The Basis of Islamic Belief-by Dr. Gary Miller
(8514 total words in this text)
(1947 reads) 
About the Author
Gary Miller (âAbdul-Ahad
Omar) shows how we can establish true faith by setting standards of truth. He
illustrates a simple but effective method of finding out the right direction in
our search for truth.
G.R. Miller is a mathematician
and a theologian. He was active in Christian missionary work at a particular
point of his life but he soon began to discover many inconsistencies in the
Bible. In 1978, he happened to read the Qur'an expecting that it, too, would
contain a mixture of truth and falsehood.
He discovered to his amazement
that the message of the Qur'an was precisely the same as the essence of truth
that he had distilled from the Bible. He became a Muslim and since then has
been active in giving public presentations on Islam including radio and
television appearances. He is also the author of several articles and
publications about Islam.
Contents
Dilemma of Applying Reason
Almost all of us have been
faced with the questioning of a child by repeating one word over and over. He
can be very frustrating to us as he asks "Why?" If you put a knife beyond his
reach, he wants to know, "Why?" When you explain it is sharp, he asks "Why?" And
so you explain, "in order to cut fruit," and he asks, "Why?" And so it goes. It
illustrates the dilemma of applying reason. What we have to do when we apply
reason is first to set standards of proof. We decide for ourselves, "What will
be satisfied with if I find such and such and so and so that constitutes for me
a final proof?". We have to decide on that first.
What happens though, is that on the really important
issues, the philosophical matters, thinkers set standards of proof and they take
a look at their subjects and eventually they may arrive at their standards. They
may arrive at the point which they say would constitute a proof. But then they
ask for a proof of the proof.
Top
The key to avoiding an endless
dissatisfaction is to satisfy ourselves about standards first; to satisfy
ourselves that such and such are a list of criteria that constitute proof,
satisfying proof, and then we test the subjects that we examine. In particular I
will apply this to the Qur'an. Ask a thoughtful Christian why he is a Christian,
and he will usually reply, "The miracle of the Resurrection."
The basis for his belief being that about two thousand years
ago a man died and he was raised from the dead. That is his miracle, his
"touchstone", because all else depends on that. Ask a Muslim, "Well, what is
your miracle? Why are you a Muslim? Where is your miracle?" and the Muslim can
go over and take his miracle off the shelf and hand it over to you because his
miracle is still with us today. It is the Qur'an; it is his "touchstone".
Top
While all the prophets have
their signs, Moses had the competition with the magicians and the Pharaoh, Jesus
healed the sick and raised the dead and so on, one Sign was given to the last of
the prophets. According to the Muslims, this is the Qur'an. And this one Sign is
still with us. Does not that after all seem fair, that if prophethood is to end
that the last prophet should bring something that stays with us so that, in
fact, a Muslim who takes his religion seriously suffers no disadvantage to
Muslims who lived fourteen centuries ago? Those people who kept company with the
Prophet had access to no more of the necessary information than we have today.
They had the Qur'an. That was the sign for them. It is still a sign to us today,
the same miracle. Well, let us test the Qur'an. Suppose that if I say to a man,
"I know your father." Probably he is going to examine the situation and see if
it seems likely that I have met his father. If he is not convinced, he will
start asking me questions like: "You know my father, you say, is he a tall man?
Does he have curly hair? Does he wear glasses?," and
so on. If 1 keep giving him the right answers to all these questions, pretty
soon he is going to be convinced. "Well, I guess this man did meet my father
like he said." You see the method.
Top
Here in the Qur'an we have a
book which claims that its author is one who was present at the beginning of the
universe, at the beginning of life. So, we have a right to address that author
and say, "Well, tell me something prove to me that you were there when the world
began, when life began." The Qur'an gives us an interesting statement. It reads:
âHave not the
disbelievers seen that the Heavens and the Earth were one piece and we parted
them? And We made every living thing from water. Will
they not then believe?â (21:30).
There are three key points
here. First of all, it is the disbelievers who are mentioned as being those who
would see that the heavens and the earth were one piece and then parted and
would see that all life came to be made from water. As it happens, the
universally accepted theory of the origin of the universe is now the Big Bang
theory. It maintains that at one time all of the heavens and the earth were one
piece, the monoblock as it is called. At a
particular point in time, this "monoblock" burst and
it continues to expand. This gives us the universe we have today. This was a
recent discovery, a recent confirmation.
The Nobel
prize in Physics was awarded only a few years ago to those who confirmed
the Big Bang origin of the universe. It was only about two hundred years ago
that Leeuwenhoek and others perfected the microscope and discovered for the
first time that living cells are composed of about eighty percent water. Those
Nobel Prize winners and the Dutchman who invented the microscope were not
Muslims. And yet they confirmed the vital statement that at one time the
universe was one piece, that life was made from
water, just as this verse says:
"Have not the
disbelievers seen that the heavens and the earth were one piece and
We parted them? And We
made every living thing from water. Will They not
then believe?" (21:30).
Well, this sounds like an
answer to the question we started with when we ask the author. "Tell me
something that shows me you were present when the universe began, when life
began?"
Top
Everyone must be committed to
something. You have to put your foot down some place. It is impossible to be
neutral at all times. There has to be a point of reference in the life of any
thinking individual. You have to take a stand somewhere. The question, of
course, is to put your foot down in the right place. Since there is no such
thing as a proof of a proof of a proof and so on, in order to find the right
place to put oneâs foot down, to take a stand, we have to search and find that
place and it is by a method that I hope to illustrate here.
It is a question of finding a
point of convergence. You see, we search for truth in many places and we begin
to know that we are succeeding in finding the truth if all our different paths
start to converge; they start to come together at the same point.
If we are examining a book,
looking for evidence of divine origin, and we are led to Islam, this is one
path. If at the same time, we are examining the words of all those who were
called prophets and we find ourselves led to Islam, we have a firmly grounded
basis for belief We started looking for truth in two different places and found
ourselves going down the path headed for the same destination.
No one ever proves all things.
We have to stop at some point being satisfied with our standards as I have
mentioned earlier. The point is, in order to take a stand and to be sure it is
in the right place, we want to examine all the evidence around us and see where
it leads us and anticipate this point of convergence; to say it looks like all
things are pointing to this place. We go to that place and then look at the data
around us to see if it fits into place. Does it now make sense? Are we standing
is on right place?
Top
Let me first show more of our
examination of the Qur'an, and then an examination of some words of prophets to
find this point of convergence. In chapter fifty one, verse forty seven, it is
mentioned that the heavens are expanding. As I mentioned earlier, this is in
connection with the "Big Bang" origin of the universe, as it is usually called,
and it was in 1973 that the Nobel Prize was awarded to three men who were
confirming that, after all, the universe is expanding.
The comments of Muslims over
the centuries on this verse which speaks of the heavens doing exactly that is
very interesting.
The wisest among them had stated that the words are very dear, that the heavens
are expanding, but they could not imagine how that could be so. But they were
content to leave the words as they were, to say: "Allah knows best."
Top
The Qur'an mentions a city by
the name of Iram (89:7). The city of
Iram
has been unknown to history, so unknown that even some Muslim commentators, out
of embarrassment or feeling apologetic for their religion, have commented on
this mention of the city in the Qur'an as being perhaps figurative, that
Iram was possibly a man and not a city.
In 1973 the excavation in
Syria at the site of the ancient city of
Eblus
uncovered the largest collection of cuneiform writings on clay tablets ever
assembled. In fact, the library discovered in Eblus
contains more day tablets that are more than four thousand years old than all
the other tablets combined from all the other sites.
Interestingly enough, you will
find the details in the National Geographic of December 1978 (pp.730- , esp.
p.736) which confirms that in those tablets the city of
Iram
is mentioned. The people of Eblus used to do
business with the people of Iram. So here in 1973,
comes confirmation of the fact that, after all, there really was an ancient city
by that name, wherever it was. How did it find its way into the Qur'an, we might
ask?
Those
Muslims who may have offered their comments, trying to explain away this
reference that they were uncomfortable with, were outsmarted by the author of
the Qur'an. They are those who would outsmart the author of the Qur'an They
would attempt it. Primarily, their activity would involve trying to produce the
evidence that the author of this book had a primitive understanding of the world
around us.
Top
For example, there is a word
which is translated today usually in Arabic as zarrah.
This is usually translated as "atom" and it is usually thought of in Arabic as
being the smallest item available at one time. Perhaps the Arabs thought it was
an ant or a grain of dust. Today the word is usually translated as "atom".
Those who would outsmart the
author of the Qur'an have insisted that, well, the atom is not after all the
smallest piece of matter because in this century it has been discovered that
even the atom is made of still smaller pieces of matter. Is it then possible to
outsmart the author who chose to use this word? Well, there is an interesting
verse, in chapter ten, verse sixty one, which speaks of items the size of a
zarrah, (atom) or smaller. There is no possibility
that on this subject someone is going to say a new discovery has outdated the
words of the Qur'an on the issue of the size of matter or the ultimate
particles. The verse talks about items the size of a zarrah
(atom) or smaller.
Top
Speaking of outsmarting the
author of the Qur'an, the Islamic point of view is that when a man embraces
Islam, his past is forgiven from the very beginning. This has been the
invitation to Islam: come to Islam and all is forgiven from the past.
But consider this. There is
only one enemy of Muhammad, peace be upon him, who is mentioned by name in the
Qur'an: one Abu Lahab. In a short chapter of this
book, he is condemned to punishment for his sins.
As it happens, the man himself
was alive for many years after this revelation. He could therefore have finished
Islam very easily. He needed only to go to the Muslims to announce his
conversion. They had in their hands the revelation which said that this man is
doomed to punishment. He could have gone to the Muslims and say- "I accept
Islam, am I forgiven or not?"
He could have confused them so
much as to finish this small movement because he would have been pointing out to
them that they were now in confusion. The policy was instant forgiveness of the
past but their own revealed scripture announced that
he was not forgiven. As it was, Abu Lahab died
without accepting Islam.
Top
In fact, the Qur'an
confidently predicted a number of things only a few years before they came to
pass. The fall of the Persian Empire, for example, was predicted in spite of the
fact that it had just suffered a serious military reverse. The evidence was all
to the contrary. But in the chapter entitled Rom, the fall of the Persian Empire
who were recently victors over the Romans was
predicted.
When all the Muslims in the
world could meet in one room, the revelations were already discussing their
future successes. In confidence, they were planning for the day when they would
be in charge of the city where they were forced at that time to hide for their
very lives.
Top
Some people may like to find
any number of things in the Qur'an. But an honest method in examining this book,
looking for evidence of the Divine origin, is to take things at their value, to
look for things that are dear and to look in those places where we are invited
to look. Remember the passage that I quoted earlier
"Have not the disbelievers seen..."
This a common phrase of the Qurâan: "0 Man, Have
you not seen." The invitation is to examine the evidence in these
places. We are doing the sensible thing if we examine the words used to look for
the doubted meaning and to find evidence of the Divine origin. Each one of us is
an expert on something. One does not have to have a degree in a particular
subject to decide that now, "I can take my expertise to the Qur'an and see what
I can find." We all know something for sure from our own experience and life. I
heard a story, several years ago in Toronto, of a man who was given the Qur'an
to read. The man was a member of the merchant marines who spent his life on the
sea. When he read a verse in the Qur'an describing the waves on the ocean,
"waves within waves and the darkness between,"
he was surprised because the description was just what he knew the
situation to be. When he returned the Qur'an to the man who gave it to him to
read, he asked him (because he was completely ignorant of the origins of Islam):
"This Muhammad, was he a sailor?" Well, of course, he
was quite surprised to know that the man spent his life in the desert. So he had
to ask himself. "From where did he get this knowledge of what looks like on a
stormy sea?"
We all know something that we
can be confident of, and if we can turn to the Qur'an to read what it says about
this subject, we are asking for confirmation of our belief in the Divine origin
of the book.
Top
A friend of mine from the
University of Toronto had the experience of dealing with a man who was doing his
doctorate in psychology. He chose as his subject: "The Efficiency of Group
Discussion".
He suggested a number of
criteria as to what constitutes an efficient discussion. He graphed the process;
that is, he achieved a measure of the efficiency of all groups in their
discussions according to an index by his system. On his graph he indicated the
progress made by the discussion groups of various sizes.
The interesting thing that
happened which he did not expect to find when he began his project was that,
while there were some differences between the size of any given group and how
well they did in discussions, he was surprised to find that groups of two were
completely off his scale. In other words, when two people sit down to discuss
something, they were so much more efficient than any
other size of group that it went completely off his scale of measurement.
When my friend heard about
this, something went on at the back of his mind. My friend, being a Muslim,
thought there was something familiar here about this idea. The psychology
researcher was not a Muslim. He was debating with himself on changing the topic
of his thesis. Should he call it "The Phenomenon of Two" or "The Two Phenomena"?
He was so surprised at his discovery.
Meanwhile, my friend found
that there is a verse in the Qur'an, and he found it for himself on the same
night, which speaks on discussions and the size of groups and how efficient they
are. And maybe we should not be surprised to find that it is the groups that are
two in numbers that do the best in achieving results. The verse in the Qur'an
reads, concerning discussion groups, that when discussing the Qur'an one should
sit alone and reflect on its meaning or discuss it in groups of two.
Top
For myself, as I said everyone
knows something for sure or has an interest and experience in life; my interest
is in mathematics and logic. There is a verse in the Qur'an which says:
"This is a
scripture whose verses are perfected and then expounded." (11:1)
Which tells me that there are
no wasted words in the Qur'an; that each verse is perfected and then it is
explained. It
could not be in a better form. One could not use fewer words to say the same
thing or if one uses more words one would only be adding superfluous
information.
This directed my attention to
a particular mathematical subject, a logical subject, and I examined the Qurâan
to see if I could find something of what I knew to be the case.
A revolution in logic has
occurred in the last one hundred years, primarily over the difference between
use and mention of words. A structure of logic seemed to be in danger of
collapsing about a hundred years ago because it came to the attention of the
people who studied these matters that the structure was not quite sound. The
issue involved "self-reference" and the use and the mention of words which I
will explain briefly.
Aristotleâs law of the
"excluded middle" was the statement that every statement is either true or
false. About a hundred years ago, somebody pointed out that the law of the
excluded middle is a statement and is therefore not a law after all. It could
just as well be false as well as true.
This was a tangled knot for
the logicians to untie until they came to understand the difference between the
use and the mention of a word.
When we use a word, we
consider its meaning. When we mention a word we are discussing the word itself.
If I say Toronto is a large city, I mean Toronto, that place, is a large city.
If I say Toronto has seven letters, I am talking about the word "Toronto". In
the first case I used the word and in the second I mentioned the word. You see
the distinction.
Top
Connecting these ideas and the
idea that the Qur'an is composed of verses that are perfected and then expounded
for us, consider the verse which says:
"The likeness of
Jesus before Allah is as the likeness of Adam." (3:59)
It is very clear that what we
have in this statement is an equation. This verse goes on to explain how that is
true because they both came under unusual circumstances rather than having a
mother and a father in the usual human reproductive way. But more than that, 1
got to considering the use of the mention of words.
The words are used clearly
enough. Jesus is like Adam and by Jesus and Adam, we mean those two men.
But what about the mention of the words? Was the
author aware of the fact that if we were considering the words as words in
themselves, this sentence also reads that "Jesus" is somehow like "Adam?" Well,
they are not spelt with the same letters; how can they be alike in this
revelation? The only answer came to me fairly quickly and I took a look at the
index of the Qur'an.
The index of the Qur'an has
been made available only since 1945. This book was the result of years of work
by a man and his students who assembled a book which lists every word in the
Qur'an and where it can be found.
So, when we look up the word
âIsa (Jesus), we find it in the Qur'an twenty-five times. When we look up Adam,
we find it in the Qur'an twenty-five times. The point is that they are very much
alike in this book. They are equated. So, following up on this idea, I continued
to examine the index looking for every case where something was set up as an
equation, where the likeness of something was said to be the likeness of some
other thing. And in every case, it works. You have for example a verse which
reads:
"The likeness of
those who reject our signs is as the likeness of the dog." (7:176)
Well, the phrase in Arabic for
"the people who reject our signs" could be found in the Qur'an exactly five
times. And so is the Arabic word for "the dog" (al-kalb).
And there are several instances of exactly the same occurrence.
It was some months after I
found this for myself that a friend of mine, who is continuing this
investigation with me, made a suggestion that there are also some places in the
Qur'an where one thing is said to be not like another thing.
As soon as he mentioned this
up to me, we both went for the index and had a quick look at several places
where one thing is said to be not like another thing and counted their
occurrence in the Qur an. We were surprised and
maybe should not have been to find that, after all, they do not match up. But an
interesting thing does happen. For example, the Qur'an makes it very clear in
the verse that trade is not like interest. The two words will be found six times
for one and seven for the other. And so it is in every other case.
When one thing is said to be
not like another, they occur for a difference of one time. It would be five of
one and four of the other, or seven of one and eight of another.
Top
There is one interesting verse
which, I felt, spoke directly to me from right off the page. It mentions two
words in Arabic, al-khabeeth (the evil), and al-taib
(the good). The verse reads:
"Say, the evil
and the good are not comparable, even though the abundance of evil will surprise
you. So be mindful of your duty to Allah, 0 Man of
understanding, that you may succeed." (5:100)
Well, I had a look at those
two words in Arabic, the evil and the good, and found it in the Qur'an that they
both occur seven times. Yet the verse here is saying that they are not
comparable. I should not expect to find that they occur
the same number of times. But what does the rest of this verse say?
"The evil and the
good are not comparable. The abundance of the evil will surprise you"
and it did for there were too many of them. But it continues:
"So be mindful of
your duty to Allah, 0 Man of understanding, that you
may succeed."
So press on. Use your
understanding and you will succeed. That is what the verse said to me. Well, I
found the answer in one verse further on where it reads:
"Allah separates
the evil from the good. The evil He piles one on top of the other, heaping them
all together." (8:37)
Here is the solution to the
difficulty. While we have seven occurrences of al-khabeeth
(the evil) which matches up with the occurrences of al-taib
(the good), according to the principle of this verse, evil is separated from
good and is piled one on top of the other and heaped all together. We do not
count them as seven separate instances.
Top
A favourite difficulty, or
supposed difficulty, which critics like to cite or have cited in the past years
concerning the Qurâan, is that apparently to their thinking, the author of this
book was ignorant because he advised the Muslims to follow the lunar year
instead of the solar year. The critics say the author was unaware of the
difference in the length of years, that if one
follows twelve lunar months one loses eleven days every year.
The author of the Qur'an was
well aware of the distinction between the length of the solar year and the lunar
year. In chapter eighteen, verse nine it mentions three-hundred years and gives
their equivalent as three-hundred and nine years. As it happens, three-hundred
solar years is equal to three-hundred and nine lunar years.
Let us go back to my original
scheme of the occurrence of words in the Qur'an. The Arabic word for "month",
shahar, will be found twelve times in the Qur'an.
There are twelve months in a year. If we find twelve months, how many days
should we expect to find? The word in Arabic is yaum,
and as it happens you will find that the word occurs three-hundred and
sixty-five times in the Qur'an.
As a matter of fact, the
original issue which had me interested in looking up the occurrence of months
and days was this distinction between the solar year and the lunar year. Well,
for twenty-five centuries it has been known that the relative positions of the
sun, moon and earth coincide every nineteen years. This was discovered by a
Greek by the name of Meton, and it is called the
Metoniccycle. Knowing this, I looked again to the
index for the word "year", sanah, and found, sure
enough, that it occurs, in the Qur'an nineteen times.
Top
Now, what is the point of this
perfect balance of words? For myself, it shows the
author was well aware of the distinction between using words and mentioning
words, a fine logical point. But more than that, it indicates the preservation
of this book.
After giving a lecture on the
subject of the Qur'an, I touched on some of these subjects and a questionnaire
from the audience afterwards said: "How do we know we still have the original
Qur'an. Maybe pieces of it have been lost or extra parts been added?" I pointed
out to him that we had pretty well covered that point because since these items,
the perfect balance of words in the Qur'an, have come to light only in this
generation, anybody who would have lost the portion of the book, hidden some of
it or added some of their own would have been unaware of this carefully hidden
code in the book. They would have destroyed this perfect balance.
It is interesting to note too
that, well, such a thing might be possible to organise today by the use of a
computer to coordinate all words so that whatever thought you might have as to a
meaning of a sentence or however you might construe an equation out of a
sentence, you could check for yourself and the book will always have the balance
of words.
If that were possible today,
if it were possible fourteen centuries ago, why would it be done and then left
hidden and never drawn to the attention of those who first saw this book? Why it
would be left with the hope of the author who contrive this, that maybe in many
centuries someone will discover it and have a nice surprise? It is a scheme that
does not make sense.
Top
We are told in the
Quran that no questionnaire will come to the Muslims
with the question for which a good answer has not been provided, and the best
explanation for whatever his question. This verse says:
"For everything
they say we are given something to go back to them and reply." (25:33)
We looked again to the index
of the Qur'an and we found that the word, qalu (they
say), is found three-hundred and thirty-two times. Now, what would be the
natural counterpart? The Arabic word, qul, which is
the command "say" and you will find at the index it also occurs three-hundred
and thirty-two times.
Top
An interesting feature of the
Qur'an is that it replies to its critics as to its origin. That is, no one has
yet come up with a suggestion as to where this book came from which is not
commented on within the book itself.
In fact, the new Catholic
Encyclopedia, under the heading âQurâan,â mentions that over the centuries there
had been many theories as to where this book came from. Their conclusion: today,
no sensible person believes any of these theories. This leaves the Christians in
some difficulty. You see, all the theories suggested so far, according to this
encyclopedia, are not really acceptable to anyone sensible today. They are too
fantastic.
Where did the book come from?
Those who have not really examined the Qur'an usually dismissed it as being, as
they say, a collection of proverbs or aphorisms, sayings that one man used to
announce from time to time. They imagined that there was a man who, from time to
time during the day, will think of some witty little sayings and spit it out and
those around him will quickly write it down and eventually these were all
collected and became the Qur'an.
Those who read the Qur'an will
find that it is not anything like that at all. The collection of things said by
the Prophet is the subject and the content of the Hadith. But the subjects and
contents of the Qur'an are all in a form of a composition and explanation. I
cite as an example the chapter Yusuf, which is an entire story in great detail
about one particular episode or one portion of the life of one man. It is a
composition.
It is for this reason that
virtually all those who have actually examined the Qur'an usually refer to it as
being the product of the authorship as attributed to Muhammad and his
"co-adjudicators". These were supposed to be people who would sit, with him and
composed the Qur'an. You see, they imagined that the Qur'an was composed by a
committee.
They acknowledged that there
was too much information and it was too well composed for one man to have
assembled. So, they imagined that a committee of men used to meet regularly,
brought their various sources of information, composed something and then handed
to this man and told him, "Go to the people tomorrow, this is your revelation."
In other words, it was a fraud concocted by a group of people. But what do we
know about fraud? The Qur'an reminds us as it says:
"Say, now the
truth has come, and falsehood neither invents anything nor restores anything."
(34:49).
It is hard to translate it
into English precisely, but what this verse is telling us is that falsehood is
not the source of a new thing. A new and truthful thing cannot come from
falsehood and falsehood does not restore, to our minds, the facts. Truth is in
agreement with facts. Falsehood is something else. So, falsehood is empty. If
something is born in fraud, it will never bring us new information. It will
never endure; it will only collapse over a period of time.
Top
Another interesting verse is a
challenge which is addressed to those non-believers. It reads:
"Have they not
considered the Qur'an, if it came, other than Allah, surely they will find in it
many inconsistencies." (4:82)
Here is a challenge to the
reader. If you think you have an explanation where this book came from, have
another look at the book. Surely you will be able to uncover some
inconsistencies to support your case.
Imagine a student submitting a
term paper or a final exam and then writing at the bottom of the page a note to
his teacher "You will find no mistakes in this paper. There are no mistakes on
this exam." Can you imagine the teacher letting that rest? The teacher would
probably not sleep until uncovering some inconsistency after a challenge like
that. It is not the way human beings speak. They do not offer challenges like
that. But here we have it in the Qur'an, a direct challenge saying. "If you have
a better idea as to where this book came from, hereâs all you need to do. Find
some inconsistencies."
There are critics who make the
attempt, critics who try to say the Qur'an contains inconsistencies. A
publication that came to my attention recently suggested that the Qurâan was
contradictory on the subject of marriage, because in one place, it says: "Donât
marry more than one wife unless you can provide for them all," and in another
place it says: "Donât marry more than four." They see this as a contradiction.
What they have is a counter-distinction. In one case, the qualification for
marrying more than one has been given. In the other case, a limitation on how
many may be married is given. There is no contradiction.
Critics are too quick to grab
hold of something, give it an interpretation, and then offer it as an excuse to
escape the reality of this document.
For critics who would attack
the Qur'an and insist it contains mistakes, we can use the same method as in our
reply to Christians who claim that Jesus is on record as claiming to be equal to
God. Remember the three categories of evidence offered. The evidence offered was
insufficient, ambiguous or impossible.
You see, if someone cites a
verse from the Qur'an, trying to show that it is a mistake, we only need to show
that the verse cited is insufficient to establish that there is a mistake or we
need to show that the verse cited has other meanings than the one given by the
critic or we can demonstrate that the verse cited cannot possibly have the
interpretation which the critic is giving it. It will always fall into one of
these three categories.
Top
I had the experience, on one
occasion, describing some of the contents in the Qur'an to a man who did not
know the book I was talking about. He sat next to me, with the cover turned
over. I just told him about the book, what it contained and told him it was not
the Bible. His conclusion was, the book was
miraculous. This man was a minister in a Christian Church. He said, "Yes, that
book could not possibly have originated with the man and therefore it must come
from the devil, because it's not the Bible."
The Qur'an comments on this
suggestion in chapter twenty-six, verse two-hundred and eleven as to those who
would suggest that the book came from the devil. It points out that it does not
quite suit him, does it? Is this how the devil misleads people? He tells them,
worship none but God, he insists that they fast, that
they practice charity. Is this how the devil misleads people?
Compare the attitude of
someone like this, to the attitude of the Jews who knew Jesus and opposed him
until the very end. There is an episode reported in the Bible where Jesus raised
a man from the dead, one Lazarus, who had been dead for four days. When Lazarus
came out of the tomb, alive again, those Jews who were watching what did they
do? Did they suddenly say that this man is a true prophet and become believers?
No, the Bible says they immediately discussed among themselves that "since this
man is working on his signs soon everyone will believe in him. Weâve got to find
a way to kill him," and they attributed his miraculous powers to the devil. He
raised that man by the power of the devil.
Now, the Christians who read
that episode will feel very sorry for those Jews who had clear evidence right
before their very eyes and attributed the miracles to the devil. Does it not
appear that they may be doing the same thing when we illustrate what we have in
the Qur'an and their final excuse is only, "It originated with the
devil."
Top
There are those who insist
that the Qur'an was copied, that it originated in Christian and Jewish sources.
As a matter of fact, a book published in recent years called Worshipping the
Wrong God has stated, as though it were a fact, that after the first revelation
of the Qur'an came to Muhammad, peace be upon him, that his wife died and so he
quickly married a Jew and a Christian, and this is where he drew the rest of his
sources for his book.
Well, they have the facts
partly right. It was ten years after the first revelation of the Qur'an that his
wife died, and it was another ten years after that when the Qur'an was virtually
completed that he married a Jew and a Christian.
Did he copy from Jewish and
Christian sources? In the Qur'an, the ruler of Egypt who opposed Moses is known
as Fir'aun, not Pharaoh. The Jews and Christians have always said "Pharaoh". It
is easy for an Arab to say "Pharaoh". But in the Qur'an, it is Fir'aun, with an
"n". Why? Surely the Jews and the Christians who surrounded the Muslim community
must have teased them about that and said: "Youâve got the word wrong. Itâs
"Pharaoh" and not Fir'aun." But they insisted on it and it continues that way in
the Qur'an, Fir'aun.
As it happens, the historical
writings of Herodotus, the Greek historian, e)dst to
this day, and Herodotus comments on the ruler of Egypt, being in his day and in
the centuries before him, one man who went by the title of Fir'aun.
Did the book copy from the
Christian sources? The Qur'an insists that Jesus was not crucified, that this
was only an illusion, but that the Jews who thought they crucified Jesus were
mistaken because it was not really so. Christians would have no part of that. As
it happens, the idea that Jesus was not really crucified is really very ancient
and can be traced back to the first century. But Christians
who believed that were eliminated as heretics within the first two-hundred years
after the time of Jesus and they were not teaching this doctrine anywhere around
the
Arabian Peninsula fourteen
centuries ago.
Could the author of the Qur'an
have been copying from Christian sources when he says that Jesus spoke to man as
a babe (3:46) and in later life? The Arabic word used indicates that he was
still speaking to man and teaching to them in his forties. The Christians have
always maintained that Jesus was gone by the time he was thirty-three. It
indicates that there could have been no copying. In fad, a man would have to be
stubborn and insists on the points as explained in the Qur'an in the face of
Christian opposition who would have said: "No! No! It wasnât like that. We tell
the story differently."
Top
< | 
