Tag Archives: christmas

The Birth Narratives of Jesus in the New Testament – Part 1

Have you ever read the birth narratives about Jesus in the New Testament? They are generally a lot later than people know them to be (in terms of manuscript dating). Generally only Papyrus 4 is said to be earlier than Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the 4th century CE, but it is still generally dated from the late 2nd century to the early 4th century CE. That is roughly between 150 to 300 years after Jesus’ time on earth. Regardless of these facts, the narratives themselves are difficult to follow and understand, they are often in direct contradiction to each other and have almost no overlap. There are important textual variants present in both groups of passages, but this is not meant to be an article focused on textual criticism. Our goal is to read these narratives and then to point out any difficulties we see with them.
Matthew 2:1-12 (ESV)

Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” 3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet:

6 “‘And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.’”

7 Then Herod summoned the wise men secretly and ascertained from them what time the star had appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, “Go and search diligently for the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may come and worship him.” 9 After listening to the king, they went on their way. And behold, the star that they had seen when it rose went before them until it came to rest over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 11 And going into the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh. 12 And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed to their own country by another way.

Luke 2:1-22 (ESV)

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3 And all went to be registered, each to his own town. 4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 5 to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. 6 And while they were there, the time came for her to give birth. 7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

8 And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with great fear. 10 And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.” 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

14 “Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

15 When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.” 16 And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. 17 And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. 18 And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. 19 But Mary treasured up all these things, pondering them in her heart. 20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

21 And at the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

22 And when the time came for their purification according to the Law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord.

The narrative in Matthew tells us that it took a special sign from God, a star, in order for the wise men to find Joseph, Mary and Jesus. There is no mention of these wise men in the narrative which Luke gives us. Do note, I’m not saying “Matthew” or “Luke” as in reference to historical persons, but as for simple titles to refer to their various stories as presented in the New Testament. Interestingly in Matthew, these wise men first go to Jerusalem to inquire about the location of the Messiah, yet when they reached Jerusalem all the chief priests and scribes of the people (Matthew 2:3-6) were already aware that the Messiah was to be found in Bethlehem. At the outset this first piece of information presents us with the problem of the wise men being not so wise, if all the chief priests and scribes already knew this information (which is a quote from the Old Testament), then how is it possible that the only people to visit baby Jesus are the very people who don’t know how to find him?

What makes this worse is that all of Jerusalem was troubled alongside Herod regarding the news of the birth of the Messiah. If that is the case, then most people in Jerusalem would have known this information, so it was not only all the chief priests and all the scribes, but also most of the people who knew where to find the Messiah. Yet, Herod tasks the wise men to find the Messiah, yet if he already knew they were in Bethlehem and wanted to kill the Messiah, why not send Roman soldiers? Instead, it seems to appear that the authors of Matthew found it sensible to write that the wise men were to go to Herod and ask him information that was widely and publicly circulated, then they were to go to Bethlehem and find him, then they would travel from Bethlehem back to Jerusalem to inform Herod. Such a circumstance allows for only one conclusion, that the authors of Matthew had to provide a window of time for Joseph, Mary and Jesus to fear for their safety and flee out of Bethlehem.

Yet, if we look at the narrative in Luke 2:7, Mary gives birth to Jesus. In Luke 2:8-20, an angel appears to native shepherds who reside near Bethlehem and gives them the news about the Messiah. These shepherds and the angels, along with their conversation is totally absent from Matthew’s version. Luke 2:17-18 then says:

17 And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. 18 And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them.

The Shepherds then announce the news of the angels and the news directly about Jesus. There is no warning about their safety, no concern about Herod wanting the Messiah to be killed, the shepherds made the news “known” and specifically that “all” who heard the news, wondered about it. Had they been concerned about the Messiah’s safety, why would they make the story “known”? The narratives here have very little overlap, indeed there is no fleeing to Egypt as Matthew recounts, but in the story of Luke, Jesus and his family venture into Jerusalem where Joseph and Mary are to present Jesus in the Temple, as Luke 2:22 says.

There is a simple explanation to all this. If Herod wanted to kill the Messiah, and he knew the Messiah had to be brought to the Temple in Jerusalem for presentation before the Lord, then why not have the soldiers present within and throughout Jerusalem, wait at the Temple in secret and then kill every boy who is brought forth?

If one were to read the story of Matthew in isolation, it would be a suspenseful drama, filled with prophecies, fear, intrigue, mystery, violence and a great escape!

If one were to read the story of Luke in isolation, it would be filled with no suspense, no fear, no violence and no great escape, but rather it would appear to be a happy story without any worrying, anxiety or concern.

As Christmas comes closer, we will compare and contrast the various stories, try to make sense of them and even try to solve the contradictions without compromising on the text themselves. If it is possible to find an alternative version which perfectly harmonizes these two narratives, I would love to read it. Unfortunately, I’ve read from Tatian’s to modern authors such as Dr. Licona in an effort to find atleast one version that manages to combine these two narratives without having need to omit or add one element or another. What curious problems do you see in these narratives?

Part 2 can be found here.

and God knows best.

Christmas: A Unique Birth?

During the Christmas season, many celebrate the birth of Christ, the incarnation of God as something unique and unprecedented. It’s an incarnation of God that brought about the new covenant, allowing Christ to die for our sins and grant us eternal life. Or so that is what is said. There is however, nothing unique about God becoming incarnate from a Christian perspective, theophanies or the appearance of God in various forms throughout the Old Testament is a common and well-known theme, therefore it begs the question as to why any Christian should consider the incarnation to be a unique, once in a lifetime event.


As already established in an earlier article, the date of Christmas itself is not Biblically based1. Those who hold to the December 25th date are merely doing so out of tradition and culture, as opposed to Christian beliefs or rites. While some may believe that there is some religious, Biblical basis for the celebration of the birth of whom they consider to be God, at no point in the New Testament (or early Christian documents) do any of the authors ever indicate that the disciples, apostles, presbyters, or patristics ever commemorated the birth of Christ himself.

Perhaps though what is more confusing is that according to Christian beliefs the incarnation was not unique. It was not unique in the sense that Christ had come to earth in an incarnate form previously, and it was also not unique for in the same incarnate form he also bore no sin. One Christian author argues:

Divine manifestations and revelatory experiences of the latter sort are commonly called theophanies (i.e., appearances of God). One of the most important forms that theophanies take in the OT is that of the Malak Yahweh, commonly translated as “the Angel of the LORD” or “the Angel of Yahweh”. According to the Old Testament Scriptures, this figure is an appearance of Yahweh in human form.2

The author identifies this Angel of Yahweh as being Jesus in no uncertain terms:

The earliest Christians, as well as many other Christian worthies throughout the centuries, have also viewed the Malak Yahweh as a distinct divine person within the Godhead, further explicating it as a Christophany, that is, an appearance of the pre-incarnate Logos or Word of God – the Lord Jesus Christ.3

In the Book of Genesis, it records the myth of Abraham’s meeting with three men who were the God (the Lord) in human form:

The Lord appeared to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent during the hottest time of the day. Abraham looked up and saw three men standing across from him. When he saw them he ran from the entrance of the tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground. He said, “My lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by and leave your servant. – Genesis 18:1-3.4

In conclusion, as it pertains to Christmas, the celebration of a unique incarnation of God is unremarkable. According to Christian beliefs, Christ was already incarnate in an earlier time and so the advent of the birth of Christ is not and should not be considered unique or something worthy of celebration unless one were Muslim. In the Islamic case, we do have reason to believe that Jesus’s birth was unique, that his birth manifested itself through the will of God, a birth without a father. While we do not celebrate Christmas under false pretenses, we do however have more of a reason to consider his birth unique and miraculous than our Christian brothers and sisters.


and Allah knows best.


  1. Three Reasons Why Christians Should Not Celebrate Christmas.
  2. The Malak Yahweh: Jesus, the Divine Messenger of the Old Testament.
  3. Ibid.
  4. NET Genesis 18:1-3.

Three Reasons Why Christians Should Not Celebrate Christmas

Tis the season to be jolly, but should Christians hold this holiday in such high esteem? In this article, we look at three reasons why Christians should reject celebrating Christmas –


1. The Earliest Christians  Didn’t Celebrate Christmas

As shocking as it might seem, the earliest Christians – including the apostles and disciples of Christ, had no such celebration. The early Church Fathers Iraenaeus and Tertullian omit any mention of it from their list of Christian feasts. The Church Father Origen argues that only sinners celebrate their birthdays. Furthermore, the early Christian apologist Arnobius ridiculed the pagan Graeco-Romans for celebrating the ‘birth’ of their gods.

Notoriously absent from any of the four gospel accounts is the mention of a yearly celebration of Jesus’s birth. During Jesus’s ministry, no such celebration is ever recorded. During the formative years of the Church, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, no such celebration is ever mentioned. One needs to ask, if such a celebration was essential to the Christian faith, wouldn’t Christ, his mother, his apostles and disciples have mentioned it? Whether Catholic or Protestant, Christian tradition does not record any yearly celebration or feast of Jesus’s birth in the Bible, nor is there any record of any yearly celebration or feast of Jesus’s birth in the early Church tradition until the 3rd century CE.

When mention of this celebration did occur, the dates listed were the 20th of May, the 19th or 20th of April and the 28th of March. Even if one wanted to celebrate the birth of Christ due to some late Church tradition, it would not be held in December. So, if you’re a Catholic or adhere to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, it’s going to be quite difficult to claim that Christmas is an essential Christian feast that merits the Christian faith. According to all historical records, Christmas is a later development, far removed from the time of Christ and early Christian apologists ridiculed the pagans for celebrating the ‘birth’ of their pagan gods.[1]

2. Christians Once Banned Christmas and Condemned it as a Heretical Festival

Citing a lack of ‘Biblical Justification’ and its ‘derivation from the Catholic tradition’, Protestant Christians in England banned Christmas in 1644. In further condemnation of the festival, the English’s Long Parliament in June 1647 passed an ordinance confirming the abolition of the feast of Christmas. Protestant Christians in England considered Christmas Trees, decorations and Christmas foods to be unholy pagan rituals.[2] Across the Atlantic, Christians in America soon followed suit. Christmas was banned in Boston from 1659 to 1681, and it did not become a legal holiday in the New England until 1856.[3]


3. Christmas in a Christian Perspective

The festival now known as ‘Christmas’ is derived from the Old English phrase Cristes Maesse, first noted in 1038 CE.[4] While the first use of Christmas Trees – the Evergreen Fir Trees, was adopted from the pagan usage of them for decorating their homes during the winter solstice. Similarly, it is documented that pagans also used them for decorating their temples during the festival of Saturnalia. The first documented use of the Christmas Tree was in the cities of Tallinn in Estonia (1441 CE) and Riga in Latvia (15010 CE).[5]

Taking into consideration the previous evidences – there was no yearly celebration of Christ’s birth recorded to be done by Christ, his family, the apostles or the disciples. No mention of a yearly celebration of Christ’s birth by the early Church, and early renunciations of this practise as a pagan festival by at least one noted Christian apologist. The dates for Christ’s birth are not only historically uncertain, none of the recorded date coincide with the month of December. The festival itself was banned by Christian nations, with those prohibitions being based on a lack of scriptural evidence and an acute similarity to pagan festivals.

Christmas itself is not, and has not been for a long time about the nativity or Jesus. The most famous character during the Christmas season is Santa Claus. Worldwide search trends since 2004 record Santa Claus being the dominant search term, exponentially outpacing Jesus Christ on a year to year basis during the Christmas Season by a factor of 7:


Commercialization. Holiday sales account for at least 1/5th or ~20% of retail industry’s sales in the US. The holiday season accounts for more sales than Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, Valentine’s Day, Halloween, Easter, and St. Patrick’s Day combined.


Notably, the only time Jesus is said to have reacted violently, is recorded in the Gospels when money changers were using the Temple as a marketplace. In essence, people were using something holy for commercial means, not unlike what we find with the commercialization of the Christ-mass season today. A cursory reading of Matthew 21:12-13 or of John 2:14-17 makes it absolutely clear that the commercialization of Jesus’s name is something of great disrepute.

All in all, Christmas is not about Jesus. It’s not essential to the Christian faith and it’s not a practise found in the early Christian tradition. Christians who practise Christmas today are practising a festival that took hundreds of years to develop, a festival which adopted pagan practises, a festival which has no Biblical basis, a festival that is more about retail sales and Santa Claus than it is about the person of Jesus the Christ.

Christians have an important decision to make. Either you go against the grain and reject this pagan-commercialized syncretic holiday or adopt a non-Biblical modern commercial holiday:

Aggravation is better than merriment
because a sad face may lead to a glad heart.
4 The wise heart is in the house that mourns,
but the foolish heart is in the house that rejoices.
5 It is better to obey the reprimand of the wise
than to listen to the song of fools,
6 because the fool’s merriment
is like nettles crackling under a kettle.
That too is pointless.

– Ecclesiastes 7:3-6.

and God knows best.


1 – Martindale, Cyril Charles. “Christmas.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 3. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. 24 Dec. 2015 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm&gt;.

2 – Burton-Hill, Clemency. “When Christmas Carols Were Banned.” BBC. BBC, 19 Dec. 2014. Web. 24 Dec. 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20141219-when-christmas-carols-were-banned&gt;.

3 – Melina, Remy. “The Surprising Truth: Christians Once Banned Christmas.” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 14 Dec. 2010. Web. 24 Dec. 2015. <http://www.livescience.com/32891-why-was-christmas-banned-in-america-.html&gt;.

4Ibid – 1.

5 – “The History of Christmas Trees on Whychristmas?com.” The History of Christmas Trees. Web. 24 Dec. 2015.<http://www.whychristmas.com/customs/trees.shtml&gt;.

No War on Christmas

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

As a Muslim, I identify with the sentiments of the secular population. Most governments have holidays for Christmas, use state funds to purchase Christmas decorations and host Christmas parties. For us Muslims, we don’t have this luxury for ‘Eid, for our Hindu brothers in humanity, they don’t have this privilege for their religious festivals either. Even Jews don’t get a holiday for Hannukah or Passover. Christmas, or the Celebration of Jesus the Christ is solely a Christian holiday, not a secular holiday such as a Republic Day or Independence Day holiday.

Islam has no qualms with Christians celebrating Christmas, but as a Muslim, I do wish that governments would stop showing favour to one religion’s festivals and celebrate all accordingly.

War on Christmas

wa Allaahu ‘Alam.

Early Christianity: Diverse Doctrines and Beliefs

Our Brother Alexus, from Lebanon, has braved the threats of his Christian neighbours and has been able to compile a succinct yet extremely detailed introduction to Christianity. If you’re a Christian or Muslim, it presents the beliefs of Christianity in an objectified format, comparing some of the propositions of the Bible with the proclamations of the Qur’aan. As part of our Christmas Special, this post will be made into a page and this will be made into a freely downloadable and distributable PDF file, God Willing. Please look forward to the updated link in this post for the PDF download link.

Download this in PDF form: [Currently Offline]

                         Christianity: A Brief Introduction                   


Opening Statement: Seriously, did you know?
Did you know that ancient Christians—dating from the very earliest centuries, believed there were 2 different Gods, 12, 30, or even 365?

Obviously, many people today would argue that such views could not be Christian. Yet, what is striking is that these people who believed in such things claimed to be “Christians”. They even insisted that their teachings were taught and maintained by Jesus (may God be pleased with him) himself. Ironically, they could appeal to written proof, for they, each group, possessed documents allegedly penned by Jesus’ own apostles.

So how diverse was Christianity, one may ask?

What is Christianity: The Creed?

In order to define Christianity, one would have to examine its creeds. Firstly, what is a creed? A creed is a statement of belief—usually a statement of faith that describes the beliefs shared by a religious community and is often recited as part of a religious service. The word derives from the Latin: credo for “I believe” (because the Latin translation of the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed both begin with this word).

Of course there are many creeds, including:

-Old Roman Creed

-Nicene Creed

-Apostles’ Creed (based on the Old Roman Creed).

-Chalcedonian Creed.

-Athanasian Creed.

-Tridentine Creed.

-Masai Creed.

-Credo of the People of God.

One of the most widely used creeds in Christianity is the Nicene Creed, first formulated in AD 325 at the First Council of Nicaea. It is the first council which explicitly stated the imperative belief in the divinity of Jesus and the trinity.

It could be summarized as follows:

  • Jesus Christ is described as “God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,” proclaiming his divinity. When all light sources were natural, the essence of light was considered to be identical, regardless of its form.
  • Jesus Christ is said to be “begotten, not made”, asserting his co-eternalness with God, and confirming it by stating his role in the Creation. Basically, they were saying that Jesus was God, and God’s son, not a creation of God.
  • He is said to be “from the substance of the Father,” in direct opposition to Arianism. Eusebius of Caesarea ascribes the term homoousios, or consubstantial, i.e., “of the same substance” (of the Father), to Constantine who, on this particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority.

The council did not completely solve the problems and establish the criteria of the Christian faith—this is why many councils were executed later on such as the First Council of Constantinople and the council of Ephesus and many others.

So what do Christians exactly believe: The six points.

In light of the aforementioned, the Christian set of belief can be simply divided as follows:

  • The Divinity of Jesus—He is at the same time fully Divine and fully human.
  • The Trinity—the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Three persons yet One God who share equally the Glory and substance of the one and only God, Almighty.
  • The Original Sin
  • The crucifixion—aka the Cross.
  • The resurrection
  • Salvation.

Before we begin: The Structure.

My focus during this lecture will be based on the first 3 points: The Divinity of Jesus, the Trinity and the Original Sin. I shall discuss these three topics in light of:

1)      The Biblical Scripture—the Old and New Testament.

2)      The Quranic Scripture.

3)      The Logical Perspective.

The Divinity of Jesus: A Fact or a Fiction?

It is noteworthy to mention that there is not a single verse in the Biblical Scripture where Jesus says he is the Almighty God or order worship. This very statement should give us a long pause. If Jesus was indeed God, why didn’t he simply say so? Was he shy? Did he feel awkward? Or maybe was he afraid? A Christian might say: Jesus did not immediately proclaim divinity simply because it is a hard concept on humans to grasp—hence, he did it in a gradual manner. Many difficulties arouse from that response:

1)      There is no gradual process as Jesus did not claim divinity. How could there be a gradual process when the end result is not attained?!

2)      Jesus claimed inferiority rather than equality par rapport to the Creator.

Jesus (pbuh) was a Jewish prophet sent to the Jewish community, a follower of the Jewish law and a devout worshipper of the Jewish God. What’s the issue with Divinity then? The idea that God became a man, a God-man is not a thing just reserved to Christians. Buddhists teaches that God revealed himself in Buddha, Druze claim Al Hakem was God incarnate and Alawites assure that Ali is simply, the Almighty. Ironically, even today, you still find some people declaring divinity. Dr. Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda who recently appeared during a Cnn interview is an example. As a matter of fact, this notion stems from the idea that out of humility and love, the Almighty God decided to take human form to feel and experience what humans go through. To that view, the Holy Quran clarifies, in Surah 67, Ayah 14:

أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ

“Should He not know what He created? And He is The Ever-Kind, The Ever-Cognizant.”

We ask why would God need to be a human in order to understand us? Does God really require becoming what He created to understand every aspect? A weird and incomprehensible concept.

Humility? Are we to perceive humility by seeing God, Almighty going to the toilet? Having a round of beat? Or by being spat on? Is this what defines humility. To this blasphemous and atrocious notion, we say:

سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ عُلُوًّا كَبِيرًا

“Glorified is He, and High Exalted above what they say!”  (Holy Quran 17:43).

The List: Christianity, a tale?

Before moving in depth, I would like to share the following list. These are religious icons whose myths share many or most of the attributes of Christianity fairy tale most of them including resurrection:

* Chrishna of Hindostan
* Budha Sakio of India
* Salivahana of Bermuda
* Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt
* Odin of the Scandinavians
* Crite of Chaldea
* Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia
* Baal and Taut “The only Begotten of God,” of Phenecia
* Indra of Tibet
* Bali of Afghanistan
* Jao of Nepal
* Wittoba of the Bilingonese
* Thammuz of Syria
* Atys of Phrygia
* Xamolsix of Thrace
* Zoar of the Bonzes
* Adad of Assyria
* Deva Tat, and Sammonocadam, of siam
* Alcides of Thebes
* Mkado of the Sintoos
* Beddru of Japan
* Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids
* Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls
* Cadmus of Greecde
* Hil and Feta of the Mandaites
* Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico
* Universal Monarch of the Sibyls
* Ischy of the island of Formosa
* Divine Teacher of Plato
* Holy One of Xaca
* Fohi and Tien of China
* Adonis, son of the virgin Io, of Greece
* Ixion and Quirinus, of Rome
* Prometheus of Caucasus

Some specifics on a few in ascending order of age (ALL of which predate christianity):
Dionysus, Greece, 500.B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Performed miracles with his disciples, such as: turning water into wine
* Common names: “king of kings”, “god’s only begotten son”, “alpha and omega”
* Upon death, resurrected

Krishna, India, 900 B.C.
* Born of a virgin
* Birth heralded by a star in the east
* performed miracles
* Upon death, resurrected

Attis, Greece, 1200 B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Crucified
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected

Mithra, Persia, 1200 B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Had 12 disciples
* Performed miracles
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected
* Nicknames: “the truth”, “the light”
(Sacred day of worship of Mithra was Sunday)

Horus, Egypt, 3000 B.C.
(Sun anthropomorphized)
* Born of virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Birth heralded by star in the east that was followed by 3 kings
* Teacher at 12
* Baptized at 30 and began ministry
* Had 12 disciples
* Performed miracles: healing sick and walking on water
* Nicknames: “the truth”, “lamb of god”, “the light”, “the good shepherd”
* Crucified
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected

A God-man: Debunked!

I shall present now 15 main points arguing why Jesus cannot be divine tackling it from 3 ways accordingly as already explained.

The Judgment Day.

1) Mark 13:32 read:

“”No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

This statement not only assures to us that Jesus is ignorant concerning the Judgment day—a thing which is incomprehensible—it raises another problematic issue: How does Jesus know and doesn’t know? It is like saying a part of God knows while the other has no idea! How can this be?

Adam Clarke, a biblical scholar, who wrote the famous “Commentary on the Bible” says:

“To me it is utterly unaccountable, how Jesus, who knew so correctly all the particulars which he here lays down, and which were to a jot and tittle verified by the event – how he who knew that not one stone should be left on another, should be ignorant of the day and hour when this should be done.  I cannot comprehend, but on this ground, that the Deity which dwelt in the man Christ Jesus might, at one time, communicate less of the knowledge of futurity to him than at another. However, I strongly suspect that the clause was not originally in this Gospel. Its not being found in the parallel places in the other evangelists is, in my opinion, a strong presumption against it.”

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible read:

“Neither the Son – This text has always presented serious difficulties. It has been asked, If Jesus had a divine nature, how could he say that he knew not the day and hour of a future event? In reply, it has been said that the passage was missing, according to Ambrose, in some Greek manuscripts; but it is now found in all, and there can be little doubt that the passage is genuine.  Others have said that the verb rendered “knoweth” means sometimes to “make” known or to reveal, and that the passage means, ‘that day and hour none makes known, neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father.’ But then it is natural to ask where has “the Father” made it known? In what place did he reveal it?’”

Where did the Father makes it known asks Barnes—No where.

Therefore, how come God does not know when the hour of Judgment is? Allegedly speaking and for the sake of the argument—did He lose His powers when He became a man? If yes, then are we still to consider Him as God? If not, what makes him divine then?

The Glorious Quran strictly refutes this absurd statement:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَخْفَىٰ عَلَيْهِ شَيْءٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَا فِي السَّمَاءِ

“Indeed, from Allah nothing is hidden in the earth nor in the heaven.” (Holy Quran 3:5)

وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ نَسِيًّا

“And your Lord is not forgetful.” (Noble Quran 19:64)

إِنَّمَا إِلَٰهُكُمُ اللَّهُ الَّذِي لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۚ وَسِعَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ عِلْمًا

“Your Ilah (God) is only Allah, the One (La ilaha illa Huwa) (none has the right to be worshipped but He). He has full knowledge of all things.” (Glorious Quran 20:94).

A helpless unreliable God?

2) John 5:30-2

“I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is valid.”

Indeed, one huge can of worms is opened by this verse. Firstly, how can God do nothing by Himself? This is truly a weird unsolved enigma. Secondly, the Biblical Jesus is declaring that his judgment is right—why? Because he is following not his will but the will of God which is according to Christians his will. So in other words, not his will but his will. In short, why are his words true—simply because he abide not by his will but by his will. Do you perceive the difference?

Did anyone, seriously anyone, grasp what was being said here? I guess not.

Finally, the last part—“If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid”. Can anyone imagine God testimony as invalid? Does this refer to “Lying”? Are we really to believe that? Nonetheless the ultimate problem here is the issue that God is testifying about himself yet insisting that if it relates to Him— “If I testify about myself”—it is wrong. Illogical.

A possible desperate Christian answer might be that God/Jesus is referring to his human nature. I would say, it would have been better to remain silent than to give this ridiculous answer, simply because:

–          You are asserting that by becoming a man, God testimony became invalid yet he was still God whose testimony is even above the word “Valid”—how can this be? How can God words or worse—his testimony valid and not valid at the same time?

–          How can we know when Jesus is talking in his human or divine nature?

–          By assuming that God words became unreliable, this would mean that He would have uttered lies. Istaghfor Allah.

–          Whether it was his human or divine nature—that does not refute the mere fact that it was God—hence still God testimony.
Now, what does the Quran says concerning God testimony:

قُلْ أَيُّ شَيْءٍ أَكْبَرُ شَهَادَةً ۖ قُلِ اللَّهُ ۖ

Say (O Muhammad SAW): “What thing is the most great in witness?” Say: Allah. (Holy Quran 6:22)

While in what relates to the statement “I can of mine own self do nothing”, Allah, the greatest says:

قُلْ أَتَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَا لَا يَمْلِكُ لَكُمْ ضَرًّا وَلَا نَفْعًا ۚ وَاللَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

Say, “Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no [power of] harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?” (Holy Quran 5:76)



So how many Gods are there?

3) Mark 12:29

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord”

John 20:17

“Jesus said to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brothers, and say to them, I ascend to my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”

Apparently, according to both these verses, Jesus has a God. How is that so? Doesn’t Christians believe in just one God—a Three Godhead? Or is it Two Gods now? Jesus and his “God”? Nonetheless, It is shiny clear according to Mark 12:29 which is basically a quote of Deuteronomy 6:4 that God is One.

Strikingly, Adam Clarke and Barnes are quite silent about this verse. I will quote another commentary, the well known Gill’s exposition of the entire Bible, as it seems to be exclusively interesting:

“God was his Father, not by creation, as he is to angels, and the souls of men, and therefore is called the Father of spirits; nor by adoption, as he is to the saints; nor with respect to the incarnation of Christ, for, as man, he had no father; or with regard to his office as Mediator, for as such he was a servant, and not a Son; but he was his Father by nature, or with regard to his divine person, being begotten of him, and so his own proper Son, and he his own proper Father;”

According to Gill, Jesus is not a “created” son as par rapport to his Father yet the Bible mentions Jesus as God firstborn—in other words, a created being. Obviously, God is not born, nor will He ever will be. Additionally, this latter tells us that God was a Father to Jesus by nature—What does Father by nature really means, one may ask? The Almighty God is at the same time a Father to himself and a Son—to himself? Surely, Christianity is one big mes.

Finally, Jesus is described and believed to be “Begotten”, a word which literary refers to the sexual mean of reproduction. Not only Jesus was shaped and created in his mother’s womb—this word unfortunately denotes an unworthy description related to the Almighty one really do not wish to open that door.

We have noticed how Jesus refers to his God, “My God and your God”, it is fascinating now to see what the Quran says concerning that issue:

لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَقَالَ الْمَسِيحُ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُ مَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَاهُ النَّارُ ۖ وَمَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ مِنْ أَنصَارٍ

“They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.” (Holy Quran 5:72)

ذَٰلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۚ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ مَا كَانَ لِلَّهِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ مِن وَلَدٍ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ ۚ إِذَا قَضَىٰ أَمْرًا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُوهُ ۚ هَٰذَا صِرَاطٌ مُّسْتَقِيمٌ

“That is Isa (Jesus) son of Maryam, in word of truth, concerning which they are wrangling. In no way is it for Allah to take to Him a child. All Extolment be to Him! When He decrees a Command, then He only says to it, “Be!” and it is.  And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. This is a straight Path.”

He is blaming himself now?!

4)  Mark 15:34   

“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

To me, it is one of the best biblical verses. I will draw first what is happening here. As a matter of fact, after being sentenced to death by crucifixion by Pontius Pilate, Jesus was nailed to the cross, where according to the Gospel of Mark; he was silent—unknowing what was happening to him—in a complete state of Shock!

Back to our issue, two points are actually raised here:

-To whom is Jesus talking to?

-Why is he blaming himself?

Apparently, either the Biblical God talk with himself—ask himself or even now blame himself—or something is really fishy going on here? I would say both.

Yet ironically, the bigger critical point here: Why is God blaming himself that he left himself to feel pain—all by himself? How could any normal, rational being believe this?

What do Christian missionaries present as response to this serious dilemma? A smart response is that Jesus was simply quoting Psalms 22, an Old Testament verse which to some extent is similar to that verse—a quote said by David. It may sound as a smart response from a shallow look but we examined carefully—it would seem so ridiculous. Ironically even though it is incomprehensible how David suddenly became Jesus—the passage if read carefully, one would undoubtedly note that it could not refer to Jesus—nonetheless, even if I would want to take it as a Prophecy—I am too nice—still that does not solve the issue. Just saying it is a prophecy simply means that it was known to happen yet it does not present a logical answer why Jesus was blaming himself?! In other words, a prophecy or not—Jesus still blamed why God left him, oddly himself—on the cross? The problem still stands!

To sum up: Difficulty arouse not only with the idea of a suicidal God—we have a biblical God that is not aware of what is going on, talking with himself and strikingly blaming himself why he killed himself—Fantastic.

The Quran:

وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا لَّقَدْ جِئْتُمْ شَيْئًا إِدًّا  تَكَادُ السَّمَاوَاتُ يَتَفَطَّرْنَ مِنْهُ وَتَنشَقُّ الْأَرْضُ وَتَخِرُّ الْجِبَالُ هَدًّا  أَن دَعَوْا لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ وَلَدًا  وَمَا يَنبَغِي لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ وَلَدًا  إِن كُلُّ مَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ إِلَّا آتِي الرَّحْمَٰنِ عَبْدًا لَّقَدْ أَحْصَاهُمْ وَعَدَّهُمْ عَدًّا وَكُلُّهُمْ آتِيهِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ فَرْدًا

“They say: “(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!” Indeed you have brought forth (said) a terrible evil thing. At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin, That they should invoke a son for (Allah) Most Gracious. For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to (Allah) Most Gracious as a servant. Indeed He has already enumerated them, and He has numbered them with (exact) numbering. And everyone of them will come to Him singly on the Day of Judgment. (Noble Quran 19:88-95).

5)  Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13

“Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil.”

Out of the four Gospels—only three mentions this incident and just two of them describe specifically what happened. While Mark is content with a general statement—John completely omits it. Therefore, our focus will be stressed on Matthew and Luke who narrate this fascinating story but with a slight difference which we will examine it shortly.

Apparently, the Spirit which is understood to be the Holy Spirit—One of God’s distinct personality that forms the trinity—has directed Jesus (himself?) for his temptation. One by just reading this would normally ask: God lead himself for his own temptation? Really?

We are told that Jesus was tempted for 40 days and during this period he fasted (Matthew 4:2; Luke 4:2)—obviously, so that his concentration be focused and ultimately avoiding sinning. Seeing Jesus has not succumbed—the Devil then uses his last three most powerful moves:

-He tells him to change stones into bread so that he could eat (Matthew 4:3; Luke 4:3)

-He takes him to the top of the temple and order him to jump  (Matthew 4:5-6; Luke 4:9) saying if you are the son of God—you will not be harmed—as the angels will prevent you from falling.

-Finally, he takes him (again?) to a very high mountain, showing him all the kingdom of the world and assuring him if he worships him—all what he has seen will be his. (Matthew 4:8-9; Luke 4:5-6).

From where do I begin—ah that seems a hard task.

I will divide my argument into five points:

I)  Mark, Matthew and Luke flat out contradict what James tells us in his epistle. As a matter of fact, according to James (1:13) “God cannot be tempted and nor does he tempt with evil”. A simple straightforward contradiction.

II) As already mentioned, Jesus fasted for 40 days. Quite interestingly, after that period, it is said that he became “Hungry”. Can anyone imagine a hungry God?

III) We read that Jesus was one time taken to top of the mountain and another to the high mountain—I honestly ask: Is Jesus a sack of potato that Satan throws from one place to another? Wake up Christians!!! This is the Almighty we are talking about.

IV) How could Satan have any effect on God, Almighty? How can he have power over His creator? And telling God to worship him? Seriously? Christians, do you realize what you are saying?

V) The book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus was tempted “in every way just as we are” (Hebrews 4:15). Now this is one bizarre terrible statement. Every way? Are we to believe that God thought of raping a woman? Throwing an old woman from a cliff? Or maybe dancing naked?

One way to reconcile this is to claim that Jesus did not sin, thus temptations did not have any effect any him. The issue is not whether he sinned or not—rather, the temptation. Whether he fell to Satan or not is irrelevant to the point discussed here.  Finally and as usual, you have the man part answer. It was the human part of God that was tempted. I don’t understand how that really solves the issue. First, do Christians, each time they face a difficulty, immediately shout: HUMAN PART! Second, on what basis? Third, even if we would want to accept that it was the human part that was being tempted—still it means that GOD WAS TEMPTED!According to the basic Christian belief, both the human and divine nature is both God.

The Quran:

وَرَبُّنَا الرَّحْمَٰنُ الْمُسْتَعَانُ عَلَىٰ مَا تَصِفُونَ

“And our Lord is the Beneficent Allah, Whose help is sought against what you ascribe (to Him).” (Noble Quran 21:112)

Good or not?

6) Luke 18:19; Matthew 19:16-17 and Mark 10:17-18


Consider the story of the rich young ruler. A story narrated by the first three Gospels. John here too—omits that story. Actually, the man is rich according to all three accounts, but only in Matthew he is said to be young and only in Luke he is said to be a ruler. Does that mean we are facing a contradiction here? Not the least. A contradiction occurs when two (or more) statements in relation to a subject conflict—one of them has to be wrong—which is not the case here.

Now, this young rich ruler approached Jesus by referring to him by the words: “Oh good teacher”. Jesus then asks him: Why are you calling me good? Only God is good! In other words, Jesus refused to be set on the same level of the Almighty—to be even put in a comparison. So how could God be not good but still good? He is not good but yet only he is good? A World of contradictions.

Another striking point to be considered is to compare these accounts. A process called by Christian scholars “Redaction Criticism”—which aims to point out how a Gospel author modified a story and why? It is noteworthy to mention that scholars believe that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, Luke and Matthew followed it and finally John. It is also believe that Matthew and Luke have considered Mark as one of their source. By comparing, we find that Luke agrees with Mark word for word. Yet let us read how Matthew renders the story:

“Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

One of the interesting things about this passage is that the man who approaches Jesus uses the term “good” in both accounts but in Matthew he uses it to refer to the deed he must do, whereas in Mark and Luke he uses it to refer to Jesus. As a result the ensuing dialogue in Mark makes sense: Jesus by asking refuse to be compared to God while in Matthew the flow of dialogue seems a bit flow: Why would Jesus object to the man asking about what is good, on the ground that God is only good?

One may ask, why did Matthew alter the text? Obviously, Matthew did not like the issue that Jesus was claiming to be inferior to God and realized that this would cause a serious problem so what did he do? He changed the text.

Jesus, a prophet?

7) Luke 24:19:

“What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.”

Matthew 21:11:

“The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.”

Matthew 13:57:

And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”

In the first two verses, we notice Jesus being referred to as a “Prophet” once by Cleopas, the brother of Joseph, the huband of Mary and another by the crowds. Yet what is striking is that in the last quotation, Jesus even refers to himself as a Prophet!!! As a matter of fact, when Jesus began preaching in the Synagogues, in his hometown—Nazareth, he was immediately rebuked by the Jews—his own people. Hence his words: “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”

Hence, the question now begs itself: Is Jesus a Prophet or God? Or could he both? Firstly, what is a Prophet? A Prophet is a person who conveys another person message. In religion, it refers generally to an individual who delivers a certain revelation to people. If Jesus was God, how would he be a Prophet? A prophet to whom? To himself? That seems pretty much absurd and illogical.

One answer I presume would be: Jesus was a prophet to the Father. He was delivering his Father message.


Yet Jesus and his Father are the one and same God. Hence, when a person says Jesus as a Prophet was simply transferring what the Father or his Father said is like saying God is transferring his own words.

Therefore, logically Jesus has to be either God or Prophet—and obviously, from the Biblical and logical perspective, the latter is to be picked.

Let’s go to the Holy Quran:

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلَا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ ۚ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ ۖ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۖ وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ ۚ انتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَّكُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ أَن يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ ۘ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا

“O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allah aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, (“Be!” – and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Ruh) created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: “Three (trinity)!” Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilah (God), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.” (4:171)

Circumsized, ate and evidently went to W.C?
8) Luke 2:21

“And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.”

Is anyone not familiar with the meaning of the word “circumcised”? Just in case, circumcision simply means:

“Male circumcision is the surgical removal of some or the entire foreskin (prepuce) from the penis.”

Seriously, I am even ashamed of myself by saying this. How could anyone attribute such a thing to the Almighty God? He had the dirty part of his genitals cut? Dirty and this part? Unfortunately, Christians do not realize the extent of blasphemy they are uttering by believing that God was a man, a fully human being. We Muslims cannot but to say:

سبحان الله و تعالى عما يصفون

Praise is He highly on what they describe.

Now concerning the issue of Jesus eating and hitting the toilet, I would like to quote the Quran to show how God, Almighty deals with such subject, we read:

مَّا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ صِدِّيقَةٌ ۖ كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ ۗ انظُرْ كَيْفَ نُبَيِّنُ لَهُمُ الْآيَاتِ ثُمَّ انظُرْ أَنَّىٰ يُؤْفَكُونَ

“The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded away from the truth.” (Glorious Quran 5:75)

Consider the eloquence of the Quran and how it smoothly and intellectually delivers the message. The verse says that both Mary and Jesus ate food and obviously what does the person do next? It’s the toilet’s time.

Hence, the Quran strictly refute that nonsense but as we have seen in a beautiful eloquent manner. Al Hamdulilah.

The Quran says:

قُلْ أَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ أَتَّخِذُ وَلِيًّا فَاطِرِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَهُوَ يُطْعِمُ وَلَا يُطْعَمُ ۗ قُلْ إِنِّي أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أَكُونَ أَوَّلَ مَنْ أَسْلَمَ ۖ وَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ

“Say, ‘Is it other than Allah I should take as a protector, Creator of the heavens and the earth, while it is He who feeds and is not fed?” Say, [O Muhammad], “Indeed, I have been commanded to be the first [among you] who submit [to Allah ] and [was commanded], ‘Do not ever be of the polytheists.’ ” (Holy Quran 6:14)

And finally,

لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ ۖ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ

“There is nothing whatever similar unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things).” (Noble Quran 42:11).

God changed his mind?
9) Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42

“Father, if you are willing, please take this cup of suffering away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine.”

According to the Christian teachings, specifically the Original Sin, no matter what a person does, no matter how much he prays, fasts, does good deeds—he is doomed to eternal Hell. What was the solution according to Christianity? God had to take human form—Jesus, to be crucified and ultimately to take all the sins of the world with him by dying. That may seem a bit weird but according to this faith—God did it according to his very own will. That was the only solution after all.

Ironically, Luke 22:42 tells us another thing. Here we notice Jesus praying to God, Almighty (himself?) not to die by taking away this “Cup of suffering”. In Luke, he simply asks once while in Mark, he insists three times!!!Now, doesn’t that K.O all the Christian faith apart? If God, Almighty willingly decided to go on a suicide mission—considering that it was the only solution plausible—Why did he suddenly change his mind? Are we to believe that God changes his mind now too? Although the Bible clearly mentions otherwise (Numbers 23:19).

Finally, Jesus says:”Your will to be done and not mine”.

We again here face a terrible nonsense. We note that:

-Jesus is talking with himself.

-Praying to himself.

-Asking himself to spare him from the mission.

-And for the final touch down, hoping that God’s will which is his will be done but not his will.

There is nothing I could say apart: Fantastic!

The Quranic perspective:
God is not a man: Is it that hard to understand?

10) Numbers 23:19; Samuel 15:39

“God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should change his mind.”

A simple straightforward fact: God is neither a man nor the son of a man. Why can’t Christians understand that? Who was Jesus? A pious God-fearing man and the son of Mary. Actually, God, Almighty since the beginning of time has sent Prophets with good news, with the message of Tawheed, the message of La Ilah illa Allah—there is no god but Allah warning mankind not to associate partners with God and not to worship the sun, the moon, the nature and of course—humans.  Nonetheless, thanks to Christianity—we are wrapped back to the ancient times.

A Christian rebuttal to this point might simply be:

“The verse says that God is not a man and not the Son of man—however, it does not say that God can never be a man or the Son of Man.”

Counter rebuttal:

This argument fails to perceive that the Old Testament is filled with verses that say that God is this or that and those verses remain true for eternity as Christians themselves will concede in their theology. What do I mean?

Let us take Deuteronomy 6:4 as an example.

“Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!”

To be consistent the proponents of the first rebuttal must now say that it is possible for God to be 1000 instead of echad(one) in the future if He so wishes. I do not think any reasonable Christian will agree to that.

And finally for my K.O point, Psalms 102:27 assures that God is the same, yesterday, today and tomorrow:

“But you remain the same, and your years will never end.”

Muslims sometimes when shocked by a certain thing say:

سبحان الدي يغير و لا يتغير

Praise is to Him that [causes] change but is never changed.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Christmas: The Origins [Shaykh Abdullah Hakim Quick]

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

What are the origins of Christmas? See what a historian, social activist and modern explorer has to say on this subject. It’s a pleasant introduction into a 25 minute video that goes indepth into the history, politics and theology behind the day of Christmas. Shaykh Abdullah’s speaking style is both simple and extant (to the point), yet his speech is not condemning, in fact it’s quite inviting, with that we invite both Muslims and Christians to watch his video:

For the more enthusiastic seeker with a few minutes extra to spare, the Shaykh has authored a wonderfully written article:

Since earliest times the inhabitants of the Northern countries have observed that there is a period during the year when the days begin to lengthen and the cold begins to strengthen.  This event is the Winter Solstice, the turning point when winter having reached its zenith, has also reached the point when it must decline again towards spring.  Thus, December 21st is the shortest day of the year.
It was on or about December 21st that the Ancient Greeks celebrated the Bacchanalia or festivities to honour Bacchus the god of wine.  In Ancient Rome the Saturnalia of festivals in honour of Saturn, the god of time, began on December 17th and continued for seven days.  Both festivals ended in drunkenness, obscenity and disorder.  The Druids observed this season in their great roofless temples at Stonehenge and Avebury in England.  Torches were lit and strange pagan ceremonies were enacted in honour of the Sun god and to cut the Mysterious Mistletoe to which they gave god-like powers.  Even the Ancient Egyptians celebrated this mid-winter in honour of Horus, the son of Isis, born at the close of December.

The Ancient Germanic tribes celebrated the pagan feast of the 12 Night from Dec. 25th to Jan. 6th.  The conflicts between the active forces of nature were represented as battles between the gods and plants.  The winter was the Ice-Giant, cruel and unruly, and darkness and death followed him.  The Sun god and the South Wind were symbols of light and life.  At last Thor, the god of the Thunderstorm riding on the wings of the air hurled his thunderbolt at the winter castle and demolished it.

In Scandinavian countries, great fires were kindled to defy the Frost King.  The followers of Mithra, throughout the Northern countries, called this period sol invictus representing the time of the victory of light over darkness.  Mithra, for them, was not only the Sun god, but the Mediator between mankind and the Supreme Being.  His birthday was celebrated on the 25th of December.  Sunday, the seventh day of the week (for seven was his number) was consecrated to him, and known as the Lord’s Day long before the Christian Era.

The roots of the Christmas observance, therefore, go deeply into the folklore of the early pagan traditions.  What we may read of Christmas in ancient days finds its flower in the past  and present customs of Western Civilization.  We should clearly understand one important fact.  Christmas is not the actual date of the birth of Jesus (p.b.u.h), but a compromise with paganism.  The Gospels say nothing about the seasons of the year when Jesus was born.  On the other hand, they do tell us that shepherds were guarding their flocks in the open air.  Hence, many of the early leaders of the Church considered it most likely that the nativity took place either in the late summer of early Fall.

This and countless facts point to the conclusion that Christmas (Dec. 25th) actually has nothing to do with Jesus (p.b.u.h.) and Mary (p.b.u.h.), the humble of servants of Allah who abstained from the world and submitted entirely to their lord. Christmas has actually incorporated into itself all the pagan festivals; Greek, Roman, Druid, German, Scandinavian, etc., and given them new meaning.  The wild revels of the Bacchanalia, the Saturnalia, and the Twelve Nights survive in a milder form in the merriment that marks the season of Christmas today.

“Christmas gifts themselves remind us of the presents that were exchanged in Rome during Saturnalia.  In Rome, it might be added, the presence usually took the form of wax tapers (candles) and dolls – the latter being in turn a survival of human sacrifices once offered to Saturn.  It is a queer thought that in our Christmas presents we are preserving under another form one of the most savage customs of our barbarian ancestors!  The shouts of ‘Bona Saturnalia’, which the Roman people exchanged among themselves are the precursors of ‘Merry Christmas!’ The decorations and illuminations of our Christians churches recall the temples of Saturn, radiant with burning taper and resplendent with garlands”

Today, when Christmas is mentioned, most people immediately think of Santa Claus. The image of Jesus, the son of Mary ((Peace be upon them) is secondary and sometimes lost in the merriment and materialism. The prices in the market place go up and we find that people are spending thousands in order to buy gifts for their friends and neighbours. Most Christians fall into debt that can last for the greater part of the year.
The problem that comes during the Christmas season for Muslims and non-Christians is that there are a number of contradictory symbols. Some of these symbols reveal an animistic religious base but others appear to be monotheistic. At the top of all of them is Santa Claus. One might then ask ‘What do pagan festivals have to do with the innocent, loveable Santa Claus?’

“Actually, in every one of these festivals, the leading figure was an old man with a large, white beard.  In the Bacchanalia, the chief god was not actually the young Bacchus, but the aged, cheery and decidedly disreputable Silenus, the chief of the Satyrs (Half man, half animal figures of Greek mythology) and the god of drunkards.  In the Saturnalia, it was Saturn, a dignified and venerable old gentleman, the god of Time.  In the Germanic feasts it was Thor, a person of patriarchal aspect, and a warrior to boot.” So, although the main figure of the Christian festival was supposed to be Jesus, the child-god born to an innocent woman, the pagan ways of the past were too strong in the hearts of the Christians to be easily dismissed.  The earlier gods were replaced by Saint Nicholas, an austere Christian Bishop who was born in Turkey in the 4th Century A.D., and became the patron Saint of children throughout the Western World.  The name Saint Nicholas has now been abbreviated to Santa Claus and even his image has changed, but one fact remains crystal clear; this merry, mystical figure that flies through the air in a reindeer-drawn sleigh is the re-incarnation of a pagan deity that is very much alive today in the minds of men.

“The early Germans considered the Norse Hertha or Bertha, the goddess of domesticity and the home.  During the winter solstice, houses were decked with Fir and Evergreens to welcome her coming.  When the family and the serfs gathered to dine, a great alter of flat stones was erected and here a fire of Fir bough was laid.  Hertha descended through the smoke, guiding those who were wise in Saga to foretell the fortunes of those persons at the feast.  We learn from this story of Hertha and the reason why Santa Claus comes down the chimney instead of in at the door.”

In just about all times and continents, we find records of the worship, at some former period, of a tree as a divine object.  The Pagan Scandinavians called their greatest and most famous tree (the Ash tree) Yggdrasil.  Nobody had ever seen it, but everybody believed in it.  It was supposed to have been so big that it had three roots, one in heaven, one in hell, and one on earth.  According to Scandinavian mythology, when the roots of Yggdrasil are eaten through, the tree will fall over and the end of all things will have arrived.  The Anglo-Saxon Druids adopted this mythology and during Christmas period chose Yule log which they blessed an proclaimed that it should be ever burning.  This custom has survived and the Yule log is burnt throughout England.  The origin if he sacred tree may have been developed in Ancient Egypt and other older societies.”  Egypt had one in the palm, which puts forth a shoot every month.  From Egypt the custom reached Rome, where it was added to the other ceremonies of the Saturnalia.  But as palm trees do not grow in Italy, other trees were used in its stead.  A small fir tree, or the crest of a large one was found to be the most suitable because it is shaped like a cone or pyramid.  This was decorated with twelve burning tapers lit in honour of the god of Time.  At the very tip of the pyramid blazed the representation of a radiant sun placed there in honour of Apollo, the sun-god to whom the three last days of December were dedicated.”

“Some people believe that the word “Holly” is a form of the word “Holy” because of the association of these evergreens with Christmas.  This is not the true derivation, however.  Holly is merely a variation of Holin, Hollin, or Holm.  The name Holme is now used for a kind of oak.  This tree was admired by the Druids who believed that its evergreen leaves attested to the fact that the sun never deserted it. It was therefore, sacred.  It was also believed to be hateful to witches and is therefore, placed on doors and windows to keep out the evil spirits.”

This is only a glimpse at the incredible amount of distortion and paganism that has been incorporated into the Christmas doctrine and disseminated throughout the world in the name of love, giving, and the purity of the Virgin Mary and Jesus (Peace be upon them). Somewhere along the line when the Christians were being tortured and killed in Roman coliseums, somebody made the decision to make it easy for the northern people to accept these teachings. So what comes about is an adaptation and a change so that you actually have the Christmas ceremony which once represented Pagan images of nature, images based upon the worship of the sun, or the worship of the created things, now in the monotheistic religion.

It is interesting to note that as late as 1647, Britain’s Puritan Parliament had Christmas ceremony banned as pagan. St. Nicholas appeared in early European folklore as another character, sometimes known as Beowulf , or Nick or Nikker. He was said to be a demon or the evil spirit of the north. Descriptions of him show him when humanoid as an aged creature with a flowing white beard. By The 16th century, the term had become more specific, the Chrisitianized:”Old Nick” or even “St. Nicholas” meant the devil proper. In the Bible, Isaiah 14:13, the devil’s throne was in the north. Satan presided over the winter’s darkness. So the character representing evil for the northern Christians was transferred into the figure of Santa Claus. He was often covered with red fur or driven in a sleigh by winged snakes.

If Santa Claus now is flying all over the world giving gifts to children what happened to the labour of their mother and the father?  Why is Santa Claus coming down the chimney? That is because there was a belief in ancient Scandinavia that a goddess of flames would come into the home.  And so this confusion now is all put together on the Christmas occasion and people have forgotten about Isa (p.b.u.h).

In the Islamic understanding, Isa or Jesus (p.b.u.h), the son of Mary (p.b.u.h)was a very humble person who possessed only one or two changes of clothing. He used to walk bare foot most of the time. He renounced the life of materialism and wanted people to move away from focussing on gold and silver. He encouraged the Children of Israel to have spirituality and to remember the Creator.  According to most Christian and Muslim theologians, the actual birth of Jesus the son of Mary (p.b.u.h) was in the summer.  In a Qur’anic chapter called Maryam ( Quran 19:16-40), there is a detailed discourse on Mary (p.b.u.h).  She is depicted as a very pious individual who spent most of her life fasting.  When the angel Gabriel told her that she would have a son, she couldn’t believe it. He informed her that it would happen by the power of God who would breath his spirit into her she would become pregnant; and she did.  She went out of the city to a remote area.  In the Quran, 19:24-25, Allah (swt) sent the angel to tell her that water will come under her and then to shake the palm tree and rutuban janniyya, the ripe dates, will fall down from the tree.  The Arabs knew that the ripe dates come in the summer time. Even the Christians agreed with this because, according to their traditions, the shepherds were putting their flocks outside.  And in the area of Bethlehem and Nazarath this could only be done in the warm weather.

Therefore, it is basically agreed upon that Jesus (p.b.u.h.) was a humble, simple, non- materialistic person who was born in the summer.  What is happening now is a cleverly contrived mixture that is moving more towards the celebration of immorality and materialism than piety and God-consciousness.

Allah has revealed in the Blessed Qur’an , Surah An-Nisaa (157-9), the following verses:

…And because of their sayings: We killed the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger, but they killed him not nor crucified him. It appeared so to them. And lo, those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture. They killed him not for certain. But Allah took him unto Himself.  And Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.  There is not one of the People of the Book but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them.

In Surah Al Ma’idah is the following:

The Messiah, son of Maryam is but an Apostle; Apostles before him have Indeed passed away. And his mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food.  See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away. Say: Do you serve besides Allah that which does not control for you any harm, or any profit? And Allah is the All Hearing, the All Knowing.

Say: O followers of the Book! Be not unduly immoderate in your religion, and do not follow the low desire of people who went astray before and led many astray and went astray from the right path.

Shaykh Abdullah Hakim Quick : Source

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

CL Edwards Responds, Again

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Earlier today I received a notification that a comment had been posted on this website. It wasn’t really a surprise to see who had written it, but I couldn’t keep a straight face after reading it. I’m still coping with the amount of humour this guy brings to the table. Naturally, I’m a bit perplexed though. You see, earlier yesterday evening, Mr. Edwards decided to author a post about me, “Pulling the cloak off the self appointed Da’ee“, which was fun and all to refute, which you can find here and here. However, as it seems, our respected opponent has a problem with the refutations. He thinks it’s creepy that I’m refuting his attacks on Islam and against me:

It’s always nice to have him comment on my posts, alteast that way I know he’s read something and can’t respond to it, so he leaves a comment to show it “just isn’t worth his time” (although he does have time to send me inbox messages, comments and links on FB), which really just signals to me, he doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to give a rebuttal to my writings. In fact, Mr. Edwards does have a creepy stalker like obsession with me, while I was a legal minor (that is according to most international law declarations), he would message me constantly on FB, until finally, a few months ago I sent him a reply that really must’ve knocked the wind out of him:

I say it must’ve knocked the wind out of him because he stopped sending me messages asking me about my personal life, that being in terms of religion. It’s sad to say he’s at it again, I’m legal now, so he must be rearing to have a chance at me (in what way, I can’t say), otherwise I’m not quite sure why he has the need to message me on FB, post comments on threads I’ve used, comment on my website or write entire articles about me.

As you can see for yourselves, just how many comments I’ve received from this man total atleast 100 +:

1 + 33 + 40 + 11 + 21 = 106

May God guide him from whatever evil he intends towards me, or any other young Muslims on the internet, Ameen.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]