another choice

7/23/2019 Another Choice

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/another-choice 1/60

ANOTHER CHOICEThe Teaching of Ahmed Deedat

By Samuel Green

The first to present his case seems right,

till another comes forward and questions him.

(Proverbs 18:17, !"#

$hmed %eedat (d. &''# wrote man) boo*s, gave tal*s and was involved in public

debates. +is material continues to be widel) used b) uslims to promote !slam and

attac* -hristianit). or man) uslims, what the)

understand of -hristianit) comes from $hmed %eedat. Thisarticle e/amines the main ideas that %eedat taught.

CONTENTS

• !n the 0eginning

• The itnesses of 2esus

• -rucifi/ion or -ruci3fiction4

• !ncest and Pornograph) in the 0ible

• 5sau 3 The True ame of 2esus

• Three 6rades of 5vidence

• -harge of The word

• The 9eal ounder of -hristianit)

• The ign of the Prophet 2onah

• hat the 0ible sa)s about uhammad

• The ultiple 0ible "ersions

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#word

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#witnesses

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#or

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#incest

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#name

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#grades

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#sword

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#christianity

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#sign

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#prophet

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#versions

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#witnesses

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#or

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#incest

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#name

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#grades

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#sword

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#christianity

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#sign

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#prophet


http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#word



• ift) Thousand 5rrors4

• ther 5rrors in the 0ible

• 9eferences

!n the 0eginning

!n the beginning was the ord, and the ord was with

6od, and the ord was 6od. (2ohn 1:1, !"#

$hmed %eedat, claims to have had the following conversation with a -hristian

minister.

! as*ed the 9everend whether he *new 6ree*4 ;es, he said, +e had studied 6ree*

for five )ears before qualifications. ! as*ed him what the 6ree* word was for 6od

the first time it occurs in the translation 3 "and the ord !a !ith God"4 +e *ept

staring, but did not answer. o ! said, the word was HOTHEOS, which literall)

means T+5 6% ... which in turn is rendered 3 6od. ow tell me, what is the

6ree* word for 6od in the second occurrence in )our quotation 3 "and the ord !aGod"4 The 9everend still *ept silent ... the game was up. ! said

the word was TT+5, which means a god. ($hmed

%eedat, Christ in Islam, ch. 7, pp. <'3<1#

!n this conversation %eedat claims to understand the original

language of the 0ible. +e claims that through this *nowledge he

was able to defeat this -hristian minister. The problem is that

ever)thing he sa)s about the 6ree* language is wrong.

irstl), he sa)s that the first reference to 6od is HOTHEOS. Thisis wrong. +ere is the cripture:

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#errors

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#other

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#references

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#errors

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#other

http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm#references



The first occurrence is T T+5 and not +T+5. %eedat is wrong.

e/t, %eedat sa)s that the second occurrence for 6od is TONTHEOS.

$gain this is wrong:

The second occurrence is T+5 and not TT+5 as %eedat claims. $gain, he is

wrong. %eedat claims to understand the original language of the 0ible but he does

not= he cannot even get the letters right>

The itnesses of 2esus

!n his boo*let, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction?, $hmed %eedat quotes ar* 1<:' to

prove that 2esus? disciples were not e)e3witnesses to his crucifi/ion:

... one of the alleged witnesses, t. ar*, tells us that at the most critical @uncture in

the life of 2esus 3 $ll his disciples forsoo* him and fled 3 (ar* 1<:'#. Please as*

)our -hristian friend, %oes all mean all in )our language ...4 ... o the so3called

e)e3witnesses are not reall) eye#!itnee to the happenings ... The reason thedisciples of 2esus were afraid was that the) had learned b) hearay that their aster

was *illed b) being fastened to the cross 3 that he was crucified. The) had learned

b) hearay ... that he had died. ($hmed %eedat, Crucifixion or

Cruci-Fiction?, ch. A, pp. 738 B ch. 1A, p. #

-hristians and uslims both agree that it is important to read a

verse in its conte/t. hen ar* 1<:' is read in conte/t it actuall)

sa)s the opposite of what %eedat claims.

Then ever)one deserted him and fled. $ )oung man, wearing

nothing but a linen garment, was following 2esus. hen the)

seiCed him, he fled na*ed, leaving his garment behind. The) too*

2esus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, elders and

teachers of the law came together. Peter followed him at a

distance, right into the court)ard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and

warmed himself at the fire. (ar* 1<:'3<, !"#



The verse in conte/t sa)s that Peter followed 2esus, and thus witnessed the final

events of his life. !f %eedat cannot read a verse in conte/t then he is not qualified to

teach the 0ible.

Peter was not the onl) disciple who witnessed these events. an) of his disciples and

his mother witnessed them too.

inall) Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. o the soldiers too* charge of

2esus. -arr)ing his own cross, he went out to the place of the *ull ... +ere the)

crucified him, ... ear the cross of 2esus stood his mother, his mother?s sister, ar)

the wife of -lopas, and ar) agdalene. hen 2esus saw his mother there, and the

disciple whom he loved standing nearb), he said to his mother, %ear woman, here is

)our son, and to the disciple, +ere is )our mother. rom that time on, this disciple

too* her into his home (to care for her#. (2ohn 1D:1E3&7, !"#

hen the) came to the place called the *ull, there the) crucified him ... 2esus calledout with a loud voice, ather, into )our hands ! commit m) spirit. hen he had said

this, he breathed his last ... hen all the people who had gathered to witness this sight

saw what too* place, the) beat their breasts and went awa). 0ut all those who *new

him, including the women who had followed him from 6alilee, stood at a distance,

watching these things. (Fu*e &A:AA3<D, !"#

%eedat claimed that ar* 1<:' proved that the disciples of 2esus were not witnesses

to his crucifi/ion. +owever, reading the verse in conte/t shows that what %eedat sa)s

is false. The disciples of 2esus were e)e3witnesses to the events of 2esus? life,

including his crucifi/ion and resurrection, and it is their inspired testimon) that wehave in the 0ible. The 0ible contains not @ust one witness, but man) witnesses to the

life of 2esus.

$ matter must be established b) the testimon) of two or three witnesses.

(%euteronom) 1D:1, !"#

This is one of the reasons wh) the 0ible has four gospels and not @ust one. 6od

appointed and inspired man) e)e3witnesses to the life of 2esus.

The Tetimony of the $ur%an

!nstead of listening to the man) testimonies to 2esus? life in the 0ible, %eedat urges his

readers to listen to the testimon) of the Gur?an. +e sa)s that this is the truth about

2esus, but is the Gur?an a reliable testimon)4 -onsider the following three points.



1. !t is claimed that the Gur?an is the testimon) of 6od. ;et we see 6od changing his

testimon) and improving it.

arrated $l30ara: There was revealed: Hot equal are those believers who sit (at

home# and those who strive and fight in the -ause of $llah.I (GurJan <.D# The

Prophet said, -all Kaid for me and let him bring the board, the in*pot and the scapula bone ... Then he said, rite: Lot equal are those 0elievers who sit...J, and at that

time ?$mr bin Mm a*tum, the blind man, was sitting behind the Prophet. +e said,

$llah?s $postle> hat is )our order for me (as regards the above "erse# as ! am a

blind man4 o, instead of the above "erse, the following "erse was revealed: Hot

equal are those believers who sit (at home# e/cept those who are disabled (b) in@ur)

or are blind or lame etc.# and those who strive and fight in the cause of $llah.I

(GurJan <.D# (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E1, no. 1&, Nhan#

+ere we see uhammad?s 6od change his testimon). !nitiall) it was:

ot equal are those believers who sit (at home# and those who strive and fight in the

-ause of $llah.

0ut this was found to be unsatifactor), so the verse was changed to:

ot equal are those believers who sit (at home# e/cept those who are disabled (b)

in@ur) or are blind or lame etc.# and those who strive and fight in the cause of $llah.

(GurJan <.D#

urel) 6od would get his testimon) right the first time and not need to change it4 !fthe Gur?an trul) is the testimon) of 6od then wh) did it need to be changed4

&. %eedat tells us that uhammad received the testimon) of 6od from the angel

6abriel. This sounds ver) simple, but what actuall) happened is more disturbing, for

when uhammmad received this testimon) he would:

• uffer a hard and severe condition, and hear the ringing of bells in his ears.

(uslim: b*. A', no. 7E, iddiqui#

• +e would faint. ($l3Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. viii, pp. &3A#

• +e would sweat even on a cold da). (0u*hari: vol. , b*. D, no. <E&, Nhan#

• +is face would go red and he would breathed heavil). (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E1,

no. '8, Nhan#



• +e would snort li*e a camel. (0u*hari: vol. A, b*. &7, no. 17, Nhan#

• $nd his mouth and lips would quiver. (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E1, no. E<, Nhan#

• hen uhammad first began to e/perience this he was suicidal. (0u*hari: vol.

D, b*. 87, no. 111, Nhan#

These are the s)mptoms that uhammad had when he was inspired b) his 6od. h)

does %eedat not tell us about them4 These s)mptoms suggest that there is a medical

e/planation for what was happening to uhammad. This is particularl) the case since

uhammad also suffered from a period of delusion in which he imagined he was

doing things that he was not actuall) doing.

arrated $isha: agic was wor*ed on the Prophet so that he began to fanc) (imagine#

that he was doing a thing which he was not actuall) doing. ... (0u*hari: vol. <, b*. <,

no. <D', Nhan#

These s)mptoms and uhammad?s period of delusion strongl) suggest that

uhammad?s inspiration was not from 6od but was a medical condition that was not

understood at the time.

A. inall), uhammad lived E'' )ears after 2esus and was not an e)e3witness to

an)thing he sa)s about 2esus in the Gur?an. rom a purel) historical point of view we

should see* to listen to the earliest accounts that are available, and these are the e)e3

witness accounts in the 0ible.

!n view of these three facts about the Gur?an and uhammad, there is no reason to

believe their testimon) about 2esus.

-rucifi/ion or -ruci3fiction4

rom the title of his boo*, Crucifixion or Cruci-fiction?, it appears that %eedat is

casting doubt over whether 2esus was crucified. 0ut surprisingl) this is not the case,for in this boo* %eedat taught that:



• 2esus was crucified on the cross.

• +e sufferred and became unconscious.

• The 9oman soldiers thought he was dead.

• +e was buried in a tomb.

• Then his disciples came and resuscitated him.

0elow are the quotes where he teaches these things and the picture

he gives of what 2esus? crucifi/ion reall) loo*ed li*e.

-ontrar) to common belief, 2esus was

not nailed to the cross, but bound, if atall, li*e the other two (being crucified#.

(ch. 7, p. A1#

hen 2ohn (in the 0ible# sa)s that the

soldiers saw (that 2esus was dead#, he

means that the) surmised. or no

modern3da) stethoscope was used to

verif) death= nor did an)one touch his

bod) or feel his pulse before concluding

that he was dead alread). (ch. 8, p. AE#

6od wor*s in a m)sterious wa). +e

inspires the soldiers to thin* that the

victim is dead alread) so as not to

brea* his legs, but at the same time

inspires another to lance him on the side

with a spear, and ...

... &ORTHITH came there out

'lood and !ater. (+F; 0!0F5,2ohn 1D:A<#.

!t is a 0lessing of 6od that when the human bod) cannot endure further pain or agon),

unconsciousness supervenes. 0ut immobilit), fatigue and the un3natural stance on the

cross must have slowed down the blood3circulation. The lancing came to the rescue.

0) blood3letting, the circulation could regain its rh)thm. (ch. 1', p. AD#



e must not suppose that 2esus was buried E feet underground. The sepulchre was a

big, air) chamber and not a grave. (ch. 11, p. <&#

(T#he secret disciples of 2esus (came# to render help to the wounded man. (ch. 11, p.

<A#

The removal of the stone and the unwinding of the winding (burial# sheets was the

need of a ph)sicall) resuscitated bod), not that of a resurrected bod)> (Crucifixion or

Cruci-fiction?, ch. 11, p. <#

!n repl) to %eedat, three points need to be made. irstl), what %eedat teaches here is

against the Gur?an. %eedat teaches that 2esus was crucified, but survived, while the

Gur?an teaches that 2esus was not crucified at all, but that he onl) appeared to be.

(;#et the) did not sla) him, neither crucified him, onl) a li*eness of that was shown to

them. (Gur?an <:17, $rberr)#

The idea that 2esus survived his crucifi/ion is called the swoon theor). woon

means to faint. This theor) was promoted b) 18th and 1Dth centur) rationalist estern

scholars who sought to give a non3miraculous rational e/planation for the life of

2esus. The swoon theor) is also held b) the $hmadi))a uslim ovement (p. <#. !t

seems that %eedat is more influenced b) these groups than he is b) the Gur?an.

econdl), %eedat tries to re3read the gospel accounts to show that the) actuall) teach

that 2esus did not die but onl) fainted. 0ut his attempt is not successful because he

ignores the plain meaning of the accounts. or instance he sa)s that the 9oman soldier pierced 2esus? side with a spear and that his was actuall), ?blood3letting?, (so that# the

circulation (of 2esus? blood# could regain its rh)thm (ch. 1', p. AD#. This is medical

nonsense and the accounts cannot be re3read this wa). pearing someone in the side is

how )ou *ill them not assist their recover).

$ll of the gospels testif) to the fact that 2esus said he would die and that he did die.

rom that time on 2esus began to e/plain to his disciples that he must go to 2erusalem

and suffer man) things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law,

and that he must be *illed and on the third da) be raised to life. (atthew 1E:&1, !"=also atthew 17:&A, &':&8, &1:AA3AD, ar* 8:A1, 1':<, 1&:138, Fu*e D:&&, &':D31,

2ohn E:1, 1&:AA, 18:A&#

$nd when 2esus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. (atthew

&7:', !"#

http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/thelight/1922/light19220301.pdf

http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/thelight/1922/light19220301.pdf



ith a loud cr), 2esus breathed his last. (ar* 1:A7, !"#

2esus called out with a loud voice, ather, into )our hands ! commit m) spirit. hen

he had said this, he breathed his last. (Fu*e &A:<E, !"#

0ut when the) (the soldiers# came to 2esus and found that he was alread) dead, the)did not brea* his legs. !nstead, one of the soldiers pierced 2esus? side with a spear,

bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. (2ohn 1D:AA3A<, !"#

inall), %eedat called his boo*let, Crucifixion or Cruci-fiction?, and in doing so he

has accused the 0ible of being fiction when it spea*s of 2esus? death. hat is fiction4

iction is where someone invents a stor) that in fact never happened. The iron) is that

in the Gur?an the death of 2esus is a fiction, a fiction that uhammad?s 6od has

created.

(;#et the) did not sla) him, neither crucified him, onl) a li*eness of that was shown tothem. (Gur?an <:17, $rberr)#

The Gur?an sa)s that 6od made it seem that 2esus was crucified: a li*eness of that

was shown to them, when in fact he was not. That is, to the people present it did loo*

li*e 2esus was being crucified but 6od was @ust tric*ing ever)one. Thus the death of

2esus in the Gur?an is said to be a fictional event 6od made up. The 0ible is ver)

different to this, it is based on man) testimonies to real events and not fictional ones.

!ncest and Pornograph) in the 0ible

%eedat is critical of the 0ible for recording how 2udah had se/ual relations with his

daughter3in3law.

INCEST HONO(RED

... Mnder what categor) ... will )ou place the incest of 2udah, and his illegitimate

progen)4 $ll of these characters are honoured in the 0oo* of 6od for their bastard).

... 0ut what about the moral (of this stor)#4 6od blesses 2udah for his incestuous

crime> ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word , ch. 8, pp. <83<D#



irstl), %eedat does not tell his reader that 2udah was deceived

into se/uall) relations with his daughter3in3law.

ot realiCing that she was his daughter3in3law, he went over to her

b) the roadside ... (6enesis 1A:1E, !"#

Thus 2udah did not do this *nowingl). $nd 2udah is never

honoured for this action as %eedat claims. 0ut the main problem

with %eedat?s criticism is that uhammad had se/ual relations

with his daughter3in3law too> This is a well *nown event in

uhammad?s life. uhammad had an adopted son called Ka)d bin

uhammad. Ka)d had a beautiful wife was called Ka)nab.

ne da) the essenger of 6od went out loo*ing for Ka)d. ow there was a covering

of haircloth over the doorwa), but the wind had lifted the covering so that the

doorwa) was uncovered. Ka)nab was in her chamber, undressed, and admiration forher entered the heart of the Prophet. ($l3Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. viii, p.

<#

uhammad loo*ed into another person?s house and saw his daughter3in3law

undressed. $dmiration for her entered (his# heart, but there was a terrible problem,

she was his daughter3in3law, the wife of his adopted son. Then uhammad claimed

that 6od had saved him from this problem. irst he said that 6od had cancelled all

adoptions.

(#either has +e made )our adopted sons )our sons in fact. (Gur?an AA:<, $rberr)#

This meant that Ka)d was no longer uhammad?s son and that Ka)nab was no longer

his daughter3in3law. Then he said that 6od had given Ka)nab to him.

o when Kaid had accomplished what he would of her (divorced her#, then e gave

her in marriage to )ou (uhammad#. (Gur?an AA:A7, $rberr)#

2udah was deceived into se/ual relations with his daughter3in3law, uhammad was

not. The fact that uhammad and Ka)nab eventuall) got married does not @ustif) this

event, and adoption is not an evil institution that needs to be abolished. The fact isuhammad loo*ed into another person?s house and saw a woman undressed. This

lead to revelations that allowed him to fulfil his desire and ta*e her to be his wife.

0e honest, uhammad is ma*ing up revelations to suit his own desires. !f an)one else

had such revelations we would rightl) re@ect them as false, but when uhammad has

these revelations !slamic leaders tell us it is a miracle of 6od.



DA(GHTERS SED(CE THEIR &ATHER

9ead 6enesis 1D, verses A' to the end and mar* again in "red" the words and phrases

deserving this honour (of being censored#. %o not hesitate and procrastinate. ... To

continue: the histor) has it that, night after night, the daughters of Fot seduced their

drun*en father with the noble (4# motive of preserving their father?s "eed". ... o

decent reader can read the seduction of Fot to his mother, sister or daughter, not evento his fiancee if she is a chaste and moral woman. ;et )ou will come across perverted

people who will gorge this filth. Tastes can be cultivated> ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible

God's Word , ch. 8, p. '#

%eedat refers to the incident of Fot?s daughters having se/ual relations with their

father. +is conclusion is that the 0ible is a filth) boo*, a bad e/ample, and unworth)

to be called the ord of 6od. %eedat?s comments are wrong for the following reasons.

The 0ible records what humans are li*e 3 and we are sinful. Fot and his daughters

sinned and it is not wrong to record that this happened. The 0ible is clear that Fot?sactions are not an e/ample for us to follow.

o one is to approach an) close relative to have se/ual relations. (Feviticus 18:E,

!"#

%o not have se/ual relations with both a woman and her daughter. (Feviticus 18:17,

!"#

+owever, for man) uslims there is another problem with what the 0ible sa)s.

uslims consider Fot to be a prophet and that prophets do not sin. Therefore to sa)that a prophet behaved this wa) is unacceptable. +owever, the Gur?an and unnah also

record that the prophets sinned seriousl). or instance, it sa)s that $dam was the first

idolater.

!t is +e who created )ou out of one living soul ($dam#, and made of him his spouse

that he might rest in her. Then, when he covered her, she bore a light burden and

passed b) with it= but when it became heav) the) cried to 6od their Ford, !f Thou

givest us a righteous son, we indeed shall be of the than*ful. Thereafter, when +e

gave them a righteous son, the) assigned +im associates in that +e had given them=

but 6od is high e/alted above that the) associate. (Gur?an 7:18D31D', $rberr)#

uhammad also sinned this wa) in the famous event of the atanic "erses. ne da)

when uhammad was reciting ura A he recited these words to his tribe:



+ave )ou thought of al3Fat and al3MCCa and anat, the third ... these are the e/alted

6haraniq (a high fl)ing bird# whose intercession is approved. (!bn !shaq, Sirat asul

!llah, pp. 1E31EE#

$l3Fat, al3MCCa and anat were some of the local idols worshiped in ecca.

Previousl) uhammad had spo*en against them in his monotheist preaching but nowhe recited that their intercession is approved. hen uhammad?s tribe heard what

he had said the) accepted him as a prophet.

Then 6abriel came to the apostle and said, hat have )ou done, uhammad4 ;ou

have read to these people something ! did not bring )ou from 6od and )ou have said

what +e did not sa) to )ou. (!bn !shaq, Sirat asul !llah, p. 1EE#

Then uhammad confessed his sin.

! ascribed to $llah, what +e had not said. (!bn a?d, "itab !l-Taba#at !l-"abir , vol. 1, p. &A7#

! have fabricated things against 6od and have imputed to +im words which +e has

not spo*en. ($l3Tabari, The History of !l-Tabari, vol. vi, p. 111#

$ccepting pol)theism and spea*ing false words in 6od?s name is serious sin, and for a

short period of time, while he was claiming to be a prophet, uhammad did this. !t is

true that uhammad confessed and repented, and this is to his credit, but this event

still shows a ver) serious failing in his life. This event must not be ignored because it

is inconvenient for it shows that all people are affected b) sin.

(uhammad pra)ed# $llah> orgive m) mista*es and m) ignorance and m)

e/ceeding the limit (boundaries# of righteousness in m) deeds= and forgive whatever

;ou *now better than !. $llah> orgive the wrong ! have done @o*ingl) or seriousl),

and forgive m) accidental and intentional errors, all that is present in me. (0u*hari:

vol. 8, b*. 7, no. <'8, Nhan#

o *now ( uhammad# that there is no 6od save $llah, and as* forgiveness for th)

sin and for believing men and women (Gur?an <7:1D, Pic*thall#

Therefore, the Gur?an and the unnah both agree with the 0ible that even prophets sin.

%eedat does not *now the Gur?an or even the histor) of his own prophet. This is wh)

the message of 2esus is so important because 2esus never sinned. 6od sent 2esus for

this reason and he is our onl) hope.



$n angel of the Ford appeared to him (2oseph# in a dream and said, 2oseph son of

%avid, do not be afraid to ta*e ar) home as )our wife, because what is conceived in

her is from the +ol) pirit. he will give birth to a son, and )ou are to give him the

name 2esus, because he will save his people from their sins. (atthew &:&'3&1, !"#

+e committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth. (1 Peter &:&&, !"#

5sau 3 The True ame of 2esus

The +ol) Gur?an refers to 2esus as "Eea", ... $ctuall) his proper name

was "Eea" ($rabic#, or "Eau" (+ebrew#= classical ")ehehua" ... The word is

ver) simpl) 3 5$M 3 a ver) common 2ewish name, used more than si/t) times in

the ver) first boo*let alone of the 0ible, in the part called6enesis. ($hmed %eedat, Christ in Islam, ch. &, p. E#

%eedat is correct to sa) that the Gur?an calls 2esus, 5esa, and that

5esa corresponds closest to the +ebrew name, 5sau. 0ut the rest

of the information %eedat gives is incorrect:

1. ;eheshua should be spelt ;ehoshua.

&. 2esus? classical +ebrew name is ;eshua not ;ehoshua. ;eshua

and ;ehoshua are related names, and both are classical +ebrew

names, but 2esus? name is ;eshua.

A. 5sau is not a ver) common 2ewish name as %eedat claims. !t is a ver) rare name

and onl) used for one person in the 0ible.

<. %eedat is completel) wrong to sa) that 5sau is the common form of the name

;ehoshua, and that 2esus? common name is 5sau. 5sau and ;ehoshua are two

completel) different names, with different letters and two different meanings. hen

the name ;ehoshua is shortened it becomes ;eshua and not 5sau. 2esus? name in

+ebrew is ;eshua not 5sau.

. !n $rabic 2esus? name is ;asua. This is similar to the +ebrew name, ;eshua,

because the) are closel) related languages.

S(**AR)

He're! Name Ara'ic Name Englih Name



;eshua;asua

2esus

5sau5esau

5sau

5esa

4

This e/poses a significant error in the Gur?an because the Gur?an calls 2esus, 5esa,

when his name in $rabic should be ;asua. $s )ou can see, the $rabic for 5esa is ver)

close to 5sau and this is wh) %eedat thin*s that 2esus? name should be 5sau, but 5sau

is the wrong name. This means the Gur?an has the wrong name for 2esus or that it uses

a ver) corrupted version of his name. 5ither wa) the Gur?an fails to get 2esus? name

right.

Three 6rades of 5vidence

e uslims have no hesitation in ac*nowledging that in the 0ible, there are three

different *inds of witnessing recogniCable without an) need of

specialiCed training. These are:

1. ;ou will be able to recogniCe in the 0ible what ma) be

described as "The ord of God".

&. ;ou will also be able to discern what can be described as

the "ord of a +ro,het of God-"

A. $nd )ou will most readil) observe that the bul* of the 0ible

is the records of e)e witnesses or ear witnesses, or people

writing from hearsa). $s such the) are the "ord of a

Hitorian-"

... The following quotations will ma*e the position cr)stal clear:

The &IRST T)pe:

a. I will raise them up a prophet ... and I will put m) words in ... and he shall

spea* unto them all that I shall command him. (%euteronom) 18:18#

b. I, even I, am the Ford, and beside me there is no saviour. (!saiah <A:11#



c. Foo* unto me, and be )e saved, all the end of the earth: for I am 6od, and

there is non else. (!saiah <:&&#

ote the first person pronoun singular (in bold# in the above references, and without

an) difficult) )ou will agree that the statements seem to have the sound of being

6%? 9%.

The SECOND T)pe:

a. .eu cried with a loud voice, sa)ing 5li, 5li, lama sabachtani4 ... (atthew

&7:<E#

b. $nd .eu an!ered him, The first of all the commandments is, +ear,

!srael= the Ford our 6od is one Ford: (ar* 1&:&D#

c. $nd .eu aid unto him, h) callest thou me good4 There is none good butone, that is 6od. (ar* 1':18#

5ven a child will be able to affirm that 2esus "cried/" 2esus "an!ered/" and

2esus "aid" are the words of the one to whom the) are attributed, i.e. the 9%

$ P9P+5T 6%.

The THIRD T)pe:

$nd seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he, (25M# came, if hapl) he (25M#

might find an)thing thereon= and when he (25M# came to it, he (25M# foundnothing but leaves... (ar* 11:1A#

The bul* of the 0ible is a witnessing of this THIRD *ind. These are the words of a

third person. ote the underlined pronouns. The) are not the ords of 6od or of his

prophet, but the 9% $ +!T9!$.

or the uslim it is quite eas) to distinguish the above t)pes of evidence, because he

also has them in his own faith. 0ut of the followers of the different religions, he is the

most fortunate in this that his various records are contained in e,arate 0oo*s>

ONE0 The first *ind 3 T+5 9% 6% 3 is found in a 0oo* called The Holy

$ur%an.

TO0 The second *ind 3 T+5 9% T+5 P9P+5T 6% ... are

recorded in the 0oo*s of Tradition called The Hadith.

THREE0 5vidence of the third *ind abound in different volumes of !slamic histor) ...



The uslim *eeps the above three t)pes of evidence @ealousl) apart, in their proper

gradations of authorit). +e never equates them. n the other hand, the +ol) 0ible

contains a motle) t)pe of literature ... ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch.

1, pp. <3E#

hat %eedat sa)s about the 0ible and the Gur?an is false. -onsider the Gur?an first.

The $ur%an 3 %eedat sa)s that the Gur?an is the t)pe 1 witness. That is, it is where

6od sa)s, ! and me, but this is false as an) reader of the Gur?an *nows. -onsider

these e/amples.

!n the ame of 6od, the erciful, the -ompassionate.

Praise be to 6od, Ford of the Mniverse,

The -ompassionate, the erciful,

overeign of the %a) of 2udgement>

;ou alone we worship, and to ;ou alonewe turn for help.

6uide us to the straight path,

The path of those whom ;ou have favoured,

ot of those who have incurred ;our wrath,

or of those who have gone astra).

(Gur?an 1, %awood#

... ur Ford> -ondemn us not if we forget, or miss the mar*>

ur Ford> Fa) not on us such a burden as thou didst la) on those before us>

ur Ford> !mpose not on us that which we have not the strength to bear>Pardon us, absolve us and have merc) on us, Thou, our Protector,

and give us victor) over the disbelieving fol*. (Gur?an &:&8E, Pic*thall#

The whole first sura and &:&8E are pra)ers directed to 6od. There is no ! or me of

6od spea*ing in them. 0) %eedat?s own standard these are t)pe & witness, not t)pe

1.

-onsider another e/ample.

e descend onl) at the bidding of )our Ford. To +im belongs what is before us and behind us, and all that lies between. ;our Ford does not forget. +e is the Ford of the

heavens and the earth and all that is between them. orship +im, then and be patient

in +is service. (Gur?an 1D:E<3E<, %awood#

$gain we see there is no ! or me of 6od spea*ing (t)pe 1#. !nstead there are

spirits or angels, we, spea*ing about 6od, him. This is the voice of the ma@orit) of



the Gur?an. 0) %eedat?s own standard this is a mi/ture of t)pe & B A witness, which

according to him not the word of 6od.

There are also several parts of the Gur?an in which it is uhammad spea*ing.

?erve )ou none but 6od? (! am to )ou a warner from +im and a bearer of goodtidings# and: ?$s* forgiveness of )our Ford, then repent to +im, and +e will give )ou

fair en@o)ment unto a term stated, and +e will give of +is bount) to ever) man of

grace. 0ut if )ou should turn )our bac*s ! fear for )ou the chastisement of a might)

da)= to 6od shall )ou return= +e is powerful over ever)thing.? (Gur?an 11:&3<,

$rberr)#

m) people, let not the breach with me move )ou, so that there smite )ou the li*e of

what smote the people of oah, or the people of +ood, or the people of alih= and the

people of Fot are not far awa) from )ou. $nd as* forgiveness of )our Ford, then

repent to +im= surel) m) Ford is $ll3compassionate, $ll3loving.? (Gur?an 11:8D3D',$rberr)#

! have onl) been commanded to serve the Ford of this territor) which +e has made

sacred= to +im belongs ever)thing. $nd ! have been commanded to be of those that

surrender. (Gur?an &7:D1, $rberr)#

The Gur?an does have a small amount of t)pe 1 witness.

! created the @inn and man*ind onl) that the) might worship e. ! demand no

livelihood of them, nor do ! as* that the) should feed e. (Gur?an 1:7, &:1&,7:18A,%awood#

Thus the Gur?an has man) voices in it. !t has the voice of the angelsOspirits spea*ing

about 6od, the voice of the uslim communit) pra)ing to 6od, the voice of

uhammad addressing his people and the voice of 6od spea*ing directl). !t is not a

t)pe 1 witness as %eedat claims.

The Bi'le 3 %eedat moc*s the 0ible and calls it a motle) t)pe of literature, and thus

inferior to the Gur?an. !t is true that the 0ible has man) t)pes of literature. !t is a

collection of the writings of about <' prophets and apostles over a 1'' )ear period. !thas:

• The Faw of oses

• The Psalms of %avid and others



• The isdom of olomon: Proverbs

• ongs

• Prophecies

• Pra)ers

• Parables

• 6enealogies

• "isions

•$ngelic 5/planations

• Prophetic +istor)

• 6ospels

• $postolic Fetters

6od has inspired his word in man) wa)s.

!n the past 6od spo*e to our forefathers through the prophets at man) times and invarious wa)s (+ebrews 1:1, !"#.

6od is not limited to one t)pe of witness. +e has inspired people with his word in

man) different wa)s. !n fact a revelation from 6od must have man) t)pes of

inspiration and witness for it to be complete. -onsider the 0ible, since it contains

histor), it provides all of its own conte/t and chronolog). This means that all of its

commands, prophecies and the gospel can be understood in their proper conte/t,

which the 0ible itself provides. The 0ible is complete and the onl) essential boo* in

-hristianit).

The Gur?an is ver) different. uhammad spo*e the Gur?an in response to different

situations in his life, but what these situations were (the conte/t# is not recorded in the

Gur?an. !t is essential to *now this conte/t in order to rightl) understand and appl) the

Gur?an but this essential conte/t comes from other boo*s called the +adith and ira.



The Gur?an also does not contain the unnah (practices of uhammad#. ;et the

unnah is essential in !slam. +ow, when and what to pra), what to do on +a@@,

circumcision, in fact most of the essential !slamic practices come from the unnah and

this too comes from the +adith and ira.

ince the Gur?an does not contain its own conte/t or the unnah, it is an incomplete boo*. The essential boo*s of !slam are the Gur?an, +adith and ira and not the Gur?an

alone. The essential boo* of -hristianit) is the 0ible. Therefore it is wrong to

compare the 0ible to the Gur?an in the wa) that %eedat has. $ fair comparison will

compare the essential boo*s of both religions.

or more information read, -omparing the 0ible and the Gur?an

-harge of The word

+ow can the enemies of !slam account for uhummed?s phenomenal achievements

e/cept to decr) that he spread his religion at the point of the sword4 +e forced !slam

down people?s throats>4

Ea. +!T9; $N5 !T -F5$9 +5"59, T+$T T+5 F565%

$$T!-$F MF! 55P!6 T+9M6+ T+5 9F% $% 9-!6

!F$ $T T+5 P!T T+5 9% MP -GM595% 9$-5 ! 5

T+5 T $T$T!-$FF; $0M9% ;T+ T+$T +!T9!$ +$"5

5"59 95P5$T5%. (%e Fac) ?Fear)#. ($hmed%eedat, $uhammed %&buh( the Greatest , ch. &, pp. A'3A1#

%eedat claims that uhammad did not spread !slam b) the sword.

To *now whether this claim is true or not a person must *now

earl) !slamic histor), however, most people don?t *now it. +ere is

a ver) brief selection from the earl) !slamic histories that show

that uhammad did use the sword to spread !slam.

Aaination 3 uhammad had people assassinated in order to

spread !slam. The following account records how uhammad hadtwo people assassinated, and how these assassinations caused the tribe of Nhatma to

convert to !slam.

$bu $fa* ... showed his disaffection when the apostle (uhammad# *illed al3+arith

b. amit ... The apostle said, ho will deal with this rascal for me4 hereupon

alim b. Mma)r, ... went forth and *illed him. ... ($sma d. arwan# was of (the

http://answering-islam.org/Green/compare.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Green/compare.htm



tribe# 0. Mma))a b. Ka)d. hen $bu $fa* had been *illed she displa)ed

disaffection. ... hen the apostle heard what she had said, he said, ho will rid me

of arwan?s daughter4 Mma)r b. $di) al3Nhatmi who was with him heard him, and

that ver) night he went to her house and *illed her. !n the morning he came to the

apostle and told him what he had done and he (uhammad# said, ;ou have helped

6od and +is apostle, Mma)r> hen he as*ed if he would have to bear an) evilconsequences the apostle said, Two goats won?t butt their heads about her, ... The

da) after 0int arwan was *illed the men of (tribe of# Nhatma became

uslims because the) saw the power of !slam. (!bn !shaq, Sirat asul !llah, pp. E73

E7E#

Offeni1e arfare 3 uhammad did fight some battles in self3defence, but when he

grew in militar) power he began to attac* others. +e sought to conquer all those

around him and bring them under !slamic rule.

arrated ulaiman bin urd: hen the clans were driven awa), ! heard the Prophetsa)ing, rom now onwards we will go to attac* them (i.e. the infidels# and the) will

not come to attac* us, but we will go to them. (0u*hari: vol. , b*. D, no. <AE,

Nhan#

arrated !bn ?Mmar: $llah?s $postle said: ! have been ordered (b) $llah# to fight

against the people until the) testif) that none has the right to be worshipped but $llah

and that uhammad is $llah?s $postle ... (0u*hari: vol. 1, b*. &, no. &<, Nhan#

The $postle of $llah, sent Nhalid !bn al3alid with four hundred uslims to 0anu al3

+arith ... +e ordered him to invite them to !slam three times before fighting. ... The)accepted what he had called them to. +e sta)ed among them to teach them !slam, its

regulations, the 0oo* of $llah and the sunnah of +is Prophet. (!bn a?d, "itab !l-

Taba#at !l-"abir , vol. 1, p. ADD#

$nas b. ali* reported: The essenger of $llah used to attac* the enem) when it was

dawn. +e would listen to the $dhan (!slamic call to pra)er#= so if he heard an $dhan,

he stopped, otherwise made an attac*. (uslim: b*. <, no. 7<, iddiqui#

$bu 0a*r said: ;ou as*ed me for the best advice that ! could give )ou, and ! will tell

)ou. 6od sent uhammad with this religion and he strove for it until men accepted itvoluntar) or b) force. (!bn !shaq, Sirat asul !llah, pp. EE83EED#

The earl) !slamic histor) shows that uhammad spread his religion b) the sword. or

more information read, $ urve) of +ow uhammad pread !slam

http://answering-islam.org/Green/spread.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Green/spread.htm



e/t, %eedat claims that !slam spread throughout the world not b) the sword but b)

peaceful !slamic traders who too* !slam with them as the) traded throughout the

world.

0ut what can the enem) (of !slam# sa) about countries where no single uslim

soldier had set foot4

1. !%5!$: !t is a fact that over a hundred million !ndonesians are

uslim, )et no conquering uslim arm) ever) landed on an) of its over

two thousand islands.

&. $F$;!$: The overwhelming number of its people in this countr) are

uslims )et no uslim soldier had landed on there either.

A. $9!-$: The ma@orit) of people on the 5ast coast of $frica as far down

as oCambique, as well as the bul* of the in habitants of the est coastof the continent are uslims, but histor) does not record an) invading

hoards of uslims from an)where. hat sword4 here was the sword4

The uslim trader did the @ob. +is good conduct and moral recititude

achieved the miracle of conversion. ($hmed %eedat, $uhammed

%&buh( the Greatest , ch. &, pp. A&3AA#

%eedat claims that it was the !slamic traders, and not !slamic soldiers, who brought

!slam to countries li*e !ndonesia, ala)sia and 5ast $frica. This is true, but this does

not mean it was peaceful or without coercion, for !slamic traders were slave traders.

ost of us have a romantic view of traders. e thin* that the) traded in oil, spices, potter) and sil*. The) did, but the) also gathered and traded in slaves.

The !slamic empire conquered all of the iddle 5ast, orth $frica, pain, Persia and

across to !ndia. rom all of these regions !slamic traders too* millions of slaves, but

most of their slaves came from the non3conquered regions bordering the !slamic

empire. These traders made e/cursions into these unconquered regions gathering

slaves for sale in the !slamic and other empires. !slamic traders gathered millions of

slaves from $frica, 5urope, Persia, !ndia, !ndonesia, ala)sia and possibl) even as

far as $ustralia. laves of an !slamic master would be treated better if the) converted

to !slam, and if a tribe converted to !slam then the) could not be enslaved. ome tribesconverted and then wor*ed with the !slamic traders to help enslave other nearb)

tribes.

!t must be remembered that the !slamic empires never abolished slaver). !t was the

-hristian estern empires that did this after their shameful involvement in it. !nstead,



!slam seemed to encourage the e/pansion of slaver), for uhammad, who is regarded

as the perfect model uslim, *ept slaves.

... a blac* slave of $llah?s $postle was (sitting# on the first step (of uhammad?s

house#. ... (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E', no. <A, Nhan#

$nd uhammad traded in slaves.

... (uhammad said# ell him (a slave# to me. $nd he (uhammad# bought him for

two blac* slaves ... (uslim: b*. 1', no. AD'1, iddique#

$nd in the Gur?an he promised slaves as a reward in paradise for faithful uslims.

!n the 6ardens of delight (Paradise#. ... (The) will be# on thrones woven with gold and

precious stones, 9eclining thereon, face to face. The) will be served b) immortal

bo)s, ith cups, and @ugs, and a glass from the flowing wine. (Gur?an E:1&318,+ilali3Nhan. $lso 7E:1D.#

$nd the +adith records that uslims were to use slaver) to convert people to !slam.

arrated $bu +uraira: The "erse:33;ou (true uslims# are the best of peoples ever

raised up for man*ind.(A:11'# means, the best of peoples for the people, as )ou bring

them with chains on their nec*s till the) embrace !slam. (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E', no.

8', Nhan#

The !slamic traders did spread !slam, but the slave trade was part of the wa) the) didthis. !slamic traders enslaved millions of people from pain to outh 5ast $sia and

down into $frica for over a 1''' )ears, and this is part of the wa) that !slam spread.

or more information and references read, !slam and laver). "iew a short video

on !slam and laver).

The 9eal ounder of -hristianit)

5ver) *nowledgeable -hristian concedes that the real founder of -hristianit) is t.

Paul and not 2esus -hrist (peace be upon him#. !n an) event, if there is an) division

between a uslim and a -hristian on the grounds of dogma, belief, ethics or moralit),

then the cause of such conflict could be traced to an utterance of Paul found in his

boo*s ... in the 0ible. ($hmed %eedat, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction?, ch. 1, pp. 13&#

http://answering-islam.org/Green/slavery.htm

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2237312499464971431

http://answering-islam.org/Green/slavery.htm

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2237312499464971431



%eedat claims that modern -hristianit) is the product of Paul and

not 2esus, and that an) division between -hristians and uslims is

because of Paul. +owever, %eedat?s re@ection of Paul is wrong for

three reasons.

2- Chritian read all of the ,ro,het- The 0ible is not @ust one boo* but a collection of all the prophets. !n contains the Torah the

law of oses, the Psalms of %avid, the isdom of olomon, the

prophetic boo*s of !saiah, 2eremiah, 5Ce*iel, %aniel, +osea, 2oel,

$mos, badiah, 2onah, icah, ahum, +aba**u*, Kephaniah,

+aggai, Kechariah and alachi. !t has the gospel of 2esus from

atthew, ar*, Fu*e and 2ohn, and the writings of the apostles of the essiah. Paul?s

writings are about EQ of the 0ible.

hat -hristians believe about 6od comes from all of the prophets and not @ust Paul.

-hristians believe in all the prophets and so the) read all the prophets and not @ustPaul. $n) division between -hristians and uslims is because uslims do not read

all the prophets. uslims sa) the) believe all the prophets but in practice the) onl)

listen to what uhammad said in the Gur?an and +adith. -hristians, however, read all

the prophets.

3- +aul agree !ith the earlier ,ro,het-

2esus came to fulfil and confirm the teaching of the prophets who were before him.

%o not thin* that ! (2esus# have come to abolish the Faw (of oses# or the Prophets= !have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. (atthew :17, !"#

This means that an)one who is sent b) 2esus must teach what is consistent with the

Faw and the prophets. Paul sa)s that he was sent b) 2esus (6alatians 1:1#. !f this is

true then the gospel he taught must agree with the Faw and the Prophets. +ere are

seven *e) areas in which Paul agrees with the earlier prophets.

a. ne 6od

The prophets before Paul taught that there is onl) one 6od (!saiah <:#. Paul alsotaught that there is onl) one 6od.

(#e *now that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no 6od but one.

(1 -orinthians 8:<, !"#

or there is one 6od ... (1 Timoth) &:, !"#



b. 6od is the creator

The prophets before Paul taught that 6od is the creator.

!n the beginning 6od created the heavens and the earth. (oses, 6enesis 1:1, !"#

!t is ! who made the earth and created man*ind upon it. ) own hands stretched out

the heavens. (!saiah <:1&, !"#

Paul also preached that 6od is the creator.

The 6od who made the world and ever)thing in it is the Ford of heaven and earth and

does not live in temples built b) hands. $nd he is not served b) human hands, as if he

needed an)thing, because he himself gives all men life and breath and ever)thing else.

($cts 17:&<3&, !"#

c. The !mage and Fi*eness of 6od

The prophets before Paul taught that 6od made humanit) in his image.

Then 6od said, Fet us ma*e man in our image, in our li*eness ... o 6od created

man in his own image, in the image of 6od he created him= male and female he

created them. (oses, 6enesis 1:&E3&7, !"#

ince we are in 6od?s image 6od calls us to be li*e him.

0e hol) because !, the F9% )our 6od, am hol). (oses, 5/odus 1D:&, !"#

Paul too teaches that we are made in the image of 6od and are to be li*e him.

(e are# being renewed in *nowledge in the image of (our# -reator. (-olossians A:1',

!"#

+owever, the Gur?an never teaches that we are created in the image of 6od, in fact it

sa)s that nothing is li*e 6od (11&:<#.

d. The ons of 6od

The prophets before Paul said that 6od?s people are called the sons of 6od.

This is what the F9% sa)s: !srael is m) firstborn son, and ! told )ou (Pharaoh#, Fet

m) son go, so he ma) worship me. (oses, 5/odus <:&&, !"#



!n the place where it was said to them, ;ou are not m) people, the) will be called

sons of the living 6od. (+osea 1:1', !"#

(2esus said# 0lessed are the peacema*ers, for the) will be called sons of 6od.

(atthew :1'#

Paul also taught that 6od?s people are called the sons of 6od.

;ou are all sons of 6od through faith in -hrist 2esus. (6alatians A:&E, !"#

uhammad, however, denied that an)one could be called a son of 6od.

a) the 2ews and -hristians, e are the sons of 6od, and +is beloved ones. a):

h) then does +e chastise )ou for )our sins4 o= )ou are mortals, of +is

creating ... (Gur?an :18, $rberr)#

e. The on of 6od

The prophets before Paul taught the essiah (or -hrist# in particular was the son of

6od.

! (6od# will be his father, and he shall be m) son ... (& amuel 7:1<, !"#

! will proclaim the decree of the F9%: +e said to me, ;ou are m) on= toda) ! have

become )our ather. (%avid, Psalm &:7, !"#

The high priest said to him, ! charge )ou under oath b) the living 6od: Tell us if )ou

are the essiah, the on of 6od. ;es, it is as )ou sa), 2esus replied. (atthew

&E:EA3E<, !"#

Paul also taught that the essiah was 6od?s son.

Paul, a servant of -hrist 2esus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of

6od 3 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the +ol) criptures

regarding his on, who as to his human nature was a descendant of %avid, and who

through the pirit of holiness was declared with power to be the on of 6od b) hisresurrection from the dead: 2esus -hrist our Ford. (9omans 1:13<, !"#

uhammad, however, denied that the essiah is the son of 6od.

(T#he -hristians sa), The essiah is the on of 6od. That is the utterance of their

mouths, conforming with the unbelievers before them. 6od assail them> +ow the) are

perverted> (Gur?an D:A', $rberr)#



f. The 9ule of the essiah

The prophets before Paul taught that the essiah is the Ford who rules from 6od?s

right hand.

! will proclaim the decree of the F9%: +e said to me, ;ou are m) on= toda) ! have become )our ather. $s* of me, and ! will ma*e the nations )our inheritance, the ends

of the earth )our possession. (%avid, Psalm &:738, !"#

The F9% sa)s to m) Ford: it at m) right hand until ! ma*e )our enemies a

footstool for )our feet. (%avid, Psalm 11':1, !"#

or to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his

shoulders. $nd he will be called onderful -ounsellor, ight) 6od, 5verlasting

ather, Prince of Peace. f the increase of his government and peace there will be no

end. +e will reign on %avid?s throne and over his *ingdom. (!saiah D:E37, !"#

!n m) vision at night ! loo*ed, and there before me was one li*e a son of man, coming

with the clouds of heaven. +e approached the $ncient of %a)s (6od# and was led into

his presence. +e was given authorit), glor) and sovereign power= all peoples, nations

and men of ever) language worshipped him. +is dominion is an everlasting dominion

that will not pass awa), and his *ingdom is one that will never be destro)ed. (%aniel

7:1A31<, !"#

Then 2esus came to them and said, $ll authorit) in heaven and on earth has been

given to me. (atthew &8:18, !"#

Paul also taught that the essiah is the Ford who rules from 6od?s right hand.

(6od# raised him (2esus# from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the

heavenl) realms, far above all rule and authorit), power and dominion, and ever) title

that can be given, not onl) in the present age but also in the one to come. (5phesians

1:1D3&1, !"#

+owever, uhammad taught that the essiah is not Ford but onl) a prophet.

The essiah, son of ar), was onl) a essenger= essengers before him passed

awa)= his mother was a @ust woman= the) both ate food. (Gur?an :7, $rberr)#

g. The acrifice for in

The prophets before Paul taught that there was a sacrifice for sin.



+e (the priest# shall then slaughter the goat for the sin offering for the people ... (then#

+e is to la) both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the

wic*edness and rebellion of the !sraelites 3 all their sins 3 and put them on the goat?s

head. +e shall send the goat awa) into the desert in the care of a man appointed for

the tas*. The goat will carr) on itself all their sins to a solitar) place. (oses,

Feviticus 1E:13&1, !"#

The prophet !saiah prophesied that 6od would provide the true sacrifice for sin. !t

would be the servant of the Ford.

0ut he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities= the

punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and b) his wounds we are healed.

e all, li*e sheep, have gone astra), each of us has turned to his own wa)= and the

F9% has laid on him the iniquit) of us all. ... or he bore the sin of man), and made

intercession for the transgressors. (!saiah A:<3E, 1&b, !"#

2ohn the 0aptist identified 2esus as this sacrifice.

The ne/t da) 2ohn saw 2esus coming toward him and said, Foo*, the Famb of 6od,

who ta*es awa) the sin of the world> (2ohn 1:&D, !"#

2esus identified himself as this sacrifice.

Then he too* the cup, gave than*s and offered it to them, sa)ing, %rin* from it, all of

)ou. This is m) blood of the covenant, which is poured out for man) for the

forgiveness of sins. (atthew &E:&73&8, !"#

Paul agrees with the earlier prophets when he sa)s:

6od presented him (2esus# as a sacrifice of atonement. (9omans A:&, !"#

uhammad contradicts the earlier prophets because he denies that 6od has provided a

sacrifice for our sins. uhammad taught that 2esus never died on the cross.

(ome 2ews sa)# e slew the essiah, 2esus son of ar), the essenger of 6od 3

)et the) did not sla) him, neither crucified him, onl) a li*eness of that was shown tothem. ... and the) slew him not of a certaint). (Gur?an <:17, $rberr)#

h. -ircumcision

The prophets before Paul spo*e about circumcision. -ircumcision was the sign of

6od?s covenant.



This is m) covenant with )ou ($braham# and )our descendants after )ou, the

covenant )ou are to *eep: 5ver) male among )ou shall be circumcised. ;ou are to

undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and )ou.

(6enesis 17:1'311, !"#

6od commanded the !sraelites to *eep this sign of the covenant (Feviticus 1&:A#.+owever, the !sraelites re@ected 6od?s covenant.

0oth the house of !srael and the house of 2udah have bro*en the covenant ! made with

their forefathers. (2eremiah 11:1', !"#

or this reason 6od promised to bring a new circumcision. !t was to be a circumcision

that he would perform on all this people so that the) would trul) *eep his covenant.

The F9% )our 6od will circumcise )our hearts and the hearts of )our descendants,

so that )ou ma) love him with all )our heart and with all )our soul, and live.(%euteronom) A':E, !"#

2esus brings the fulfilment of this promise and Paul faithfull) e/plains this.

!n him (2esus# )ou were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not

with a circumcision done b) the hands of men but with the circumcision done b)

-hrist. (-olossians &:11, !"#

... circumcision is circumcision of the heart, b) the pirit, not b) the written code.

uch a man?s praise is not from men, but from 6od. (9omans &:&D, !"#

hat Paul teaches about circumcision is in line with the message of the prophets

before him. +owever, the Gur?an never mentions circumcision even though it is such

an important message of the prophets.

i. The 6ift of the pirit

The prophets before Paul prophesied that 6od would give his pirit to his people.

! will pour out m) pirit on all people. (2oel &:&8, !"#

(T#ill the pirit is poured upon us from on high. (!saiah A&:1, !"#

! will give )ou a new heart and put a new spirit in )ou= ! will remove from )ou )our

heart of stone and give )ou a heart of flesh. $nd ! will put m) pirit in )ou ... (5/e*iel

AE:&E3&7, !"#



! (2ohn# baptiCe )ou with water for repentance. 0ut after me will come one who is

more powerful than !, whose sandals ! am not fit to carr). +e will baptiCe )ou with the

+ol) pirit and with fire. (2ohn the 0aptist, atthew A:11, !"#

$nd with that he (2esus# breathed on them and said, 9eceive the +ol) pirit. (2esus,

2ohn &':&&, !"#

Paul agrees with the earlier prophets when he sa)s:

e have not received the spirit of the world but the pirit who is from 6od. (1

-orinthians &:1&, !"#

$gainst the earlier prophets, uhammad gave no promise of the pirit to his

followers. !nstead he recited:

The) will question )ou concerning the pirit. a): ?The pirit is of the bidding of m)Ford. ;ou have been given of *nowledge nothing e/cept a little.? (Gur?an 17:8,

$rberr)#

The gospel that Paul taught agrees with the prophets who were before him. This is

wh) Paul said,

! am sa)ing nothing be)ond what the prophets and oses said would happen 3 that the

-hrist would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his

own people and to the 6entiles. ($cts &E:&&3&A#

uhammad teaches some things that agree with the earlier prophets but he disagrees

with them at man) significant points. !t is not Paul who is the source of disagreement

between -hristians and uslims= it is uhammad. !f )ou sa) that )ou believe all the

prophets then please read them and not @ust believe what uhammad sa)s about them.

4- Early Ilamic authoritie acce,t +aul- 3 The Gur?an and +adith never spea*

against Paul, and !slamic scholars accept that he was trul) sent b) 2esus.

!bn !shaq accepted Paul.

Those whom 2esus son of ar) sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in

the land were: Peter the disciple and Paul with him ... (!bn !shaq, Sirat asul !llah, p.

EA#

$l3Tabari accepted Paul.



$mong the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the $postle Peter

and Paul who was a follower and not an apostle= the) went to 9ome. ($l3Tabari, The

History of al-Tabari, vol. iv, p. 1&A#

hen referring to Gur?an AE:1<, !bn Nathir quotes earl) uslims who had no problem

in viewing Paul as an apostleOmessenger.

( so We reinforced them )ith a third ,# means, e supported and strengthened them

with a third essenger. !bn 2ura)@ narrated from ahb bin ula)man, from hua)b

$l32aba?i, The names of the first two essengers were hamun and ;uhanna, and

the name of the third was 0ulus (Paul#, and the cit) was $ntioch ($nta*i)ah#. (!bn

Nathir, Tafsir Ibn "athir , vol. 8, p. 17D#

!bn Nathir is never critical of Paul. Therefore, %eedat?s re@ection of Paul is at odds

with ma@or earl) !slamic scholars.

%eedat continues his argument againt Paul b) sa)ing that Paul teaches the opposite of

what 2esus taught.

$s against the teaching of the aster (2esus# that salvation onl) comes through

*eeping of the commandments (atthew 1D:1E317#, Paul nails the law and the

commandments to the cross (-olossians &:1<#, and claims that salvation can onl) be

obtained through the death and resurrection of 2esus -hrist. ($hmed

%eedat, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction?, ch. 1, p. &#

%eedat does not understand the teaching of 2esus, Paul or even uhammad. +e sa)sthat Paul teaches salvation b) faith in -hrist, while 2esus taught salvation b) *eeping

the law. The truth is that 2esus and Paul teach both these ideas.

0oth 2esus and Paul taught that if )ou obe) 6od then )ou will be saved.

!f )ou want to enter life, obe) the commandments. (atthew 1D:17, !"#

(!#t is not those who hear the law who are righteous in 6od?s sight, but it is those who

obe) the law who will be declared righteous. (9omans &:1A, !"#

+owever, nobod) *eeps 6od?s law. 2esus, Paul and even uhammad ma*e it ver)

clear that we all fail to obe) 6od.

(the disciples as*ed# ho then can be saved4 2esus loo*ed at them and said, ith

man this is impossible, but with 6od all things are possible. (atthew 1D:&3&E,

!"#



Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his (6od?s# sight b) observing the law=

rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. ... for all have sinned and fall

short of the glor) of 6od. (9omans A:&'3&A, !"#

!f $llah were to ta*e man*ind to tas* for their wrong3doing, he would not leave

hereon a living creature ... (Gur?an 1E:E1, Pic*thall#

Therefore we cannot save ourselves b) obe)ing 6od. e all fail to obe) 6od. e

need 6od to have merc) and save us. This is the message of the prophets: we need

6od?s merc) and this is what Paul and 2esus both teach.

6od foretold through the prophet !saiah 7'' )ears before 2esus how he would act to

save us. +e told us of his special servant.

0ut he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities= the

punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and b) his wounds we are healed.e all, li*e sheep, have gone astra), each of us has turned to his own wa)= and the

F9% has laid on him the iniquit) of us all. ... or he bore the sin of man), and made

intercession for the transgressors. (!saiah A:<3E, 1&b, !"#

$nd this is what 2esus came to fulfil and what the $postle Paul taught.

(2esus said of himself# The on of an did not come to be served, but to serve, and to

give his life as a ransom for man). (atthew &':&8, !"#

0ut 6od demonstrates his own love for us in this: hile we were still sinners, -hristdied for us. (9omans :8, !"#

2esus and Paul teach the same thing because the) continue the message of 6od?s

prophets. Paul is a faithful apostle.

The ign of the Prophet 2onah

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him (2esus#, Teacher, wewant to see a miraculous sign from )ou. +e answered, $ wic*ed and adulterous

generation as*s for a miraculous sign> 0ut none will be given it e/cept the sign of the

prophet 2onah. or as 2onah was three da)s and three nights in the bell) of a huge

fish, so the on of an (2esus# will be three da)s and three nights in the heart of the

earth. (atthew 1&:A83<', !"#



$hmed %eedat made the following comments about this teaching

of 2esus.

+ow was 2onah in the whale?s bell) for three da)s and three

nights3 %ead or $live4 The uslims, the -hristians and the 2ews

again give a unanimous verdict of $3F3!3"35> +ow was 2esus inthe tomb for the same period of time3 %ead or $live4 ver a

thousand million -hristians, of ever) church or %enomination give

a unanimous verdict of %353$3%> !s that li*e 2onah or un3li*e

2onah in )our language4 $nd ever)one whose mind is not

confused, sa)s that, that is ver) M3F!N5 2onah. 2esus said he

would be F!N5 2$+ and his infatuated followers sa) that he was M3F!N5

2$+>. ho is l)ing 3 2esus or his followers4 ! leave the answer to )ou> ($hmed

%eedat, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction, ch. 1, pp. E83ED#

%eedat?s comments are false for the following reasons.

irstl), %eedat sa)s that ever)one agrees that 2onah was alive in the fish. This is not

the case. !n the boo* of 2onah, 6od commands 2onah to go to the cit) of ineveh and

warn it of 6od?s @udgement. 2onah refuses. Therefore, 6od sends the fish but the fish

is much more than transport= it is a place of revelation. !n the fish 2onah has an

e/perience and revelation of death. Fisten to what 2onah actuall) sa)s.

!n m) distress ! called to the F9%, and he answered me. rom the depths of the

grave ! called for help, and )ou listened to m) cr). ... 0ut )ou brought m) life up from

the pit, F9% m) 6od. (2onah &:&3E, !"#

2onah is ta*en to the place of death. This revelation of death teaches 2onah that those

who die without 6od are lost.

Those who cling to worthless idols forfeit the grace that could be theirs. (2onah &:8,

!"#

Thus, 6od used the fish to show 2onah that if he does not spea* to the inevites then

the) will be lost forever. This is the stor) of 2onah in conte/t. Therefore, 2onah was

not alive or dead in the fish. !n the fish he was ta*en alive into death so that he couldlearn 6od?s lesson, that those who die without 6od have no hope. %eedat does not

understand the stor) of 2onah.

econdl), %eedat @ust has not listened to what 2esus actuall) said, for in these verses

2esus said he would die. 2esus said that he would be in the heart of the earth, and



this phrase is a common wa) to spea* about being dead in the grave. e see this in

the Psalms.

The) who see* m) life will be destro)ed= the) will go down to the depths of the

earth . (Psalms EA:D, !"#

To go into the heartOdepths of the earth means to be dead in the grave. 2esus is

sa)ing that he will die as a result of his crucifi/ion.

Thirdl), again %eedat fails to read the 0ible properl). -hristians and uslims agree

that their hol) boo*s should be read carefull). This means that to properl) understand

a sub@ect in the 0ible or Gur?an a person should consider all that is said about that

sub@ect in that boo*. or instance, the Gur?an sa)s that there will be rivers of wine in

paradise.

This is the similitude of Paradise which the godfearing have been promised: thereinare rivers of water unstaling, rivers of mil* unchanging in flavour, and rivers of wine 3

a delight to the drin*ers ... (Gur?an <7:1, $rberr)#

!f we were to @ust read this verse alone we ma) conclude that the !slamic paradise is a

drun*en part). 0ut if )ou read other verses in the Gur?an it e/plains that this wine does

not lead to drun*enness.

!n the 6ardens of delight (Paradise#. ... The) will be served b) immortal bo)s, ith

cups, and @ugs, and a glass from the flowing wine, herefrom the) will get neither

an) aching of the head, nor an) into/ication. (Gur?an E:1&31D, +ilali3Nhan#

Thus, it is important to consider all that the Gur?an sa)s about a sub@ect if we wish to

understand it properl). !t is the same with the 0ible. To properl) understand what

2esus taught we should consider all that he said. The following verses are were 2esus

e/plains more about what was to happen to him.

rom that time on 2esus began to e/plain to his disciples that he must go to 2erusalem

and suffer man) things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law,

and that he must be *illed and on the third da) be raised to life. (atthew 1E:&1, !"#

hen the) came together in 6alilee, he said to them, The on of an is going to be

betra)ed into the hands of men. The) will *ill him, and on the third da) he will be

raised to life. (atthew 17:&&3&A, !"#

ow as 2esus was going up to 2erusalem, he too* the twelve disciples aside and said

to them, e are going up to 2erusalem, and the on of an will be betra)ed to the



chief priests and the teachers of the law. The) will condemn him to death and will turn

him over to the 6entiles to be moc*ed and flogged and crucified. n the third da) he

will be raised to life> (atthew &':1731D, !"#

!t is ver) important to consider all that the 0ible and Gur?an teach on a sub@ect if )ou

want to understand them properl). $hmed %eedat has failed to do this. +e has ta*en @ust one part of the 0ible and ignored the other parts. This is ver) poor scholarship and

as a result he does not understand what 2esus taught. 2esus clearl) taught that he

would die as a result of his crucifi/ion.

%eedat also sa)s that 2esus was not in the tomb for the length of time that he said he

would be.

2esus said that he would be in the tomb for THREE da)s and THREE nights,

whereas the -hristians sa) that he was in the tomb for onl) ONE da) and T

nights. ho is l)ing, 2esus for the -hristians4 Fet them answer. ($hmed%eedat, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction, ch. 1E, pp. 7&#

!n this case %eedat is @ust ignorant of an ancient 2ewish figure of speech that 2esus is

using. or the 2ewish people, three da)s and three nights was an e/pression for an)

part of three da)s. e see this in the boo* of 5sther.

(5sther said# 6o, gather together all the 2ews who are in usa, and fast for me. %o

not eat or drin* for three da)s, night or da). ! and m) maids will fast as )ou do. hen

this is done, ! will go to the *ing ... n the third da) 5sther put on her ro)al robes and

stood in the inner court of the palace, in front of the *ing?s hall. (5sther <:1E3:1, !"#

;ou will notice that it was not after the three da)s and nights that 5sther went to stand

before the *ing but on the third da). 2esus uses the same e/pression,

... (2esus said# The) will condemn him to death and will turn him over to the 6entiles

to be moc*ed and flogged and crucified. n the third da) he will be raised to life>

(atthew &':1731D, !"#

!f we want to understand the 6ospel then we must understand the figures of speech

that were used at the time. %eedat refuses to do this and so misunderstands themessage of the 6ospel.

hat the 0ible sa)s about uhammad



%eedat wrote a boo*let called, What the Bible Says !bout $uhammad . !n this boo*let

he see*s to show that the 0ible predicted the coming of

uhammad. The main verse that he considers is %euteronom)

18:18 which is part of the Torah of oses.

! (6od# will raise up for them a prophet li*e )ou (oses# fromamong their brothers= ! will put m) words in his mouth, and he

will tell them ever)thing ! command him. (%euteronom) 18:18,

!"#

%eedat claims that this verse predicts the coming of uhammad

(p. # and not the coming of 2esus, as -hristians claim. +is reason

is that uhammad is li*e oses while 2esus is unli*e oses. +e gives the following

comparison between oses, 2esus and uhammad to prove this.

1. oses and uhammad both had a father but 2esus did not. (p. 7#

&. oses and uhammad were conceived naturall) but 2esus was not. (pp. 738#

A. oses and uhammad got married while but 2esus did not. (p. 8#

<. oses and uhammad were accepted b) their people while 2esus was not. (pp.

83D#

. oses and uhammad brought earthl) *ingdoms but 2esus brought 6od?s

spiritual *ingdom. (pp. D31'#

E. oses and uhammad brought new laws while 2esus said he did not. (pp. 1'3

11#

7. oses and uhammad both had natural deaths while 2esus was according to

-hristians was *illed violentl). (p. 1&#

8. oses and uhammad both were buried while 2esus was raised up to 6od. (p.

1&#

There are three reasons wh) %eedat?s identification of uhammad as the prophet li*e

oses is false.

Reaon 20 A Selecti1e Com,arion



%eedat?s comparison is ver) selective. +e is ver) careful to onl) compare oses,

2esus and uhammad at points which prove his case. +owever, if we compare them

at other points 2esus is more li*e oses.

1. oses and 2esus were brother 2ews while uhammad was not.

&. oses and 2esus did miracles while uhammad did not.

A. oses and 2esus provided sacrifices for sin while uhammad did not.

(Feviticus 1E, atthew &E:173A'#

<. oses and 2esus instituted covenants through sacrifice while uhammad did

not. (5/odus &<, atthew &E:173A'#

To compare oses, 2esus and uhammad at these points would ma*e 2esus more li*e

oses than uhammad. %eedat has deliberatel) avoided considering these facts,therefore his comparison proves nothing.

Reaon 30 Deuteronomy 25026#36

-hristians and uslims agree that it is important to read a verse in its conte/t.

Therefore we should read %euteronom) 18:18 in conte/t to see what else is said about

the prophet li*e oses.

Fet no one be found among )ou who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who

practices divination or sorcer), interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells,or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. ... (instead# ! will raise up for

them a prophet li*e )ou from among their brothers= ! will put m) words in his mouth,

and he will tell them ever)thing ! command him. ... 0ut a prophet who presumes to

spea* in m) name an)thing ! have not commanded him to sa), or a prophet who

spea*s in the name of other gods, must be put to death.(%euteronom) 18:1'3&',

!"#

hen %euteronom) 18:18 is read in conte/t we also learn that a prophet li*e oses:

1. ill not allow spells.

&. ill not spea* in 6od?s name words that 6od has not told him.

+owever, uhammad did both of these. uhammad accepted spells (incantations# as

long as the) were !slamiCed.



?$uf b. ali* $sh@a?i reported: e practised incantation in the pre3!slamic da)s and

we said: $llah?s essenger, what is )our opinion about it4 +e said: Fet me *now )our

incantation and said: There is no harm in the incantation which does not smac* of

pol)theism. (uslim: boo* &E, number <7, iddiqui#

Therefore uhammad is not a prophet li*e oses.

econdl), uhammad confessed to spea*ing words in 6od?s name that 6od had not

commanded him.

! ascribed to $llah, what +e had not said. (!bn a?d, "itab !l-Taba#at !l-"abir , vol. 1,

p. &A7#

! have fabricated things against 6od and have imputed to +im words which +e has

not spo*en. ($l3Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. vi, p. 111# 9ead the full

account.

Therefore uhammad is not a prophet li*e oses.

Reaon 40 A ,ro,het li7e *oe mut agree ith *oe-

The message of the prophets ma) var) in terms of e/ternal ceremonies and

regulations. or instance, before the flood some animals were unclean (6enesis 8:&'#

but after the flood 6od declared all animals clean.

5ver)thing that lives and moves will be food for )ou. 2ust as ! gave )ou the green plants, ! now give )ou ever)thing. (6enesis D:A, !"#

0ut while ceremonies ma) change, other aspects of the prophets? message never

changes. or instance, there is onl) one 6od. $ genuine prophet must agree with this

truth. 9egarding idolatr), this practice is alwa)s wrong and never changes throughout

the prophets. hen the Faw of oses forbids idolatr), this includes the use of sacred

stones as part of our worship of 6od.

%o not ma*e idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for )ourselves (Feviticus &E:1,

!"#

... and do not erect a sacred stone, for these the F9% )our 6od hates. (%euteronom)

1E:&&, !"#

+owever, uhammad continued the pre3!slamic practice of honouring the sacred

0lac* tone and it is now an essential part of !slamic worship in ecca.

http://answering-islam.org/Green/satanic.htm






0u*hari, uslim and $bu %aw?ud reported that ?Mmar approached the 0lac* tone

and *issed it. Then he said: ! *now that )ou are a mere stone that can neither harm

nor do an) good. !f ! had not seen the Prophet (peace be upon him# *issing )ou, !

would have never *issed )ou. $l3Nhatabi said: This shows that abiding b) the

unnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him# is binding, regardless of whether or not

we understand its reason or the wisdom behind it. uch information devolvesobligation on all those whom it reaches, even if the) ma) not full) comprehend its

significance. !t is *nown, however, that *issing the 0lac* tone signifies respect for it,

recognition of our obligation toward it, and using it as a means of see*ing $llah?s

blessings. ... The underl)ing spirit of all this is unquestioning submission to $llah.

($s3a))id abiq, Fi#h us-Sunnah+ Ha,, and 'mrah, vol. , p. 7#

uhammad teaches the e/act opposite of oses regarding our worship of 6od and

sacred stones. or oses this was idolatr) but for uhammad it was worship. This is

not a ceremonial difference but a fundamental difference, therefore uhammad is not

a prophet li*e oses.

or more information read, evaluating uhammad.

The ultiple 0ible "ersions

!n chapter A of, Is the Bible God's Word?, $hmed %eedat see*s to show that there are

man) versions of the 0ible while there is onl) one Gur?an. +e begins this section b) tal*ing about the Gur?an first.

0efore we scrutiniCe the various versions, let us clarif) our own

belief regarding the 0oo*s of 6od. ... e alread) *now that the

+ol) Gur?an is the infallible ord of 6od, revealed to our +ol)

Prophet +aCrat uhummed ustapha (Peace be upon him# word

for word, through the agenc) of the $rchangel 2ibraeel, (*nown as

6abriel in 5nglish#, and perfectl) preserved and protected from

human tampering for the past fourteen hundred )ears> ($hmed

%eedat, Is the Bible God's Word? ch. A, p. 7#

hat %eedat sa)s about the Gur?an is false. +ere is a ver) brief histor) of the Gur?an

according to the !slamic sources.

uhammad never collected the Gur?an into one volume.

http://www.hajinformation.com/main/j1093.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Muhammad/

http://www.hajinformation.com/main/j1093.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Muhammad/



arrated Kaid bin Thabit: ...! suggest, )ou ($bu 0a*r# order that the Gur?an be

collected. ! said to ?Mmar, +ow can )ou do something which $llah?s $postle did not

do4 ... (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E1, no. 'D, Nhan#

!t was his companions who collected the Gur?an into one boo*. 0ut the) had

memorised the Gur?an differentl) and so these collections were different versions. Thefollowing hadith shows the followers of $bdullah bin as?ud arguing with other

uslims as to which version was correct.

arrated !brahim: The companions of ?$bdullah (bin as?ud# came to $bi %arda?,

(and before the) arrived at his home#, he loo*ed for them and found them. Then he

as*ed them,: ho among )ou can recite (Gur?an# as ?$bdullah recites it4 The)

replied, $ll of us. +e as*ed, ho among )ou *nows it b) heart4 The) pointed at

?$lqama. Then he as*ed $lqama. +ow did )ou hear ?$bdullah bin as?ud reciting

urat $l3Fail (The ight#4 $lqama recited:

?0) the male and the female.?$bu $d3%arda said, ! testif) that ! heard me Prophet reciting it li*ewise, but these

people want me to recite it:33

?$nd b) +im ho created male and female.? 0ut b) $llah, ! will not follow them.

(0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E', no. <E8, Nhan, agreed.#

These different versions of the Gur?an began to cause trouble among the uslims, and

so the third -aliph, Mthman, solved this problem b) burning all other versions and

ma*ing his version the onl) acceptable one.

... ?Mthman sent to ever) uslim province one cop) of what the) had copied, andordered that all the other Gur?anic materials, whether written in fragmentar)

manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. (0u*hari: vol. E, b*. E1, no. 1', Nhan#

ome of uhammad?s companions did not accept Mthman?s version of the Gur?an and

would not surrender their versions to be burnt.

?$bdullah (b. as?ud# reported that he said to his companions to conceal their copies

of the Gur?an ... (uslim: b*. A1, no. E'&&, iddiqui#

The differences between these different versions of the Gur?an was the sub@ect ofman) boo*s in !slam?s earl) histor). $bi ;aqub al3adim was a librarian who made a

catalogue of these boo*s in the )ear A77 $.+.OD87 $.%. +ere is his list.

0oo*s -omposed about %iscrepancies of the RGur?anicS anuscripts



1. The %iscrepancies between the anuscripts of the People of al3

adinah, al3Nufah, and al30asrah according to al3Nisa?i.

&. 0oo* of Nhalaf, %iscrepancies of the anuscripts.

A. %iscrepancies of the People of al3Nufah, al30asrah, and )riaconcerning the anuscripts, b) al3arra.

<. %iscrepancies between the anuscripts b) $bu %a?ud al3i@istani.

. 0oo* of al3ada?ini about the discrepancies between the manuscripts

and the compiling of the Gur?an.

E. %iscrepancies between the anuscripts of )ria, al3+i@aC, and al3!raq,

b) !bn $mir al3;ahsubi.

7. 0oo* of uhammad ibn $bd al39ahman al3!sbahani about

discrepancies of the manuscripts.

($l3adim, The Fihrist of al-.adim - ! Tenth Century sur/ey of $uslim

Culture, p. 7D#

These !slamic scholars record the following differences between these versions of the

Gur?an.

•The number of surahs varied between 11' and 11E.

• The order of the surahs was different.

• ome verses had a different number of words or a different word order or

different words.

%eedat also seems to be unaware that there are slightl) different $rabic versions

(qira?at# of the Gur?an used around the world toda). These are all authorised )et

slightl) different. The four main printed versions are in the table below.



The arsh version.

Msed in $lgeria, orocco, parts of

Tunisia, est $frica andudan.

The +afs version.

Msed throughout the

uslimworld.

The Galun version.

Msed in Fib)a, Tunisia and parts ofGatar.

The al3%uri version.

Msed in parts of udanand est

$frica.

+ere is one e/ample of a difference between two of these Gur?ans.

+$ "59! $9+ "59!

qaala

+e said (qaala#, ) lord *nows ... (&1:<#

qul

a) (qul#: ) lord *nows ... (&1:<#

These words are spelt differentl) and mean different things. This difference changes the sub@ectof the verb. !n the +afs version the sub@ect is uhammad, +e (uhammad# said, ?) lord

*nows ...?, but in the arsh version the sub@ect is 6od, a): ) lord *nows ... as in a

command.

%eedat assures his reader that there is onl) one Gur?an and that it is perfectl)

preserved, but what he sa)s is false. !slamic histor) records that there were man)

versions of the Gur?an and that one of these versions became the standard while the

rest were burnt, and that even toda) there are slightl) different $rabic versions in use.

or more information on this sub@ect read The Preservation of the Gur?an and The%ifferent $rabic "ersions of the Gur?an.

%eedat continues this section b) sa)ing that uslims do accept the Torah, Psalms and

6ospel but not those found in the 0ible.

http://answering-islam.org/Green/uthman.htm


http://answering-islam.org/Green/seven.htm







The Tauraat we uslims believe in is not the Torah of the 2ews and the

-hristians ... Fi*ewise, we believe that the 8a'oor (Psalms# was the revelation of

6od granted to +aCrat %awood (%avid# (Peace be upon him#, but that the present

Psalms associated with his name are not that revelation. ... hat about the !n@eel

(6ospel#4 ... !n his life3time 2esus never wrote a single word, nor did he instruct

an)one to do so. hat passes off as the 6P5F toda) are the wor*s ofanon)mous hands> ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. A, pp. 738#

%eedat is tr)ing to balance his re@ection of the Torah, Psalms, 6ospel and other

prophets found in the 0ible, with the Gur?an?s command that uslims are to believe in

these boo*s.

a): e believe in 6od, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed

to $braham, !sma?il, !saac, 2acob, and the Tribes, and in (the 0oo*s# given to oses,

2esus, and the prophets, from their Ford: e ma*e no distinction between one and

another among them. ... .? (Gur?an A:8<, ;usuf $li#

%eedat?s solution is a common one among !slamic teachers. +e sa)s that he does

believe in these boo*s but that these boo*s are not the ones found in the 0ible. That is,

when the Gur?an spea*s of the Torah, Psalms and 6ospel it is referring to other boo*s

than those found in the 0ible. This theor) of %eedat?s is false for the following

reasons.

irstl), the Gur?an never sa)s this. hen the Gur?an tal*s about the Torah, Psalms,

6ospel and Prophets it is referring to boo*s that the -hristians and 2ews have in their

possession at the time of uhammad (7th centur) $.%.#.

$nd when there comes to them a 0oo* from 6od, confirming what is with them.

(Gur?an &:8D, ;usuf $li#

Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom

the) will find described in the Torah and the 6ospel (which are# with them. (Gur?an

7:17, Pic*thall#

Thus, the Gur?an is not referring to a Torah, Psalms, 6ospel and Prophets that 2ews

and -hristians used to possess in the past, but now are lost and onl) a corruptedversion remains. 9ather the Gur?an sees that the Torah given to oses, the Psalms

given to %avid, and the 6ospel given to 2esus are the scriptures that the -hristians and

2ews in their possession at the time of uhammad. e see that uhammad respected

the Torah in this wa).



arrated $bdullah !bn Mmar: $ group of 2ews came and invited the $postle of $llah

(peacebeuponhim# to Guff. o he visited them in their school. ... The) placed a

cushion for the $postle of $llah (peacebeuponhim# who sat on it and said: 0ring

the Torah. !t was then brought. +e then withdrew the cushion from beneath him and

placed the Torah on it sa)ing: ! believed in thee and in +im ho revealed thee. ($bu

%awud: b*. A8, no. <<A<, +asan#

The Gur?an and uhammad both accept the hol) boo*s of the -hristians and 2ews at

the time of uhammad, and it is these same boo*s that are in the 0ible toda). The

modern editions of the 0ible are based on manuscripts from before, during and after

the time of uhammad. These manuscripts show that the 0ible has not changed.

Than*full) there are !slamic scholars who understand this.

ince the authoriCed scriptures of 2ews and -hristians remain ver) much toda) as

the) e/isted at the time of the Prophet, it is difficult to argue that the Gur?anic

references to Tawrat and !n@il were onl) to the pure Tawrat and !n@il as e/isted at thetime of oses and 2esus, respectivel). !f the te/ts have remained more or less as the)

were in the seventh centur) -5, the reverence the Gur?an has shown them at the time

should be retained even toda). ... The wholesale dismissive attitude held b) man)

uslims in the modern period towards the scriptures of 2udaism and -hristianit) do

not seem have the support of either the Gur?an or the ma@or figures of tafsir. ($bdullah

aeed, The -harge of %istortion of 2ewish and -hristian criptures, $uslim World ,

all &''&, vol. D&, issue AO<, p. <1D#

The 0ible contains the boo*s of the prophets. !f )ou sa) that )ou believe the prophets

then show that )ou do b) reading them.

e/t %eedat compares the -atholic version of the 0ible to the Protestant 0ible.

+olding the ... 9oman -atholic "ersion of the 0ible aloft in m) hand, ! as*,

%o )O( accept THIS 0ible as the ord of 6od4 ... The -hristian questioner is

ta*en abac*. hat 0ible is that4 he as*s. h), ! thought )ou said that there was

onl) 5 0ible> ! remind him. ;3e3s, he murmurs hesitantl), but what "ersion is

that4 h), would that ma*e an) difference4 ! enquire. f course it does, and the

professional preacher *nows that it does. +e is onl) bluffing with his 5 0ible

claim.The 9oman -atholic 0ible ... contains seven e/tra boo*s which the) (Protestants#

contemptuousl) refer to as the apocr)pha i.e. of %M0TMF $MT+9!T;. ... The

Protestants have bravel) e/punged seven whole boo*s from their 0oo* of 6od> The

outcasts are:

The 0oo* of 2udith

The 0oo* of Tobias



The 0oo* of 0aruch

The 0oo* of 5sther, etc. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. A, pp. 83D#

hat %eedat sa)s here is true for both the 0ible and the Gur?an. $s was shown earlier

some collections of the Gur?an had 11' surahs while others had 11E, and there are also

the different readings (qira?at# of the Gur?an, some of which are accepted while othersre@ected.

9egarding the seven boo*s that %eedat refers to, the Protestant churches do not

include them in the 0ible because the) were not included in the Palestinian 2ewish

canon (list of boo*s#, commonl) called the ld Testament, and 2esus and his

apostles? seem to use the Palestinian canon. 0ut while Protestants do not include these

seven boo*s the) do not re@ect them as heretical either.

$nd the other 0oo*s (as 0erome sa)s# the -hurch does read for e/ample of life and

instruction of manners= but )et does not appl) them to establish an) doctrine. (-hurchof 5ngland,The !rticles of eli1ion, $rticle E#

The church ma) certainl) read these boo*s and learn from them as far as the) agree

with the canonical boo*s. (9eformed -hurch, The Bel1ic Confession, $rticle E#

The 9oman -atholic church does include these boo*s because the) follow the

$le/andrian canon and church tradition. (Protestant -hristians and 2udaism maintain

that the evidence for the $le/andrian canon is wea*.# 0ut while the) do include them

the) call them %euterocanonical, that is, the second canon, ac*nowledging that

these boo*s have been contested.

$s %eedat points out, most -hristians have no problem using the Protestant canon of

the 0ible.

The overwhelming ma@orit) of -hristians 3 both -atholic and Protestant 3 use

the Authoried ($"# or the 9ing .ame :erion (N2"# as it is alternativel) called.

($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, chap. A, p. D#

$nd so the difference between the -atholic and Protestant canons must not be

e/aggerated into a problem. 9ecognising authentic prophetic material is theresponsibilit) of both the -hristian and uslim communities. +istor) shows that both

the 0ible and Gur?an have had contested sections, but it is wrong to e/aggerate this

into a problem as %eedat does.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm



ift) Thousand 5rrors4

The 2ehovah?s itnesses in their "AA9E;" agaCine dated 8 eptember, 1D7,

carried this startling headline 3 ' ''' 5999 ! T+5 0!0F54 ... e do not

have the time and space to go into the tens of thousands of 3 grave or minor 3 defectsthat the authors of the 9evised tandard "ersion (9"# have attempted to revise. e

leave that privilege to the -hristian scholars of the 0ible. +ere ! will endeavour to cast

@ust a cursor) glance at a half3a3doCen or so of those minor changes. ($hmed

%eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. <, pp. 1&31<#

%eedat refers to an article in the !)a*e magaCine to prove that the 0ible is full of

errors, and that -hristians themselves admit this. !n his boo* %eedat has reproduced

the headline of the article (see below#. +owever, the original headline does not have

the words, -hristians $dmit, %eedat has added this himself.

The original headline as it was printed in the !)a*e magaCine.

The headline as reproduced b)%eedat in his boo*, with the

addition of -hristians $dmit.

!s this article reall) admitting that there are ',''' errors in the 0ible4 The answer is

no, for the title of the article is, ',''' 5rrors in the 0ible4, with a question mar*. !t

is not sa)ing that there are ',''' errors, but is as*ing the question, are there ','''

errors4 $nd the answer it gives is no.



... the impression that ',''' such serious errors occur in the 0ible ... is not true.

( !)a*e, eptember 8, 1D7, p. &#

Therefore, the article is not admitting that the 0ible has ',''' errors at all. The

article deals with the most ancient manuscripts of the 0ible and the variants between

them and the Ning 2ames translation (N2"O$"#. !t e/plains how modern translations,li*e the 9evised tandard "ersion (9"#, ta*e into account these variants. %eedat has

completel) twisted the meaning of the article.

e/t, %eedat puts forward a series of e/amples to demonstrate the errors in the 0ible.

This first is from !saiah 7:1<.

1. 2Therefore the 3ord himself shall 1i/e you a si1n4 Behold+ a 5IGI. shall

concei/e+ and bear a son+ and shall call his name Immanuel2 %Isaiah 6478 - !5

%"05((

The indispensable "!96! in the above verse has now been replaced in the 9"

with the phrase "a young !oman/" which is the correct translation of the +ebrew

word almah. $lmah is the word which has occurred all along in the +ebrew te/t and

T 'ethulah which means "!96!. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch.

<, p. 1<#

The first error that %eedat presents is from !saiah 7:1<. +e shows that in the Ning

2ames translation ($"ON2"# of the 0ible the +ebrew word, almah, is translated as,

virgin, while in the 9evised tandard translation (9"# the word is translated as,

)oung woman. %eedat sa)s that this is one of the man) errors in the 0ible.

+owever, this is not an error at all. !t is @ust a difference in translation. There are man)

different translations of the 0ible. 5ach of these translates the original language

slightl) differentl), and each needs to be chec*ed for accurac). The differences

between these translations are not errors in the 0ible but @ust differences in translation.

Therefore, the first error that %eedat presents is not an error at all.

The ne/t e/ample of an error that %eedat presents is from 2ohn A:1E.

3- BEGOTTEN/ NOT *ADE

2esus is the onl) begotten son of 6od, 'egotten not made, is an ad@unct of the

orthodo/ catechism, leaning for support on the following:



"&or God o lo1ed the !orld/ that he ga1e hi only BEGOTTEN on/ that

!hooe1er 'elie1eth in him hould not ,erih/ 'ut ha1e e1erlating life-" (2ohn

A:1E 3 $" (N2"##

o priest worth his cloth would fail to quote "the only BEGOTTEN of the

&ather;" when preaching to a prospective convert. 0ut this fabrication U056TT5 U has now been unceremoniousl) e/cised b) the 0ible 9evisers (of

the 9"#, without a word of e/cuse. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. <,

p. 1#

$gain, %eedat is comparing two different translations of the 0ible and how the)

translate the 6ree* word, mono1ene. The Ning 2ames translation translates it as, onl)

begotten.

or 6od so loved the world, that he gave his onl) begotten on, that whosoever

believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (2ohn A:1E, 2N"#

hile the 9evised tandard translation translates monogene as, onl).

or 6od so loved the world that he gave his onl) on, that whoever believes in him

should not perish but have eternal life. (2ohn A:1E, 9"#

$gain %eedat has failed to see that this is not an error in the 0ible but @ust a difference

in translation. 0oth of these translations reflect an aspect of the original word, and li*e

all translations need to be chec*ed with the original language. Therefore, li*e %eedat?s

first e/ample, this is not an error in the 0ible but @ust a difference in translation.

The third e/ample that %eedat gives is from 1 2ohn :7.

4- "CHRISTIAN *ES#A#*ATHICS"

"&or there are three that 'ear record in hea1en/ the &ATHER/ the ORD/ and

the HO<) GHOST0 and thee three are one-" (1st 5pistle of 2ohn :7 3 $" (2N"##

This verse is the closest appro/imation to what the -hristians call their Holy

Trinity in the enc)clopaedia called the 0!0F5. This *e)3stone of the -hristian faithhas also been scrapped from the 9" without even a semblance of e/planation.

($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. <, p. 1E#

+ere %eedat points out that part of a particular verse (1 2ohn :7# in the Ning 2ames

translation of the 0ible is not present in modern translations li*e the 9evised tandard

"ersion. hat he sa)s here is true. o wh) is there this difference4 The answer is that



modern 0iblical scholarship has not @ust accepted the integrit) of the te/t of the 0ible,

but has sought to prove it. To do this scholars have consulted all of the archaeological

and historical evidence to see how well the 0ible has been preserved. The evidence

the) consider are the ancient manuscripts of the 0ible in the original language, the

ancient translations, and quotes of the 0ible in the earl) -hristian writers. rom this

evidence the integrit) of the te/t of the 0ible can be determined.

hat this evidence shows is that the 0ible has been ver) well preserved, and that

there are onl) a few occasions where a change li*e 1 2ohn :7 has occurred. !n the

case of 1 2ohn :7, the oldest manuscripts in the original language and the quotes from

the earl) -hristian writers do not have this verse. Therefore, in view of this evidence,

the modern translations of the 0ible do not include it. The Ning 2ames translation

however, was not translated from the oldest manuscripts and so does include it.

-hristian scholars are ver) open about these facts and most of these te/tual variants

are openl) recorded in the footnotes of modern editions and translations of the 0ible.This is where -hristian scholars are ver) different to !slamic scholars. -hristian

scholars publish these variants in the footnotes of the common editions of the 0ible,

while !slamic scholars do not publish the variants of the Gur?an in the footnotes of the

common editions of the Gur?an. !nstead, at the popular level, !slamic scholars continue

to teach that the Gur?an has no variants. 0ut the Gur?an does have man) variants. 5ven

after Mthman burned all the different versions of the earl) Gur?ans there are still man)

variants that could be listed in the footnotes of modern editions of the Gur?an. +ere

are the three main sources for these variants.

1. The oldest manuscripts of the Gur?an have differences between them and themodern editions of the Gur?an. ne of the most famous old manuscripts is the

amarqand manuscript. cholars have compared it to the modern editions of the

Gur?an and shown that the) are not identical. There are appro/imatel) 1'' te/tual

differences between the ancient amarqand manuscript the modern edition of the

Gur?an. These differences could easil) be listed in the footnotes of the modern editions

of the Gur?an but !slamic scholars refuse to do this. The result is that this information

is hidden from the general public. Mntil the modern Gur?an is sub@ected to the

evidence of the ancient manuscripts it has no integrit).

http://answering-islam.org/PQ/A1.htm#AppendA






&. 5arl) !slamic literature records man)

variants in the ancient Gur?ans. This is in

boo*s li*e the +adith and The Fihrist of

al-.adim. !n the previous chapter it was

show that these boo*s record the following

differences in the ancient Gur?ans:

• The number of surahs varied

between 11' and 11E.

• The order of the surahs was

different.

• ome verses had a different number of words or a different word order or

different words.

These variants could easil) be listed in the footnotes of the modern editions of the

Gur?an but !slamic scholars refuse to do this. The result is that this information is

hidden from the general public. Mntil the modern Gur?an is sub@ected to the evidence

of the variants recorded in the earl) !slamic literature it has no integrit).

A. The final source of variants are the) man) different eadin1s (qira?at# of the Gur?an.

These different 9eadings come from the fact that the original $rabic script of the

Gur?an did not include vowels or diacritical points to distinguish between consonants.

The result was that for this script to be read the vowels and diacritical points had to be

added to it to complete the words. This was done b) memor) or to conform to the

rules of $rabic grammar or according to tradition, but the result was that there were

man) different readings of the Gur?an. These differences could easil) be listed in the

footnotes of the modern editions of the Gur?an but !slamic scholars refuse to do this.

The result is that this information is hidden from the general public, and until the

modern Gur?an is sub@ected to the evidence of the various readings it has no integrit).

To conclude, %eedat put forward the te/tual variant of 1 2ohn :7 to proof that the

0ible is full of errors. -hristians scholars are ver) open about these t)pes of te/tual

variants and have consulted the oldest manuscripts to determine the authentic reading.This is not an error, but @ust part of the process of ensuring the integrit) of the 0iblical

te/t.

The Gur?an, li*e the 0ible, has te/tual variants. The difference is that !slamic scholars

do not ac*nowledge them in the modern editions of the Gur?an. The result is that the

modern editions of the Gur?an have no integrit) because the) are not based on the





oldest manuscripts or ta*e into account the man) te/tual variants that e/ist for the

Gur?an.

The fourth e/ample that %eedat gives is from ar* 1E:D3&'.

=- THE ASCENSION

ne of the most serious of those grave defects which the authors of the 9" had

tried to rectif) concerned the $scension of -hrist. There have been onl) two

references in the -anonical 6ospels of atthew, ar*, Fu*e and of 2ohn to the most

stupendous event in -hristianit) U 25M 05!6 T$N5 MP !T +5$"5.

These two references were obtained in ever) 0ible in ever) language, prior to 1D&,

when the 9" first appeared. These were:

<a. o then the Ford 2esus, after he had spo*en to them, was T$N5 MP !T

+5$"5, and sat down at the right hand of 6od. (ar* 1E:1D#

<b. hile he blessed them, he parted from them, and was -$99!5% MP !T

+5$"5. (Fu*e &<:1#

ow please loo* at the image below, which is a photo cop) where the quotation <a

above ought to appear. ;ou will be shoc*ed to note that ar* 1E ends at verse 8,

and ... the missing verses appear in small print as a footnote at the bottom of the

page.



... The above facts are a staggering confession b) -hristendom that the inspired

authors of the -anonical 6ospels did not record a single word about the $-5!

of 2esus. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. <, pp. 17318#

irstl), %eedat claims that, There have been onl) two references (to the ascension# in

the -anonical 6ospels. This is false and %eedat has no e/cuse for such an error. Theascension is where 2esus rises (ascends# to the right hand of 6od, and there are man)

references to this event.

(2esus said# for %avid himself sa)s in the boo* of Psalms, The Ford said to m) Ford,

?it at ) right hand, Mntil ! ma*e ;our enemies a footstool for ;our feet.? (Fu*e

&':<&, $0= also atthew &&:<A3<<, ar* 1&:AE#

(2esus said# 0ut from now on the on of an will be seated at the right hand of the

power of 6od. (Fu*e &&:ED, $0= also atthew &E:E<, ar* 1<:E&#

! (2esus# will remain in the world no longer ... and ! am coming to )ou. +ol) ather ...

! am coming to )ou now. (2ohn 17:11, 1A, !"#

econdl), %eedat points out that verses D31E of ar* 1E appear as a footnote. This

issue was dealt with in the previous e/ample of 1 2ohn :7. -hristians scholars are

ver) open about these t)pes of te/tual variants and have consulted the oldest

manuscripts to determine the authentic reading. This is not an error, but @ust part of the

process of ensuring the integrit) of the 0iblical te/t. The Gur?an has te/tual variants

li*e this too but !slamic scholars do not ac*nowledge them in the modern editions of

the Gur?an. The Gur?an is in no wa) superior to the 0ible in this regard.

The fifth e/ample that %eedat gives is regarding the word $llah in the -hristian

0ible. +e claims that in the original language, $llah, is the word for 6od in the 0ible.

>- A<<AH IN THE CHRISTIAN BIB<E

The 9ev. -. !. cofield, %. %. with a team of 8 -onsulting 5ditors, also all %.%.Js in

the cofield 9eference 0ible thought it appropriate to spell the +ebrew word 5lah

(meaning 6od# alternativel) as $lah The -hristians had thus swallowed the camel

U the) seemed to have accepted at last that the name of 6od is $llah U but were stillstraining at the gnat b) spelling $llah with one F> (Photographic reproduction of the

0ible page showing the word $F$+ is preserved here for posterit) below#. ...



($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. <, pp. &13&&#

! am glad that %eedat has provided a photographic reproduction of the cofield

9eference 0ible because now )ou can read it for )ourself. Please chec* that ! have

t)ped it out correctl) below.

9lohim (sometimes 9l or 9lah#, 5nglish form 6od, the first of the three primar)

names of %eit), is a uni3plural noun formed from 9l 3 strength, or the strong one,

and !lah, to swear, to bind oneself b) an oath, so impl)ing faithfulness.

;ou can see that the cofield 9eference 0ible does not sa) that the 0iblical word for6od is !lah, but that the word, !lah, means to swear, to bind oneself b) an oath.

%eedat has completel) twisted this reference. This is appalling scholarship and

deliberate deceit.

%eedat claimed that there were ', ''' errors in the 0ible, and put forward these five

e/amples to prove this. +owever, when e/amined, these e/amples show that the 0ible

is not in error but that %eedat is a man who deliberatel) twists his references and is

not even aware of the histor) of the Gur?an.

ther 5rrors in the 0ible

God or the De1il?



!n the 0ible we read the following verses.

$gain the anger of the F9% was *indled against !srael, and he

incited %avid against them, sa)ing, 6o, number !srael and

2udah. (& amuel &<:1, 9"#

atan stood up against !srael, and incited %avid to number !srael.

(1 -hronicles &1:1, 9"#

$hmed %eedat ma*es the following comments about these verses.

;ou will observe that the authors of the boo*s

of "Chronicle" and of "Samuel" are telling the us the same stor) about %avid

ta*ing a census of the 2ews. here did %avid get his inspiration to do this novel

deed4 The author of & amuel &<:1 sa)s that it was the "<ORD" 6od who "5%

(9": incited# %avid, but the author of 1 -hronicles &1:1 sa)s that itwas "SATAN" who P9"N5% (9": incited# %avid ... +ow could the $lmight)

6od have been the source of these contradictor) "INS+IRATIONS?" !s it

6od or atan4 ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. 7, pp. A3AE#

%eedat is correct to sa) that in & amuel &<:1 it is 6od who incites %avid, while in 1

-hronicles &1:1 it is atan, but this is not a contradiction because 6od is sovereign

over all things, including atan. atan can onl) do what 6od allows him to do, and

sometimes 6od hands people over to atan. Thus both verses are true= the) show that

6od ta*es action against %avid b) handing him over to atan. The Gur?an also teaches

this same idea.

(%o )ou not see# that e have set the devils on the disbelievers to confound them with

confusion4 (Gur?an 1D:8A, Pic*thall#.

This Gur?anic verse sa)s it is 6od who confounds and confuses the unbelievers b)

sending the devils to confound and confuse them. o it is both 6od and the devils,

each with their own role. 6od is sovereign over all things including the devil. This

ma) not be eas) to understand or accept but it is part of our understanding of a totall)

sovereign 6od. The 0ible and the Gur?an are not in error at this point. !t is %eedat

who is in error because he does not understand the power of 6od.

+lagiarim

NOTHING <ESS THAN 266@



To demonstrate the degree of plagiarism practised b) the inspired 0ible writers, !

as*ed m) audience during a s)mposium at the Mniversit) of -ape Town ... to open

chapter A7 in the "Boo7 of Iaiah-" hen the audience was read), ! as*ed them to

compare m) !saiah A7 with their !saiah A7 while ! read, to see whether the) were

identical. ! began, readingl) slowl). "erses 1, &, <, 1', 1, and so on, until the end of

the chapter. ! *ept on as*ing after ever) verse if what ! had been reading, was identicalwith the verses in their 0ibles. $gain and again the) chorused U ;eh>, ;eh>. $t

the end of the chapter with the 0ible still open in m) hands at the place from which !

had been reading, ! made the -hairman to reveal to the audience that ! was not

reading from !saiah A7 at all but from 3 9INGS 2; There was a terrible

consternation in the audience> ! had thus established 1''Q plagiarism in the +ol)

0ible. ... !n other words, !saiah A7 and & Nings 1D are identical word for word. ;et

the) have been attributed to two different authors, centuries apart, whom the

-hristians claim have been inspired b) 6od. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's

Word?, ch. E, p. A1#

!t is true that !saiah A7 and & Nings 1D are the same and were written at different times

but this is not plagiarism. Plagiarism is where )ou ta*e the wor* of another and claim

that it is )ours, and neither of the prophets who wrote !saiah A7 or & Nings 1D have

claimed this. ne of these prophets has been inspired to faithfull) pass on the word of

6od given to a previous prophet. Prophets often tell the stor) and pass on the words

that 6od gave to earlier prophets. This is not an error or a problem but rather a reliable

testimon).

+owever, if %eedat is reall) worried about people cop)ing from others then he should

be ver) worried about uhammad.

arrated !bn ?$bbas: The Prophet used to cop) the people of the criptures in matters

in which there was no order from $llah. ... (0u*hari: vol. 7, b*. 7&, no. 7DD, Nhan,

agreed#

arrated $bdullah ibn $mr ibn al3?$s: The Prophet (peacebeuponhim# used to

relate to us traditions from the children of !sra?il till morning came= he would not get

up e/cept for obligator) pra)er. ($bu %awud: b*. &, no. AE, +asan#

Ho! Old a .ehoiachin # 5 or 25?

%eedat gives a series of e/amples of what he believes to be contradictions in the

0ible.



0etween 5ight and 5ighteen )ears, there is a gap or difference at a full 1' )ears. -an

we sa) (6od forbid># that the all3*nowing $lmight) could not count, and thus did not

*now the difference between 8 and 184 ...

!! -+9!-F5 AE

D. 2ehoiachin was eight )ears old when he began to reign, and he reigned three monthsand ten da)s in 2erusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the F9%.

!! N!6 &<

8. 2ehoiachin was eighteen )ears old when he began to reign, and he reigned in

2erusalem three months. $nd his mothers name was ehushta, the daughter of

5lnathan of 2erusalem. ($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. 7, p. AD#

!t is correct that there are two different numbers given for the age of 2ehoiachin when

he began to rule. e find a similar situation with the Gur?an regarding how to redeem

oneself when failing to fast. !n the +afs version of the $rabic Gur?an it sa)s:

a redemption b) feeding a poor man (mis*eenin, singular#. (Gur?an &:18<, $berr)#

hile in the arsh version of the $rabic Gur?an it sa)s:

a redemption b) feeding poor men (masa*iina, plural#. (Gur?an &:18A#

hat are we to do when faced with such a situation in the 0ible and Gur?an4 e

should see* to understand them carefull) before we rush to ma*e accusations li*e

%eedat does.

9egarding these 0ible verses, it ma) be that both are true. That is, that 2ehoiachin was

appointed co3ruler with this father when he was eight and then ruled on his own when

he was eighteen after his father died. r it ma) be a cop)ing error with the number

eighteen. -hristian scholars see* to solve this situation b) consulting the oldest

manuscripts of the 0ible. hen this is done for & Nings &<:8 all of the manuscripts

sa) eighteen. +owever, for & -hronicles AE:D some sa) eight and while others

eighteen. Thus a cop)ing error ma) have occurred in & -hronicles AE:D and eighteen

seems to be the correct reading. This information is included in the footnotes of

modern editions of the 0ible and is open for all to consider.

9egarding the difference in the Gur?an, in this case it is the result of the incomplete

nature of the original $rabic script that could be read as either singular or plural. The

main difference though is that !slamic scholars do not include these differences in the

footnotes of their editions of the Gur?an. The) falsel) lead people to believe that there

are no differences.



The Genealogy of .eu

f the four 6ospel writers, 6od inspired onl) two of them to record the genealog)

of +is son. (see atthew 1:1317 and Fu*e A:&A3A8# ... 0etween %avid and 2esus,

6od inspired atthew to record onl) &E ancestors for +is son. 0ut Fu*e, also

inspired, gathered up <1 forefathers for 2esus. The onl) name common to these twolists between %avid and 2esus is 25P+ and that, too, a supposed father according

to Fu*e A:&A ($"#. ... ;ou will also easil) observe that the lists are grossl)

contradictor). -ould both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. 6od4

($hmed %eedat, Is the Bible God's Word?, ch. D, pp. &ff#

%eedat claims that the two genealogies for 2esus in the 0ible are contradictor) and

could not have come from 6od. +owever the genealogies are not contradictor) for the

following reason.

2esus was not conceived b) an earthl) father. !nstead, 6od b) his pirit brought aboutthe conception of 2esus in the virgin ar). This means that in one sense 2esus no

genealog). The gospel writers understand this and so at the beginning of the

genealog) in Fu*e it sa)s:

+e was the son, so it was thought, of 2oseph. (Fu*e A:&A, !"#

;et at the same time, 2esus was born into a famil) and so too* on the genealog) of

that famil). !n this wa) 2esus is ver) different to us and so his genealog) is not simpl)

the same as ours.

!n the gospels the genealog) of 2esus is used as a wa) to teach us about him. or

instance, the genealog) in atthew begins with $braham and goes to 2esus. !t is

structured into three sections around $braham, %avid and the 5/ile. This shows how

the coming of the -hrist is the fulfilment of 6od?s promises to these three stages of

histor). !t also includes man) women which is unusual. !t shows how these often

re@ected women were in fact integral to 6od?s plan for the world. The) illustrate how

the coming of 2esus will be for the re@ected, and how the re@ected will be included as

6od?s people.

The genealog) in Fu*e is quite different. !t goes the other direction. !t begins with2esus and follows a different path to $dam. $t the end $dam is called the son of 6od.

This ma) be because he has no earthl) father li*e 2esus, and so the genealog) is

showing that 2esus is the second $dam.



0oth of these genealogies are true and each one gives us a unique understanding of

2esus. ur role is to carefull) stud) them and to learn the great things that 6od is

sa)ing to us.

-onclusion

hen $hmed %eedat?s arguments are chec*ed the) are found to be false and

e/aggerated. +e claims to understand the original 0iblical language but cannot even

get the letters right. hen he quotes from an article he completel) twists its original

meaning. hen he reads the 0ible he does not do it sincerel) but deliberatel) quotes it

out of conte/t. +e attac*s the 0ible for its variant readings )et sa)s nothing about the

variant readings of the Gur?an and its multiple versions. +e hides uhammad?s

moralit) and use of the sword, and !slam?s long histor) of slave trading. There aresignificant parts of !slamic theolog) that he doesn?t understand. 0ut worse still,

%eedat incites hatred and distrust between uslims and -hristians. +e actuall) stops

uslims and -hristians having meaningful dialogue.

-hristians and uslims believe ver) different things about 6od. e need to be able to

debate and challenge each other about this. 0ut the wa) we do this should not be li*e

%eedat. !nstead we should understand each other?s boo*, histor) and religion properl).

!f we wish to challenge a point we should quote in conte/t, not e/aggerate and not

twist references. e should listen to each other carefull) and be prepared to learn and

change. 0) doing this we will be sincere and engage with each other properl), and it ism) pra)er that this is how we will behave.

a) 6od?s grace and peace be with )ou.

amuel 6reen

RE&ERENCES

ulaiman $bu %awud, Sunan !bu-:a)ud (translator: Prof. $hmad +asan#.

$hmadi))a uslim ovement

%r. uhammad Taqi3ud3%in $l3+ilali B %r uhammad uhsin Nhan, Translation

of the meanin1s of the .oble ;ur'an in the 9n1lish 3an1ua1e adinah: Ning ahd

-omple/. 1<1D $.+.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/

http://www.aaiil.org/

http://www.quranbrowser.com/


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/

http://www.aaiil.org/





$l3adim, The Fihrist of al-.adim - ! Tenth Century sur/ey of $uslim Culture , ew

;or*: -olumbia Mniversit) Press, 1D7'.

$l3Tabari, The History of !l-Tabari, vol. iv, The $ncient Ningdoms, (trans: oshe

Perlmann#, $lban): tate Mniversit) of ew ;or* Press, 1D87.

, The History of al-Tabari, vol. vi, uhammad at ecca (trans. .

ontgomer) att B .". c%onald#, $lban), .;.: tate Mniversit) of ew ;or*

Press, 1D88.

, The History of !l-Tabari, vol. viii, The "ictor) of !slam, (trans: ichael

ishbein#, $lban): tate Mniversit) of ew ;or* Press, 1DD7.

$rthur 2. $rberr), The "oran Inter&reted , /ford: /ford Mniversit) Press, 1D.

uhammad ibn !smail al30u*hari, Sahih al-Bu*hari (translator: %r. uhammaduhsin Nhan#.

-hurch of 5ngland ($nglican#, 0oo* of -ommon Pra)er 3 $rticles of 9eligion

.2. %awood, The "oran, Fondon: Penguin 0oo*s, 1DD7.

$hmed %eedat, Christ in Islam, audi $rabia: $bdul3Gasim Publishing +ouse, no

date.

, Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction? %urban, 9$: !P!-, no date.

, Is the Bible God's Word+ audi $rabia: $bdul3Gasim Publishing

+ouse, not date.

, $uhammed %&buh( the Greatest , %ubai: %r. 9ida $. Nolthoum,

&''E.

, esurrection or esuscitation?, %ubai: %r. 9ida $. Nolthoum, &''E.

, The Choice+ "ol. 1, %urban, 9$: !P-!, &Eth ed., 1DDE.

, What the Bible Says !bout $uhammed %&buh(, %urdan, 9$: !P-!,

1DDA.

atthew 5lton, 1'1 -ontradictions in the 0ible, &''7.


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/

http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8986/101-Contradictions-In-The-Bible


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/

http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8986/101-Contradictions-In-The-Bible



2ohn 6ilchrist, The Textual History of the ;ur'an and the Bible, 9$: 2esus to the

uslims, 1D87.

!bn !shaq, Sirat asul !llah, translated as, The 3ife of $uhammad , (translator: $.

6uillaume#, Narachi: /ford Mniversit) Press, 1DD8.

!bn Nathir, Tafsir Ibn "athir (abridged#, 9i)adh: %arussalam, &''', 1' volumes.

!bn a?d, "itab !l-Taba#at !l-"abir , (translator: . oinul +aq# ew %elhi: Nitab

0havan, & volumes, no date.

2amaat.et

0rother ar*, $ Perfect Gur?an

2osh c%owell B 2ohn 6ilchrist, The Islam :ebate, an 0ernardino, -$: +ere?s FifePublishers, 1D8A.

uslim ibn al3+a@@a@, Sahih $uslim (translator: $bdul +amid iddique#.

ew $merican tandard 0ible ($0#, M, !owa: orld 0ible Publishers, 1D77.

2acob eusner, Genesis abbah4 The 0udaic Commentary To The Boo* of Genesis,

$tlanta, 6eorgia: cholars Press, 1D8.

+ol) 0ible, ew !nternational "ersion (!"#, Fondon: +odder B toughton, 1DD7.

ohammed armadu*e Pic*thall, The $eanin1 of the Holy ;ur'an, %elhi: -rescent

Publishing +ouse, 1D8.

9eformed -hurch, The 0elgic -onfession 3 $rticles of 9eligion

9evised tandard "ersion (9"#, ew ;or*: Thomas elson, 1D7.

$bdullah aeed, The -harge of %istortion of 2ewish and -hristian

criptures, $uslim World , all &''&, vol. D&, issue AO<.

$s3a))id abiq, Fi#h us-Sunnah+ Ha,, and 'mrah, (trans. uhammad a?eed

%abas, .. Na)ani#= !ndianapolis, !ndiana: $merican Trust Publications, 1DD&.

Prof. asud3ul3+asan, The History of Islam, %elhi: $dam Publishers and %istributors,

&''&, & volumes.

http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/texthistory.html

http://www.jamaat.net/deedat.htm

http://answering-islam.org/PQ/

http://joshmcdowellmedia.org/FreeBooks/TheIslamDebate.pdf

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/


http://www.reformed.org/documents/BelgicConfession.html

http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/texthistory.html

http://www.jamaat.net/deedat.htm

http://answering-islam.org/PQ/

http://joshmcdowellmedia.org/FreeBooks/TheIslamDebate.pdf

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/


http://www.reformed.org/documents/BelgicConfession.html



$bdullah ;usuf $li, The $eanin1 <f The Holy ;uran, ar)land, M.: $mana

Publications, &''<.

The author welcomes )our response via email.

ore articles b) amuel 6reen.-op)right V amuel 6reen &''<.

Fast update 17th 2ul) &'1'.

%eedat 9ebuttal Page

$nswering !slam +ome Page



http://answering-islam.org/Green/contact.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Green/index.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Deedat/index.htm

http://answering-islam.org/index.html


http://answering-islam.org/Green/contact.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Green/index.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Deedat/index.htm

http://answering-islam.org/index.html

another choice

Documents