pursuit of knowledge that there continues to be a great perversion of the understanding of Islamic Shari’ah laws and its applications. Proponents of the modern secular system, or of varying theological political systems, seemingly cannot produce a consistent stance on judging the use or misuse of the Islamic Shari’ah, while wholly regarding it to be unfair, unjust and backwards. Demonstrably, it can be noted that their own justice systems produce often, curious if not peculiar judgements. In one case, a mother can be sentenced to jail for a period of 5 years, for stealing clothing from a store for her children at a value of $102 dollars. While at the same time a Wall Street tycoon who has defrauded enough persons to make himself a billionaire, was sentence to a period of only, 11 years. What then, can we say is logical about this? Based on this one example of a judgement that is neither proportional to the crimes when compared and contrasted nor morally justifiable, can I then generalize the American justice system as being inhumane, profiteering and socially inept?
To further this discussion with more evidences relevant to the topic at hand, let’s examine sexual assault cases, in particular rape. This child rapist was sentenced to only 5 to 7 years in prison, the same amount of time as the woman who stole $102 dollars worth of goods. This rapist was sentenced to only 9 years in prison, while defrauding persons of hundreds of millions of dollars and sending families into distress, bankruptcy and insolvency will earn you the same amount of jail time. Continuing with this trend, we can deduce that according to the modern secular system, stealing and rape are upon the same field of justice. Considering these tragic acts, let’s examine the Islamic position on rape in the modern world. To rape in Islamic law is to have committed “ightisaab”, which means to forcefully transgress and take a woman’s honour from her (rape). The crime is punishable by death but doesn’t have to be punished by death, the punishment however has to be severe as to deter anyone else from attempting this crime. Therefore, there can be no equivalence between stealing and rape, a woman’s honour is not the same as stealing an apple, or clothing as it is seen in the secular justice system.
Islamic Shari’ah rule, is intended to govern a state by Islamic law, where the ulema (religious leaders) who are fuqaha (jurists), establish courts where a qadhi (judge) can make binding rulings (fatawa) on behalf of the state against a criminal and establish justice in the society. This understanding is based upon the Qur’anic statements:
“And so judge (you O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) among them by what Allaah has revealed” – [al-Maa’idah 5:49].
“And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the Kaafiroon (i.e. disbelievers — of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allaah’s Laws)” – [al-Maa’idah 5:44].
“And whosoever does not judge by that which Allaah has revealed, such are the Zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers — of a lesser degree)” – [al-Maa’idah 5:45].
“And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fâsiqûn [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allaah” – [al-Maa’idah 5:47].
“But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission” – [al-Nisa’ 4:65].
“Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith” – [al-Maa’idah 5:50].
To make this succinct and easy to grasp, the discussion will be broken up into several questions:
- What do the Islamic scholars (Ulema) say on the punishment of rape?
- Are four witnesses needed to prove rape?
- Are women who do not wear hijab responsible for their rape?
- Is the woman to be punished for rape?
- Forced marriage to rapist?
- Further reading.
What do the Islamic scholars (Ulema) say on the punishment of rape?
Yûsuf ibn `Abd Allâh ibn Muhammad Ibn `Abd al-Barr Abû `Umar al-Namarî al-Andalusî al-Qurtubî al-Mâlikî (may Allaah be pleased with him), a prominent Islamic jurist, of whom Imam al Qurtubi cites/ references about 500 times in his tafsir has stated in Al-Istidhkâr li Madhhab `Ulamâ’ al-Amsâr fîmâ Tadammanahu al-Muwatta’ min Ma`ânî al-Ra’î wal-Athâr (“The Memorization of the Doctrine of the Scholars of the World Concerning the Juridical Opinions and the Narrations Found in Mâlik’s Muwatta'”), 7/146:
The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (i.e., if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess, and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her, which may be proven by her screaming and shouting for help.
Are four witnesses needed to prove rape?
Mufti Taqi Uthmani [db] in his discussion during an interview on Pakistan’s implementation of the Protection of Women Bill 2006, expounded upon his rulings and the rulings of other Islamic judges:
”I myself had been directly hearing cases registered under Hudood Ordinance, first as a Judge of Federal Shariah Court and then for seventeen years as a member of Shariah Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court. In this long tenure, not once did I come across a case in which a rape victim was awarded punishment simply because she was unable to present four witnesses.
In fact it was not possible to do so. First, according to the Hudood Ordinance, the condition of four witnesses only applied to enforcing the hadd for rape. Clause 10(3), which awarded the ta’zeer punishment, did not have this requirement; the crime could be proven through one witness, medical reports, and chemical analysis report. Consequently most rape criminals were awarded punishment as per this clause.
Further, a woman claiming rape could not be punished under Qazf (false accusation of zina) since Exemption 2 in Qazf Ordinance Clause 3 clearly stated that if someone approaches the legal authorities with a rape complaint, she could not be punished in case she was unable to present four witnesses.”
To compound this statement, Shaykh Faraz Rabbani (may Allaah be pleased with him) has stated:
“This is a common myth about Islamic criminal law. Rather, the four witness requirement applies only to the prescribed hadd punishment (which in the case of a married person could be death and for the non-married, 100 lashes). [Marghinani, Hidaya] This punishment is only applied in very rare cases, as is clear, and is meant to be a social deterrent, above all.
As the classical and contemporary jurists (such as Mufti Taqi Usmani) have made clear, a rapist can be convicted on lesser evidence (including scientific evidence, such as DNA tests and medical reports) for discretionary punishments. These discretionary punishments are left up to the legal system to determine.
However, it is a myth to say that Islam would in any way condone rape, or allow a rapist to go free for this terrible crime against an innocent human being and against society.”
This therefore rests the case, of the issue with 4 witnesses being needed to prove rape, indeed rape can be proven using modern scientific methods and other evidences, as seen above, as being agreed upon by Islamic fuqaha (jurists).
Are women who do not wear hijab responsible for their rape?
Mufti Muhammad Kadwa and Mufti Ebrahim Desai (may Allaah be pleased with them both) have stated:
These are two separate issues; rape and the lack of Hijaab. The rapist will be punished for his heinous crime whilst the woman will be sinful not for rape, but for failure to observe the rules of Hijaab. Failure to wear Hijaab in no way justifies the heinous crime of rape.
Is the woman to be punished for rape?
Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) has said in Al-Muwatta’, 2/734:
In our view the man who rapes a woman, whether she is a virgin or not, if she is a free woman he must pay a “dowry” like that of her peers, …. The punishment is to be carried out on the rapist and there is no punishment for the woman who has been raped, whatever the case.
Prophet Muhammad (may Allaah’s peace and blessings be upon him) has also decreed punishments for persons who have committed rape, while freeing the woman of any punishment:
“Narrated Wa’il ibn Hujr (may Allaah be pleased with him):
When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me.And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her. She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him).
When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.
He (the Prophet) said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words (AbuDawud said: meaning the man who was seized), and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.” – (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith #4366, Kitab al Hudud [38]).
Forced Marriage to Rapist?
While Islam punishes the rapist, we do hear of some really peculiar instances where the woman is married to the man. This has no basis in Islamic law, nor does it comply with Islamic reasoning, according to this fatwa by Mufti Ebrahim Desai [db]:
“Knowing the importance and sacredness of a marriage commitment, the boy and girl having consulted with their seniors and making Istikhaara, should make their own independent choice.
They should not be compelled to marry against their wishes as the consequences (non-compatibility, divorce, disputes, custody of children, etc.) are too ghastly to bear. Parents should not compel their children to marry against their wishes due to economic status reasons.”
As well as this fatwa by the same Mufti (Islamic Jurist):
“As an adult, you have an independent right to choose your marriage partner. You should not be forced into marrying someone against your choice. Those forcing you are guilty of depriving you of your Shar’ee right and committing a major sin,
You should simply say no if you are not confident of marrying against your choice. The consequences of forced marriages are too ghastly. There are great possibilities of a marital breakdown. That will lead to disunity among many families. The matter will be clouded even more if there is a child born through the marriage. Considering the many negative consequences of a forced marriage, you should never give in to being forced to marry against your wish. It will be you and no one else who will have to bear the burdens in future. You may forward this email to those forcing you to marry against your wishes.”
However, to contrast the Islamic position, let’s look at this excerpt from the Jewish and Christian religious text, Old Testament (Torah), Deuteronomy (Devarim), Chapter 22, Verses 28 – 29:
“If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”
Further Reading:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/12/testimony-of-rape-victim/
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/does-islam-require-four-witnesses-for-rape/
http://thedebateinitiative.com/2012/03/12/is-the-shariah-inhumane-you-decide/
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Christian Blasphemy Laws
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
Islamic countries have come under criticism from many Christian missionaries for having laws which protect their religious tenets. In what can only be described as pure hypocrisy, or wilful ignorance, they seemed to have also forgotten that they also use blasphemy laws to their own benefit. Christians in India, apparently angry at a non-believer who disproved a farce of a miracle, encited authorities to detain and charge the man for allegedly, “hurting the religious sentiments of a particular community” or in other words, blaspheming their religion by disproving a false miracle.
Sanal Edamaruku, an Indian skeptic, went to Mumbai and revealed that a “miraculous” weeping cross was really just a bit of statuary located near a leaky drain whose liquid reached it by way of capillary action. The local Catholic Church demanded that he retract his statements, and when he refused, they had him arrested for blasphemy.
Source: Indian Skeptic Charged for “Blasphemy” for revealing secret behind “miracle” of weeping cross.
Please click the above link for the full article, which explains the pains through which the large Christian community in India are endeavouring upon, to hang on to pure desperation and deceit to build their faith.
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Egypt ‘necrophilia law’?
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
Whether done through intentional malice or bad fact/ data checking. A number of Western oriented news websites, inclusive of one Arab website released a news report, indicating that the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt’s Parliament were in line to bring into law, permission for a husband to have sex with his deceased wife for a period of stipulated time after her death. This act is commonly referred to as necrophilia. The problem is though, as the Christian Science Monitor has indicated, there is no actual factual source for this story. There is nothing indicating that this is a true law or even a concept being discussed by the Muslim Brotherhood:
Today, Egypt’s state-owned Al Ahram newspaper published an opinion piece by Amr Abdul Samea, a past stalwart supporter of the deposed Hosni Mubarak, that contained a bombshell: Egypt’s parliament is considering passing a law that would allow husbands to have sex with their wives after death.
But extreme, not to mention inflammatory claims, need at minimum some evidence (and I’ve read my share of utter nonsense in Al Ahram over the years). The evidence right now? Zero.
Source: The Christian Science Monitor, Egypt ‘Necrophilia Law’?
Please click the above link to be taken to the CSM’s news report that completely refutes, what can only be described as a desperate claim against Islam.
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Christ and the Law: Based on a Chronic Assessment of the Gospels
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
At the very foundation of this topic, lies the heart of the Judeo-Christian narrative on the personhood of Christ and the religion of Christianity. For some almost 2000 years, there has always existed a disconnect between the validity of the application of the Torah’s laws and Christ’s ministry. Therefore to establish a basic understanding from which to work, let’s look at the Christian position on the Law as it stands today and then regress into the ministry of Christ and subsequently the period after his ministry. In doing so, we shall develop a holistic comprehension of how the law was used in Christ’s time and how it was observed directly after his time, then we shall contrast it with the modern Christian understanding. What, therefore, is the standard Christian position towards the relevance of the law? John Calvin in his, Harmony of the Law, Volume 1, succinctly addresses or rather summarizes and defines the Christian position during his time and that of which almost all Christians have adopted today as their standard position, he states:
“The Last Part shews the end and use of the Law; and thence its usefulness is very extensive. For how would it profit us to be instructed in righteousness of life, unless the perception of our guilt and iniquity induced us to seek after the remedy? But when God allures us so gently and kindly by his promises, and again pursues us with the thunders of his curse, it is partly to render us inexcusable, and partly to shut us up deprived of all confidence in our own righteousness, so that we may learn to embrace his Covenant of Grace, and flee to Christ, who is the end of the law. This is the intention of The Promises, in which he declares that he will be merciful, since there is forgiveness ready for the sinner, and when he offers the spirit of Regeneration. On this depends that sentence of St. Paul, that Christ is the end of the Law Still I do not so distinguish this class from the foregoing, as if it had nothing in common with them. For, before arriving at it, it will be often necessary to refer both to the terrible ruin of the human race, as well as to the peculiar blessing of Adoption, and to that increasing flow of fatherly love which God extends to his people. For all the expiations have no other meaning than that God will be always merciful, as often as the sinner shall flee to the refuge of his pardon. But how needful this division is will be best understood as we proceed.”
With having read this, we come to the understanding that Christians accept the following:
- The Law (Mitzvot, Shari’ah) are from God.
- They serve a divine purpose, that being of guidance to God.
- The Law demonstrates our weakness.
- It demonstrates our weakness to aid us in turning to Christ.
- Christ is the end of the Law.
While I as a Muslim would agree with the first two points noted above, I do have to question the third notion which is commonly expressed and those of which are derived from it. If the purpose of the law is to solely demonstrate our weakness, then what happens when the law is put into practise? When obedience and application of the law is being done, does that then render the purpose of the law, invalid? Perhaps, out of God’s reason for giving the law? These questions must be asked, because if it is the Law is there to only demonstrate our weakness, what then occurs if it doesn’t? Using this line of reasoning, the Christian concept of the Law seems rather paradoxical if not, inane.
To circumvent this theological problem of the Christians, let’s examine what the Torah (LXX) actually states in Deuteronomy (Devarim) 4: 1-4 :
“Now, Israel, hear the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live and may go in and take possession of the land the LORD, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. You saw with your own eyes what the LORD did at Baal Peor. The LORD your God destroyed from among you everyone who followed the Baal of Peor, but all of you who held fast to the LORD your God are still alive today.”
Note, in these verses, the purpose of the Law, as explicitly stated isn’t to display man’s weakness (although the Law does that, it can, conversely demonstrate man’s faithfulness and piety as shown in the verses above), but to grant success, meaning then that the Law grants life. It grants life because obedience to God demonstrates piety (in Islam: taqwa) and by extension earns God’s pleasure with his obedient followers/ believers. The same can be seen in the Qur’an, see Surah 2:1-5.
If we were to also follow through on the logic that the Law is supposed to take us to Christ, in the understanding that salvation can only be sought through him, then we also have to question this track of reasoning. If for some 1,500 years before Christ the Law was supposed to lead people to him as their eternal saviour, then therein lies a problem. For 1,500 years no one was lead to the Christ, they followed a Law, which according to Christian reasoning was supposed to lead to someone who wasn’t their. Alas, early converts to Christianity did notice this exception, we find that an answer is given in Luke 16:19-21, wherein those who did good await for Jesus to take them to heaven, which Paul states in his epistle to the Ephesians, was fulfilled, see Chapter 4, Verses 8 – 10. However the problem still persists, if the Law is supposed to lead to Christ as a means of salvation, then law in itself cannot be a means of salvation. This may become confusing, so let’s break this down:
The law exists to lead to Christ.
You are only saved because of Christ.
If we accept that the law leads to Christ then can the law be held against us, i.e sinners aren’t led to Christ?
Or if the Law does lead us to Christ, are we saved because we practised the law or are we saved because of Christ? If we are saved because of Christ, then the law becomes irrelevant, if we are saved because we practised the law, then Christ didn’t actually save anyone.
Lastly, we read that Christ is the end of the Law (mitzvot, shari’ah). This statement leads us into our next section, where we examine this claim in detail. What exactly does this phrase mean? Of what consequence is it? What ideological and theological beliefs can be derived from such a position?
The Law Before Christ’s Mission:
Deuteronomy 4:1-4
“Now, Israel, hear the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live and may go in and take possession of the land the LORD, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. You saw with your own eyes what the LORD did at Baal Peor. The LORD your God destroyed from among you everyone who followed the Baal of Peor, but all of you who held fast to the LORD your God are still alive today.”Deuteronomy 13:4
It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.Deuteronomy 28:15
However, if you do not obey the LORD your God and do not carefully follow all his commands and decrees I am giving you today, all these curses will come on you and overtake you:Deuteronomy 29:31
The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.Deuteronomy 30:10
if you obey the LORD your God and keep his commands and decrees that are written in this Book of the Law and turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.Deuteronomy 30:16
For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
From these references, we can see the importance of the Mosaic Law (Mitzvot), therefore we can safely assert that before Jesus’ time, the law was held in a high regard, a high esteem that guided the People of Israel and any Prophet that was to come had to preach a message that continued upon the same foundations of the Law, or that Prophet was therefore false and had to be purged from the lands of the believing peoples:
“If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.” – Bible : Deuteronomy 13: 1-5.
This is also in accordance with Islamic belief of the risalat (message) which is God’s wahy (revelation). That we must believe in the revelation of God’s scriptures.
The Law During Christ’s Mission
From the very onset, the Judaic narrative is clear, the book of Matthew which is the opening for the New Testament, immediately announces Jesus as a descendant from a line of strict Torah observants, and therefore has the noble lineage from which the Messiah was prophesied to have come (Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5). This narrative is consistently pursued in Matthew’s Gospel, almost every chapter links Jesus to some Judaic belief of the Messiah. We read in Chapter 2 he’s labelled the King of the Jews, Chapter 3 that he is announced by by a precursor to his arrival, Chapter 4 that he quotes Deuteronomy 8:3 and so on.
What then does Jesus actually say about the law?
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.” – Bible : Matthew 5 : 17 – 20.
μη νομισητε οτι ηλθον καταλυσαι τον νομον η τους προφητας ουκ ηλθον καταλυσαι αλλα πληρωσαι. – Bible : Matthew 5: 17.
This is where the first problem begins. What does Christ mean, assuming he spoke these words, that he came to “fulfill” the Law (mitzvot)? We shall answer this by first examining the standard Christian position, that is from the Geneva Study Bible, which states:
“Christ did not come to bring any new way of righteousness and salvation into the world, but indeed to fulfil that which was shadowed by the figures of the Law, by delivering men through grace from the curse of the Law: and moreover to teach the true use of obedience which the Law appointed, and to engrave in our hearts the power for obedience.”
Now, this presents a paradox, on one end it is stated that Christ did not come to bring a new way of salvation, but that his coming was to deliver men from the curse (punishment) of the Law. This statement is self contradicting, because by stating he is delivering men from punishment, this in itself is Salvation. Salvation’s definition as it is understood, means, “to be free from sin and the punishment of sin”. Therefore the Christian position seems to be a confused one. They state that Christ didn’t come to bring a new form of salvation, yet they say he did bring salvation.
This begs the question, is this form of salvation new? Yes, there is nowhere in the Old Testament which states that one man can account for the sins of all people or for that case, another person. However there is a passage which says the opposite:
“The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.” – Ezekiel 18:20.
Foregoing the confused position taken by the Christians, let’s proceed to defining what Christ meant by, “fulfilling” the Law. The word as used in Greek is:
πληρωσαι (pleroo – Strong’s Lexicon 4137)
However, Christian Exegete Adam Clarke, on explaining this verse, makes a rather interesting point:
“It is worthy of observation, that the word gamar, among the rabbins, signifies not only to fulfil, but also to teach; and, consequently, we may infer that our Lord intimated, that the law and the prophets were still to be taught or inculcated by him and his disciples; and this he and they have done in the most pointed manner. See the Gospels and epistles; and see especially this sermon on the mount, the Epistle of James, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. And this meaning of the word gives the clear sense of the apostle’s words, Colossians 1:25. Whereof I am made a minister,ης εγενομην εγω διακονος κατα την οικονομιαν του θεου την δοθεισαν μοι εις υμας πληρωσαι τον λογον του θεου , tofulfil the word of God, i.e. to teach the doctrine of God.“
With this in mind, we can note that one understanding of Matthew 5:17, is that Christ came to teach the Law (Torah). On further examination, if we compare the words used in Greek in Matthew and Colossions, we find that that are indeed the same term used:
Matthew:
μη νομισητε οτι ηλθον καταλυσαι τον νομον η τους προφητας ουκ ηλθον καταλυσαι αλλα πληρωσαι
Colossians:
ης εγενομην εγω διακονος κατα την οικονομιαν του θεου την δοθεισαν μοι εις υμας πληρωσαι τον λογον του θεου
What we come to see is that the most used translations of this term, are either “complete” or “fulfill”. Recall, we observed above that to fulfill according to the Geneva Study Bible, meant Christ came to bring Salvation from the curse of the Law, however, a more accurate reading from the Greek, demonstrates that Christ actually stated, that he came to proclaim or teach the law. The question begs itself, why then do Christians need to appeal to this word game? On one hand, they contradict themselves if they say fulfill means to bring salvation from the punishment of the Law, whereas if we don’t appeal to their word games, we see that Christ claimed to teach or proclaim the Law:
“Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, “Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go.” – Bible : Matthew 8: 19.
“When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” – Bible : Matthew 9 : 11.
“Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.” – Bible : Matthew 12 : 38.
Continuing on the topic at hand, if we look at the meaning of the word πληρωσαι from Strong’s Lexicon, we will never be able to derive the understanding that the term means to bring salvation or deliverance from sin. In fact, the New Testament’s claim that Christ claimed to proclaim or teach the Law can further be proven by first reading how salvation, from the curse (punishment) of the Law can be achieved:
“This is what the Sovereign LORD, the Holy One of Israel, says: “In repentance and rest is your salvation, in quietness and trust is your strength, but you would have none of it.” – Bible : Isaiah 30: 15.
Something which the New Testament bears witness to Christ preaching:
“From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” – Matthew 4:17.
“Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent.” – Bible : Matthew 11: 20.
“They went out and preached that people should repent.” – Bible : Mark 6 : 12.
“I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” – Bible : Luke 5: 32.
This therefore, soundly refutes, through proof by contradiction, that Christ himself did not lay to the claim that he will himself deliver salvation from the punishment of the Law, but that he kept with the teaching of Moses and the Prophets, such as Isaiah, that the Law must be kept and that deliverance from sin for the breaking the Laws was to repent. Nothing new from Jesus, he kept the belief as it always had been and this is what he preached.
In fact, as Rabbi Michael Skobac in his discussion on the early Jewish followers of Jesus has stated, we notice that Jesus did in fact keep the practise (Sunnah) of the observant Jewish followers at that time. It’s not noticeable at first, but when one goes to the Greek, the truth becomes quite enlightening or so to speak.
Luke 8:44
” She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped.”
Quite an unassuming story, some woman touching Jesus’ cloak, how does this prove anything? Well let’s turn to the Greek:
προσελθουσα οπισθεν ηψατο του κρασπεδου του ιματιου αυτου και παραχρημα εστη η ρυσις του αιματος αυτης
What does this word: κρασπεδου, mean? From Strong’s Lexicon we read:
- in the NT a little appendage hanging down from the edge of the mantle or cloak , made of twisted wool.
- a tassel, tuft: the Jews had such appendages attached to their mantles to remind them of the Law.
A striking revelation, hidden beneath the deception of Christian translators. This is one reason both Muslims and Jews emphasize learning the original language of the Scriptures, so that one can fully understand God’s revelation. What is insightful of this verse, is that Jesus is wearing a cloak that had these tassels attached to them, which only Torah observant teachers wore. If that is the case, then clearly Jesus was practising the Law and not preaching away from it, or that it had come to an end.
The Law Practised in the Final Supper
It would be odd that if Christ did preach salvation through his crufixion, death and ressurection, that towards the end of his mission, he would still be practising the Law, as well as his disciples as Torah observant Jews, yet this is exactly the case we find during the famous, final supper:
“On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?”…..”When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve.” – Bible : Matthew 26 : 17, 20.
The Law Practised During Jesus’ Burial
For the sake of argument, let’s assume the Christian position, that Jesus’ death, signalled a new era of salvation. Believe in him having died for your sins and you would be saved. However, we run into another problem. The Disciples of Christ, even at his burial were still observing the Laws of the Torah (Mitzvot):
“It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body.” – Bible : Mark 15 : 42-43.
Joseph does this to avoid breaking the Torah commandment of the prohibition of a criminal hanging on a tree until sunset:
“What we would call Friday evening. As the law of Moses had ordered that no criminal should continue hanging on a tree or gibbet till the setting of the sun, Joseph, fearing that the body of our Lord might be taken down, and thrown into the common grave with the two robbers, came and earnestly entreated Pilate to deliver it to him, that he might bury it in his own new tomb.” – Adam Clarke’s Commentary.
We even read in John’s Gospel, quite explicitly that his burial was done under Jewish law as well:
“Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders. With Pilate’s permission, he came and took the body away. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs.” – Bible : John 19 : 38 – 40.
Again, quite odd, we see the disciples, even after the death of Christ which modern day Christians hold to be the event which grants them salvation, the disciples themselves, are nevertheless still found to be practising the Law of the Torah. What’s also clear is that the place of Jesus’ tomb was decided in a rush as to avoid breaking another Torah commandment:
“Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.” – Bible : John 19 : 42.
If we for a moment, return to Matthew’s Gospel, we see that they don’t check on Jesus’ tomb throughout the Sabbath as they were observing the Sabbath. After the Sabbath has passed, then they visited his tomb:
“After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.” – Bible : Matthew 28 : 1.
A strange occurrence for a people who allegedly are supposed to have been granted salvation through faith and belief alone (John 3:16) to then be practising the Torah’s laws so stringently.
The Law Practised by the Disciples 14 Years After Jesus
At this point in time, for one to join the group of Messianic Jews of James the Just (the brother of Jesus), they were compelled to continue practising the act of circumcision, so that they could completely enter the faith from being a Gentile to a Jew (note: The disciples considered themselves Jews, they never considered themselves to be Christians, they were Jews who had accepted the coming of the Messiah, Jesus). Under Peter’s stewardship, those who joined their group, had to be circumcised, yet Paul makes the distinction that he himself accepted those who were uncircumcised, that is, in direct contrast to Peter’s criteria:
“On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised.” – Bible : Galatians 2 : 8.
The Law, Disciples and Paul
This is now the first incident we have, some 14 years after Jesus’ ascension, of the disciples being condemned for following the Torah laws, this by someone who never lived with the disciples during the time of Christ’s mission:
“When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?” – Bible : Galatians 2 : 11 – 14.
The Law and James’ Decision
Seeing opposition from someone claiming to have seen Christ and his group of gentile followers, James had a decision to make. Since himself and Peter in Galatians 2:8, were known to only preach this message to the Jews and accept only the Jews, but Paul had included Gentiles into their group, the question begged itself, were these uncircumcised followers of the Christ, valid believers? So for the first time in 14 years, the disciples had to consider whether Gentiles could belong to their faith or not, was Paul’s position invalid? Quite odd, if Christ died for the sins, once for all (John 3:16), then why are the disciples now considering this development some 14 years later? Something is amiss. Nevertheless, let’s examine what James decides in regards to Gentiles who were not circumcised under the law of the Torah being inclusive of their group:
“Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.” – Bible : Acts 15 : 1-2.
We see that while on their way to Jerusalem, they continued to meet persons who preached that they can only be saved through the practise of the law, something which Paul found abhorrent:
“Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.” – Bible : Acts 15 : 5.
Finally, James the brother of Christ, met with them and spoke on his decision:
“It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” – Bible : Acts 15 : 19 – 21.
The final line is striking, that these instructions belong to the Law of Moses, and thus, this is what he commanded the converted gentiles to their Messianic Judaism to believe. In fact, here is Adam Clarke’s Exegesis on this verse:
“The sense of this verse seems to be this: As it was necessary to write to the Gentiles what was strictly necessary to be observed by them, relative to these points, it was not so to the converted Jews; for they had Moses, that is, the law, preached to them, in the city, that is, Antioch; and, by the reading of the law in the synagogues every Sabbath day, they were kept in remembrance of those institutions which the Gentiles, who had not the law, could not know. Therefore, James thought that a letter to the converted Gentiles would be sufficient, as the converted Jews had already ample instruction on these points.”
James continues the practise of the law in his verdict and commands it, unlike Paul who says the law is worthless and preaches for the people to forego it, we read in Galatians 3:
“So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”
“For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.”
“Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one.”
“ So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith.”
Paul relegates the Law as something to be practised until Jesus came. Yet this was never a belief propagated by Jesus, nor the disciples, even after some 14 years after the ascension. Even James, whose counsel Paul sought, advises that the law of Moses be taught to the Gentiles, if they are converting to their group of Messianic Judaism, those laws being the Noahide laws.
Conclusion
In summation, the law is to be practised and that is the final verdict of James, the brother of Jesus. Paul who after receiving this judgement from James, continued to berate the law, contradicting James and Jesus and then condemning James, Barnabus and Peter as hypocrites. The question therefore begs itself, as a Christian who is more important, Jesus and the twelve disciples or the man who never met Christ, insults the disciples and throws away the law which Christ and the disciples kept?
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best,]
Shooting Stars and Jinns: ِA Qur’anic Error?
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
“Verily, We have decorated the nearest sky with an adornment, the stars, And (have made them) a security against every rebellious devil. They cannot listen to the Upper Realm and are hit from every side To be driven off, and for them there is a lasting punishment; However, if one snatches a little bit, he is pursued by a bright flame.” – Qur’an : Surah As Saaffat : Ayat 6 – 10.
These ayat are often mocked by those who don’t comprehend them. There is a wealth of scientific and theological reasoning behind the context of these verses. In this regard, Mufti Ebrahim Desai [db] has released a fatwa which, in my opinion, settles the issue quite clearly with using the latest information (as of this date), to validate and verify the meaning of the ayat in both a scientific view and theological view. However before we begin, there is some history to the opposition of these verses due to popular thought:
“At this place, it should be borne in mind that early Greek scientists believed in meteors being terrestrial substance that rose up with vapours and would burn up when it reached the fire zone. But, the words of the Qur’an, as they appear here, seem to suggest that a meteor is not a terrestrial substance, rather, it is something generated only in the upper atmosphere. At this stage, earlier commentators have been saying all along that the Greek assumption about meteors – that it was some terrestrial substance – was no more than a conjecture.” – Tafsir Maar’iful Qur’an : Mufti Muhammad Shafi [db], pg 428.
What is striking is a quote from the Late Shaykh Tantawi in his Tafsir al Jawahir has said:
“Our forebears and scholars also took it with a heavy heart that the noble Qur’an would say something counter to contemporary astronomy of their time. But, the commentators of the Qur’an did not compromise their position. They did not agree to accept their thinking and surrender the position of the Qur’an. Instead of doing something like that, they bypassed their philosophical assumptions and continued to stay with the Qur’an. After the passage of sometime, it became automatically established that the early Greeks were wrong in their assumptions. Now, if we were to acknowledge that these stars hit, hurt and burn satans, what is there to stop us from believing so? Thus, here we are in our time embracing this statement of the Qur’an as true. And we are faithfully waiting for the future (when science will also confirm it).” – Al Jawahir, Page 14, Volume 8.
The Ulama have been qualified in their statements, with this fatwa from Mufti Ebrahim Desai [db], which answers the question using purely modern day science, using that of quantum physics:
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Easter: Contradictions in the Gospel Narratives
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
Easter has arrived again, the Christian narrative of Jesus being arrested, crucified, dying and then ascending all occurs from Good Friday to Sunday morning, these few days are the foundation for the Christian religion. The Gospels account for this episode, giving us details which are rather unique and quite puzzling, or so to speak. In this article, I’m not going to try to offend anyone and I do apologize if I do, but as a Muslim, these questions are pertinent to the narrative given to these events by the Christian faith. We need to examine the foundation, for if the foundation is based on falsehood, all that is derived from it, will also have falsehood in contained within. Therefore, in an attempt to seek answers for these dogmatic conundrums, let’s ask some questions that should by now, some 2000 years or so years later, should have answers prepared.
Zombies:
Here we have an account in Matthew 27:51-53, where apparently the dead come back to life, and in their large numbers, roam through the streets of Jerusalem. There’s a slight problem with this claim however. Dead people have crawled out of graves in Jerusalem, seen by ‘many people’, and yet the only account of it, is some 50 or so years later in a religious scripture from a new faith, fishing for miracles to get converts. So let’s see what the scripture claims:
At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
So dead people came back to life. This is a miracle proving Jesus’ resurrection, this miracle is apparently witnessed by many people and yet we have some serious discrepancies here. No other Gospel of Epistles even references or mentions explicitly, what is arguably the greatest miracle one can observe, dead people returning to life. No Jewish historian or religious figure ever mentions that dead people came back to life and roamed their holiest city’s streets. Not even the Romans, the largest Empire, most powerful nation at that time, records that dead people came back to life and roamed their streets. Yet somehow, a person not from that time, 50 or so years later (33AD, Ascension, Matthew written between 75 AD – 99 AD), mentions this maybe two or three lines and then it turns into a historical fact. Call me skeptical, but I’m needing evidence here. I find it hard to believe, that dead people, came to life and no one at that time, not even heretical early Christian sects, nor Paul who documented the vast prayers, actions and beliefs of the early Church some 14 years later, remotely mentions or references it.
Yet, us Muslims are not to be blamed, a famed Christian Exegete, Adam Clarke in his exegesis on these verses states:
It is difficult to account for the transaction mentioned Matthew 27:52,53. Some have thought that these two verses have been introduced into the text of Matthew from the gospel of the Nazarenes; others think that the simple meaning is this:-by the earthquake several bodies that had been buried were thrown up and exposed to view, and continued above ground till after Christ’s resurrection, and were seen by many persons in the city. Why the graves should be opened on Friday, and the bodies not be raised to life till the following Sunday, is difficult to be conceived. The place is extremely obscure.
Perhaps there is someone willing to validate, verify this claim or if not, admit it really did not occur and is a fanciful dream of some scribe wanting to give the masses some alleged miracle to convert to Christianity for.
Conflicting Post-Crufiction Narrative:
This question stems from reading the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, evidently, if one picks up a Bible, the New Testament begins with Matthew and then we’re introduced to Mark. The problem here however, stems from an incident that presents a problem. In Matthew 28:5-10, we read:
The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.” So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”
So from this, we deduce that:
- Some women met an angel.
- They don’t worship the angel.
- They were afraid, yet they ran to tell the disciples.
- They meet Jesus who tells them to go to Galilee.
Yet, we read in Mark, a successive Gospel, a completely different story, Mark 16:5-8:
“As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’ Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.“
- Some women met a young man in white clothes and not an angel.
- They don’t worship the young man.
- They were afraid and said nothing to anyone.
- Never met Jesus, instead the angel tells them to go to Galilee.
In fact, if we read the next Gospel in succession, that is, Luke, we have another completely different account. We read from Luke 24:4-8:
While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ ” Then they remembered his words. When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others.
- Some women did not meet an angel, nor a young man, but instead two men in clothes as bright as lightning.
- Instead of not worshipping the angel or a young man, they worship two men.
- They were afraid, but instead of telling no one, they told everyone.
- Never met Jesus, but instead two men tell them to go to Galilee.
Continuing to the final Gospel, that of John, in Chapter 20, Verses 11-19, we read:
Now Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot. They asked her, “Woman, why are you crying?” “They have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I don’t know where they have put him.” At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. He asked her, “Woman, why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”). Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her. On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
- One woman, Mary, did not meet an angel or a young man or two men but instead two angels.
- She did not worship the two angels.
- She told everyone what she saw, in contrast to the other Gospels.
- Met Jesus who does not tell her to go to Galilee.
- Jesus does not meet them at Galilee but at a house in/ near Jerusalem.
Some like to say that we’ve misunderstood their scripture, some say we’ve distorted and manipulated the truth, but all we’ve really done is read the Gospels, as they are laid out. Anyone can pick up a Bible and read these contradicting narratives. In fact, I’ve linked all the relevant chapters to a popular Christian Bible website and I do hope that anyone who comes across this article, tries to investigate it for themselves.
In conclusion, I’d like to give a quote which sums up the Muslim perspective of this incident, Mary and the other female disciples go to tell the men what has happened, this quote being from the Gospel of Luke:
It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles.
As is the Muslim view, the men’s response is practically priceless:
But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense.
As we end, one more relevant quote from the same Gospel:
Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
Which fulfills the Islamic narrative, from the Qur’an which states:
“And because they denied and spoke dreadful calumnies of Mary; and for saying: “We killed the Christ, Jesus, son of Mary, who was an apostle of God;” but they neither killed nor crucified him, though it so appeared to them. Those who disagree in the matter are only lost in doubt. They have no knowledge about it other than conjecture, for surely they did not kill him, But God raised him up (in position) and closer to Himself; and God is all-mighty and all-wise.”
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
The Crucifixion: The Diminishing of God’s Deity, Inter-Testament Conflicts
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
As a Muslim, I have always loved the Islamic portrayal of ‘Isa (may God’s peace and blessings be upon him). You may call him Jesus, Christ, Messiah, Mashiach, or whatever other titles your faith ties to him, we’re discussing the same great and mighty personality who has played a significant role in both Islamic and Judeo-Christian theology. Clearly his words, his actions and his life have impacted this world in a magnificent and bountiful way. No Muslim can be a Muslim without acknowledging and believing in the message of Christ (Mark 12:29, Acts 2:22, Qur’an Surah Baqarah 2:1-5). Furthermore what is Christianity without Christ? Most certainly our faiths tie us to this spectacular personality. We may disagree alot on his personhood, but we also tend to agree in many areas. Most non-Muslims (Jews, Christians, Atheists), don’t particularly fully understand the Islamic perception of Jesus and it is from this that seeds of discord (and discourse!) have been sown for many centuries, atleast for the most part of the past 1433 years.
This article seeks to highlight one particular area of Christ’s ministry according to the Old Testament and New Testament’s words about him. We begin with a quotation from the Book of Psalms, which reads:
“For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. They will be protected forever, but the offspring of the wicked will be cut off;” – Bible : Psalms (37) : Verse 28.
Our modus operandi from this verse onwards is intended to imply that Jesus would be the most faithful and the most just person of his time with respect to his life and personhood, whether you consider him to be a God, a man or otherwise. Both Muslims and Christians can agree on this following excerpt from the Gospel, which attributes these words to him:
“…I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.” – Bible : John (5) : Verse 30.
The verses from Psalms (Tehillim) and from John (above), promote the understanding that Jesus was just because he judged according to the rule and law of God and thus since the Old Testament says that God loves and will not forsake such a person, we all can accept that Christ was loved and would not be forsaken by God. However as a Muslim reading the New Testament, the image it portrays of Christ on this very promise allegedly from God in Psalms, is severely diminished, usurped and if I must say, perverted. On one hand, I’m being presented with such a beautiful, warm, good intended portrayal of God’s love for the just and justice, His protection is upon such a person. Yet, when we read the following verses, I am not only left discontented and in awe that the New Testament has forgotten this promise of God, I fully believe that only a person wanting to destroy Christ’s honour would believe such a story:
“About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi lama sabachthani?”—which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” – Bible : Matthew (27) : Verse 46.
“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”—which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” – Bible : Mark (15) : 34.
It is clear for anyone who is purely intended that these stories, depictions of a man forsaken by God, cannot be the man portrayed in John 5:30 and Psalms 37:28. Rather, it reminds of the man later spoken of in Psalms 37:28:
“…They will be protected forever, but the offspring of the wicked will be cut off;” – Bible : Psalms (37) : Verse 28.
Am I supposed to believe that Christ was a wicked man, cut off from the mercy of God? As a Muslim, it burdens my heart to have to believe that this is what someone who loves Christ could possibly believe. In fact, even Christian scholars have purported that this alleged saying of Christ is out of his character and simply demeans him:
“Some suppose “that the divinity had now departed from Christ, and that his human nature was left unsupported to bear the punishment due to men for their sins.” But this is by no means to be admitted…” – Adam Clarke’s Commentary of the Bible, Matthew 27.
In fact, this has troubled another commentator of the Bible, Matthew Henry in his Commentary of the Bible, says:
“What the complaint was–My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?A strange complaint to come from the mouth of our Lord Jesus, who, we are sure, was God’s elect, in whom his soul delighted (Isaiah 42:1), and one in whom he was always well pleased. The Father now loved him, nay, he knew that therefore he loved him, because he laid down his life for the sheep; what, and yet forsaken of him, and in the midst of his sufferings too! Surely never sorrow was like unto that sorrow which extorted such a complaint as this from one who, being perfectly free from sin, could never be a terror to himself; but the heart knows its own bitterness.” – Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary on the Bible, Matthew 27.
A number of times however, Matthew Henry admits that indeed Jesus was forsaken and that this is no mistake:
“That our Lord Jesus was, in his sufferings, for a time, forsaken by his Father. So he saith himself, who we are sure was under no mistake concerning his own case.” – Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary on the Bible, Matthew 27.
“That Christ’s being forsaken of his Father was the most grievous of his sufferings, and that which he complained most of. ” – Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary on the Bible, Matthew 27.
What’s worse is that even an epistle in the New Testaments willingly admits that the one who is punished upon the cross is cursed by God:
“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.” – Bible : Galatians (3) : Verse 13.
These verses, quotes, scholar’s interpretations and more, really cause disdain for the Muslim who is taught otherwise. Jesus, Christ, the Messiah, may God be pleased with him, to us, was not forsaken by God, was not abandoned, cursed, tortured, abused, mocked or destroyed. To us, he delivered his message (risalah), to his people, the Children of Israel (Bani Isra’il), he did miracles and brought guidance to the masses by God’s will. Islam portrays him not be wretched and forsaken, but worthy of the protection of God, as the Psalms has said. The Qur’an says of this great man that God indeed had protected him:
“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 who 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.” – Qur’an : Surah (3) : Ayat 55.
In conclusion, while the NT portrays Christ as being forsaken, cut off and punished by God, the Qur’an makes it clear that Christ was saved, which according to the verse in Psalms, this is what God had promised. Islam promotes and expounds upon the person of Christ as being worthy of God’s mercy (Rahma) and protection, this is what we believe of Christ and this is why we will not believe in something which degrades and perverts his beauty as the New Testament does.
May God convey His mercy and blessings upon ‘Isa (Jesus) the son of Mary (may Allaah be pleased with her) and protect him from the slanders, lies and insults that those who pretend to love him continue to preach. Ameen.
wa Allaahu ‘Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Boko Haram: More Christians Arrested Attempting to Blow Up Church [Nigeria]
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
In another report by Nigerian police, a group of Christians were again, caught in another terror plot to blow up Churches. Major Nigerian media outlet, Premium Times Nigeria, had this report to give:
Nine bombers, believed to be christians, were apprehended this morning when they attempted to bomb a COCIN church at Miya Barkate, 20 kilometres along Jos-Bauchi Highway in Bauchi State.
The suspected bombers are Lamba Goma, Filibus Danasa, Joshua Ali, Danjuma Sabo, Joseph Audu, Simon Gabriel, Bulus Haruna, Yohanna Ishaya and Daniel Ayuba (who was the immediate past Secretary of PDP at Tilden Fulani Ward, Toro LGA, Bauchi State).
The suspects are members of the same COCIN church, Unguwar Rimi, a new and small Christian settlement between Tilden Fulani and Shere Hills. The suspects who were thoroughly beaten by the public were rescued by police and then detained at the Toro Divisional Police Division before they were transferred to Bauchi State Police Command, Bauchi.
At about the same time this morning in the Neighbouring Plateau State, a bomb explosion was reported at the headquarters of the same COCIN church during a Sunday service. The number of casualties are not certain. The pastor of the targeted COCIN Church in Bauchi is Ishaya Izam, who recently arrived on posting from the Cocin headquarters in Jos, which was bombed this morning.
To read more on this ongoing development, visit the original news report here.
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]
Calling Christians 
You must be logged in to post a comment.