Tag Archives: contradiction

Is the Qur’an Easy to Understand?

Question:

Christians and those who disagree with the Qur’an often cite the verse which claims that the Qur’an is clear to understand. They ask, if the Qur’an is clear and easy to understand, why are there so many different interpretations of it?

Answer:

The questioner also submitted the following clip as an example:

Dr. James White says:

“I don’t know, it’s [sic], the, the Qur’an claims to be mubeenun ummm [sic] which means clear, perspicuous, but this text is not clear and perspicuous, which is a problem because it’s been misused.”

He is probably referencing a verse such as this (emphasis ours):

“Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Book and a clear Qur’an.” – Qur’an 15:1.

The Qur’an however, qualifies and explains, what’s clear and to whom it is clear in understanding (emphasis ours):

It is He Who has revealed the Book to you. Some of its verses are absolutely clear and lucid, and these are the core of the Book. Others are ambiguous. Those in whose hearts there is perversity, always go about the part which is ambiguous, seeking mischief and seeking to arrive at its meaning arbitrarily, although none knows their true meaning except Allah. On the contrary, those firmly rooted in knowledge say: ‘We believe in it; it is all from our Lord alone.’ No one derives true admonition from anything except the men of understanding. – Qur’an 3:7.

The Qur’an clarifies that not everything in it is understandable to everyone. It further clarifies that its verses are clear to men of understanding who are, “firmly rooted in knowledge”. Hence, claiming that the Qur’an is clear to everyone is not true and wholly incorrect.

Let us then, now consider some examples. Someone may ask, why would God reveal a verse that cannot be clearly understood? God says that He sustains Himself, while this informs us of the nature of God, as humans it is difficult for us to grasp how anything can sustain itself and not depend on anything for its livelihood. Humans need food, animals need food, computers need electricity, cars need oil and gas, but God needs nothing. While we cannot wrap our heads fully around this concept, we still have learned about the nature of God.

We must also then consider the example of a car of which the manufacturer says it is the easiest to drive. Someone purchases the car and then crashes it. Does that make the manufacturer’s statement false? No, it does not. It means that the driver has made a mistake and despite the car’s handling being easy, the fault lays with the actions of the driver.  The same is with the Qur’an, while the Qur’an has been made clear and easy, it does not mean that everyone will have the ability or capacity to understand it.

and Allah knows best.

Qur’anic Error in 4:157 – Did the Jews Claim to have Killed the Messiah?

Question:

Does the Qur’an make an error when it says the Jews claimed to have killed the Messiah in Surah 4 Verse 157?

Answer:

No, it does not make an error. According to Matthew 27:22, the Jews chose to have Jesus killed:

“What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?”Pilate asked.They all answered, “Crucify him!”

Pontius Pilate then washes his hands of the decision and places the guilt upon the Jews which they wholeheartedly accepted in verses 23 – 25:

But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!” When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!” All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”

When missionaries ask such a question, it only goes to demonstrate that they are wholly unfamiliar and unlearned with the Gospel narrative about Jesus’ alleged death.

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.]

Ezra’s Imperfect Notion of The Rules of Criticism Leads to Many Faults

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

I would like everyone to compare the following verses. Both are attempting to explain the same genealogy as given in the Bible. Read them carefully and you’ll see that they don’t match:

1 Chronicles 8:29-35 (King James Version)
29And at Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon; whose wife’s name was Maachah:
30And his firstborn son Abdon, and Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and Nadab,
31And Gedor, and Ahio, and Zacher.
32And Mikloth begat Shimeah. And these also dwelt with their brethren in Jerusalem, over against them.
33And Ner begat Kish, and Kish begat Saul, and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal.
34And the son of Jonathan was Meribbaal; and Meribbaal begat Micah.
35And the sons of Micah were, Pithon, and Melech, and Tarea, and Ahaz.

1 Chronicles 9:35-44 (King James Version)
35And in Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jehiel, whose wife’s name was Maachah:
36And his firstborn son Abdon, then Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and Ner, and Nadab.
37And Gedor, and Ahio, and Zechariah, and Mikloth.
38And Mikloth begat Shimeam. And they also dwelt with their brethren at Jerusalem, over against their brethren.
39And Ner begat Kish; and Kish begat Saul; and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal.
40And the son of Jonathan was Meribbaal: and Meribbaal begat Micah.
41And the sons of Micah were, Pithon, and Melech, and Tahrea, and Ahaz.
42And Ahaz begat Jarah; and Jarah begat Alemeth, and Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat Moza;
43And Moza begat Binea; and Rephaiah his son, Eleasah his son, Azel his son.
44And Azel had six sons, whose names are these, Azrikam, Bocheru, and Ishmael, and Sheariah, and Obadiah, and Hanan: these were the sons of Azel.

We see the clear contradiction, it is obvious to anyone who can read that the two geologies are not the same despite their near proximity within 1 Chronicles, just differing from one Chapter, what makes it worse, is that they’re two chapters one right after the other!

Adam Clarke wrote, regarding these two genealogies:

This passage to the end of the 38th verse is found with a little variety in the names, 1 Chronicles 9:35-44.

The rabbins say that Ezra, having found two books that had these passages with a variety in the names, as they agreed in general, he thought best to insert them both, not being able to discern which was the best.

His general plan was to collate all the copies he had, and to follow the greater number when he found them to agree; those which disagreed from the majority were thrown aside as spurious; and yet, in many cases, probably the rejected copies contained the true text.

If Ezra proceeded as R. Sol. Jarchi says, he had a very imperfect notion of the rules of true criticism; and it is no wonder that he has left so many faults in his text.

According to Clarke, Ezra found two books each varying slightly and so he decided to include both, even though he must have known that one or both were wrong. He continues by saying no wonder Ezra had so many faults in his text because he was unable to distinguish truth from falsehood.

I know genealogy is not knowledge that is vital to the salvation of mankind, however, this should make apparent that the Bible must be verified before accepted. This is because if the God of the Bible allowed simple mistakes such as these, what other mistakes did He allow in a book meant to guide all of mankind?

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and Allaah knows best.]