Without a doubt, you have often heard the claim that Jesus is God, the second person in the “Holy Trinity”.However, the very Bible which is used as a basis for knowledge about Jesus and as the basis for doctrine within Christianity clearly belies this claim. We urge you to consult your own Bible and verify that the following conclusions are not drawn out of context:

1. God is All Knowing… but Jesus was not.

When speaking of the Day of Judgment, Jesus clearly gave evidence of a limitation on his knowledge when he said, “but of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in Heaven, neither the son, but the Father.” (Mark 13:32 and Matt 24:36) But God knows all. His knowledge is without any limitations. That Jesus, of his own admission, did not know when the Day of Judgment would be, is clear proof that Jesus is not all-knowing, and that Jesus is therefore not God.

2. God is All-Powerful… but Jesus was not.

While Jesus performed many miracles, he himself admitted that the power he had was not his own, but derived from God. He said, “Verily I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do…” (John 5:19) Again he said, “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 has sent me.” (John 5:30) But God is not only all-powerful, He is also the source of all power and authority. That Jesus, of his own admission, could do nothing on his own is clear proof that Jesus is not all-powerful, and that therefore Jesus is not God.

3. God does not have a God… but Jesus did have a God.

God is the ultimate judge and refuge for all, and He does not call upon nor pray to any others. But Jesus acknowledged that there was one whom he worshipped and to whom he prayed when he said, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) He is also reported to have cried out while on the cross, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt 27:46) If Jesus were God, then couldn’t this be read “Myself, myself, why hast thou forsaken me?” Would that not be pure nonsense? When Jesus prayed the Lord’s prayer (Luke 11:2-4) was he praying to himself? When in the garden of Gethsemane he prayed, “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: Nevertheless, not as I will but as thou wilt.” (Matt 26:36-39) Was Jesus praying to himself? That Jesus, of his own admission, and by his own actions, acknowledged, worshipped and prayed to another being as God, is clear proof that Jesus himself is not God.

4. According to the Bible, God is invisible to humans… but Jesus was flesh and blood.

While thousands saw Jesus and heard his voice, Jesus himself said that this could not be done with God when he said, ” No man hath seen God at any time.” (John 1:18) “Ye have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape.” (John 5:37) He also said in John 4:24, “God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” That Jesus would say that no one had seen or heard God ant any time, while his followers both saw and heard him, is clear proof that Jesus was not God.

5. No one is greater than God and no one can direct Him… but Jesus acknowledged someone greater than himself whose will was distinct from his own.

Perhaps the clearest indication we have that Jesus and God are not equal, and therefore not one and the same, come again from the mouth of Jesus himself who said in John 14:28, “My Father is greater than I.” When someone referred to him as a “good master” in Luke 18:19, Jesus responded, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God…” Further more, Jesus drew clear distinctions between himself and God when he said, “I proceeded forth and came from God, neither came I of myself but He sent me.” (John 8:42) Jesus gave clear evidence of his subordination to God, rather than his equality with God, when he said in Luke 22:42, “not my will but thine be done,” and in John 5:30, “I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which has sent me.” That Jesus would admit that he did not come into the world on his own initiative but was directed to do so, that he would acknowledge another being as greater than himself, and that he would negate his own will in deference to affirming the will of another, give clear proof that Jesus is not the Supreme One and therefore Jesus is not God.

Conclusion

The Church recognizes the Bible as the primary source of knowledge about God and Jesus. But since the Bible makes it clear that Jesus is not the Supreme Being and the Supreme Being is not Jesus, upon what basis have you come to believe otherwise?

My brother or sister, the belief that the Supreme Being is a Trinity is false and completely inconsistent with the words of Jesus as presented in the Bible. God is One, not three. He is a perfect unity.

If you are interested in the truth about God and your relationship to Him, we invite you to investigate the religion of Islam.

What is the word of God about Jesus?

A. Regarding the Sonship of Jesus:

That is Jesus, son of Mary, in word of truth, concerning which they are doubting. It is not for God to take a son unto Him. Glory be to Him! When He decrees a thing, He but says to it “Be”, and it is. (Qur’an 19:34-35)

And they say, ‘The All-Merciful has taken unto Himself a son.’ You have indeed advanced something hideous. The heavens are well nigh rent of it and the earth split asunder, and the mountains well nigh fall down crashing for that they have attributed to the All-Merciful to take a son. None is there in the heavens and earth but he comes to the All-Merciful as a servant. (Qur’an 19:88-93)

Truly the likeness of Jesus, in God’s sight, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, “Be”, and he was. (Qur’an 3:59)

People of the Book, go not beyond the bounds in your religion, and say not as to God but the Truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was only the Messenger of God, and His word that He committed to Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His Messengers, and say not ‘Three’, Refrain, better it is for you. God is only One God. Glory be to Him – that He should have a son! To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth, God suffices for a guardian. (Qur’an 4:171)

B. Regarding Jesus being God:

And when God said, ‘O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say unto men, “Take me and my mother as gods, apart from God?” He said, ‘To You be glory! It is not mine to say what I have no right to. If I indeed said it, You knew it, knowing what is within my soul, and I do not know what is within Your soul; You know the things unseen. I only said to them what You did command me: “Serve God, my Lord and your Lord.” And I was a witness over them, while I remained among them; but when You did take me to Yourself the Watcher over them; You are the witness over everything. (Qur’an 5:116-117)

C. Regarding the Crucifixion of Jesus:

And for their unbelief, and their uttering against Mary a mighty calumny, and for their saying ‘We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of God’… yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them. Those who are at variance concerning him surely are in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge of him, except the following of surmise; and they did not slay him of certainty… no indeed; God raised him up to Him; God is Almighty, All-Wise. There is not one of the people of the Book but will assuredly believe in him before his death, and on the Resurrection Day he will be a witness against them. (Qur’an 4:156-159).

What is the source of the Christian concept of the Trinity?

by Aisha Brown

The three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – all purport to share one fundamental concept: belief in God as the Supreme Being, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe. Known as “tawhid” in Islam, this concept of the Oneness of God was stressed by Moses in a Biblical passage known as the “Shema”, or the Jewish creed of faith: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)

It was repeated word-for-word approximately 1500 years later by Jesus when he said “…The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord.” (Mark 12:29)

Muhammad came along approximately 600 years later, bringing the same message again: “And your God is One God: there is no God but He…” (The Qur’an 2:163).

Christianity has digressed from the concept of the Oneness of God, however, into a vague and mysterious doctrine that was formulated during the fourth century. This doctrine, which continues to be a source of controversy both within and outside the Christian religion, is known as the Doctrine of the Trinity. Simply put, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity states that God is the union of three divine persons – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit – in one divine being.

If that concept, put in basic terms, sounds confusing, the flowery language in the actual text of the doctrine lends even more mystery to the matter:

“…we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity… for there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost is all one… they are not three gods, but one God… the whole three persons are co-eternal and co-equal… he therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity…” (excerpts from the Athanasian Creed).

Let’s put this together in a different form: one person, God the Father, plus one person, God the Son, plus one person, God the Holy Ghost, equals one person, God the What? Is this English or is this gibberish?

It is said that Athanasius, the bishop who formulated this doctrine, confessed that the more he wrote on the matter, the less capable he was of clearly expressing his thoughts regarding it.

How did such a confusing doctrine get its start?

Trinity in the Bible

References in the Bible to a Trinity of divine beings are vague, at best.

In Matthew 28:19, we find Jesus telling his disciples to go out and preach to all nations. While this “Great Commission” does make mention of the three persons who later become components of the Trinity, the phrase “…baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” is quite clearly an addition to Biblical text – that is, not the actual words of Jesus – as can be seen by two factors:

1) baptism in the early Church, as discussed by Paul in his letters, was done only in the name of Jesus; and

2) the “Great Commission” was found in the first gospel written, that of Mark, bears no mention of Father, Son and/or Holy Ghost – see Mark 16:15.

The only other reference in the Bible to a Trinity can be found in the Epistle of 1 John 5:7. Biblical scholars of today, however, have admitted that the phrase “… there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” is definitely a “later addition” to Biblical text, and it is not found in any of today’s versions of the Bible.

It can, therefore, be seen that the concept of a Trinity of divine beings was not an idea put forth by Jesus or any other prophet of God. This doctrine, now subscribed to by Christians all over the world, is entirely man-made in origin.

The Doctrine Takes Shape

While Paul of Tarsus, the man who could rightfully be considered the true founder of Christianity, did formulate many of its doctrines, that of the Trinity was not among them. He did, however, lay the groundwork for such when he put forth the idea of Jesus being a “divine Son”. After all, a Son does need a Father, and what about a vehicle for God’s revelations to man? In essence, Paul named the principal players, but it was the later Church people who put the matter together.

Tertullian, a lawyer and presbyter of the third-century Church in Carthage, was the first to use the word “Trinity” when he put forth the theory that the Son and the Spirit participate in the being of God, but all are of one being of substance with the Father.

A Formal Doctrine Is Drawn Up

When controversy over the matter of the Trinity blew up in 318 between two church men from Alexandria – Arius, the deacon, and Alexander, his bishop – Emperor Constantine stepped into the fray.

Although Christian dogma was a complete mystery to him, he did realize that a unified church was necessary for a strong kingdom. When negotiation failed to settle the dispute, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council in Church history in order to settle the matter once and for all.

Six weeks after the 300 bishops first gathered at Nicea in 325, the doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out. The God of the Christians was now seen as having three essences, or natures, in the form of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Church Puts Its Foot Down

The matter was far from settled, however, despite high hopes for such on the part of Constantine. Arius and the new bishop of Alexandria, a man named Athanasius, began arguing over the matter even as the Nicene Creed was being signed; “Arianism” became a catch-word from that time onward for anyone who didn’t hold to the doctrine of the Trinity.

It wasn’t until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.

Debate Continues

Brutal punishments and even death did not stop the controversy over the doctrine of the Trinity, however, and the said controversy continues even today.

The majority of Christians, when asked to explain this fundamental doctrine of their faith, can offer nothing more than “I believe it because I was told to do so.” It is explained away as “mystery” – yet the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 14:33 that “… God is not the author of confusion …”

The Unitarian denomination of Christianity has kept alive the teachings of Arius in saying that God is one; they do not believe in the Trinity. As a result, mainstream Christians abhor them, and the National Council of Churches has refused their admittance. In Unitarianism, the hope is kept alive that Christians will someday return to the preachings of Jesus: “… Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.” (Luke 4:8)

Islam and the Matter of the Trinity

While Christianity may have a problem defining the essence of God, such is not the case in Islam:

“They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity, for there is no god except One God” (Qur’an 5:73).

It is worth noting that the Arabic language Bible uses the name “Allah” as the name of God.

Suzanne Haneef, in her book What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims (Library of Islam, 1985), puts the matter quite succinctly when she says,

“But God is not like a pie or an apple which can be divided into three thirds which form one whole; if God is three persons or possesses three parts, He is assuredly not the Single, Unique, Indivisible Being which God is and which Christianity professes to believe in.” (pp. 183-184)

Looking at it from another angle, the Trinity designates God as being three separate entities – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. If God is the Father and also the Son, He would then be the Father of Himself because He is His own Son. This is not exactly logical.

Christianity claims to be a monotheistic religion. Monotheism, however, has as its fundamental belief that God is One; the Christian doctrine of the Trinity – God being Three-in-One – is seen by Islam as a form of polytheism. Christians don’t revere just One God, they revere three.

This is a charge not taken lightly by Christians, however. They, in turn, accuse the Muslims of not even knowing what the Trinity is, pointing out that the Qur’an sets it up as Allah the Father, Jesus the Son, and Mary his mother. While veneration of Mary has been a figment of the Catholic Church since 431 when she was given the title “Mother of God” by the Council of Ephesus, a closer examination of the verses in the Qur’an most often cited by Christians in support of their accusation, shows that the designation of Mary by the Qur’an as a “member” of the Trinity, is simply not true.

While the Qur’an does condemn both trinitarianism (the Qur’an 4:171; 5:73) and the worship of Jesus and his mother Mary (the Qur’an 5:116), nowhere does it identify the actual three components of the Christian Trinity. The position of the Qur’an is that WHO or WHAT comprises this doctrine is not important; what is important is that the very notion of a Trinity is an affront against the concept of One God.

In conclusion, we see that the doctrine of the Trinity is a concept conceived entirely by man; there is no sanction whatsoever from God to be found regarding the matter simply because the whole idea of a Trinity of divine beings has no place in monotheism. In the Qur’an, God’s Final Revelation to mankind, we find His stand quite clearly stated in a number of eloquent passages,

“… your God is One God: whoever expects to meet his Lord, let him work righteousness, and, in the worship of his Lord, admit no one as partner.” (the Qur’an 18:110)

“… take not, with God, another object of worship, lest you should be thrown into Hell, blameworthy and rejected.” (the Qur’an 17:39)

– because, as God tells us over and over again in a Message that is echoed throughout ALL His Revealed Scriptures,

“… I am your Lord and Cherisher: therefore, serve Me (and no other) …” (the Qur’an 21:92)

The history behind the Christian concepts of atonement and salvation

by Aisha Brown

Salvation can be defined as the deliverance from sin and its penalties; the path to salvation, however, varies from one religion to another. In Christianity, salvation is found through the Doctrine of Vicarious Atonement. Since human nature is considered in Christianity to be wayward and sinful, this doctrine states that Jesus “rendered full satisfaction” to God for the sins of man through his death and resurrection. In a nutshell, Jesus took our place, and his death absolves us of our sins.

This is contrary to what is found in the Torah where God says: ” …every man shall be put to death for his own sin” (Deut. 24:16)

The matter of Jesus, as savior of mankind, is refuted in the Quran, wherein God says that He

“… has stamped them with their disbelief… for their saying ‘We killed God’s Messenger, Christ Jesus, the son of Mary’ They neither killed nor crucified him, even though it seemed so to them…” (4:155, 157).

Salvation According to Jesus

Nowhere in the four gospels did Jesus explicitly state that he would die to save mankind from sin. When approached by a man who asked what he could do to gain eternal life, Jesus told him to keep the Commandments (Mat. 19: 16,17); in other words, to obey God’s Law. To a similar question put to him by a lawyer, as recorded in the gospel of Luke, Jesus told him to love God and his fellow man (Luke 10:25-28).

The role of Jesus is made clear in the Quran

where God says:

“Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him…see how God doth make His Signs clear to them, yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth” (5:75).

The mission of Jesus was not, therefore, to set up a new method of achieving salvation, much less the founding of a new system of belief; as even the Bible points out, Jesus sought only to take the Jews from their emphasis on ritual back to that of righteousness (Mat. 6:1-8).

Paul of Tarsus

For the origin of the doctrine of atonement, one does not go to the teachings of Jesus, but instead to the words of Paul, the true founder of Christianity; in teachings of present Christian terms and practices.

Like many Jews, Paul had no use for the teachings of Jesus, and he himself persecuted the followers of Jesus for their unorthodox beliefs. This zealous persecutor was turned into an ardent preacher, however, through a sudden conversion around 35 CE. Paul claimed that a resurrected Jesus appeared to him in a vision, thereby, choosing Paul as his instrument for carrying his teachings to the Gentiles (Gal. 1:11; 12:15,16).

Paul’s credibility in any capacity is questionable, however, when considering that: (1) there are four contradictory versions of his so-called “conversion” (Acts 9:3-8; 22:6-10; 26:13-18; Gal. 1:15-17); (2) God says, in passages such as Num. 12:6, Deut. 18:20 and Ez. 13:8-9, that revelations come ONLY from Him, and (3) accounts of numerous disagreements between the other disciples and Paul regarding his teachings are recorded in Acts.

Experience and observation had taught Paul that preaching among the Jews was not feasible; he, therefore, chose to go to the non-Jews. By doing so, however, Paul disregarded a direct command from Jesus against preaching to other than a Jew (Mat. 10:5-6). In short, Paul set aside the actual teachings of Jesus in his desire to be a success.

The Pagan Influence

Among the pagans of Paul’s time, a wide variety of gods existed. Although these gods had different names and were embraced by people from different areas of the world – Adonis from Syria, Dionysus from Thrace, Attis from Phrygia, for instance – the basic concept in each cult was the same: these sons of gods died violent deaths and then rose again to save their people.

Since the pagans had tangible savior-gods in their old religions, they wanted nothing less from the new; they were not able to accept any sort of an invisible Deity. Paul was quite accommodating, preaching therefore of a savior named Jesus Christ, the son of God, who died and then rose again to save mankind from sin (Rom. 5:8-11; 6:8-9).

The Bible itself points out the error of Paul’s thinking. While each of the four gospels contain an account of the crucifixion of Jesus, these accounts are strictly hearsay; none of the disciples of Jesus were witness to such, having fled his side in the Garden (Mark 14:50).

In the Torah, God says that one who is “hanged upon a tree” – crucified – is “accursed” (Deut. 21:23). Paul side-stepped this by saying that Jesus became accursed in order to take on the sins of man (Gal. 3:13); in so doing, however, Paul set aside the very Law of God.

The resurrection, wherein Paul says that Jesus “conquered” death and sin for mankind (Rom. 6:9,10), plays such an important part that one who does not believe in it is not considered a good Christian (1 Cor. 15:14).

Here, too, the Bible lends little support to Paul’s notions; first of all, not only was there no eyewitness to the actual resurrection, but all post-resurrection accounts are in contradiction with each other as to who went to the gravesite, what happened there, and even where and to whom Jesus appeared (Mat. 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20).

Secondly, although Christianity states that the body following resurrection will be in a spiritual form (1 Cor. 15:44), Jesus had obviously not changed, for he both ate with his disciples (Luke 24:30,41-43), and allowed them to touch his wounds (John 20:27). Finally, as the divine son of God in Christianity, Jesus is said to share in God’s attributes; one cannot fail to wonder, however, just how it can be possible for God to die…

In his desire to win souls among the pagans, Paul simply reworked a number of major pagan beliefs to come up with the Christian scheme of salvation. No prophet – including Jesus himself – taught such concepts; they were authored entirely by Paul.

The Ultimate Sacrifice

Long accustomed to making sacrifices to their gods, the pagans easily grasped Paul’s notion that Jesus was the “ultimate sacrifice” whose blood washed away sin. A common ceremony during this time in various Middle Eastern cults, such as those of Attis and Mithras, was that of the “taurobolium”: a person descended into a pit covered over with grillwork upon which a bull (or ram), said to represent the pagan deity himself, was then ceremoniously slain. By covering himself with the blood, the person in the pit below was said to have been “born again” with his sins washed away.

It is worth noting that the Jews had given up sacrifice back in 590 BCE following the destruction of their Temple. Paul’s notions, therefore, were in direct contradiction to both Old Testament teaching (Hosea 6:6) and even to the teaching of Jesus himself (Mat. 9:13) which stressed how God desired good virtues, not sacrifice.

While Paul stressed that God’s “love” was behind the sacrifice of Jesus (Rom. 5:8), the Doctrine of Atonement instead shows a harsh Deity satisfied only by the murder of his own innocent son. Paul was way off base here, for the Old Testament is full of references to the love and mercy of God to man (Ps. 36:5-10; Ps. 103:8-17) revealed through His forgiveness (Ex. 34:6,7; Ps. 86:5-7), of which even Jesus spoke (Mat. 6:12).

Pagan influence in Christianity even extends to its sacred symbol. Although Paul calls the cross of Jesus “the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18), reference works, such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, Dictionary of Symbols, and The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art point out that the cross was used as a religious symbol centuries before the birth of Jesus. Bacchus of Greece, Tammuz of Tyre, Bel of Chaldea, and Odin of Norway are just a few examples of ancient pagan gods whose sacred symbol was that of a cross.

Original Sin

Central to the Doctrine of Atonement is Paul’s notion that mankind is a race of wrong-doers, having inherited from Adam his sin in eating of the forbidden fruit. As a result of this Original Sin, man cannot serve as his own redeemer; good works are to no avail, says Paul, for even these cannot satisfy the justice of God (Gal. 2:16).

As a result of Adam’s sin, man is doomed to die. By his death, however, Jesus took on the punishment due man; through his resurrection, Jesus conquered death, and righteousness was restored. To earn salvation, a Christian need only have faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus (Rom. 6:23).

Despite its prominent place in Christianity, the notion of an “original sin” is not found among the teachings of any prophet, Jesus included. In the Old Testament, God says: “… the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son” (Ez.18:20-22). Personal responsibility is also stressed in the Qur’an where God says: “… no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another… man can have nothing but what he strives for” (53:38,39).

The doctrine of original sin gave Paul the means to justify pagan influence in his scheme of salvation. Irresponsibility became the hallmark of Christianity through this doctrine, however, for by “transferring” sins onto Jesus, Christians assume no responsibility for their actions.

Salvation in Islam

By the seventh century, the doctrines conceived by Paul had been embellished to the point where Christianity was not almost entirely a man-made religion. At this time, God chose to send Muhammad as His Final Messenger in order to set things straight once and for all for mankind.

Since God is Almighty, He doesn’t need the charade concocted by Christians in order to forgive man. In the Qur’an, God says we are all created in a state of goodness (30:30); He has not burdened man with any “original sin”, having forgiven Adam and Eve (2:36-38; 7:23,24) as He forgives us (11:90; 39:53-56).

As we are all personally responsible for our actions (2:286; 6:164) there is no need for a humanly concocted savior in Islam; salvation comes from God alone (28:67).

Thus did Islam seek to restore the true meaning to monotheism

Qur’an God asks:

“Who can be better in religion than one who submits his whole self to God, does good, and follows the way of Abraham the true in faith?” (4:125; 41:33).

The Religion of Man

The evidence is overwhelming that the concept of salvation in Christianity – its Doctrine of Vicarious Atonement – came not from God but from man via pagan rituals and beliefs.

Paul effectively shifted the center of worship away from God by saying that Jesus was the divine agent of their salvation (Gal. 2:20). In so doing, however, Paul set aside all teachings of God’s prophets, and even the concept of monotheism itself, since God in Christianity needs Jesus for His divine “helper”.

Take a Closer Look

With his very salvation at stake here, the Christian should take a closer look at what he believes in and why.

God says in the Qur’an:

“O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was no more than a Messenger of God… for God is One God; glory be to Him: far exalted is He above having a son. To him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of Affairs.” (4:171)

Bible Prophecies About The Advent Of Muhammad

by Jamal Badawi, Ph.D.

Abraham is widely regarded as the patriarch of monotheism and the common father of the Jews, Christians and Muslims. Through his second son, Isaac, came all Israelite prophets including such towering figures as Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus. May peace and blessings be upon them all. The advent of these great prophets was in partial fulfillment of God’s promises to bless the nations of earth through the descendents of Abraham (Genesis 12:2-3). Such fulfillment is wholeheartedly accepted by Muslims whose faith considers the belief in and respect of all prophets an article of faith.

Blessings of Ishmael and Isaac

Was the first born son of Abraham (Ishmael) and his descendants included in God’s covenant and promise? A few verses from the Bible may help shed some light on this question:

1) Genesis 12:2-3 speaks of God’s promise to Abraham and his descendants before any child was born to him.

2) Genesis 17:4 reiterates God’s promise after the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac.

3) In Genesis, Ch. 21, Isaac is specifically blessed but Ishmael was also specifically blessed and promised by God to become “a great nation” especially in Genesis 21:13,18.

4) According to Deuteronomy 21:17-21 the traditional rights and privileges of the first born son are not to be affected by the social status of his mother (being a “free” woman such as Sarah, Isaac’s mother, or a “bondwoman” such as Hagar, Ishmael’s mother). This is only consistent with the moral and humanitarian principles of all revealed faiths.

5) The full legitimacy of Ishmael as Abraham’s son and “seed” and the full legitimacy of his mother, Hagar, as Abraham’s wife are clearly stated in Genesis 21:13 and 16:3.

After Jesus, the last Israelite messenger and prophet, it was time that God’s promise to bless Ishmael and his descendants be fulfilled. Less than 600 years after Jesus, came the last messenger of God, Muhammad, from the progeny of Abraham through Ishmael. God’s blessing of both of the main branches of Abraham’s family tree was now fulfilled. But are there additional corroborating evidence that the Bible did in fact foretell the advent of Prophet Muhammad?

Muhammad: The Prophet like unto Moses

A long time after Abraham, God’s promise to send the long-awaited Messenger was repeated, this time in Moses’ words.

In Deuteronomy 18:18, Moses spoke of the prophet to be sent by God who is:

1) From among the Israelite’s “brethren”. A reference to their Ishmaelite cousins as Ishmael was the other son of Abraham who was explicitly promised to become a “great nation”.

2) A prophet like unto Moses. There were hardly any two prophets who were so much alike as Moses and Muhammad. Both were given a comprehensive law code of life, both encountered their enemies and were victors in miraculous ways, both were accepted as prophets/statesmen and both migrated following conspiracies to assassinate them. Analogies between Moses and Jesus overlook not only the above similarities but other crucial ones as well (e.g. the natural birth, family life and death of Moses and Muhammad but not of Jesus, who was regarded by His followers as the Son of God and not exclusively a messenger of God, as Moses and Muhammad were and as Muslims believe Jesus was).

The awaited prophet was to come from Arabia

Deuteronomy 33:1-2 combines references to Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. It speaks of God (i.e. God’s revelation) coming from Sinai, rising from Seir (probably the village of Sa’ir near Jerusalem) and shining forth from Paran. According to Genesis 21:21, the wilderness of Paran was the place where Ishmael settled (i.e. Arabia, specifically Mecca).

Indeed the King James version of the Bible mentions the pilgrims passing through the valley of Ba’ca (another name of Makkah) in Psalms 84:4-6.

Isaiah 42:1-13 speaks of the beloved of God. His elect and messenger who will bring down a law to be awaited in the isles and who “shall not fail nor be discouraged till we have set judgement on earth.” Verse 11 connects that awaited one with the descendants of Ke’dar. Who is Ke’dar? According to Genesis 25:13, Ke’dar was the second son of Ishmael, the ancestor of Prophet Muhammad.

Muhammad’s migration from Makkah to Madinah: Prophesised in the Bible?

Habakkuk 3:3 speaks of God (God’s help) coming from Te’man (an Oasis north of Medina according to J. Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible), and the holy one (coming) from Paran. That holy one who under persecution migrated from Paran (Makkah) to be received enthusiastically in Madinah was none but Prophet Muhammad.

Indeed the incident of the migration of the Prophet and his persecuted followers is vividly described in Isaiah 21:13-17. That section foretold as well about the battle of Badr in which the few ill-armed faithful miraculously defeated the “mighty” men of Ke’dar, who sought to destroy Islam and intimidate their own folds who turned to Islam.

The Qur’an: Foretold in the Bible?

For twenty-three years, God’s words (the Qur’an) were truly put into Muhammad’s mouth. He was not the “author” of the Qur’an. The Qur’an was dictated to him by Angel Gabriel who asked Muhammad to simply repeat the words of the Qur’an as he heard them. These words of the Qur’an were then committed to memory and to writing by those who heard them during Muhammad’s lifetime and under his supervision.

Was it a coincidence that the Prophet “like unto Moses” from the “brethren” of the Israelites (i.e. from the Ishmaelites) was also described as one in whose mouth God will put His words and that he will speak in the name of God. (Deuteronomy 18:18-20) Was it also a coincidence that “Paraclete” that Jesus foretold to come after him was described as one who “shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak…” (John 16:13).

Was it another coincidence that Isaiah ties between the messenger connected with Ke’dar and a new song (a scripture in a new language) to be sung unto the Lord (Isaiah 42:10-11). More explicitly, prophesies Isaiah “For with stammering lips, and another tongue, will he speak to this people” (Isaiah 28:11). This latter verse correctly describes the “stammering lips” of Prophet Muhammad reflecting the state of tension and concentration he went through at the time of revelation. Another related point is that the Qur’an was revealed in piece-meal over a span of twenty-three years. It is interesting to compare this with Isaiah 28:10-13 which speaks of the same thing.

That Prophet – Paraclete – Muhammad

Up to the time of Jesus (peace be upon him), Israelites were still awaiting for that prophet “like unto Moses” prophesied in Deuteronomy 8:18. When John the Baptist came, they asked him if he was Christ and he said “no”. They asked him if he was Elias and he said “no”. Then, in apparent reference to Deuteronomy 18:18, they asked him. “Art thou that Prophet” and he answered, “no”. (John 1:19-21)

In the Gospel according to John (chaptcrs 14, 15, 16) Jesus spoke of the “Paraclete” or comforter who will come after him, who will be sent by the Father as another Paraclete, who will teach new things which the contemporaries of Jesus could not bear. While the Paraclete is described as the spirit of truth, (whose meaning resembles Muhammad’s famous title AI-Amin, the trustworthy), he is identified in one verse as the Holy Ghost (John 14:26). Such a designation is however, inconsistent with the profile of that Paraclete. In the words of the Dictionary of the Bible, (Ed. J. Mackenzie) “there items, it must be admitted, do not give an entirely coherent picture.”

Indeed history tells us that many early Christians understood the Paraclete to be a man and not a spirit. This might explain the following who responded to some who claimed, without meeting the criteria stipulated by Jesus, to be the awaited “Paraclete”.

It was Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was the Paraclete, Comforter, helper, admonisher sent by God after Jesus. He testified of Jesus, taught new things which could not be borne at Jesus’ time; he spoke what he heard (revelation); he dwells with the believers (through his well-preserved teachings). Such teachings will remain forever because he was the last messenger of God, the only Universal Messenger to unite the whole of humanity under God and on the path of PRESERVED truth. He told of many things to come which “came to pass” in the minutest detail, meeting the criterion given by Moses to distinguish between the true prophet and the false prophets (Deuteronomy 18:22). He did reprove the world of sin, of righteousness and of judgement (John 16:8-11).

Was the shift of religious leadership prophesised?

Following the rejection of the last Israelite Prophet, Jesus, it was about time that God’s promise to make Ishmael a great nation, be fulfilled, (Genesis 21:13,18).

In Matthew 21:19-21, Jesus spoke of the fruitless fig tree (A Biblical symbol of prophetic heritage) to be cleared after being given a last chance of three years (the duration Jesus’ ministry) to give fruit. In a later verse in the same chapter, Jesus said: “Therefore, say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken away from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruit thereof” (Matthew 21:43). That nation of Ishmael’s descendants (the rejected stone in Matthew 21:42) which was victorious against all super-powers of its time as prophesied by Jesus: “And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken, but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder (Matthew 21:44).

Out of context coincidence?

Is it possible that the numerous prophecies cited here are all individually and combined out-of-context misinterpretations? Is the opposite true, that such infrequently studied verses fit together consistently and clearly point to the advent of the man who changed the course of human history, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Is it reasonable to conclude that all these prophecies, appearing in different books of the Bible and spoken by various prophets at different times were all coincidence? If this is so here is another strange “coincidence”!

One of the signs of the prophet to come from Paran (Makkah) is that he will come with “ten thousands of saints” (Deuteronomy 33:2 KJV). That was the number of faithful who accompanied Prophet Muhammad to Paran (Makkah) in his victorious, bloodless return to his birthplace to destroy the remaining symbols of idolatry in the Ka’bah.

Says God as quoted by Moses:

“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.” (Deuteronomy 18:19)

Dear readers, may the light of truth shine in your heart and mind. May it lead you to peace and certitude in this life and eternal bliss in hereafter. Ameen

A comparison between Islam and Christianity on how the religions treat women from their religious texts.

Creation

Female Gender vs. Male Gender

The Female Spiritual Essence

Menses

Sexual Relation During Her Menses

A Woman’s Right to Education

Right to Inheritance

Dressing Modesty / Head Covering

Polygamy

Prohibition in Marriage

Divorce

The Divorcee & Widow

The Respect of Parents

The difference between the Quran and the Bible

by M. Amir Ali, Ph.D.

The Muslims and non-Muslims consider the Qur’an and the Bible to be their respective books of guidance without realizing the vast differences between the two. Firstly, the Bible is a scripture and many Muslims erroneously consider the Qur’an to be a scripture. In the Qur’an, Allah describes the Qur’an as “Al-Kitab“, meaning “the Book”, which is the right name for it. The Bible is called a scripture and if asked about the authorship, Christians tell you that there were forty-some persons, rarely a prophet or a messenger among them, who wrote the Bible under divine inspiration. The concept of divine inspiration is an assumption without verification. Whereas, the Qur’an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad Sall-Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam (henceforth denoted as S) who dictated to his scribes, the most honorable companions. In the sense of authorship the Bible is a scripture whereas the Qur’an is not a scripture but a revealed book.

The Qur’an talks about the TAURAT, ZUBOOR and INJEEL which were the books revealed by Allah to the Prophets Musa, Dawood and ‘Isa ‘alaihumus-salaam, respectively, which are not the same books as the Bible. Due to the similarity of some contents of TAURAT, ZUBOOR and INJEEL, some people equate them with the Torah and Psalms of David and the Gospels respectively, which is an error. This has given an excuse to the Christian missionaries to present the Bible in the native languages of the Muslim countries as the TAURAT, ZUBOOR and INJEEL of the QUR’AN and confuse and confound naive Muslims. The revealed Taurat, Zuboor and Injeel were revealed books which are extinct, whereas, the Bible may contain some parts of Taurat, Zuboor and Injeel in modern-day language translation in corrupt form. A translation of a revealed book cannot be the word of God because in the process of translation the word of God is transformed into the word of man. In the language of revelation (Arabic or Aramaic or Hebrew) only one manuscript or codex could be the word of God, whereas, there can be an infinite number of translations by man. It is, therefore, agreed by Muslim scholars that any translation of the Qur’an is not the word of God and does not qualify to be called the Qur’an. Non-Arabic speaking people should be able to benefit from translations but no one should depend upon a single translation because no translation is free of errors. A translation represents the understanding or lack of it by the translator himself. If any one desires to become a scholar of the Qur’an there is no choice but to learn the Arabic language of the Qur’an and gain expertise in it.

One of the major sources of corruption of the Bible is translation and translations of translations. With regards to the Gospels of the Christians, there is no record of even writing down any document when Jesus received revelations. It is believed by the Christians that the first records of the teachings of Jesus (A) and his life were made decades after his disappearance and it was in the Greek language. The earliest manuscript available is from the fourth century after Jesus. In the case of the Old Testament, it was written in Hebrew and its dialects, but was destroyed at least twice by the enemies of Judaism in ancient times without leaving a single copy and was rewritten from memory, one of the sources of corruption. The Qur’an was recorded in writing as well as in the memory of many people in the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (S) and was compiled in book form according to his directions by his companions shortly after his death. It is, therefore, suggested that Muslims should not apply the term “scripture” to the Qur’an. “Al-Kitab“, when used in the Qur’an, should be translated simply as “the Book”.