|
Mankind's corruption of the Bible
Misheal al-Kadhi http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora Assalam alaikum. Inshallah this will be a document which will prove the claims of the Qur'an regarding the Bible. Let us start with a clear prophesy of Mohammed (pbuh) in the Bible: Three distinct prophesies: In the Bible we read of the test that the Jews applied to Jesus (pbuh) inorder to ascertain is truthfulness. The Jews had a prophecy thatrequired Elias to come before Jesus (pbuh): "Elias verily cometh first" Mark 9:12. They had not seen Elias yet so they doubted the claim of Jesus (pbuh). Jesus, however, responded to them that Elias had already come but that they did not recognise him. In Matthew 17:12-13 we read: "But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not.........Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist". John, however refutes the claims of Jesus (pbuh). This is one of the Christian's "dark sayings ofJesus" that their scholars have tried to reconcile for centuries. We will leave this matter for them to work out among themselves. Now, in John 1:19-21 we read "And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?. And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I AM NOT THE CHRIST. And they asked him, What then? ART THOU ELIAS? And he saith, I am not. ART THOU THAT PROPHET?And he answered, No". We notice that there are three distinct prophecies here: 1) Elias, 2) Jesus, 3) That prophet. The Jews were not waiting for two prophecies, but three. This can be further clarified by reading John 1:25: "And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be:a) not that Christ,b) nor Elias,c) neither that prophet?" If "that prophet" were Jesus (pbuh) wouldn't the third question in both verses be redundant?. If we are to believe that "that prophet" is the holy ghost, then did John look like a ghost?. Further, we must remember that "That prophet" can not apply to any prophet before the time of Jesus (pbuh) because at the time of Jesus (pbuh) the Jews were still waiting for all three. Notice how when we let the Bible speak for itself, without forcing the holy spirit or other supernatural meanings on it in the commentary, or forcing three questions to be only two, how clear these verses become. It is quite obvious from the above verses that the followers of Jesus (pbuh) recognised that the Jews were waiting for THREE prophesies to be fulfilled. The Bible, to one degree or another, confirmsthat both the first and second prophesies were fulfilled. However, it provides no logical explanation for the third prophesy. As usual, most "professional" Christians with something to lose by recognising the obvious will tenaciously cling for dear life to the established beliefs they were taught no matter how clear the evidence is. On the other hand, those Christians who are sincere are usually the more open minded and are not prevented by fear of a loss of their job...etc. to seethe obvious. (ie they seek true guidance to their lord) Inshallah this is only the first of a series of articles which will prove:1) That Mohammed (pbuh) was indeed prophsised by Jesus (pbuh) andthe previous prophets.2) That the "trinity", "son of God", "initial sin", and "atonement" wereall fabrications of mankind3) The tampering fingers of the unscrupulous have left countlesscontradictions between the verses of the Bible, such that some Christian sources claim that the contradictions number close to 50,000 errors.4) Historical details of when the bible was altered, by whom, why theydid that, and how it was accomplished. May Allah almighty guide us to see the obvious and be guided to thetruth of his elect messenger Jesus (peace be upon him). Misheal Al-Kadhi We will continue with two more prophesies of Mohammed (pbuh) in the Bible: 2) Glorifies Jesus (pbuh): 1 John 4:1-3 "Beloved, believe not every spirit (prophet), but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world".This one is very easy to understand: Every prophet who does not confess that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was not sent by God. He is a false prophet. But any prophet that confesses that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was sent by God. What does the Qur'an and Mohammad (pbuh) say aboutJesus (pbuh)?. They say that a Muslim is not a Muslim if he does not believe in Jesus (pbuh), in his miraculousbirth, in his giving life to the dead by God's permission, in his healing of the lepers and the blind by God's permission, in his piety and chastity, in his truthfulness, and in the fact that he was the Messiah (the Christ). The Qur'an is practically overflowing with verses to this effect. For example, in A'al-Umran(3):40 we read: "And the angles said `O Mary, Allah gives you glad tidings of a Wordfrom Him, his name is Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Highhonoured in this world and the next, of those near stationedto Allah" So now we must ask: Has Mohammad (pbuh)fulfilled this criteria or not?. Also, please read theeighth point in the following: 3) A "Paraclete" like Jesus:In the Bible we can find the following four passages wherein Jesus (pbuh) predicts a great event: John 14:16 "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever" John 15:26 "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me" John 14:26 "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you". John 16:7-14 "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement:Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come,he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you". In these four verses, the word "comforter" is translated from the word "Paraclete" ("Ho Parakletos" in Greek). Parakletos in Greek means an advocate, one who pleads the cause of another, one who councils or advises another from deep concern for the other's welfare (From the Beacon Bible commentary volume VII, p.168). In these verses we are told that once Jesus (pbuh) departs, a Paraclete will come. He will glorify Jesus (pbuh), and he will guide mankind into all truth. This "Paraclete" is identified in John 14:26 as the Holy Ghost. It must be pointed out that the original Greek manuscripts speak of a "Holy pneuma". The word pneuma {pnyoo'-mah} is the Greek root word for "spirit". There is no separate word for "Ghost" in the Greek manuscripts, of which there are claimed to be over 24,000 today. The translators of the King James Version of the Bible translate this word as "Ghost" to convey their own personal understanding of the text. However, a more accurate translation is "Holy Spirit". More faithful and recent translations of the Bible, such as the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), do indeed now translate it as "Holy Spirit". This is significant, and will be expounded upon shortly. All Bibles in existence today are compiled from "ancient manuscripts", the most ancient of which being those of the fourth century AD. Any scholar of the Bible will tell us that no two ancient manuscripts are exactly identical. All Bibles in our possession today are the result of very extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no SINGLE one being the DEFINITIVE reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows up in one manuscript but is totally missing from many others. For instance, Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole verses) is completely missing from the most ancient manuscripts available today (such as the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican #1209 and the Armenian version) but shows up in more recent "ancient manuscripts". There are also many documented cases where even geographical locations are completely different from one ancient manuscript to the next. For instance, in the Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript, Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount Gerizim", while in the Hebrew manuscript the exact same verse speaks of "mount Ebal". From Deuteronomy 27:12- 13 we can see that these are two distinctly different locations. We could go on and on. What the translators of the Bible have done when presented with such discrepancies is to do their best to choose the correct version. In other words, since they can not know which "ancient manuscript" is the correct one, they must do a little detective work on the text in order to decide which "version" of a given verse to accept. John 14:26 is just such an example of such selection techniques. John 14:26 is the only verse of the Bible which associates the Parakletos with the Holy Spirit. But if we were to go back to the "ancient manuscripts" themselves, we would find that they are not all in agreement that the "Parakletos" is the Holy Spirit. For instance, in the famous Palimpsest manuscript of the Bible, written in the Syriac (around the fourth century AD.), John 14:26 only mentions a "Spirit" and not a "Holy Spirit" (Remember, Christ and his disciples' native tongue was Aramaic or Syriac). Are we just knit picking?. "Spirit" or "Holy Spirit",what's the big deal?. Obviously they both refer to the same thing. Right?. Wrong!. There is a big difference.A "spirit", according to the language of the Bible simply means "a prophet" (see for instance 1 John 4:1-3: "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world", also see 1 John 4:2), or an inspired human, for example read 1 Corinthians 2:10, 2 Thessalonians 2:2,...etc. We will describe in the future inshallah countless documented admitted cases of deliberate modification of the Biblical text by members of the Christian clergy themselves, as well as deliberate large scale projects to "correct" the Bible, and the writings of "the early fathers", by them (such as the deliberate insertion of the verse of 1 John 5:7 which is now universally discarded). It is, therefore, possible that either: 1) The word "Holy" could have been dropped by a careless copyist., or 2) A copyist could have inserted the word "Holy" to convey his personal understanding of the text. Which was it?. In order to arrive at the answer we must follow the same path of detective work the Biblical scholars themselves do. We must study the characteristics of the "Paraclete" and compare them to both the "Holy Spirit" and to a "spirit". Muslims believe that Mohammad was the one intended and not the Holy Ghost. In the Christian's own "Gospel of Barnabas" Mohammad is mentioned BY NAME here. The Trinitarian church, however, has done it's utmost to obliterate all existing copies of "The Gospel of Barnabas", and to hide it from the masses (God willing, the details of this will be presented in future posts). For this reason, it becomes necessary to show that even the Gospels adopted by Paul's church also originally spoke of Mohammad (pbuh). 1) Does the Holy Spirit "speak" or "inspire": The Greek word translated as "hear" in the Biblical verses ("whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak") is the Greek word "akouo" {ak-oo'-o} meaning to perceive sounds. It has, for instance, given us the word "acoustics", the science of sounds. Similarly the verb "to speak" is the Greek verb "laleo" {lal-eh'-o} which has the general meaning "to emit sounds" and the specific meaning "to speak". This verb occurs very frequently in the Greek text of the Gospels. It designates a solemn declaration by Jesus (pbuh) during his preachings (For example Matthew 9:18). Obviously these verbs require hearing and speech organs in order to facilitate them. There is a distinct difference between someone "inspiring" something and his "speaking" something. So the Paraclete will "hear" and "speak", not "inspire". Mohammad (pbuh), as seen above, did indeed fulfil this prophesy. Whatsoever he "HEARD" from Gabriel (The Qur'an), the same did he physically "SPEAK" to his followers. In the Qur'an we read: Al-Najm(53):1-4: "(God swears) By the star when it falls: Your comrade (Mohammad) errs not, nor is he deceived; Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is naught save a revelation that is revealed (unto him)". 2) The Holy Ghost was already with them: In the above verses we read "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you". The comforter can not be the Holy Ghost because the Holy Ghost (according to the Bible) was "with" them already (and even quite active) long before the coming of Jesus (pbuh) himself and then throughout his ministry. Read for example. 1 Samuel 10:10 "And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them". 1 Samuel 11:6 "And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly". Isaiah 63:11 "Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?" Luke 1:15 "For he (John the Baptist) shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb". Luke 1:41 "And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:" Luke 1:67 "And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying," Luke 2:26 "And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost (Simeon), that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ." Luke 3:22 "And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him (Jesus), and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased." However, probably the clearest of all verses is: John 20:21-22 "Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:". Did they or did they not already receive the Holy Ghost?. Was Jesus (pbuh) not still with them when they received the Holy Ghost?. Was the Holy Ghost not with Peter and Paul and many others while Jesus was still with them?. Was the Holy Ghost not with Elisabeth and Zacharias before the birth of Jesus (pbuh)?. Was the Holy Ghost not with Moses (pbuh) when he parted the seas?. There are countless more similar verses to be found in the Bible. In the above verses, we are told that if Jesus (pbuh) does not depart then the "parakletos" will not come. Thus, the "Holy Ghost" cannot be the one originally intended since it was already with them. The contradiction is quite obvious. 3) Selective translation,: Jesus (pbuh) too is a Paraclete: The word "Paraclete" is applied to Jesus (pbuh) himself in 1 John 2:1 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate(parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:". Notice how the translators have managed to translate this exact same word one way (advocate) inreference to Jesus (pbuh) and another (comforter) with regard to the coming "parakletos". Why would they want to do such a thing?. Does this not seem just a little peculiar?. The reason is that the translators did not want the Christians, after reading "we have an advocate(parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" to then read "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another advocate(parakletos)". Can we see why this would make them nervous?. Well, what was Jesus (pbuh)?. He was a prophet!. Read Matthew 21:11: "...This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee". and Luke 24:19: "..Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people"...etc. Mohammad (pbuh) was also a prophet of God. We will demonstrate in the future, God willing ,how the verses of the Bible themselves prove quite conclusively that Jesus (pbuh) was neither a god nor part of God almighty, but an elect messenger of God. The concept of his divinity was concocted by Paul and his ministry during the first three centuries after the departure of Jesus (pbuh) and is explicitly refuted by the Bible itself and Jesus' apostles 4) "Another" Paraclete: Now go back to John 14:16 and notice the words "another Paraclete". If the comforter is the Holy Ghost then how many Holy Ghost's are there?. The word "another" is significant. We have already seen how this term is applied to Jesus (pbuh) himself. In English, "another" may mean "One more of the same kind" or "one more of a different kind". If the latter were the one intended then thecurrent Christian interpretation might bear some merit. However, if "One more of the same kind" was what was intended then this is positive proof that the coming Paraclete would be just like Jesus (pbuh), a human being and a prophet, not a ghost. The actual Greek word used was the word "allon" which is the masculine accusative form of "allos" {al'-los}: "Another of the SAME kind". The Greek word for "another of a different kind" is "heteros" {het'-er-os}. 5) "Parakletos" or "Periklytos"?: Some scholars believe that what Jesus (pbuh) said in his own Aramaic tongue in these verses represents more closely the Greek word "Periklytos" which means the admirable or glorified one. This word corresponds exactly to the Arabic word "Mohammad" which also means the "admirable one" or "glorified one". There are several similar documented cases of similar word substitution in the Bible. It is also quite possible that both words were contained in the original text but were dropped by a copyist because of the ancient custom of writing words closely packed, with no spaces in-between them. In such a case the original reading would have been: "and He will give you another comforter(Parakletos), the admirable one(Periklytos)" (See examples of many similar cases in the Biblical text in "The Emphatic Diaglott"). 6) "He" not "It": Notice the use of "he" when referring to the Paraclete and not "it". If we read John 16:13, we will find no less than SEVEN occurrences of the masculine pronoun "He" and "Himself". There is not another verse in the 66 books of the Protestant Bible or the seventy three books of the Catholic Bible which contains seven masculine pronouns, or seven feminine pronouns, or even seven neuter genders. So many masculine pronouns ill befits a Ghost, holy or otherwise. Mr. Ahmed Deedat, on page 51 of his booklet "Mohammad, the natural successor to Christ", says: "When this point of seven masculine pronouns was mooted by Muslims in India in their debates with the Christian missionaries, the Urdu (Indian) version of the Bible had the pronouns presently changed to SHE, SHE, SHE! so that the Muslims could not claim that this prophecy referred to Muhammed (pbuh) - a man! This Christian deception I have seen in the Bible myself. This is a common trickery by the missionaries, more specially in the vernacular. The very latest ruse I have stumbled across in the Afrikaans Bible, on the very verse under discussion; they have changed the word "Trooster" (Comforter), to "Voorspraak" (Mediator), and interpolated the phrase - "die Heilige Gees" - meaning THE HOLY GHOST, which phrase no Bible scholar has ever dared to interpolate into any of the multifarious English Versions. No not even the Jehovah's witnesses. This is how the Christians manufacture God's word". 7) He will guide you into all truth: In the above verses Jesus (pbuh) is quoted as saying "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth". What does Jesus (pbuh) mean by "ye cannot bear them now"?. If we were to read the Bible, we would find many verses throughout the Bible wherein Jesus (pbuh) bemoans the lack of understanding he was constantly greeted with from his disciples throughout his ministry: Matthew 8:26 "And he(Jesus) saith unto them(the disciples).....O ye of little faith". Matthew 14:31 "...and (Jesus) said unto him(Peter), O thou of little faith". Matthew 16:8 "he (Jesus) said unto them(the disciples), O ye of little faith". Luke 8:25 "And he(Jesus) said unto them(the disciples), Where is your faith?". Notice that these are not common Jews who he is saying these words to, but his own elect disciples. The Bible vividly illustrates how he is constantly going out of his way to simplify matters for them and to speak to them as one speaks to little children. However, even at that, they still misunderstand. He is finally driven to frustration and made to say: Matthew 15:16 "And Jesus said, Are ye even yet without understanding?". and Luke 9:41 "And Jesus answering said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you, and suffer you?". We are even told that his own people did not accept him: John 1:11 "He came unto his own, and his own received him not". Jesus (pbuh) had "all truth", but he could not give it to them because they were not fit to receive it. Therefore, he told them that another would come after him who shall guide them into "all truth" which they could not receive from him. He tells us that the one who will come will "teach you all things". This one who will guide them into "all truth" is described as "The spirit of truth". We have already seen how the word "spirit" in the Bible is synonymous with the word "Prophet". Mohammed (pbuh), even before he became the prophet of Islam was known among his people as "Al-sadik Al-amin", which means "The truthful, the trustworthy". Thus, it becomes apparent that Mohammed was indeed "the spirit of truth". Since the departure of Jesus (pbuh) and to this day, the "Holy Ghost" has not taught mankind a single new truth not revealed by Jesus (pbuh) himself. It is important to notice the words "ALL truth" and "MANY things". "Many" and "All" means more than one. There were many loose ends left untied by Jesus (pbuh) at the time of his departure because his disciples could not yet receive them. There were many truths which needed to be introduced to complete his message, however, it was cut short before he could complete it. For instance, alcohol abuse is a serious problem in the West. It is claimed that the United States is home to 11 million alcoholics, and 44 million "heavy drinkers". Many excuses have been made for them because Jesus' first miracle is claimed to have been the changing of water into wine (John 2:7-10). St. Paul actually encouraged his followers to "Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake andthine often infirmities" (1 Timothy 5:23). Now the drunkards are littering the streets. What solution has the "Holy Ghost" given which Jesus (pbuh) never mentioned?.None!. Mohammed (pbuh) however, came with the decisive answer: Abolish all drinking. Period!. He has succeeded where the great "superpower" has failed. There are countless problems which were left unresolved by Jesus (pbuh) at the time of his departure which were not resolved until the coming of Mohammed (pbuh). Not because he did not have the solution, but because his followers could not bear them. Examples of these problems aregambling, racism, fortune telling, inheritance, limits of modest clothing, ...etc. Mohammed (pbuh) has brought answers to all of these problems. Unlike Jesus (pbuh), Mohammad (pbuh) brought a complete and comprehensive system of law, conduct, punishment, and worship for all mankind. What new and innovative teachings has the "Holy Ghost" given for them which were not taught by Jesus (pbuh)?. The Qur'an says: "O mankind! The messenger (Mohammad) hath come unto you with the truth from your Lord. Therefore believe; (it is) better for you. But if ye disbelieve, still, lo! unto Allah belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and the earth. Allah is ever Knower, Wise". 8) He shall glorify me: The Paraclete "shall glorify me" and will "testify of me". Mohammad (pbuh) did indeed testify of Jesus (pbuh) and did indeed glorify him and raise him and his mother to their well deserved stations of honour and piety and even made it an article of faith for every Muslim to bear witness to this. Just one of the many examples of this is: "And the angles said `O Mary, Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name is Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, High honoured in this world and the next, of those near stationed to Allah". The Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):40. Nobody seems to recognise this fact as being at all extraordinary. People generally look upon the Jews as true worshippers of God and followers of a legitimate faith, even if they do consider them misguided by not following Jesus (pbuh) but killing him. Their book is even incorporated into the Bible as the faultless word of God.On the other hand, Muslims are looked down upon as followers of a false prophet and as savage blood thirsty terrorists or barbarians. However, if we were to look at the Jewish opinion of Jesus (pbuh) we would find that an early reference in the Babylonian "Talmud" says that "Jeshu ha-Nocri" was a false prophet who was hanged on the eve of the Passover for sorcery and false teaching. They furtherclaim that he was a bastard son of a Roman adulterer among many other allegations. Mr. Josh McDowell is one of the leading Biblical scholars on the topic of the Jewish Talmud's view of his "Lord". The Talmud, of course, is the ultimate authoritative body of Jewish tradition, comprising the Mishnah and Gemara. In Mr. McDowell's book, "Evidence that demands a verdict", he quotes extensively from the Jewish Talmud with regard to the official Jewish view of Jesus (pbuh). The following is a small sampling from pages 85-86 of this book: "Tol'doth Yeshu. Jesus is referred to as `Ben Pandera'". Note: `Ben Pandera' means `son of Pandera'. He was a Roman soldier the Jews allege to have raped Mary to produce the illegitimate son Jesus (God forbid).Yeb. IV 3;49a: "Rabbi Shimeon Ben Azzai said (regarding Jesus): `I found a genealogical roll in Jerusalem wherein was recorded, such-an-one is a bastard of an adulteress". Joseph Klausner adds: "Current editions of the Mishnah, add: `To support the words of Rabbi Yehoshua' (who in the same Mishnah says: What is a bastard? Everyone who's parents are liable to death by the Beth Din), that Jesus is here referred to seems to be beyond doubt..". Grolier's encyclopaedia tells us that "...the reliable Jewish sources tell us that he(Jesus) was a Jewish teacher who was put to death for sorcery and false prophecy and that he had a brother named James.". At a time when such claims, and many others, were being levelled by the Jews against Jesus (pbuh), Mohammed (pbuh) revealed the following verses of the Qur'an: "Then because of their breaking of their Covenant and their rejection of the signs of Allah and their slaying of the Prophets wrongfully and that they said "Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah's Word; we need no more)"; nay but Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their rejection, so they believe not save a few. And because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a horrendous fabrication". Al-Nissa(4): 155-156 So tremendous a sin is this lie considered with Allah, that it is not even repeated in the Qur'an. The closest the Qur'an ever comes to actually reproducing their words is:"Then she (Mary) brought him (Jesus) to her own folk, carrying him. They said: O Mary! Thou hast come with a most atrocious thing. Oh sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a wicked man nor was thy mother a harlot" Mariam(19):27-28. "And when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah hath chosen thee, and purified thee, and preferred thee above (all) the women of creation.". The Qur'an, A'Al-Umran(3):42. 9) Sin, righteousness, and error: The coming paraclete, we are told, will demonstrate the error of the world regarding sin, righteousness, and judgement "he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement". This is indeed what Mohammed (pbuh) did. He came to the world to show them howthey had been misguided in "sin" by believing that mankind can inherit sin (see Ezekiel18:19-20) and that someone else's sin can be forgiven by the sacrifice of others. He also showed them how they had been misguided in "righteousness" by believing that a righteous person is one who has "faith" in the crucifixion and does nothing else (Romans 3:28), or who believes that another man's death will make him a righteous person (Romans 5:19). And they were misguided in "judgement" by believing that they will be judged by "faith" and other people's deeds and not their own deeds (Mark 16:16), or that God's "judgement" was to punish all mankind for the sin of one man (Romans 5:16, 5:18). Mohammed (pbuh) taught that the unscrupulous had altered the words of Jesus (pbuh) and his faithful followers after their passing. He taught that no one will be held accountable by God for anyone else's sin. Similarly, no one can bear my sin. He emphasised that God has made this a life of work and the next life one of reward and no work. He also revealed that mankind will be judged one at a time according to their own individual actions and no one else's. 10) That he may abide with you for ever: In these verses, Jesus (pbuh) is quoted as saying that the coming Paraclete will "abide with you forever". What does he mean by this?. Let us read John 8:51-55 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall NEVER SEE DEATH. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying". and also John 10:28 "And I (Jesus) give unto them (the believers) eternal life; and they shall NEVER PERISH, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand". Jesus (pbuh) is quoted many times in the Bible as telling his followers that they will never taste death. However, there is not a single one of them alive to this day. Was he lying?. Of course not!. As seen above, Jesus' (pbuh) followers were constantly misunderstanding his words. The were not yet ready to "bear" his words. He was telling them that a man lives on without death through his faith. Jesus' (pbuh) followers will live on through their faith and teachings, Jesus (pbuh) lives among us through his faith and teachings, and even Abraham (pbuh) lives on among them and us through his faith and teachings. In a similar manner, the coming Paraclete will live eternally with us through his faith and teachings. The Paracletos will be the last prophet, because he will "abide with you forever" and "he will guide you into all truth" (Greek "into the whole truth") and "he shall teach you all things", so there will be no need for any further prophets. In the Qur'an, al-Ahzab(33):40 we read: "Muhammad is not the father of any man among you, but he isthe messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets; andAllah is Aware of all things". And al-Maidah(5):3 "This day have I (God) perfected your religion for you (mankind) and completed My favor unto you, and have chosen for you as religion AL-ISLAM". So the religion of Islam is the last message to mankind and it, as well as the Qur'an, will abide with them forever. To this day, Mohammed (pbuh) abides with us through the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Jesus (pbuh) had "the whole truth" and had many things he longed to teach his disciples but he could not give it to them because they "cannot bear them now". These matters would only be revealed six centuries later by God through the agency of Mohammad (pbuh). What new truths has the Holy Spirit guided us into after the departure of Jesus (pbuh) which Jesus (pbuh) had no say in?.11) He will show you things to come: There were many prophesies made in the Qur'an and in the Sunnah (tradition) of the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) himself. For instance, in the opening verses of the chapter of al- Room (The Romans), we read: "The Romans have been defeated. In the lowest land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious. Within ten years. Allah's is the command in the former case and in the latter and in that day the believers will rejoice. In Allah's support to victory. He helps to victory whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Merciful. It is a promise of Allah. Allah fails not His promise, but most of mankind know not. They know only some appearance of the life of theworld, and are heedless of the Hereafter" When Islam was still in it's infancy and it's followers were being severely persecuted, tortured, and killed by the pagan idol worshipers of Arabia (Quraish), there were two "Superpowers" near by. They were the Romans and the Persians. The pagans of Arabia used to like to see the Persians victorious against the Romans because the Persians were pagans like them. However, the Muslims liked to see the Romans victorious because they were "people of the book". About this time, the Romans suffered a resounding defeat to the Persians that seemed to signal the end of the Roman empire. The pagans of Arabia were ecstatic. They went out of their way to hold this defeat over the heads of every Muslim they would encounter. They said: "Just as the Christians in Rome have been crushed by the pagans of Persia, so shall we crush you". This was psychological warfare against the Muslims which they were adding to the physical torture they were subjecting the Muslims to. It was at this time that these verses were revealed to Mohammed (pbuh) consoling him and the Muslims in general that matters were not as they seemed, and that the Romans would come back and defeat the Persians within "Bidh'u" years. "Bidh'u" is an Arabic word that means "between three and nine". This prophesy did indeed come true and the Romans were once again victorious against the Persians, at the same time, the Muslims achieved their first strategic victory against the pagans of Arabia. Mr. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, in his commentary on the Qur'an narrates the following explanation of the above verses: "The remarkable defeats of the Roman Empire under Heraclius and the straits to which it was reduced are reviewed in Appendix No. 6 (to follow this Sura). It was not merely isolated defeats; the Roman Empire lost most of its Asiatic territory and was hemmed in on all sides at its capital, Constantinople. The defeat, "in a land close by" must refer to Syria and Palestine, Jerusalem was lost in 614-15 A.D., shortly before this Sura was revealed. The Pagan Quraish of Makkah rejoiced at the overthrow of Rome by Persia. They were pro-Persian, and in their heart of hearts they hoped that the nascent movement of Islam, which at that time was, from a worldly point of view, very weak and helpless, would also collapse under their persecution. But they misread the true Signs of the times. They are told here that they would soon be disillusioned in both their calculations, and it actually so happened at the battle of Issus in 622 (the year of Hijrat) and in 624, when Heradius carried his campaign into the heart of Persia (see Appendix No: 6) and the Makkan Quraish were beaten off at Badr. Bidh'un in the text means a short period-a period of from three to nine years. The period between the loss of Jerusalem (614-15) by the Romans and their victory at Issus (622) was seven years, and that to the penetration of Persia by Heraclius was nine years. See last note. The battle of Badr (2 A.H. = 624 A.D.) was a real time of rejoicing for the Believers and a time of disillusionment for the arrogant Quraish, who thought that they could crush the whole movement of Islam in Madinah as they had tried to do in Makkah. but they were singly repulsed" There were many other prophesies made by the Qur'an which, without exception, all came true. Another example would be that of Al-Israa(17):7. However, we will leave it up to the interested student to research this topic in order to verify it's authenticity. There are many other points which could be brought up in this comparison, however, we leave it up to the reader to study Islam, Mohammad, and the Qur'an, and arrive at their own conclusion with regard to Mohammad (pbuh) having fulfilled all of the requirements of the coming"Paraclete". In the West, people have developed the system of giving people abbreviated names. For instance, a man called William would be called "Bill" by his friends, Robert would be called "Bob", Joshua would be called "Josh"....etc. In a similar manner, Mohammed (pbuh) was known by two names:"Mohammad" and "Ahmed". I mention this to clarify the following verse: "And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel!verily! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me,whose name is Ahmed(the praised one). But when he came to them with clear proofs, they said: This is clearly magic"The Qur'an, Al-Saf(61):6 May Allah almighty guide us to see the obvious and be guided to the truth of his elect messenger Jesus (peace be upon him). Misheal Al-KadhiAssalam alaikum Inshallah this will be the third in the continuing series of articles which will prove the claims of the Qur'an regarding the Bible. In the first two post, three very clear prophesies of Mohammed (pbuh) were presented from the Bible. We will continue with this first phase of the proof by presenting yet another prophesy of Mohammed (pbuh) in the Bible (total is now four prophesies of Mohammed pbuh in the Bible) the second phase of the proof will (by Allahs will) involve the refutal of the "trinity", "son of God", ...etc...etc. from the words for the Bible itself, stay tuned: Moses foretells of Mohammad's coming Deuteronomy 18:18 "I (God) will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him". There are many verses in the Old Testament that predict the coming of Jesus (pbuh). This one, however, is not one of them. This can be clearly seen from the following four points: a) Like unto Moses Muslims believe in all of the previous prophets. They make no distinction between them, nor do they place one above the others in piety. However, they are all human, and as humans they differ from one another in their characteristics. Let us compare these characteristics: 1) Both Christians and Muslims agree that both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) had fathers and mothers. They both also believe that Jesus (pbuh) had only a mother and no father. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 2) Both Christians and Muslims believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus (pbuh), while Moses and Mohammad (pbut) were born naturally. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 3) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) married and begat children. Jesus (pbuh) never married nor had any offspring. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 4) Moses (pbuh) was accepted by the Jews and to this day, as a nation, they accept him as their prophet. Mohammad (pbuh) was accepted by his people, and as a nation, over one billion Muslims around the world accept him as the prophet of Allah. Jesus (pbuh), however, was rejected by his people (the Jews) as stated in the Christian's own Bible: "He (Jesus) came unto his own, but his own received him not" (John 1:11) Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 5) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) were kings on Earth in the sense that they had the ultimate power of government, the power to inflict capital punishment. When the Jews brought before Moses (pbuh) the Israelite who had been caught collecting firewood on the Sabbath, Moses had him stoned to death (Numbers 15:36). Mohammad (pbuh) had similar authority. When a woman came before him confessing (with no witnesses) to having committed adultery, he gave her a chance to consider the severity of her claim and the punishment she would receive. When she insisted, he ordered her stoned to death and ordered his companions to respect her for her ultimate and sincere repentance. Jesus (pbuh), however, explicitly refuted the claim that he had a kingdom on earth. When he was dragged before the Roman Governor Pontious Pilate with a charge of sedition he said: (John 18:36) "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence". Jesus (pbuh) would not resort to lying to save his skin. Thus, he had no earthly kingdom. Further, in John 8:1-7 we read the story of the woman who was taken in adultery by the Jews and brought before Jesus (pbuh). They were hoping to trap him by either having him contradict the laws of Moses (pbuh) by not stoning her, or by placing him in a bad position with the Roman empire by taking the law into his own hands and ordering her stoned. Jesus cleverly extracted himself from this predicament by commanding them: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her". So the woman was set free. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 6) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) came with a new and comprehensive set of laws for their people. Jesus (pbuh), however, as witnessed by Matthew, claimed to have not introduced any new laws, but to have come to renew the law of Moses (pbuh) and to have neither added nor subtracted from it. In Matthew 5:17-18 we read: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled". Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 7) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) died natural deaths. Jesus (pbuh), is claimed by the Christians to have died violently on the cross. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 8) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbut) lie buried in the ground. Jesus (pbuh), however, is claimed by the Christians to abide in heaven. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 9) Most Christians claim that Jesus (pbuh) is God. No Christian or Muslim, however, claims that Moses or Mohammad (pbut) was God. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 10) Both Moses and Mohammad (pbuh) began their prophetic missions at the age of forty. Jesus (pbuh) began at thirty. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. 11) Christians claim that Jesus (pbuh) was resurrected after his death. Neither Muslims nor Christians claim that Moses or Mohammad was resurrected. Therefore, Mohammad is like Moses, but Jesus is unlike Moses. There are many additional points that could be mentioned but we will suffice with these for now. b) Can not be a Jew Well, is Mohammed (pbuh) the only prophet who is "Like unto Moses"?. For example, what about Jesus (pbuh)?. Well, we should then notice that Jesus (pbuh) was a Jew, and the Bible specifically denies that this awaited prophet will be a Jew. We are told that in Deuteronomy 34:10 Moses himself says: "And there arose NOT a prophet since in Israel LIKE unto Moses". This awaited prophet, however, must be "LIKE unto thee (Moses)". So he will come from OUTSIDE of Israel. c) Is from the BRETHREN of the Jews If this prophet can not be a Jew, then what is left?. In this verse, God speaks to Moses (pbuh) about the Jews as a racial entity. The awaited prophet is claimed to not be "from the Jews" or "from among themselves" but rather "from among their (the Jew's) brethren". Who are the brethren of the Jewish nation?. The Jews are the sons of Isaac, the son of Abraham. Isaac's older brother was Ishmael, the father of the Arabs. Thus, the brethren of the Jewish nation is the nation of the Arabs. This statement is further reinforced by the following definition of "Brethren" in the Hebrew Dictionary of the Bible: "personification of a group of tribes who were regarded as near kinsmen of the Israelites". d) Put my words in his mouth If we were to read the Qur'an we would find that it contains many verses stating "I am your Lord, so worship Me" (Al-Anbia: 92, Al-Muminoon: 52), "Verily, I am Allah" (Taha: 14, Al-Namil: 9, Al-Qasas: 30), "I am thy Lord" (Taha: 19). These verses are not preceded by "I heard God say.....", or "And God said....", or similar statements which would be the words of a man transmitting the words of God, rather, their form is that of the first person who speaks of himself. Neither Mohammad (pbuh) nor any Muslim ever claimed that Mohammad (pbuh) was God, therefore, Mohammad (pbuh) was speaking with his mouth the words of God. Similarly, we can find in the Qur'an more than four hundred verses of the form "Say (O Mohammad) : .......". In other words God almighty is putting His words into Mohammad's (pbuh) mouth and commanding him to speak them. Christians claim that the Bible has many "authors", and that while the "inspiration" is from God, still, the words are those of mortal men. Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible institute, Chicago, one of the most prestigious Christian evangelical missions in the world says on page 17 of his book "It is human, yet divine": "...Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style the characteristics of men...." Another erudite Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says on page 277 of his book, "The call of the minaret": ".....Not so the New testament....... There is condensation and editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the church behind the authors. They represent experience and history....." The Qur'an, however, is both the inspiration of God and the physical words of God. An example of this is a teacher who sends two students to teach what they have learned from him. The first is told to "teach them what I taught you". While the second is given a textbook written by this teacher and told to read verbatim from this book and say nothing of his own accord. The first will convey the thoughts of the teacher. The second will convey both his thoughts and his words. This matter becomes clearer when studying for example the personal greetings and salutations of Paul and his friends at the ends of Titus (3:15), 2 Timothy (4:19), 1 Thessalonians (5:26) ..... etc. These words are not the word of God but the personal greetings of Paul and his friends. There are many such examples to be found in the Bible. The Qur'an contains no such verses from Mohammad (pbuh). The words of Mohammed (pbuh) are collected in a completely separate reference from the Qur'an called "The Sunnah". We notice from all this that even the Christians themselves do not claim that the Bible is the physical word of God, but his "inspiration" (his teachings) through the words of men. The Qur'an, however, is the physical word of God. GRAVE WARNINGS FOR ALL WHO DO NOT FOLLOW HIM So what shall we say to those who say: "Jesus has redeemed us. We have no need to follow any future prophets."?. After the above verse of Deuteronomy, God himself threatens severe retribution against all those who do not follow this awaited prophet. In Deuteronomy 18:19 we read: "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him". (or in some translations: "I will be the revenger") We would like the reader to remember that Mohammad (pbuh) never in his lifetime claimed that the Qur'an was his words, but the words of God. He further taught his followers to never recite any chapter or verse of the Qur'an without first prependingit with the words: "In the name of God, the gracious, the merciful". The Qur'an contains 114 Chapters. If we were to follow them on down we would find that the first chapter, second chapter, third chapter, and so on all begin with the words "In the name of God, the gracious, the merciful". On the other hand we will find most Christians will begin with "In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost". So not only Mohammad (pbuh), but all Muslims in general recite the words of God in His name. Indeed, the Qur'an does even confirm this same warning of Deuteronomy: "And whosoever seeks other than Islam as their religion it will not be accepted from him, and he shall be in the hereafter among those who have lost" (A'al Umran(3):85) Assalam alaikum Inshallah this will be the forth in the continuing series of articles which will prove the claims of the Qur'an regarding the Bible. In the first three post, four very clear prophesies of Mohammed (pbuh) were presented from the Bible. We will continue with this first phase of the proof by now branching off to a slightly different topic. The Jews and Christians claim that no prophet of God can come from OTHER than the Jews. This will be proven here to be a lie concocted by the Jews in order to promote themselves to the position of the "chosen children of God". It will now be proven through the words of their own book how they have inserted lies and fabrications into their book in order to claim that prophet Abraham's first son (pbut) was excluded from God's covenant the upcoming second phase of the proof will (by Allah's will) involve the refutal of the"trinity", "son of God", ...etc...etc. from the words for the Bible itself, stay tuned: 1.8: Legitimacy of Hagar as Abraham's (pbuh) wife, Ishmael as his son, and the blessing of Ishmael: Many Christians and Jews mistakenly believe that Abraham's descendants through Ishmael (Mohammad and his ancestors) were excluded from God's promise and covenant with Abraham (pbuh) because Ishmael's mother Hagar was not a legitimate wife of Abraham, thus, her son Ishmael (the father of the Arabs) was not a legitimate son of Abraham. Therefore, they conclude that Ishmael(pbuh) and his descendants were not included in God's covenant with the sons of Abraham (pbuh) and that this covenant was exclusive to Abraham's second son, Isaac, the father of the Jews. In what follows we will disprove each of these claims, in addition to showing evidence of human tampering with the text of the Biblical verses. The story of Ishmael according to the Bible is as follows: Abraham married Sarah (pbut). Sarah was a barren woman and bore him no children (Genesis 16:1). God then made a great promise to Abraham even before any children were born to him. Genesis 12:2-3: "And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed". Not long after, Sarah gave Abraham her handmaid, Hagar, to be his wife according to the legal Jewish custom of polygamous marriages (customary in the Bible among Israelites and even their prophets). Genesis 16:3: "And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.". In Genesis 16 we are told that after Hagar (pbuh) became pregnant with Ishmael, Sarah (pbuh) felt that Hagar despised her, so she dealt with her harshly until she was forced to escape from this harsh treatment "And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her face" Genesis 16:6. The angel of God then appeared before Hagar and told her to return to Sarah and submit herself to her will and that "the Lord has heard thy affliction" and would reward her with a son called "Ishmael" (God hears) and would multiply her seed exceedingly. Hagar willingly bowed to the command of her Lord and returned and submitted herself to Sarah. In A Dictionary of Biblical tradition in English literature, we read: "The Jewish Haggadah identifies Ishmael as one of the six men who were given a name by God before their birth (Ginzberg, LJ 1.239)". When Abraham reached ninety-nine years of age, Ishmael was thirteen years old and remained the only son of Abraham. Now, God promises to establish his covenant with all of Abraham's "seed" without exception: "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.". In Genesis 17:7-8. God now informs Abraham that his covenant shall be given through circumcision, so Abraham immediately circumcises himself and Ishmael, the father of the Arabs (Genesis 17:23), thus establishing God's covenant with Ishmael. The significance of circumcision was also noted by Biblical scholars as being not merely an external act: "This was His own sign and seal that Israel was a chosen people. Through it a man's life was linked with great fellowship whose dignity was it's high consciousness that it must fulfill the purpose of God" (Interpreter's Bible, p. 613). To this day, all Muslims practice circumcision. The "sign and seal" of the Abrahamic covenant. We notice that God's covenant was promised to be with Abraham's "seed". But if we read Genesis 21:13 we will find that Ishmael is of Abraham's "seed": "And also of the son of the bondwoman......he is thy seed". The same arguments can be made for God's covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15:18 "the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates". As we can see, this covenant was intended to be of the same generality as God's covenants with Noah (Genesis 9:8-17), and David (2 Samuel 7; 23:5). God's covenant was intended to be a covenant with those who are obedient to Him and follow his command, not a covenant that makes a certain group of people genetically superior and closer to God even from before their birth, such that they are his "chosen children", and God's prophethood and message can only come from their lineage. When Abraham reached one hundred years of age, God blessed him with a second son, Isaac(Genesis 21:5). Isaac was born to him through his first wife, Sarah. The Bible tells us that because of Sarah's jealousy that Ishmael may inherit with her own son Isaac (Genesis 21:10), she had Abraham cast out Hagar and Ishmael and send them to the wilderness of "Paran" (genesis 21:21). We are told that she was particularly angry with what she considered to be a mockery on the part of Ishmael towards her own son Isaac. This incident is alleged to have occurred after Isaac was weaned (remember this) as narrated in Genesis 21:8. Sarah now allegedly ordered Abraham to cast Hagar and Ishmael out, (apparently, in Abraham's tribe, children who mock their brothers and sisters are to be thrown out in the nearest desert along with their mothers) Abraham obeyed Sarah and cast the "bondwoman" and her son in the desert and was blessed by God who told him to "hearken unto her voice". Abraham gave Hagar provisions and water and put her child "Ishmael" upon her shoulder and left them in the wilderness of Beer Sheba in Southern Palestine. When they ran out of water, an angel appeared and conveyed to her the words of God: "Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation". God then showed her a well of water and they drank. Ishmael dwelt in the wilderness of "Paran" and begat twelve sons one of whom was called "Kedar". The Muslims have a very similar narration of the same sequence of events in their Qur'an. However, in the Qur'an, the details differ from the narration of the Old Testament. Muslims are taught in the Qur'an and the Sunnah that Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Isaac, and Ishmael (pbut) were, all five, very decent and pious people. Muslims believe that the prophet Abraham (pbuh) received a revelation from God to take Hagar and her BABY, Ishmael, to a barren desert in Northern Arabia (Paran), more specifically to the future location of Mecca, and to leave them there. When Abraham began to leave, Hagar called out to him "where are you leaving us?". After repeating the question three times she asked him "Did God command you to do this?". Abraham answered "yes". So Hagar said: "Then He will not forsake us". When Hagar and her baby ran out of water she began to fear for her baby's life and took to running back and forth between the two hills of "Al-Safa" and "Al-Marwa" in search of water. During this time God sent an angel who caused water to gush out of the earth for them. This became the water of the well of "Zamzam" which the pilgrims of Mecca drink from today. Once water was found in this place the Bedouins began to settle there and it became the city of Mecca (Makkah). Centuries later, Mohammad (pbuh), the prophet of Islam, was born to the descendants of Ishmael. The rights of hastening between the two hills of "Al-Safa" and "Al-Marwa" have been preserved in the Muslim's yearly pilgrimage to Mecca even to this day. The major differences in these two narrations, the Biblical and the Qur'anic, are in the claim that Hagar was (originally) left in Beer Sheba and not Paran as stated by the Muslims, and that this occurred when Ishmael was not a baby, but a full grown teenager. This Old Testament narration can be found to contain obvious modifications from the following analysis: According to the Bible, Abraham was eighty six years old when Ishmael was born (Genesis 16:16). He was one hundred years old when Isaac was born (Genesis 21:5). This makes Ishmael fourteen years older than Isaac. The above expulsion of Ishmael and his mother is alleged to have occurred after Isaac was weaned (Genesis 21:8). Muslims wean their children after two years. Biblical scholars tell us that babies were weaned about the age of three. This makes Ishmael at least seventeen years old at the time of the alleged mockery and expulsion. The profile of Ishmael in Genesis 21:14-19 however, is one of a small baby and not that of a full grown teenager of seventeen years. Let us study it. 1) According to the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible which was compiled from manuscripts even more ancient than those of the King James Version of the Bible, the verse of Genesis 21:14 reads "..putting it on her shoulder, along with the child". Did Abraham put a seventeen year old boy on Hagar's shoulder??. It would be more logical for him to put Hagar on Ishmael's shoulder if he were, as claimed, seventeen years old at the time. So Ishmael must have been a baby at the time. 2) In Genesis 21:15 we read "and she cast the child under one of the shrubs" Did Hagar "cast" a seventeen year old teenager under a shrub??. This too is consistent with a baby and not a full-grown teenager. 3) We read in Genesis 21:16 that Hagar sat far away from Ishmael so as not to see him die before her own eyes. Is this the profile of a full-grown teenager who should, more appropriately be worried about his mother or of a helpless baby??. 4) In Genesis 21:17 we read the angel's command to Hagar: "Arise, lift up the lad". Who would be more capable of lifting the other up, Hagar or her seventeen year old teenage son?. This too is the profile of a little baby. 5) Throughout this story we are drawn a picture of Hagar doing this, and Hagar doing that, and Hagar worrying, and Hagar weeping, and so on while Ishmael sits where he was "cast", under the shrub. Would a full grown teenager of seventeen sit under a shrub and wait for his mother and himself to die while his mother looked for water for him, or would he have her sit in the shade while he went in search of water?. 6) Even the angel did not address both of them but only Hagar, the only one who would understand. Once again the profile of a baby and not a seventeen year old teenager. 7) Ishmael is always referred to as "the child" and "the lad" in the story. Do people usually refer to seventeen year old teenagers as "child" and "lad"?. 8) In Genesis 21:20 we read that after this incident, "God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer". Is this a profile of a fully developed teenager or a child who is growing up, learning, and developing? The above analysis clearly exhibits evidence of human modification to the text of this story. The claim that Ishmael mocked Isaac and that this had anything to do with Hagar's journey is an obvious fabrication since Isaac was not even born yet when this story occurred (Ishmael was still a baby). The reason for Hagar's journey was not Sarah's jealousy, Ishmael's mockery, or the racial superiority of Sarah. It was only the command of God, pure and simple. In an effort to keep all prophets of God Israelites, even God himself is alleged to have submitted to, and even blessed the alleged jealous whims of Sarah. Further, if such elaborate additions to the story could be introduced into the text, then how much simpler to change the original journey to Paran to become a journey to Beer Sheba. The Interpreter's Bible compares the texts of Genesis 21:14-19 with Genesis 16:1-16 and draws the following conclusion: "The inclusion in Genesis of both stories so nearly alike and yet sufficiently different to be inconsistent, is one of the many instances of the reluctance of the compilers to sacrifice any of the traditions which has become established in Israel" (emphasis added). As damaging and conclusive as this proof of the modification of the Old Testament is, still, it pales to insignificance before the infinitely more devastating proof of this same fact to be found in the previous post "proof that the torah of the Jews was notwritten by Moses". Some people will now jump up and say: well then, the verses stating Abraham's age must be the ones which have been (unintentionally) modified. The problem with this is that first of all, these numbers were spelled out in letters and not written using numerals. Second, the transmitters of the Old Testament (the Jews) claim that every word and every letter was faithfully counted and preserved and thus, they can confidently claim that it would be impossible for unintentional errors to creep in. If we are to believe that the most God-fearing people of the time of Abraham (pbuh) were in the habit of throwing children and their mothers out in the desert and cutting off their inheritance if they mocked their younger brothers and that this was justice, then either: 1) The ages are wrong, and Ishmael was not a teenager at the time but a small child, and thus, an unreasoning child and his mother are abandoned in a desert, and his inheritance cut off, because of this innocent child's mockery of his younger brother, and because his step mother is jealous of his inheritance with her own son. Or, 2) The ages are correct, and Ishmael was a full-grown teenager when he and his mother were thrown out in the desert and this totally contradicts the language of the above verses. We also notice that even in the New Revised Standard version of the Bible, Genesis 16:16 and 21:5 state the same ages mentioned above. Is this not proof of the Qur'an's claim that the previous books of God were changed by the hands of the unscrupulous few?. It now becomes evident that sometime after God sent down the Old Testament, someone decided that they did not want the Arab descendants of Ishmael to be included in God's covenant with Abraham. They wanted it exclusive to the Jews. Therefore, the Old Testament was "corrected" in order to show that God's intent was that His covenant be with the Jews only. Now that we see that the original covenant of God was with all of the children of Abraham (pbuh) without exception, then we are left with another question: The Bible describes in great detail the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham through Isaac which was fulfilled in Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, and Jesus (pbut). But what of his promise to Abraham through Ishmael?. God does not renege on his promises, so how was it fulfilled?. The Bible is, for the most part, silent about the promise to the Ishmaelites. Why?. Because just as Jesus (pbuh), during the time of the Old Testament had not yet come and there were only prophesies of his coming containing unmistakable signs but no detailed stories of his life, in the same manner, both the Old and New Testament contain unmistakable prophesies of Mohammad (pbuh) but no in-depth analyses and stories. The Interpreter's Bible admits that the Ishmaelites and other descendants of Abraham were "somehow participating in the Abrahamic covenant" (page 616). The coming of Mohammad (pbuh), the descendant of Ishmael, is the fulfillment of this promise. Some people will claim that even though Ishmael was Abraham's "seed", still, "seed" is a lesser designation than "son", and only Isaac was Abraham's "son". However, the Bible also bears witness to the fact that Ishmael was Abraham's "son": Genesis 17:23: "And Abraham took Ishmael his son". Not only that, but the Bible tells us that Ishmael remained the legitimate son of Abraham until even after his death, Genesis 25:8-9: "Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah" So was Ishmael a lesser "son" than Isaac because Isaac's mother was Abraham's wife while Hagar was not?. Once again, let us read the Bible: Genesis 16:3: "And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid....and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife." So the Bible also bears witness that Hagar was Abraham's legitimate wife. Once the legitimacy of Hagar as Abraham's wife and Ishmael as his son has been established, now the objection of many becomes that Isaac was a better and truer son of Abraham because he was the son of the free woman not a bondwoman. However, this claim is not supported by the law of the Jews. According to this law, the first born son was to have double portions of honor, and even inheritance, and this right could not be affected by the status of his mother. Deuteronomy 21:15-17 "If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved first born before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his". In the same Interpreter's Bible we read the following comment on the above verses: "However, the law of the first-born had ancient sanction, and so long as it was accepted justice demanded that mere favoritism not be allowed to deprive the eldest son of his rights" Abraham was eighty six years old (Genesis 16:16) when Ishmael was born and was one hundred years old (Genesis 21:5), when he was blessed with a second son, Isaac (pbuh). So Isaac was fourteen years younger than his older brother Ishmael, the first-born son of Abraham. It should further be noted here that a similar occurrence is narrated in the Old Testament regarding a slave girl named Ruth and a landowner named Boaz (Ruth, chapters 3 and 4). Ruth, a widowed slave girl, was married to Boaz and gave him a son named Obed. Obed went on to become the founder of the royal line of Jews who, according to the Old and New Testament, were the ancestors of both David the King and Jesus Christ peace be upon them both (for example Matthew 1:5-16). Not only that, but according to the same Old Testament, Ruth was a Moabitess (Ruth 2:2). Moabite women, according to the Old Testament, were women used to lure Israelite men into immorality and the worship of the pagan god Baal. So, if a slave woman of a nation of such ill repute among the Jews as the Moabites is given legitimacy among the Jews and can een go on to become the ancestor of their greatest prophets and leaders and indeed Jesus Christ (pbuh) himself, then why is a whole branch of prophet Abraham's children cast off simply because their mother too was a slave girl?. Jacob M. Myers, a professor at the Lutheran Theological Seminary and a contributor to Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, is a well recognized leading expert on the Old Testament. In his book Invitation to The Old Testament (pp. 26) he states the following regarding the Nuzi laws of marriage of Abraham's (pbuh) time: "Archaeological discoveries help us to fill in the details of the biblical narrative and to explain many of the otherwise obscure references and strange customs that were commonplace in Abraham's world and time...... A Nuzi marriage contract provides that a childless wife may take a woman of the country and marry her to her husband to obtain progeny But she may not drive out the offspring even if she later has children of her own. The child born of the handmaid has the same status as the one born to the wife. That is why, when Sarah wanted to drive out Hagar and Ishmael, it was quite objectionable to Abraham -because of the legal custom of the religion from which he came, he was reluctant to do so. It required a special divine dispensation to act contrary to that custom". We have already seen how the "special divine dispensation" was a forgery. Further, while Ishmael was the first begotten son of Abraham, we notice that Obed was the tenth grandson of Abraham (The Old and New Testament genealogies differ in the actual names). So, if Obed is given such legitimacy in the Old Testament as being a legitimate father in their most royal line, even though he is the son of a bondwoman, then Ishamel's claim to this legitimacy is much older and more pronounced. Once Ishmael has been proven to be a legitimate son of Abraham and not only equal to Isaac, but according to the law of the Jews, deserving of double the portion of honor and inheritance allotted to Isaac, then the final objection becomes that Isaac was specifically chosen to be the child of promise. In A Dictionary of Biblical tradition in English literature, we read: "St. Augustine, in De civitate Dei (15.2), equates Ishmael "born in the course of nature", with the flesh and Isaac, "born in fulfillment of a promise" with the spirit. For Augustine, Ishmael exists outside the realm of God's grace; for this reason, and because of their enforced wanderings in the desert, he associates Ishmael and Hagar with Cain". As we have already seen, God's covenant was with the "seed" of Abraham (pbuh), among who was Ishmael. Secondly, there are many verses which specifically single out Ishamel for God's blessing. After the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac, God repeats his promise to Abraham to bless all the earth through his progeny. Genesis 17:4: "As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations". Also, in Genesis 21:13,18 we read: "And also of the son of the bondwoman (Hagar) will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. ......... I will make him a great nation". So, not only is Ishmael a legitimate son of Abraham, but God almighty promised to bless Ishmael's descendants just as he would in the future promise to bless Isaac's descendants. Not only that, but God's covenant of circumcision with Abraham was fulfilled in Ishmael long before the birth of Isaac. As will be demonstrated soon by Allahs will, the Bible has been modified extensively over the ages to the point that it now contains many hundreds of conflictions between it's verses. Many examples have been presented. As seen there, thirty two Biblical scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating denominations bore witness to the "many" and "serious" errors contained in the current King James Bible. Even the original ancient manuscripts themselves contain many differences and conflictions. Whole passages show up in some "ancient manuscripts" while being completely missing from older ones. Even geographical locations are changed from one ancient copy to the next. All Bibles in existence today are the result of very extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no single ancient copy being the definitive reference. Even at that, all Bibles in existence today still contain countless examples of very serious contradictions of founding Christian doctrine (to be demonstrated in future posts by Allahs will). In the Interpreter's Bible we read: "Many Israelites did not want a God who would be equally the God of all nations on the Earth. They did not want one who would be impartial Holiness. They wanted a God who would be partial to them. So we read in Deuteronomy of the demands for a complete extermination of all non-Israelite people of Palestine (Deuteronomy 7:2) and as to the carrying out of that injunction read the harsh sentences of Deuteronomy 20:10-17". Is it possible, in light of the overwhelming evidence beginning to come to light of the modification of the Old Testament, that the transmitters of this book (Genesis) made certain modifications to favor their own people?. Sound impossible?. We have already seen the evidence. Such verses as Genesis 17:21 and Genesis 21:21 do not exclude Ishmael from God's covenant as some claim. The example of this is one who says: "I love my parents" and then a few days later says "I love my mother". Does this mean that he does not love his father?. Since God had already consecrated his covenant between Abraham and his son Ishmael before the birth of Isaac, and Abraham had already circumsised Ishmael so that he might receive God's covenant, therefore, it was necessary for him to reaffirm that Isaac was not left out of this covenant even though it was established after the birth of Ishmael and before his own birth. Many people point to the verse of Genesis 22:2 as proof that Isaac was the only legitimate son of Abraham. We read: "And he (God) said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of". What is going on here?. On the one hand we have verses such as Genesis 16:15, Genesis 17:23, Genesis 17:25, Genesis 17:26, and Genesis 25:9...etc. which clearly confirm the fact that not only was Ishmael the first born son of Abraham and a legitimate son, but he remained so until the day Abraham died and was buried. On the other hand we have Genesis 22:2 which claims that Isaac, Abraham's second son is the only son of Abraham. To understand this we need to go back to the Qur'anic version of this story. In the Qur'an we are told that Abraham was deprived children until his old age whereupon he was given Ishmael, his first born son. Up until this point the Qur'an and the Old Testament are in agreement. It stands to reason that after having been deprived an heir for so long Abraham would become extremely attached to his only begotten son Ishmael. For all he knew then he very likely might not be blessed with any more children before his death. We are now told in the Qur'an that Allah (God) almighty decided to test Abraham's faith. He therefore decided to set up a test for Abraham in the one thing which he held most dear to his heart in all of this world: His only son. God al |