In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the
Compassionate
Christ in Islam
by Ahmed Deedat
Chapter One : Christian Muslim Responses
Debate on TV
At the end
of the debate - "Christianity and Islam" - which appeared on
the SABC-TV
program "Cross Questions" on Sunday 5th June 1983, the
Chairman,
Mr. Bill Chalmers commented: "I think it can be said from this
discussion
that there is, at present, somewhat more accommodation on the
Islamic
side for the founder of Christianity than there is on the Christian side for the
founder of Islam. What the
significance of that is, we leave it to you, the viewer, to determine, but I do
think you will agree that it is a good
thing that
we are talking together."
"Bill" as
he is popularly addressed, without any formalities, on all his programs, by all
his panelists, is
extremely
charming and stupendous in his humility. He is a picture of what the Holy Quran
portrays of a good
Christian:
"...And
nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say: 'We
are Christians': because
among these
are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world. And they are
not arrogant."
(The Holy
Quran 5:82)
Jesus - His Status
Were the
Muslims on the panel trying to placate the viewers out policy, deceit or
diplomacy? Nothing of the
kind! They
were only articulating what God Almighty had commanded them to say in the Holy
Quran. As
Muslims,
they had no choice. They had said in so many words: "We Muslims believe, that
Jesus was one of
the
mightiest messengers of God that he was the Christ, that he was born
miraculously without any male
intervention (which many modern-day Christians do not believe today), that he
gave life to the dead by God's
permission
and that he healed those born blind and the lepers by god's permission. In fact,
no Muslim is a
Muslim if
he or she does not believe in Jesus!"
Pleasant Surprise
Over 90% of
the people who witnessed this debate must have been pleasantly, but skeptically,
surprised. They
might have
not believed their ears. They must have surmised that the Muslims were playing
to the gallery - that
they were
trying to curry favor with their fellow Christian countrymen; that if the
Muslims would say a few
good words
about Jesus, then in reciprocation the Christians might say a few good words
about Muhammed
(may the
peace and the blessings of God be upon all His righteous servants, Moses, Jesus,
Muhammed...etc.);
that I
scratch your back and you scratch my back - which would be a sham or hypocrisy.
Page 1
Christ in Islam
Hate Cultivated
We cannot
blame the Christians for their skepticism. They have been so learned for
centuries. They were
trained to
think the worst of the man Muhammed, salla Allah
u alihi wa sallam, and his religion. How aptly
did Thomas
Carlyle say about his Christian brethren over a hundred and fifty years ago:
"The lies which wellmeaning
zeal has
heaped round this man (Muhammed) are disgraceful to ourselves only." We Muslims
are
partly
responsible for this. We have not done anything substantial to remove the
cobwebs.
Ocean of Christianity
South
Africa is an ocean of Christianity. If Libya boasts the highest percentage of
Muslims on the continent of
Africa,
then the Republic of South Africa would also be entitled to boast the highest
percentage of Christians.
In this
ocean of Christianity the R.S.A. - the Muslims are barely 2% of the total
population. We are a voteless
minority -
numerically, we count for nothing; politically, we count for nothing; and
economically, one white
man, as
Oppenheimer, could buy out the whole lot of us, lock, stock and barrel.
So if we
had feigned to appease, we might be excused. But no! We must proclaim our
Master's Will; we must
declare the
Truth, whether we liked it or not. In the words of Jesus: "Seek ye the truth,
and the truth shall set
you free"
(John 8:32).
Chapter Two : Jesus in the Quran
Christians Unaware
The
Christian does not know that the true spirit of charity which the Muslim
displays, always, towards Jesus
and his
mother Mary spring from the fountainhead of his faith - the Holy Quran. He does
not know that the
Muslim does
not take the holy name of Jesus, in his own language, without saying
Eesa, alaihi assalam
("Jesus,
peace be upon him")
The
Christian does not know that in the Holy Quran Jesus is mentioned twenty five
times. For example:
"We gave
Jesus, the son of Mary, clear signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit"
(The Holy Quran
2:87)
"O Mary!
God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus,
the son of Mary..."
(3:45)
"...Christ
Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of god..." (4:171)
"...And in
their foot steps we sent Jesus the son of Mary..." (5:46)
"And
Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous."
(6:85)
Jesus - His Titles
Though
Jesus is mentioned by name in twenty-five places in the Holy Quran, he is also
addressed with respect
as:
Ibn Maryam, meaning "The son of Mary"; and as the
Maseeh
(in Hebrew it is the Messiah), which is
translated
as "Christ". He is also known as Abdullah, "The
servant of Allah"; and as Rasul u
Allah, the
messenger
of Allah.
He is
spoken of as "The Word of God", as "The Spirit of God", as a "Sign of God", and
numerous other
epithets of
honor spread over fifteen different chapters. The Holy Quran honors this mighty
messenger of God,
and the
Muslims have not fallen short over the past fourteen hundred years in doing the
same. There is not a
single
disparaging remark in the entire Quran to which even the most jaundiced among
the Christians can take
exception.
Eesa Latinised to "Jesus"
The Holy
Quran refers to Jesus as Eesa, and this name is used more times than
any other title, because this was
his
"Christian" name. Actually, his proper name was
Eesa
(Arabic), or Esau (Hebrew); classical
Yeheshua,
which the
Christian nations of the West latinised as Jesus. Neither the "J" nor the second
"s" in the name Jesus
is to be
found in the original tongue - they are not found in the Semitic languages.
The word is
very simply "E S A U" a very common Jewish name, used more than sixty times in
the very first
booklet
alone of the Bible, in the part called "Genesis". There was at least one "Jesus"
sitting on the "bench" at
the trial
of Jesus before the Sanhedrin. Josephus the Jewish historian mentions some
twenty five Jesus' in his
"Book of
Antiquities". The New Testament speaks of "Bar-Jesus" a magician and a sorcerer,
a false prophet
(Acts
13:6); and also "Jesus-Justus" a Christian missionary, a contemporary of Paul
(Colossians 4:11). These
are
distinct from Jesus the son of Mary. Transforming "Esau" to (J)esu(s) - Jesus -
makes it unique. This unique
(?) name
has gone out of currency among the Jews and the Christians from the 2nd century
after Christ.
Among the
Jews, because it came to be a name of ill - repute, the name of one who
blasphemed in Jewry; and
among the
Christians because it came to be the proper name of their God. The Muslim will
not hesitate to name
his son
Eesa
because it is an honored name, the name of a righteous servant of the
Lord.
Chapter Three : Mother And Son
Mary Honored
The birth
of Jesus Christ is described in two places of the Quran - chapter 3 and chapter
19. Reading from the
beginning
of his birth, we come across the story of Mary, and the esteemed position which
she occupies in the
House of
Islam, before the actual annunciation of the birth of Jesus is given:
"'Behold'!
the angels said: 'O Mary! God hath chosen thee and purified thee, and chosen
thee above the
women of
all nations" (3:42)
"Chosen
thee above the women of all nations." Such an honor is not to be found given to
Mary even in the
Christian
Bible! The verse continues:
"O Mary!
Worship thy Lord devoutly: prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with
those who bow
down."
(3:43)
Divine Revelation
What is the
source of this beautiful and sublime recitation which, in its original Arabic,
moves men to ecstasy
and tears?
verse 44 below explains:
"This is
part of the tidings, of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O
Muhammad!) by inspiration:
Thou wast
not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be
charged with the care
of Mary:
nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point)." (3:44)
Mary's Birth
The story
is that the maternal grandmother of Jesus, Hannah, had hitherto been barren. She
poured out her
heart to
God: If only God will grant her a child, she would surely dedicate such a child
for the service of God
in the
temple.
God granted
her prayer and Mary was born. Hannah was disappointed. She was yearning for a
son, but instead
she
delivered a daughter; and in no way is the female like the male, for what she
had in mind. What was she to
do? She had
made a vow to God. She waited for Mary to be big enough to fend for herself.
When the
time came, Hannah took her darling daughter to the temple, to hand over for
temple services. Every
priest
wanted to be the god-father of this child. They cast lots with arrows for her -
like the tossing of the coin -
head or
tail?
eventually
she fell to the lot of Zakariya, but not without a dispute.
The Source of His Message
This was
the story. But where did Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, get this
knowledge from? He
was an
Ummi, Arabic
for "unlettered". He did not low how to read or write. He is made by God
Almighty to
answer this
very question in the verse above, by saying that it was all
by divine inspiration. "No!", says the
controversialist. "This is Muhammed's own concoction. He copied his revelations
from the Jews and
Christians.
He plagiarized it. He forged it."
Knowing
full-well, and believing as we do, that the whole Quran is the veritable Word of
God, we will
nevertheless agree, for the sake of argument, with the enemies of Muhammed,
salla Allah u alihi wa sallam,
for a
moment, that he wrote it. We can now expect some cooperation from the
unbelievers.
Ask him:
"Have you any qualms in agreeing that Muhammed was an Arab?" Only an ignorant
will hesitate to
agree. In
that case there is no sense in pursuing any discussion. Cut short the talk.
Close the book!
With the
man of reason, we proceed. "That this Arab, in the first instance, was
addressing other Arabs. He was
not talking
to Indian Muslims, Chinese Muslims, or Nigerian Muslims. He was addressing his
own people, the
Arabs.
Whether they agreed with him or not, he told them in the most sublime form,
words that were seared
into the
hearts and minds of his listeners that Mary the mother of Jesus, a
Jewess, was chosen above the
women of
all nations. Not his own mother, nor his wife nor his daughter, nor any other
Arab woman, but a
Jewess! Can
one explain this? Because to everyone his own mother or wife, or daughters would
come before
other
women.
Why would
the prophet of Islam honor a woman from his opposition! and a Jewess at that!
belonging to a race
which had
been looking down upon his people for three thousand years? Just as they still
look down upon their
Arab
brethren today."
Sarah and Hagar
The Jews
learn, from the Bible, that their father, Abraham, had two wives Sarah and
Hagar. They say that they
are the
children of Abraham through Sarah his legitimate wife; that their Arab brethren
have descended
through
Hagar, a "bondwoman", and that as such, the Arabs are an inferior breed.
Will anyone
please explain the anomaly as to why Muhammed,
salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, if he is the
author,
chose this Jewess for such high honor? The answer is simple, he
had no choice he had no right to
speak of
his own desire. "It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him." (53:4)
The Chapter of Maryam
There is a
Chapter in the Holy Quran, named Surat u Maryam "Chapter
Mary", named in honor of Mary the
mother of
Jesus Christ, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him; again, such an honor is
not to be found
given to
Mary in the Christian Bible. Out of the 66 books of the Protestants and 73 of
the Roman Catholics,
not one is
named after Mary or her son. You will find books named after Matthew, Mark,
Luke, John, Peter,
Paul and
two score more obscure names, but not a single one is that of Mary!
If
Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, was the
author of the Holy Quran, then he would not have failed
to include
in it with Mary, the mother of Jesus, his own mother Aamina, his dear wife
Khadija, or his beloved
daughter
Fatima. But No! No! This can never be. The Quran is not his handiwork!.
Chapter Four : The Good News
" 'Behold!'
the angels said: 'O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him: his
name will be Jesus,
the son of
Mary; held in honor in this world and the hereafter; and (of the company of)
those nearest to Allah."
(3:45)
"Nearest to
God," not physically nor geographically, but spiritually. Compare this with "And
(Jesus) sat on the
right hand
of God." (Mark 16:19). The bulk of Christendom has misunderstood this verse as
well as many
others in
the Bible. They imagine the Father (God) sitting on a throne, a glorified chair,
and His Son, Jesus,
sitting on
His right hand side. Can you conjure up the picture? If you do, you have strayed
from the true
knowledge
of God. He is no old Father Christmas. He is beyond the imagination of the mind
of man. He
exists. He
is real, but He is not like anything we can think of, or imagine.
In eastern
languages "right hand" meant a place of honor, which the Holy Quran more
fittingly describes as "In
the company
of those nearest to Allah." The above verse confirms that Jesus is the Christ.
and that he is the
Word which
God bestowed upon Mary. Again, the Christian reads into these words, a meaning
which they do
not carry.
They equate the word "Christ" with the idea of a god-incarnate; and the "Word"
of God to be God.
"Christ" Not a Name
The word
"Christ" is derived from the Hebrew word Messiah Arabic
Maseeh
Root word masaha meaning
The word
Christ is derived from the Hebrew word Messiah, Arabic
Maseeh. Root word masaha, meaning
"to rub",
"to massage", "to anoint". Priests and kings were anointed when being
consecrated to their offices.
But in its
translated Grecian form, "Christ" seems unique: befitting Jesus only.
Christians
like to translate names into their own language; like
Cephas
to "Peter" , Messiah to
"Christ". How
do they do
that? Very easily. Messiah in Hebrew means "Anointed". The Greek
word for anointed is Christos.
Just lop
off the 'os' from Christos, and you
are left with "Christ"; a unique name!
Christos
means "Anointed", and anointed means appointed in its religious
connotation. Jesus, peace and
blessing be
upon him, was appointed (anointed) at his baptism by John the Baptist, as God's
Messenger. Every
prophet of
God is so anointed or appointed. The Holy Bible is replete with the "anointed"
ones. In the original
Hebrew, he
was made a Messiah. Let us keep to the English translation
"anointed."
Not only
were prophets and priests and kings anointed (Christos-ed), but
horns, and cherubs and lamp-posts
also.
"I am the
God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar
..." (Genesis 31:13)
"If the
priest that is anointed do sin ..." (Leviticus 4:3)
"And
Moses... anointed the tabernacle and all things that was
therein..." (Leviticus 8:100)
"..the Lord
shall...exalt the horn of his anointed" (I Samuel
2:10)
"Thus saith
the Lord to his anointed to Cyrus..." (Isaiah 45:1)
"Thou art
the anointed cherub..." (Ezekiel 28:14)
There are
an hundred more such references in the Holy Bible. Every time you come across
the word
"anointed"
in your Bible, you can take it that that word would be
christos
in the Greek translations, and if you
take the
same liberty with the word that the Christians have done, you will have Christ
Cherub, Christ Cyrus,
Christ
Priest and Christ Pillar, ...etc.
Some Titles Exclusive
Although,
every prophet of God is an anointed one of God, a Messiah, the title
Maseeh
or Messiah, or its
translation
"Christ" is exclusively reserved for Jesus, the son of Mary, in both Islam and
in Christianity. This is
not unusual
in religion. There are certain other honorific titles which may be applied to
more than one prophet,
yet being
made exclusive to one by usage: like "Rasulullah", meaning
"Messenger of God", which title is
applied to
both Moses (19:51) and Jesus (61:6) in the Holy Quran. Yet
"Rasullullah"
has become synonymous
only with
Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, among Muslims.
Every
prophet is indeed a "Friend of God", but its Arabic equivalent
"Khalillullah"
is exclusively associated
with Father
Abraham. This does not mean that the others are not God's friends.
"Kaleemullah", meaning
"One
who spoke
with Allah" is never used for anyone other than Moses, yet we believe that God
spoke with many
of His
messengers, including Jesus and Muhammed, may the peace and blessings of God be
upon all His
servants.
Associating certain titles with certain personages only, does not make them
exclusive or unique in any
way. We
honor all in varying terms.
Whilst the
good news was being announced (verse 45 above) Mary was told that her unborn
child will be
Whilst the
good news was being announced (verse 45 above) Mary was told that her unborn
child will be
called
Jesus, that he would be the Christ, a "Word" from God, and that...
"He shall
speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the
company) of the righteous."
(3:46)
"At length
she brought the (babe) to her people carrying him. They said: 'O Mary! truly a
strange thing has
thou
brought!'. 'O sister of Aaron!, thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother
a woman unchaste!' " (The
Holy Quran
19:27-28)
Jews Amazed
There is no
Joseph the carpenter here. The circumstances being peculiar, Mary the mother of
Jesus had retired
herself to
some remote place in the East (19:16). After the birth of the child she returns.
A. Yusuf
Ali, comments in his popular English translation of the Quran:
"The
amazement of the people knew no bounds. In any case they were prepared to think
the worst of her, as
she had
disappeared from her kin for some time. But now she comes, shamelessly parading
a babe in her arms!
How she had
disgraced house of Aaron, the fountain of priesthood!
"Sister of
Aaron": Mary is reminded of her high lineage and the unexceptionable morals of
her father and
mother.
How, they said, she had fallen, and disgraced the name of her progenitors!
What could
Mary do? How could she explain? Would they, in their censorious mood accept her
explanation?
All she
could do was to point to the child, who, she knew, was no ordinary child. And
the child came to her
rescue. By
a miracle he spoke, defended his mother, and preached to an unbelieving
audience."
Allah
azza wa jall says in the Quran:
"But she
pointed to the babe. They said: 'How can we talk one who is a child in the
cradle?' He (Jesus) said: 'I
am indeed a
servant of Allah (God) : He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet: 'and
He hath made
me blessed
wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I live.
'(He hath made me)
kind to my
mother, and not overbearing or unblest; 'So Peace is on me the day I was born,
the day that I die,
and the day
that I shall be raised up to life again)'!" (19:29-33)
His First Miracle(s)
Thus Jesus,
peace and blessings be upon him, defended his mother from the grave calumny and
innuendoes of
her
enemies. This is the very first miracle attributed to Jesus in the Holy Quran
that, he spoke as an infant from
his
mother's arms. Contrast this with his first miracle in the Christian Bible which
occurred when he was over
thirty
years of age:
"And the
third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was
there: And both Jesus
was called,
and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of
Jesus saith unto him,
they have
no wine. Jesus saith unto her, 'Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is
not yet come.' His
mother
saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And there were set
there six water pots of
stone,
after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins
apiece. Jesus saith unto
them, Fill
the water pots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith
unto them, Draw out
no and bear
nto the go ernor of the feast And the bare it When the r ler of the feast had
tasted the ater
now, and
bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the
feast had tasted the water
that was
made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water
knew;) the governor
of the
feast called the bridegroom, And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth
set forth good wine;
and when
men have well drunk, then that which is
worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." (John
2:110)
Since this
miracle, wine has flowed like water in Christendom. Many reason that what was
good for the Master
is good
enough for them. Jesus was no "kill-joy" they say. Didn't he make good potent
wine, that even those
"well
drunk", those whose senses had been dulled could make out the difference ? "That
the best was kept for
the last.".
This was no pure grape juice. It was the same
wine
that, according to the Christian Bible, enabled the
daughters
of Lot to seduce their father (Genesis 19:32-33).It was the same
wine
which the Christian is advised
to eschew
in Ephesians 5:18 - "And be not drunk with wine..."
It is that
innocent (?) 1% potency that eventually leads millions down into the gutter.
America has 10 million
drunkards
in the midst of 70 million "born-again" Christians! The
Americans call their drunkards "Problem
Drinkers".
In South Africa, they are called "Alcoholics"; drunkard is too strong a word for
people to stomach.
But the
Prime Minister of Zambia, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, does not hesitate to call a spade
a spade. He says, "I
am not
prepared to lead nation of drunkards", referring to his own people who drink
intoxicants.
Whether the
water "blushed" or not "seeing" Jesus, we cannot blame him or his disciples for
the drinking
habits of
his contemporaries. For he had truly opined, "have yet many things to say unto
you, but ye cannot
bear them
now" (John 16:12). Mankind had not reached the stage of receiving the whole
Truth of Islam. Did
he not also
say "You cannot put new wine into old bottles"? (Matthew 9:17).
"Mother" or "Woman"?
According
to St. John, in the fourth verse above, describing the marriage feast at Cana,
we are told that Jesus,
peace and
blessings be upon him, behaved insolently towards his mother. He calls her
"woman," and to rub
more salt
into the wound he is made to say "what have I to do with thee?" What connection
is there between
you and me,
or what have I got to do with you? Could he have forgotten that this very
"woman" had carried
him for
nine months, and perhaps suckled him for 2 years, and had borne endless insults
and injuries on
account of
him? Is she not his mother? Is there no word in his language for "mother"?
Strange as
it may seem, that while the missionaries boast about their master's humility,
meekness and longsuffering,
they call
him the "Prince of Peace" and they sing that "he was led to the slaughter like a
lamb, and
like a
sheep who before his shearer is dumb, he opened not his mouth", yet they proudly
record in the same
breath,
that he was ever ready with invectives for the elders of his race, and was
always itching for a
showdown
i.e. if their records are true:
"Ye
hypocrites!"
"Ye wicked
and adulterous generation!"
"Ye whited
sephulcres!"
"Ye
generation of vipers!"
and now to
his mother: "Woman..."
Jesus Defended
Muhammed,
salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the Messenger of God, is made to absolve Jesus from
the false
charges and
calumnies of his enemies.
"And He
(God Almighty) hath made me (Jesus) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or
unblest" (19:31).
On
receiving the good news of the birth of a righteous son Mary responds:
"She said:
'O My Lord! how shall I have a son, when no man hath touched me?"
The angel
says in reply:
"He said:
'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a matter He
but sayth o it
'Be,' and
it is! And Allah (God) will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah (Law) and
the Gospel,"
(3:47-48).
Chapter Five : Quranic and Biblical Versions
Meeting the Reverend
I was
visiting the "Bible House" in Johannesburg. Whilst browsing through the stacks
of Bibles and religious
books, I
picked up an Indonesian Bible and had just taken in hand a Greek - English New
Testament, a large,
expensive
volume. I had not realized that I was being observed by the supervisor of the
Bible House. Casually,
he walked
up to me. Perhaps my beard and my Muslim headgear were an attraction and a
challenge? He
inquired
about my interest in that costly volume. I explained that as a student of
comparative religion, I had
need for
such a book. He invited me to have tea with him in his office. It was very kind
of him and I accepted.
Over the
cup of tea, I explained to him the Muslim belief in Jesus, peace and blessings
of Allah be upon him. I
explained
to him the high position that Jesus occupied in the House of Islam. He seemed
skeptical about what I
said. I was
amazed at his seeming ignorance, because only retired Reverend gentlemen can
become
Supervisors
of Bible Houses in South Africa. I began reciting from verse 42 of chapters 3 of
the Holy Quran:
"'Behold!'
The angels said: 'O Mary, Allah hath chosen thee...'"
I wanted
the Reverend to listen, not only to the meaning of the Quran, but also to the
music of its cadences
when the
original Arabic was recited. Rev. Dunkers (for that was his name) sat back and
listened with rapt
attention
to "Allah's Words".
When I
reached the end of verse 49, the Reverend commented that the Quranic message was
like that of his
own Bible.
He said, he saw no difference between what he behaved as a Christian, and what I
had read to him.
I said:
"that was true". If he had come across these verses in the English language
alone without their Arabic
equivalent,
side by side, he would not have been able to guess in a hundred years that he
was reading the Holy
Quran. If
he were a Protestant, he would have thought that he was reading the Roman
Catholic Version, if he
had not
seen one, or the Jehovah's Witness Version or the Greek Orthodox Version, or the
hundred and one
other
versions that he might not have seen; but he would never have guessed that he
was reading the Quranic
version.
The
Christian would be reading here, in the Quran, everything he wanted to hear
about Jesus, but in a most
noble,
elevated and sublime language. He could not help being moved by it.
In these
eight terse verses from 42 to 49 we are told:
(a) That
Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virtuous woman, and honored above the women of
all nations.
(b) That
all that was being said was God's own Revelation to mankind.
(c) That
Jesus was the "Word" of God.
(d) That he
was the Christ that the Jews were waiting for.
(e) That
God will empower this Jesus to perform miracles even in infancy.
(f) That
Jesus was born miraculously, without any male intervention.
(g) That
God will vouchsafe him Revelation.
(h) That he
will give life to the dead by God's permission, and that he will heal those born
blind and the
lepers by
God's permission, ... etc.
"Chalk and Cheese"
The most
fervent Christian cannot take exception to a single statement or word here. But
the difference
between the
Biblical and the Quranic narratives is that between "chalk and cheese". "To me
they are identical,
what is the
difference?" the Reverend asked. I know that in their essentials both the
stories agree in their
details,
but when we scrutinize them closely we will discover that the difference between
them is staggering.
Now compare
the miraculous conception as announced in verse 47 of the Holy Quran with what
the Holy
Bible says:
"Now the
birth of Jesus Christ was in this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to
Joseph, before they
came together, (as husband and wife) she was found with child
of the holy ghost."(Matthew 1:18)
Master Dramatizer
The eminent
Billy Graham from the United States of America dramatized this verse in front of
40,000 people
in King
Park, Durban, with his index finger sticking out and swinging his outstretched
arm from right to left,
he said:
"And the Holy Ghost came and impregnated Mary!" On the other hand St. Luke tells
us the very same
thing but
less crudely. He says, that when the annunciation was made, Mary was perturbed.
Her natural
reaction
was :
"How shall
this be, seeing I know not a man?" (Luke 1:34) meaning sexually.
The Quranic
narrative is:
"She said:
O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" (3:47) meaning
sexually.
In essence
there is no difference between these two statements "seeing I know not a man"
and "when no man
hath
touched me". Both the quotations have an identical meaning. It is simply a
choice of different words
meaning the
same thing. But the respective replies to Mary's plea in the two Books (the
Quran and the Bible)
are
revealing.
The Biblical Version
Says the
Bible:
"And the
angle answered and said into her : 'The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee, and the power of the
Highest
shall overshadow thee" (Luke 1:35)
Can't you
see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat
you with? They may well
ask "How
did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest overshadow her?" We
know that
literally
it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language
used here, is distasteful.
Now
contrast this with the language of the Quran:
The Quranic Version
"He said
(the angel says in reply): 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when
He hath decreed a
plan, He
but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!' " (3:47)
This is the
Muslim concept of the birth of Jesus. For God to create a Jesus, without a human
father, He merely
has to will
it. If He wants to create a million Jesus' without fathers or mothers, He merely
wills them into
existence.
He does not have to take seeds and transfer them, like men or animals by contact
or artificial
insemination . He wills everything into being by His word of command "Be" and
"It is".
There is
nothing new in what I am telling you, I reminded the Reverend. It is in the very
first Book of your
Holy Bible,
Genesis 1:3 "And God said..." What did He say? He said "Be" and "It was". He did
not have to
articulate
the words. This is our way of understanding the word "Be", that He willed
everything into being.
Choice for His Daughter
"Between
these two versions of the birth of Jesus, the Quranic version and the Biblical
version, which would
you prefer
to give your daughter ?" I asked the supervisor of the Bible House. He bowed his
head down in
humility
and admitted "The Quranic Version."
How can "a
forgery" or "an imitation", as it is alleged of the Quran, be better than the
genuine, the original, as
it is
claimed for the Bible? It can never be, unless this Revelation to Muhammed is
what it, itself, claims to be
viz. The
pure and holy Word of God! There are a hundred different tests that the
unprejudiced seeker after
truth can
apply to the Holy Quran and it will qualify with flying colors to being a
Message from on High.
Like Adam
Does the
miraculous birth of Jesus make him a God or a "begotten" son of God? No! says
the Holy Quran:
"The
similitude of Jesus before Allah (God) is that of Adam; He created him from dust
then said to him: 'Be',
and he
was." (3:59)
Yusuf Ali,
comments in his notes in the Quran translation:
"After a
description of the high position which Jesus occupies as a prophet in the
preceding verses we have a
repudiation
of the dogma that he was God, or the son of God, or any thing more than man. If
it is said that he
as born
without a human father Adam as also so born Indeed Adam as born without either a
human
was born
without a human father, Adam was also so born. Indeed Adam was born without
either a human
father or
mother. As far as our physical bodies are concerned they are mere dust.
In God's
sight Jesus was as dust just as Adam was or humanity is. The greatness of Jesus
arose from the divine
command
'Be': for after that he was more than dust a great spiritual leader and teacher"
The logic
of it is that, if being born without a male parent entitles Jesus to being
equated with God, then, Adam
would have
a greater right to such honor, and this no Christian would readily concede.
Thus, the Muslim is
made to
repudiate the Christian blasphemy.
Further, if
the Christian splits hairs by arguing that Adam was "created" from the dust of
the ground, whereas
Jesus was
immaculately "begotten" in the womb of Mary, then let us remind him that, even
according to his
own false
standards, there is yet another person greater than Jesus, in his own Bible .
Who is this superman?
Paul's Innovation
"For this
Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God... Without father,
without mother, without
descent,
having neither beginning of days,
nor end of life..." (Hebrews 7:1,3)
Here is a
candidate for Divinity itself, for only God Almighty could possess these
qualities. Adam had a
beginning
(in the garden), Jesus had a beginning (in the stable); Adam had an end and,
claim the Christians, so
had Jesus
"and he gave up the ghost". But where is Melchisedec? Perhaps he is hibernating
somewhere like
Rip Van
Winkel (a fairy tale character who slept for many ages.)
And what is
this "Hebrews"? It is the name of one of the Books of the Holy Bible, authored
by the gallant St.
Paul, the
self appointed thirteenth apostle of Christ. Jesus had twelve apostles, but one
of them (Judas) had the
Devil in
him. So the vacancy had to be filled, because of the "twelve" thrones in heaven
which had to be
occupied by
his disciples to judge the children of Israel (Luke 22:30).
Saul was a
renegade Jew, and the Christians changed his name to "Paul", probably because
"Saul" sounds
Jewish.
This St. Paul made such a fine mess of the teachings of Jesus, peace blessings
be upon him, that he
earned for
himself the second most coveted position of "The Most Influential Men of
History" in the
monumental
work of Michael H. Hart: The 100 or The Top
Hundred or the Greatest Hundred in History. Paul
outclasses
even Jesus because, according to Michael Hart, Paul was the
real
founder of present day
Christianity. The honor of creating Christianity had to be shared between Paul
and Jesus, and Paul won
because he
wrote more Books of the Bible than any other single author, whereas Jesus did
not write a single
word.
Paul needed
no inspiration to write his hyperboles here and in the rest of his Epistles. Did
not Hitler's Minister
of
Propaganda Goebbels say: "The bigger the lie the more likely it is to be
believed'? But the amazing thing
about this
exaggeration is that no Christian seems to have read it. Every learned man to
whom I have shown
this verse
to, seemed to be seeing it for the first time. They appear dumbfounded, as
described by the fitting
words of
Jesus:
"...seeing
they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." (Matthew
13:13)
The Holy
Quran also contains a verse which fittingly describes this well cultivated
sickness:
"Deaf, dumb
and blind, will they not return (to the path)." (2:18)
The Sons of God
The Muslim
takes strong exception to the Christian dogma that "Jesus is the only begotten
son, begotten not
made". This
is what the Christian is made to repeat from childhood in his catechism. I have
asked learned
Christians,
again and again as to what they are really trying to emphasize, when they say:
"Begotten not
made".
They know
that according to their own God given (?) records, God has sons by the tons:
"...Adam,
which was the son of God."(Luke 3:38)
"That the sons of God saw the daughters of
men that they were fair... And when the sons of God
came in unto
the
daughters of men, and they bare children to them..." (Genesis 6: 2,4)
"...Israel
is My son, even My firstborn:" (Exodus 4:22)
"...for I
(God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn."
(Jeremiah 31:9)
"...the
Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art My son: this day
have I begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7)
"For as
many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the
sons of God." (Romans 18:14)
Can't you
see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and
Harry who
followed
the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God". It was a metaphorical descriptive
term commonly
used among
the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but
Jesus was not like
that". Adam
was made by God. Every living thing was made by
God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer
of all.
Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the
"begotten" son of God, not
a
created
son of God ?
Begotten Means "Sired"!
In my forty
years of practical experience in talking to learned Christians, not a single one
has opened his mouth
to hazard
an explanation of the phrase "begotten not made". It had to
be an American who dared to explain.
He said :
"It means, sired by God." "What!?" I exploded : "Sired by God?" "No, no!" he said, "I am only
trying to
explain the meaning, I do not believe that God really sired a son."
The
sensible Christian says that the words do not literally mean what they say. Then
why do you say it? Why
are you
creating unnecessary conflict between the 1,200,000,000 Christians and a
thousand million Muslims of
the world
in making senseless statements?
Reason for Objection
The Muslim
takes exception to the word "begotten", because begetting is an animal act,
belonging to the lower
animal
functions of sex. How can we attribute such a lowly capacity to God?
Metaphorically we are all the
children of
God, the good and the bad, and Jesus would be closer to being the son of God
than any one of us,
because he
would be more faithful to God then any one of us can ever be. From that point of
view he is
preeminently the son of God.
Although
this pernicious word "begotten" has now unceremoniously been thrown out of the
"Most Accurate"
version of
the Bible, the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V.), its ghost
still lingers on in the Christian mind,
both black
and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the white man is made to feel
superior to his black
Christian
brother of the same Church and Denomination. And in turn, the black man is given
a permanent
inferiority
complex through this dogma.
Brain-washed Inferiority
The human
mind can't help reasoning that since the "begotten son" of an African will look
like an African, and
that of a
Chinaman as a Chinese, and that of an Indian like an Indian: so the
begotten
son of God aught
naturally
to look like God. Billions of beautiful pictures and replicas of this "only
begotten son of God" are put
in peoples
hands. He looks like a European with blonde hair, blue eyes and handsome
features like e one I saw
in the
"King of Kings" or "The Day of Triumph" or "Jesus of Nazareth". Remember Jeffrey
Hunter? The
"Savior" of
the Christian is more like a German than a Jew with his polly nose. So
naturally, if the son is a
white man,
the father would also be a white man (God?). Hence the darker skinned races of
the earth
subconsciously have the feeling of inferiory ingrained in their souls as God's
"step children". No amount of
face
creams, skin lighteners and hair straighteners will erase the inferiority.
God is
neither black nor white. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. Break
the mental shackles of
a Caucasian
(white) man-god, and you have broken the shackles of a permanent inferiority.
But intellectual
bondages
are harder to shatter: the slave himself fights to retain them.
Chapter Six : Answer to Christian Dilemmas
"Christ in
Islam" is really Christ in the Quran: and the Holy Quran has something definite
to say about every
aberration
of Christianity. The Quran absolves Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, from
all the false
charges of
his enemies as well as the misplaced infatuation of his followers. His enemies
allege that he
blasphemed
against God by claiming Divinity. His misguided followers claim that he did avow
Divinity, but
that was
not blasphemy because he was God. What does the Quran say ?
Addressing
both the Jews and the Christians, Allah says:
"O People
of the Book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah (God) aught
but the truth. Christ
Jesus son
of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah (God), and His Word, which he
bestowed on
Mary, and a
Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah (God) and His messengers..."
(4:171)
Going to Extremes
"O People
of the Book" is a very respectful title with which the Jews and the Christians
are addressed in the
Holy Quran.
In other words, Allah is saying "O Learned People!", "O People with a
Scripture!" According to
their own
boast, the Jews and the Christians prided themselves over the Arabs, who had no
Scripture before
the Quran.
As a learned people, Allah pulls up both the contending religionists for going
to either extremes as
regards the
personality of Christ.
The Jews
made certain insinuations about the legitimacy of Jesus and charged him of
blasphemy by twisting
his words.
The Christians read other meanings into his words; wrench words out of their
context to make him
God.
The modern
day Christian, the hot - gospeller, the Bible thumper, uses harsher words and
cruder approaches to
win over a
convert to his blasphemies.
He says:
(a) "Either
Jesus is God or a liar"
(b) "Either
Jesus is God or a lunatic"
(c) "Either
Jesus is God or an impostor"
These are
his words, words culled from Christian literature. Since no man of charity,
Muslim or otherwise, can
condemn
Christ so harshly as the Christian challenges him to do, perforce he must keep
non-committal. He
thinks he
must make a choice between one or the other of these silly extremes. It does not
occur to him that
there is an
alternative to this Christian conundrum.
Sensible Alternative
Is it not
possible that Jesus is simply what he claimed to be, a prophet, like so many
other prophets that passed
away before
him? Even that he is one of the greatest of them, a mighty miracle worker, a
great spiritual teacher
and guide -
the Messiah!. Why only God or Lunatic? Is "lunacy"
the opposite of "Divinity" in Christianity?
What is the
antonym of God? Will some clever Christian answer?
The Quran
lays bare the true position of Christ in a single verse, followed by a note by
Yusuf Ali's:
1 "That he
was the son of a woman, Mary, and therefore a man;"
2 "But a
messenger, a man with a mission from Allah (God), and therefore entitled to
honor."
3 "A Word
bestowed on Mary, for he was created by Allah's word 'Be', and he was;"(3:59).
4 A spirit
proceeding from Allah (God), but not Allah: his life and mission were more
limited than in the
case of
some other messengers, though we must pay equal honor to him as a prophet of
Allah. The
doctrines
of Trinity, equality with God, and sons, are repudiated as blasphemies. Allah
(God) is
independent
of all needs and has no need of a son to manage His affairs. The Gospel of John
(whoever
wrote it)
has put a great deal of Alexandrian Gnostic mysticism round the doctrine of the
Word (Greek,
Logos), but
it is simply explained here."
Jesus Questioned
Reproduced
below are verses 119 to 121 from the Chapter of Maeda (chapter 5 of the Quran)
depicting the
scene of
Judgment Day, when Allah will question Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him,
regarding the
misdirected
zeal of his supposed followers in worshipping him and his mother: and his
response,
"And behold! Allah will say: 'O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men,
take me and my mother for
two gods beside Allah?' He will say: 'Glory to Thee! never could I say what I
had no right (to say). Had I said
such a thing, Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my
heart, Thou I know not what is
in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.
'Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit,
'Worship Allah, my Lord and
your Lord'; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou
didst take me up Thou
wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things.
'If Thou dost punish them, they are Thy servant: If Thou dost forgive them, Thou
art the Exalted in power, the
Wise.'"
(5:116-118)
Claimed No Divinity
If this is
the statement of truth from the All-Knowing, that "Never said I to them aught
except what Thou didst
command me
to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'", then how do the
Christians justify
worshipping
Jesus?
There is
not a single unequivocal statement throughout the Bible, in all its 66 volumes
of the Protestant
versions,
or in the 73 volumes of the Roman Catholic versions, where Jesus claims to be
God or where he says
"worship
me". Nowhere does he say that he and God Almighty "are one" and "the same
person."
The last
phrase above "one and the same person" tickles many a "hot-gospeller" and
"Bible-thumper," not
excluding
the Doctor of Divinity and the Professor of Theology. Even the new converts to
Christianity have
memorized
these verses. They are programmed to rattle off verses out of context, upon
which they can hang
their
faith. The words "are one" activates the mind by association of memories. "Yes",
say the Trinitarians, the
worshippers
of three gods in one God, and one God in three gods, "Jesus did claim to be
God!" Where?
Reverend at the Table
I had taken
Rev. Morris D.D. and his wife, to lunch at the "Golden Peacock." While at the
table, during the
course of
our mutual sharing of knowledge, the opportunity arose to ask, "Where?" And
without a murmur he
quoted, "I
and my father are one" to imply that God and Jesus were one and
the same person. That Jesus
here claims
to be God. The verse quoted was well known to me, but it was being quoted out of context. It did
not carry
the meaning that the Doctor was imagining, so I asked him, "What is the
context?"
Choked on "Context"
The
Reverend stopped eating and began staring at me. I said, "Why? Don't you know
the context?", "You see,
what you
have quoted is the text, I want to know the context, the text that goes with it,
before or after." Here
was an
Englishman (Canadian), a paid servant of the Presbyterian Church, a Doctor of
Divinity, and it
appeared
that I was trying to teach him English. Of course he knew what "context" meant.
But like the rest of
his
compatriots, he had not studied the sense in which Jesus had uttered the words.
In my forty
years of experience, this text had been thrown at me hundreds of times, but not
a single learned
Christian
had ever attempted to hazard a guess as to its real meaning. They always start
fumbling for their
Bibles. The
Doctor did not have one with him. When they do start going for their Bibles, I
stop them in their
stride:
"Surely, you know what you are quoting?", "Surely, you know your Bible?" After
reading this, I hope
some
"born-again" Christians will rectify this deficiency. But I doubt that my Muslim
readers will ever come
across one
in their lifetime who could give them the context.
What is the Context?
It is
unfair on the part of the Reverend, having failed to provide the context, then
to ask me, "Do you know the
context?"
"Of course," I said. "Then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. I said, "That
which you have
quoted is
the text of John chapter 10, verse 30. To get at the context, we have to begin
from verse 23 which
reads:
23. "and
Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade." (John 10:23).
John, or
whoever he was, who wrote this story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus
tempting the Devil by
walking
alone in the lion's den. For we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden
opportunity to get even with
Jesus.
Perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the
Jews single-handed in
the Temple,
and upset the tables of the money changers at the beginning of his ministry
(John 2:15).
24. "The Jews
gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are
the
Christ,
tell us plainly." (John 10:24).
They
surrounded him. Brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him
and provoking him;
saying that
he had not put forth his claim plainly enough, clearly enough. That he was
talking ambiguously.
They were
trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. In fact, their real
complaint was that they did
not like
his method of preaching, his invectives, the manner in which he condemned them
for their formalism,
their
ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgetting the spirit.
But Jesus could not afford to
provoke
them any further there were too many and they were itching for a fight.
Discretion
is the better part of valor. In a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occasion:
25. "Jesus
answered, I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my
Father's name speak
for me,"
26. "but you
do not believe because you are not my sheep." (John 10:25-26).
Jesus
rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous in his claims to
being the Messiah that they
were
waiting for. He says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not
listen to him, but:
27. "My sheep
listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me."
28. "I give
them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no
one can snatch them out of my hand."
29. "My
Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no
one can snatch them out of my
Father's hand.." (John 10:29).
How can
anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending of the last two
verses. But spiritual
blinkers
are more impervious than physical defects. He is telling the Jews and recording
for posterity, the real
unity or
relationship between the Father and the son. The most crucial verse:
30. "I
and the Father are one." (John 10:30).
One in
what? In their Omniscience? In their Nature? In their Omnipotence? No! One in
purpose! That once a
believer
has accepted faith, the Messenger sees to it that he remains in faith, and God
Almighty also sees to it
that he
remains in faith. This is the purpose of the "Father"
and
the "son" and the "Holy Ghost"
and
of every
man
and
every woman of faith. Let the same John explain his Gnostic mystic
verbiage.
"That they
all may be one as thou. Father, art in me, and I in
thee, that they also may be one in us..."
"I in them,
and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in
one..."(John
17:20-22)
If Jesus is
"one" with God, and if that "oneness" makes him God, then the traitor Judas, and
the doubting
Thomas, and
the satanic Peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need
are God(s),
because the
same "oneness" which he claimed with God in John 10:30, now he claims for all "who forsook
him and
fled" (Mark 14:50). All "ye of little faith" (Matthew 8:26). All "O faithless and perverse generation"
(Luke
9:41). Where and when will the Christian blasphemy end? The expression "I and my
Father are one,"
was very
innocent, meaning nothing more than a common purpose with God. But the Jews were
looking for
trouble and
any excuse will not do, therefore,
31. "Again
the Jews picked up stones to stone him,"
32. "but
Jesus said to them, I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For
which of these
do you
stone me?"
33. "The Jews
answered him, saying : 'For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy;
and
because
that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God.'" (John 10:31-33).
In verse 24
above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. When that
charge was ably
refuted,
they then accused him of blasphemy which is like treason in the spiritual realm.
So they say that Jesus
is claiming
to be God "I and the Father are one". The Christians agree with the Jews in this
that Jesus did make
such a
claim; but differ in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that
he was God and was
entitled to
own up to his Divinity.
The
Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is serious. To one as
an excuse for good
"redemption", and to the other as an excuse for good "riddance". Between the
two, let the poor Jesus die. But
Jesus
refuses to co-operate in this game, so:
34. "Jesus
answered them, Is it not written in your Law, `I have said you are gods'?"
35. "If he
called them `gods,' to whom the word of God came --and the Scripture cannot be
broken--,"
36. "what
about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?
Why then
do you
accuse me of blasphemy because I said, `I am God's Son'?" (John 10:34-36).
Why "Your Law"?
He is a bit
sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say: "Your Law"? Is it not
also his Law? Didn't
he say:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the Law of the
prophets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill
(the Law).
For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one Jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass
from the
Law, till all
be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:1718).
"You are Gods"
"You are
gods:" He is obviously quoting from the 82nd Psalm , verse 6, "I have said, ye are gods: and all of
you are the
children of the most High."
Jesus,
continues: "If he (i.e. God Almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of
God came (meaning that
the
prophets of God were called 'gods') and the scripture cannot be broken..." (John
10:35), in other words he
is saying:
"you can't contradict me!" Jesus knows his Scripture; he speaks with authority;
and he reasons with
his enemies
that: "If good men, holy men, prophets of God are being addressed as 'gods' in
our Books of
Authority,
with which you find no fault, then why do you take exception to me? When the
only claim I make
for myself
is far inferior in our language, viz. 'A son of God' as against others being
called 'gods' by God
Himself.
Even if I (Jesus) described myself as 'god' in our language, according to Hebrew
usage, you could
find no
fault with me." This is the plain reading of Christian Scripture. I am giving no
interpretations of my
own or some
esoteric meaning to words!
Chapter Seven : "In The Beginning"
"Where does
Jesus say: 'I am God,' or 'I am equal to God,' or 'Worship me'?" I asked the
Rev. Morris again.
He took a
deep breath and took another try. He quoted the most oft-repeated verse of the
Christian Bible - John
1:1.
"In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Please
note, these are not the words of Jesus. They are the words of John (or whoever
wrote them).
Acknowledged by every erudite Christian scholar of the Bible as being the words
of another Jew, Philo of
Alexandria,
who had written them even before John and Jesus were born. And Philo claimed no
divine
inspiration
for them. No matter what mystical meaning that Philo had woven around these
words (which our
John has
plagiarized), we will accept them for what they are worth.
Greek not Hebrew
Since the
manuscripts of the 27 Books of the New Testament are in Greek, a Christian sect
has produced its
own version
and has even changed the name of this selection of 27 Books to
Christian Greek Scriptures ! I
asked the
Reverend whether he knew Greek? "Yes," he said, He had studied Greek for 5 years
before
qualification. I asked him what was the Greek word for "God" the first time it
occurs in the quotation "and the
Word was
With God"? He kept staring, but didn't answer. So I said, the word was
Hotheos, which
literally
means
"The God".
Since the
European (including the North American) has evolved a system of using capital
letters to start a
proper noun
and small letters for common nouns, we would accept his giving a capital "G" for
God; in other
words
Hotheos
is rendered "the god" which in turn is rendered "God".
"Now tell
me, what is the Greek word for "God" in the second occurrence in your quotation
- "and the Word
was God"?
The Reverend still kept silent. Not that he did not know Greek, or that he had
lied, but he knew
more than
that; the game was up. I said : "the word
was Tontheos, which means "a
god".
According
to your own system of translating you aught to have spelt this word 'God' a
second time with a
small 'g'
i.e. 'god', and not 'God' with a capital 'G'; in other words
Tontheos
is rendered "a god". Both of these,
"god" or "a
god" are correct.
I told the
Reverend: "But in 2 Corinthians 4:4 you have dishonestly reversed your system by
using a small 'g'
when
spelling 'God' "(and the devil is) the god of this world." The Greek word for
"the god" is Hotheos the
same as in
John 1:1. "Why have you not been consistent in your translations ?" "If Paul was
inspired to write
hotheos
the God for the Devil, why don't you use that capital 'G'?"
And in the
Old Testament, the Lord said unto Moses: "See, I have made thee a
god to Pharoah" (Exodus 7:1).
"Why do you
use a small 'g' for 'God' when referring to Moses instead of a capital 'G' as
you do for a mere
word 'Word'
- "and the Word was God."?
"Why do you
do this? Why do you play fast and loose with the Word of God?" I asked the
reverend. He said,
"I didn't
do it." I said, "I know, but I am talking about the vested interests of
Christianity, who are hell-bent to
deify
Christ, by using capital letters here and small letters there, to
deceive the unwary masses who think
that every letter, every comma and full stop and the capital and small letters
were dictated by God
(Capital
'G' here!)."
Chapter Eight : What is Left
Three Topics
I
t can
hardly be expected in a small publication of this nature that one can deal with
all the references about
Jesus,
peace and blessings be upon him, interspersed throughout the fifteen different
chapters of the Holy
Quran. What
we can do is to give a quick glance to the index page reproduced from the Quran
earlier in this
letter.
Here we
find three significant topics, not dealt with yet in our discussion:
1 Not
crucified, (4:157).
2 Message
and miracles,(5:113, 19:30-33).
3
Prophesied Ahmed, (61:6).
Regarding
the first topic, "not crucified", I had written a booklet under the heading "Was
Christ Crucified?"
some twenty
years ago. The book is presently out of print, and further, it needs updating,
for much water has
passed
under the bridge since it first saw the light of day.
As regards
the third topic mentioned above, "Prophesied Ahmed", I propose to write a
booklet under the title
"Muhammed,
salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the
Natural Successor to Christ" after I have completed "Was
Christ
Crucified?", I hope to complete both these projects soon,
Insha Allah! (Arabic: "By the will of Allah").
The Way to Salvation
We are now
left with Topic No. 2, "Message and miracles". The message of Jesus was as
simple and straight
forward as
that of all his predecessors as well as that of his successor Muhammed,
salla Allah u alihi wa
sallam, namely
"Believe in God and keep His Commandments". For the God who
inspired His
Messengers,
is an unvarying God and He is
consistent: He is not the "author of confusion" (1
Corinthian14:33).
A law
abiding Jew comes to Jesus seeking eternal life or salvation In the words of
Matthew :
A law
abiding Jew comes to Jesus seeking eternal life or salvation. In the words of
Matthew:
"And
behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do,
that I may have eternal
life?
And he said
unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is God: but
if thou wilt enter
into life,
keep the commandments." (Matthew 19:16-17)
You will
agree, that if you or I were that Jew, we would infer from these words that,
according to Jesus, peace
and
blessings be upon him, salvation was guaranteed, provided we kept the
commandments without the
shedding of
any innocent blood. Unless, of course Jesus was speaking with tongue in cheek;
knowing full well
that his
own "forthcoming redemptive sacrifice", his "vicarious atonement" (?) for the
sins of mankind, was not
many days
hence.
Why would
Jesus give him the impossible solution of keeping
the Law (as the Christian alleges) when an
easier way
was in the offing? Or did he not know what was going to happen, that he was to
be crucified ? Was
there not a
contract between Father and Son, before the worlds began, for his redeeming
blood to be shed?
Had he lost
his memory? No! There was no such fairy tale agreement as far as Jesus was
concerned. He knew
that there
is only one way to God, and that is, as Jesus said, "keep the
Commandments"!
Miracles, What They Prove
Regarding
his miracles: the Holy Quran does not go into any detail about blind Bartimus or
about Lazarus or
any other
miracle, except that he (Jesus) defended his mother as an infant in his mother's
arms. The Muslim has
no
hesitation about accepting the most wondrous of his miracles - even that of
reviving the dead. But that does
not make
Jesus a "God" or the begotten "Son of God" as understood by the Christian.
Miracles do
not prove even prophethood, or whether a man is true or false. Jesus himself
said:
"For there
shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and
wonders; insomuch that,
if it were
possible, they shall deceive the very elect."(Matthew 24:24)
If false
prophets and false Christs can perform miraculous feats, then these wonders or
miracles do not prove
even the
geniuses or otherwise, of a prophet.
John the
Baptist, according to Jesus, was the greatest of the Israelite prophets. Greater
than Moses, David,
Solomon,
Isaiah and all, not excluding himself: in his own words:
"Verily I
say unto you, among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater
than John the
Baptist..."
(Matthew 11:11)
1 Not
excluding Jesus: because, was he not born of a woman - Mary?
2 The
Baptist, greater than "all", yet he performed not a single miracle! Miracles are
no standards of
judging
truth and falsehood.
But in his
childishness, the might Christian insists that Jesus is God because he gave life
back to the dead. Will
reviving
the dead make others God too? This perplexes him, because he has mentally
blocked himself from the
miracles of
others who outshine Jesus in his own Bible. For example, according to his false
standard:
M i h J b h
lif b ki d d i k d di f h l
Moses is
greater than Jesus because he put life back into a dead stick and transmuted it
from the plant
kingdom to
the animal kingdom by making it into a serpent (Exodus 7:10).
Elisha is
greater than Jesus because the bones of Elisha brought a man back to life merely
by coming
into
contact with the corpse (2 Kings 13:21).
Need I
illustrate to you a catalogue of miracles? But the sickness persists - "it was
God working miracles
through His
prophets but Jesus performed them of his own power." Where did Jesus get all his
power from?
Ask Jesus,
and he will tell us:
Power not His Own
"...All
power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Matthew
28:18)
"...I cast
out devils by the Spirit of God then the kingdom of
God is come unto you." (Matthew 12:28)
"I can of
mine own self do nothing " (John 5:30)
"I with the finger of God cast out devils" (Luke
1 1:20)
Borrowed Power
The "power"
as he says is not his, "it is given unto me". Given by whom? By God, of course!
Every action,
every word
he attributes to God.
Lazarus
But since
so much is made of Jesus' mightiest miracle of reviving Lazarus from the dead,
we will analyze the
episode as
recorded in John's Gospel. It is astonishing that none of the other Gospel
writers mention Lazarus in
any
context. However, the story is that Lazarus was very sick, his sisters Mary and
Martha had made frantic
calls for
Jesus to come and cure his sickness but he arrived too late, actually four days
after his demise.
He Groaned
Mary wails
to Jesus that had he arrived in time, perhaps her brother would not have died;
meaning that if he
could heal
other peoples' sicknesses, why would he not have healed her brother, a dear
friend of his. Jesus says
that "even
now if ye have faith, ye shall see the glory of god." The condition was that
they should have faith.
Didn't he
say that faith could move mountains?
He asks to
be taken to the tomb. On the way, "he groaned in the spirit". He was not
mumbling; he was pouring
out his
heart and praying to God. But while he sobbed so bitterly his words were not
audible enough for
people
around him to understand. Hence the words "he groaned". On reaching the grave,
Jesus "groaned"
again;
perhaps, even more earnestly and God heard his groaning (his prayer), and Jesus
received the assurance
that God
will fulfill his request. Now, Jesus could rest assured and command that the
stone which was barring
the tomb,
be removed so that Lazarus could come back from the dead. Without that assurance
from God, Jesus
would have
made a fool of himself.
Avoiding Misunderstanding
Mary thinks
of the stink because her brother had been dead for four days! But Jesus was
confident and the
stone was
removed. Then he looked up towards heaven and said:
"Father, I
thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but
because of the
people
which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me." (John
11:41-42)
What is all
this, play - acting? Why all the drama? Because he know that these superstitious
and credulous
people will
misunderstand the source of the miracle. They might take him for "God". Giving
life to the dead is
the
prerogative of God alone. To make doubly sure, that his people do not
misunderstand, he speaks out loudly
that the
"groaning" was actually his crying to God Almighty for help. The prayer was
incoherent as far as the
bystanders
could discern, but the Father in heaven had accepted his prayer, viz. "thou hast
heard me".
Furthermore, he says, "thou hearest me always"; in other words, every miracle
wrought by him was an answer
by God
Almighty to his prayer. The Jews of his day understood the position well, and
they "glorified God", as
Matthew
tells us of another occasion when the Jews exclaimed "for giving such power unto
men" (Matt. 9:8).
In fact,
Jesus gives his reason for speaking loudly. He says, "that they may believe that
thou has sent me." One
who is sent
is a messenger, and if he be sent by God, then he is a Messenger of God i.e. Rasulullah. Jesus is
referred to
in the Quran asRasulullah ("Messenger of
Allah").
Alas, this
attempt by Jesus to prevent any misunderstanding, as to who really performed the
miracle, and that
he was in
fact only a messenger of God, failed. Christians will not even accept the
unambiguous disavowal of
Jesus, nor
the testimony of Peter, the "Rock" upon which Jesus was supposed to build his
Church. Peter truly
testified:
"Ye men of
Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, A man
approved of God among you by miracles and
wonders and
signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye
yourselves also know. " (Acts 2:22)
Case Not Hopeless
This very
same message is repeated by God Almighty in the Holy Quran, following the
annunciation. In verse
49 of
chapter 3, Allah makes it clear that every sign or wonder that Jesus performed
was "By Allah's leave,"
by God's
permission. Jesus says so, Peter says so and God says so; but the stubborn
controversialist will not
listen:
prejudice, superstition and credulity die hard. Our duty is simply to deliver
the Message, loud and clear,
the rest we
leave to God. The case is not altogether hopeless for Allah tells us in His Holy
Book:
"And among
them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors."
(3:110)
"Among
them", meaning among the Jews and the Christians, there are two types of people;
the one group
described
as people of faith to whom this book is addressed, and the other as rebellious
transgressors. We must
also find
ways and means of getting at them. Our literature is eminently suited to cater
for all. Pass them on to
your non -
Muslim friends after reading.
Open the
Holy Quran and make your Christian friends and acquaintances to read the verses
discussed in this
book. Then
we can truly conclude:
"Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary:
(it is) a statement of truth, about which
they (vainly) dispute.
"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah
(God) that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him!
when He determines a matter, He only says to it,
'Be', and it is.
"Verily Allah is my Lord and your Lord:
Him therefore serve ye: this is a Way that is straight."
(19:34-36)
This is an
authorized modification of the original English text.