The Basis of Islamic Belief
By
Dr. Gary Miller
About
the Author
Gary
Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar) shows how we can establish true faith by setting
standards of truth. He illustrates a simple but effective method of
finding out the right direction in our search for truth.
G.R. Miller is a mathematician and a theologian. He was active in
Christian missionary work at a particular point of his life but he soon
began to discover many inconsistencies in the Bible. In 1978, he happened
to read the Qur'an expecting that it, too, would contain a mixture of
truth and falsehood.
He discovered to his amazement that the message of the Qur'an was
precisely the same as the essence of truth that he had distilled from the
Bible. He became a Muslim and since then has been active in giving public
presentations on Islam including radio and television appearances. He is
also the author of several articles and publications about Islam.
Dilemma
of Applying Reason
Setting
Standards
Sign
of God
The
Big Bang Theory
Taking
a Stand
The
Expanding Heavens
The
City of
Iram
The
Smallest Matter
Forgiveness
Predictions
Evidence
of Divine Origin
The
Two Phenomena
Use
and Mention of Words
Jesus
and Adam
Good
and Evil
Occurrence
of Words
Perfect
Balance of Words
Best
Explanation
Origin
of the Qur'an
Challenge
Attributing
it to the Devil
A
Different Story
House
Cleaning
A
Prophet Like Moses
Paraclete
Followers
of Jesus
Dilemma
of Applying Reason
Almost
all of us have been faced with the questioning of a child by repeating one
word over and over. He can be very frustrating to us as he asks
"Why?" If you put a knife beyond his reach, he wants to know,
"Why?" When you explain it is sharp, he asks "Why?"
And so you explain, "in order to cut fruit," and he asks,
"Why?" And so it goes. It illustrates the dilemma of applying
reason. What we have to do when we apply reason is first to set standards
of proof. We decide for ourselves, "What will be satisfied with if I
find such and such and so and so that constitutes for me a final
proof?". We have to decide on that first. What happens though, is
that on the really important issues, the philosophical matters, thinkers
set standards of proof and they take a look at their subjects and
eventually they may arrive at their standards. They may arrive at the
point which they say would constitute a proof. But then they ask for a
proof of the proof.
Setting
Standards
The
key to avoiding an endless dissatisfaction is to satisfy ourselves about
standards first; to satisfy ourselves that such and such are a list of
criteria that constitute proof, satisfying proof, and then we test the
subjects that we examine. In particular I will apply this to the Qur'an.
Ask a thoughtful Christian why he is a Christian, and he will usually
reply, "The miracle of the Resurrection." The basis for his
belief being that about two thousand years ago a man died and he was
raised from the dead. That is his miracle, his "touchstone",
because all else depends on that. Ask a Muslim, "Well, what is your
miracle? Why are you a Muslim? Where is your miracle?" and the Muslim
can go over and take his miracle off the shelf and hand it over to you
because his miracle is still with us today. It is the Qur'an; it is his
"touchstone".
Sign
of God
While
all the prophets have their signs, Moses had the competition with the
magicians and the Pharaoh, Jesus healed the sick and raised the dead and
so on, one Sign was given to the last of the prophets. According to the
Muslims, this is the Qur'an. And this one Sign is still with us. Does not
that after all seem fair, that if prophethood is to end that the last
prophet should bring something that stays with us so that, in fact, a
Muslim who takes his religion seriously suffers no disadvantage to Muslims
who lived fourteen centuries ago? Those people who kept company with the
Prophet had access to no more of the necessary information than we have
today. They had the Qur'an. That was the sign for them. It is still a sign
to us today, the same miracle. Well, let us test the Qur'an. Suppose that
if I say to a man, "I know your father." Probably he is going to
examine the situation and see if it seems likely that I have met his
father. If he is not convinced, he will start asking me questions like:
"You know my father, you say, is he a tall man? Does he have curly
hair? Does he wear glasses?," and so on. If 1 keep giving him the
right answers to all these questions, pretty soon he is going to be
convinced. "Well, I guess this man did meet my father like he
said." You see the method.
The
Big Bang Theory
Here
in the Qur'an we have a book which claims that its author is one who was
present at the beginning of the universe, at the beginning of life. So, we
have a right to address that author and say, "Well, tell me something
prove to me that you were there when the world began, when life
began." The Qur'an gives us an interesting statement. It reads:
Have
not the disbelievers seen that the Heavens and the Earth were one piece
and we parted them? And We made every living thing from water. Will they
not then believe? (
21:30
).
There
are three key points here. First of all, it is the disbelievers who are
mentioned as being those who would see that the heavens and the earth were
one piece and then parted and would see that all life came to be made from
water. As it happens, the universally accepted theory of the origin of the
universe is now the Big Bang theory. It maintains that at one time all of
the heavens and the earth were one piece, the monoblock as it is called.
At a particular point in time, this "monoblock" burst and it
continues to expand. This gives us the universe we have today. This was a
recent discovery, a recent comfirmation.
The
Nobel prize in Physics was awarded only a few years ago to those who
confirmed the Big Bang origin of the universe. It was only about two
hundred years ago that Leeuwenhoek and others perfected the microscope and
discovered for the first time that living cells are composed of about
eighty percent water. Those Nobel prize winners and the Dutchman who
invented the microscope were not Muslims. And yet they confirmed the vital
statement that at one time the universe was one piece, that life was made
from water, just as this verse says:
"Have
not the disbelievers seen that the heavens and the earth were one piece
and We parted them? And We made every living thing from water. Will They
not then believe?" (
21:30
).
Well,
ths sounds like an answer to the question we started with when we ask the
author. "Tell me something that shows me you were present when the
universe began, when life began?"
Taking
a Stand
Everyone
must be committed to something. You have to put your foot down some place.
It is impossible to be neutral at all times. There has to be a point of
reference in the life of any thinking individual. You have to take a stand
somewhere. The question, of course, is to put your foot down in the right
place. Since there is no such thing as a proof of a proof of a proof and
so on, in order to find the right place to put one"s foot down, to
take a stand, we have to search and find that place and it is by a method
that I hope to illustrate here.
It
is a question of finding a point of convergence. You see, we search for
truth in many places and we begin to know that we are succeeding in
finding the truth if all our different paths start to converge; they start
to come together at the same point.
If
we are examining a book, looking for evidence of divine origin, and we are
led to Islam, this is one path. If at the same time, we are examining the
words of all those who were called prophets and we find ourselves led to
Islam, we have a firmly grounded basis for belief We started looking for
truth in two different places and found ourselves going down the path
headed for the same destination.
No
one ever proves all things. We have to stop at some point being satisfied
with our standards as I have mentioned earlier. The point is, in order to
take a stand and to be sure it is in the right place, we want to examine
all the evidence around us and see where does it lead us and anticipate
this point of convergence; to say it looks like all things are pointing to
this place. We go to that place and then look at the data around us to see
if it fits into place. Does it now make sense? Are we standing is on right
place?
The
Expanding Heavens
Let
me first show more of our examination of the Qur'an, and then an
examination of some words of prophets to find this point of convergence.
In chapter fifty one, verse forty seven, it is mentioned that the heavens
are expanding. As I mentioned earlier, this is in connection with the
"Big Bang" origin of the universe, as it is usually called, and
it was in 1973 that the Nobel prize was awarded to three men who were
confirming that, after all, the universe is expanding.
The
comments of Muslims over the centuries on this verse which speaks of the
heavens doing exactly that is very interesting. The wisest among them had
stated that the words are very dear, that the heavens are expanding, but
they could not imagine how that could be so. But they were content to
leave the words as they were, to say: "Allah knows best."
The
City of Iram
The
Qur'an mentions a city by the name of Iram (89:7). The city of
Iram
has been unknown to
history, so unknown that even some Muslim commentators, out of
embarrassment or feeling apologetic for their religion, have commented on
this mention of the city in the Qur'an as being perhaps figurative, that
Iram was possibly a man and not a city.
In
1973 the excavation in
Syria
at the site of the
ancient city of
Eblus
uncovered the largest
collection of cuneiform writings on clay tablets ever assembled. In fact,
the library discovered in Eblus contains more day tablets that are more
than four thousand years old than all the other tablets combined from all
the other sites.
Interestingly
enough, you will find the details in the National Geographic of December
1978 (pp.730- , esp. p.736) which confirms that in those tablets the city
of
Iram
is mentioned. The
people of Eblus used to do business with the people of Iram. So here in
1973, comes confirmation of the fact that, after all, there really was an
ancient city by that name, wherever it was. How did it find its way into
the Qur'an, we might ask?
Those
Muslims who may have offered their comments, trying to explain away this
reference that they were uncomfortable with, were outsmarted by the author
of the Qur'an. They are those who would outsmart the author of the Qur'an
They would attempt it. Primarily, their activity would involve trying to
produce the evidence that the author of this book had a primitive
understanding of the world around us.
The
Smallest Matter
For
example, there is a word which is translated today usually in Arabic as
zarrah. This is usually translated as "atom" and it is usually
thought of in Arabic as being the smallest item available at one time.
Perhaps the Arabs thought it was an ant or a grain of dust. Today the word
is usually translated as "atom".
Those
who would outsmart the author of the Qur'an have insisted that, well, the
atom is not after all the smallest piece of matter because in this century
it has been discovered that even the atom is made of still smaller pieces
of matter. Is it then possible to outsmart the author who chose to use
this word? Well, there is an interesting verse, in chapter ten, verse
sixty one, which speaks of items the size of a zarrah, (atom) or smaller.
There is no possibility that on this subject someone is going to say a new
discovery has outdated the words of the Qur'an on the issue of the size of
matter or the ultimate particles. The verse talks about items the size of
a zarrah (atom) or smaller.
Forgiveness
Speaking
of outsmarting the author of the Qur'an, the Islamic point of view is that
when a man embraces Islam, his past is forgiven from the very beginning.
This has been the invitation to Islam: come to Islam and all is forgiven
from the past.
But
consider this. There is only one enemy of Muhammad, peace be upon him, who
is mentioned by name in the Qur'an: one Abu Lahab. In a short chapter of
this book, he is condemned to punishment for his sins.
As
it happens, the man himself was alive for many years after this
revelation. He could therefore have finished Islam very easily. He needed
only to go to the Muslims to announce his conversion. They had in their
hands the revelation which said that this man is doomed to punishment. He
could have gone to the Muslims and say- "I accept Islam, am I
forgiven or not?"
He
could have confused them so much as to finish this small movement because
he would have been pointing out to them that they were now in confusion.
The policy was instant forgiveness of the past but their own revealed
scripture announced that he was not forgiven. As it was, Abu Lahab died
without accepting Islam.
Predictions
In
fact, the Qur'an confidently predicted a number of things only a few years
before they came to pass. The fall of the
Persian empire
, for example, was
predicted in spite of the fact that it had just suffered a serious
military reverse. The evidence was all to the contrary. But in the chapter
entitled Rom, the fall of the
Persian empire
who were recently
victors over the Romans was predicted.
When
all the Muslims in the world could meet in one room, the revelations were
already discussing their future successes. In confidence, they were
planning for the day when they would be in charge of the city where they
were forced at that time to hide for their very lives.
Evidence
of Divine Origin
Some
people may like to find any number of things in the Qur'an. But an honest
method in examining this book, looking for evidence of the Divine origin,
is to take things at their value, to look for things that are dear and to
look in those places where we are invited to look. Remember the passage
that I quoted earlier "Have not the disbelievers seen..." This a
common phrase of the Qur.an: "0 Man, Have you not seen." The
invitation is to examine the evidence in these places. We are doing the
sensible thing if we examine the words used to look for the doubted
meaning and to find evidence of the Divine origin. Each one of us is an
expert on something. One does not have to have a degree in a particular
subject to decide that now, "I can take my expertise to the Qur'an
and see what I can find." We all know something for sure from our own
experience and life. I heard a story, several years ago in
Toronto
, of a man who was
given the Qur'an to read. The man was a member of the merchant marines who
spent his life on the sea. When he read a verse in the Qur'an describing
the waves on the ocean, "waves within waves and the darkness
between," he was surprised because the description was just what he
knew the situation to be. When he returned the Qur'an to the man who gave
it to him to read, he asked him (because he was completely ignorant of the
origins of Islam): "This Muhammad, was he a sailor?" Well, of
course, he was quite surprised to know that the man spent his life in the
desert. So he had to ask himself. "From where did he get this
knowledge of what looks like on a stormy sea?"
We
all know something that we can be confident of, and if we can turn to the
Qur'an to read what it says about this subject, we are asking for
confirmation of our belief in the Divine origin of the book.
The
Two Phenomena
A
friend of mine from the
University
of
Toronto
, had the experience
of dealing with a man who was doing his doctorate in psychology. He chose
as his subject: "The Efficiency of Group Discussion".
He
suggested a number of criteria as to what constitutes an efficient
discussion. He graphed the process; that is, he achieved a measure of the
efficiency of all groups in their discussions according to an index by his
system. On his graph he indicated the progress made by the discussion
groups of various sizes.
The
interesting thing that happened which he did not expect to find when he
began his project was that, while there were some differences between the
size of any given group and how well they did in discussions, he was
surprised to find that groups of two were completely off his scale. In
other words, when two people sit down to discuss something, they were so
much more efficient than any other size of group that it went completely
off his scale of measurement.
When
my friend heard about this, something went on at the back of his mind. My
friend, being a Muslim, thought there was something familiar here about
this idea. The psychology researcher was not a Muslim. He was debating
with himself on changing the topic of his thesis. Should he call it "Ihe
Phenomenon of Two" or "The Two Phenomena"? He was so
surprised at his discovery.
Meanwhile,
my friend found that there is a verse in the Qur'an, and he found it for
himself on the same night, which speaks on discussions and the size of
groups and how efficient they are. And maybe we should not be surprised to
find that it is the groups that are two in numbers that do the best in
achieving results. The verse in the Qur'an reads, concerning discussion
groups, that when discussing the Qur'an one should sit alone and reflect
on its meaning or discuss it in groups of two.
Use
and Mention of Words
For
myself, as I said everyone knows something for sure or has an interest and
experience in life; my interest is in mathematics and logic. There is a
verse in the Qur'an which says:
"This
a scripture whose verses are perfected and then expounded." (11:1)
Which
tells me that there are no wasted words in the Qur'an; that each verse is
perfected and then it is explained. It could not be in a better form. One
could not use fewer words to say the same thing or if one uses more words
one would only be adding superfluous information.
This
directed my attention to a particular mathematical subject, a logical
subject, and I examined the Quran to see if I could find something of what
I knew to be the case.
A
revolution in logic has occurred in the last one hundred years, primarily
over the difference between use and mention of words. A structure of logic
seemed to be in danger of collapsing about a hundred years ago because it
came to the attention of the people who studied these matters that the
structure was not quite sound. The issue involved
"self-reference" and the use and the mention of words which I
will explain briefly.
Aristotle"s
law of the "excluded middle" was the statement that every
statement is either true or false. About a hundred years ago, somebody
pointed out that the law of the excluded middle is a statement and is
therefore not a law after all. It could just as well be false as well as
true.
This
was a tangled knot for the logicians to untie until they came to
understand the difference between the use and the mention of a word.
When
we use a word, we consider its meaning. When we mention a word we are
discussing the word itself. If I say
Toronto
is a large city, I
mean
Toronto
, that place, is a
large city. If I say
Toronto
has seven letters, I
am talking about the word "
Toronto
". In the first
case I used the word and in the second I mentioned the word. You see the
distinction.
Jesus
and Adam
Connecting
these ideas and the idea that the Qur'an is composed of verses that are
perfected and then expounded for us, consider the verse which says:
"The
likeness of Jesus before Allah is as the likeness of Adam." (
3:59
)
It
is very clear that what we have in this statement is an equation. This
verse goes on to explain how that is true because they both came under
unusual circumstances rather than having a mother and a father in the
usual human reproductive way. But more than that, 1 got to considering the
use of the mention of words.
The
words are used clearly enough. Jesus is like Adam and by Jesus and Adam,
we mean those two men. But what about the mention of the words? Was the
author aware of the fact that if we were considering the words as words in
themselves, this sentence also reads that "Jesus" is somehow
like "Adam". Well, they are not spelt with the same letters; how
can they be alike in this revelation? The only answer came to me fairly
quickly and I took a look at the index of the Qur'an.
The
index of the Qur'an has been made available only since 1945. This book was
the result of years of work by a man and his students who assembled a book
which lists every word in the Qur'an and where it can be found.
So,
when we look up the word Isa (Jesus), we find it in the Qur'an twenty-five
times. When we look up Adam, we find it in the Qur'an twenty-five times.
The point is that they are very much alike in this book. They are equated.
So, following up on this idea, I continued to examine the index looking
for every case where something was set up as an equation, where the
likeness of something was said to be the likeness of some other thing. And
in every case, it works. You have for example a verse which reads:
"The
likeness of those who reject our signs is as the likeness of the
dog." (7:176)
Well,
the phrase in Arabic for "the people who reject our signs" could
be found in the Qur'an exactly five times. And so is the Arabic word for
"the dog" (al-kalb). And there are several instances of exactly
the same occurrence.
It
was some months after I found this for myself that a friend of mine, who
is continuing this investigation with me, made a suggestion that there are
also some places in the Qur'an where one thing is said to be not like
another thing.
As
soon as he mentioned this up to me, we both went for the index and had a
quick look at several places where one thing is said to be not like
another thing and counted their occurrence in the Qur an. We were
surprised and maybe should not have been to find that, after all, they do
not match up. But an interesting thing does happen. For example, the
Qur'an makes it very clear in the verse that trade is not like interest.
The two words will be found six times for one and seven for the other. And
so it is in every other case.
When
one thing is said to be not like another, they occur for a difference of
one time. It would be five of one and four of the other, or seven of one
and eight of another.
Good
and Evil
There
is one interesting verse which, I felt, spoke directly to me from right
off the page. It mentions two words in Arabic, al-khabeeth (the evil), and
al-taib (the good). The verse reads:
"Say,
the evil and the good are not comparable, even though the abundance of
evil will surprise you. So be mindful of your duty to Allah, 0 Man of
understanding, that you may succeed." (5:100)
Well,
I had a look at those two words in Arabic, the evil and the good, and
found it in the Qur'an that they both occur seven times. Yet the verse
here is saying that they are not comparable. I should not expect to find
that they occur the same number of times. But what does the rest of this
verse say?
"The
evil and the good are not comparable. The abundance of the evil will
surprise you" and it did for there were too many of them. But it
continues:
"So
be mindful of your duty to Allah, 0 Man of
understanding, that you may succeed."
So
press on. Use your understanding and you will succeed. That is what the
verse said to me. Well, I found the answer in one verse further on where
it reads:
"Allah
separates the evil from the good. The evil He piles one on top of the
other, heaping them all together." (
8:37
)
Here
is the solution to the difficulty. While we have seven occurrences of al-khabeeth
(the evil) which matches up with the occurrences of al-taib (the good),
according to the principle of this verse, evil is separated from good and
is piled one on top of the other and heaped all together. We do not count
them as seven separate instances.
Occurrence
of Words
A
favourite difficulty, or supposed difficulty, which critics like to cite
or have cited in the past years concerning the Qur'an is that, apparently
to their thinking, the author of this book was ignorant because he advised
the Muslims to follow the lunar year instead of the solar year. The
critics say the author was unaware of the difference in the length of
years, that if one follows twelve lunar months one loses eleven days every
year.
The
author of the Qur'an was well aware of the distinction between the length
of the solar year and the lunar year. In chapter eighteen, verse
twenty-five it mentions three-hundred years and gives their equivalent as
three-hundred and nine years. As it happens, three-hundred solar years is
equal to three-hundred and nine lunar years.
Let
us go back to my original scheme of the occurrence of words in the Qur'an.
The Arabic word for "month", shahar, will be found twelve times
in the Qur'an. There are twelve months in a year. If we find twelve
months, how many days should we expect to find? The word in Arabic is yaum,
and as it happens you will find that the word occurs three-hundred and
sixty-five times in the Qur'an.
As
a matter of fact, the original issue which had me interested in looking up
the occurrence of months and days was this distinction between the solar
year and the lunar year. Well, for twenty-five centuries it has been known
that the relative positions of the sun, moon and earth coincide every
nineteen years. This was discovered by a Greek by the name of Meton, and
it is called the Metoniccycle. Knowing this, I looked again to the index
for the word "year", sanah, and found, sure enough, that it
occurs, in the Qur'an nineteen times.
Perfect
Balance of Words
Now,
what is the point of this perfect balance of words? For myself, it shows
the author was well aware of the distinction between using words and
mentioning words, a fine logical point. But more than that, it indicates
the preservation of this book.
After
giving a lecture on the subject of the Qur'an, I touched on some of these
subjects and a questionnaire from the audience afterwards said: "How
do we know we still have the original Qur'an. Maybe pieces of it have been
lost or extra parts been added?" I pointed out to him that we had
pretty well covered that point because since these items, the perfect
balance of words in the Qur'an, have come to light only in this
generation, anybody who would have lost the portion of the book, hidden
some of it or added some of their own would have been unaware of this
carefully hidden code in the book. They would have destroyed this perfect
balance.
It
is interesting to note too that, well, such a thing might be possible to
organise today by the use of a computer to coordinate all words so that
whatever thought you might have as to a meaning of a sentence or however
you might construe an equation out of a sentence, you could check for
yourself and the book will always have the balance of words.
If
that were possible today, if it were possible fourteen centuries ago, why
would it be done and then left hidden and never drawn to the attention of
those who first saw this book? Why it would be left with the hope of the
author who contrive this, that maybe in many centuries someone will
discover it and have a nice surprise? It is a scheme that does not make
sense.
Best
Explanation
We
are told in the Quran that no questionnaire will come to the Muslims with
the question for which a good answer has not been provided, and the best
explanation for whatever his question. This verse says:
"For
everything they say we are given something to go back to them and
reply." (25:33)
We
looked again to the index of the Qur'an and we found that the word, qalu
(they say), is found three-hundred and thirty-two times. Now, what would
be the natural counterpart? The Arabic word, qul, which is the command
"say" and you will find at the index it also occurs
three-hundred and thirty-two times.
Origin
of the Qur'an
An
interesting feature of the Qur'an is that it replies to its critics as to
its origin. That is, no one has yet come up with a suggestion as to where
this book came from which is not commented on within the book itself.
In
fact, the new Catholic Encyclopedia, under the heading Quran, mentions
that over the centuries there had been many theories as to where this book
came from. Their conclusion: today, no sensible person believes any of
these theories. This leaves the Christians in some difficulty. You see,
all the theories suggested so far, according to this encyclopedia, are not
really acceptable to anyone sensible today. They are too fantastic.
Where
did the book come from? Those who have not really examined the Qur'an
usually dismissed it as being, as they say, a collection of proverbs or
aphorisms, sayings that one man used to announce from time to time. They
imagined that there was a man who, from time to time during the day, will
think of some witty little sayings and spit it out and those around him
will quickly write it down and eventually these were all collected and
became the Qur'an.
Those
who read the Qur'an will find that it is not anything like that at all.
The collection of things said by the Prophet is the subject and the
content of the Hadith. But the subjects and contents of the Qur'an are all
in a form of a composition and explanation. I cite as an example the
chapter, Yusuf, which is an entire story in great detail about one
particular episode or one portion of the life of one man. It is a
composition.
It
is for this reason that virtually all those who have actually examined the
Qur'an usually refer to it as being the product of the authorship as
attributed to Muhammad and his "co-adjudicators". These were
supposed to be people who would sit, with him and composed the Qur'an. You
see, they imagined that the Qur'an was composed by a committee.
They
acknowledged that there was too much information and it was too well
composed for one man to have assembled. So, they imagined that a committee
of men used to meet regularly, brought their various sources of
information, composed something and then handed to this man and told him,
"Go to the people tomorrow, this is your revelation." In other
words, it was a fraud concocted by a group of people. But what do we know
about fraud? The Qur'an reminds us as it says:
"Say,
now the truth has come, and falsehood neither invents anything nor
restores anything." (34:49).
It
is hard to translate it into English precisely, but what this verse is
telling us is that falsehood is not the source of a new thing. A new and
truthful thing cannot come from falsehood and falsehood does not restore,
to our minds, the facts. Truth is in agreement with facts. Falsehood is
something else. So, falsehood is empty. If something is born in fraud, it
will never bring us new information. It will never endure; it will only
collapse over a period of time.
Challenge
Another
interesting verse is a challenge which is addressed to those
non-believers. It reads:
"Have
they not considered the Qur'an, if it came, other than Allah, surely they
will find in it many inconsistencies." (4:82)
Here
is a challenge to the reader. If you think you have an explanation where
this book came from, have another look at the book. Surely you will be
able to uncover some inconsistencies to support your case.
Imagine
a student submitting a term paper or a final exam and then writing at the
bottom of the page a note to his teacher "You will find no mistakes
in this paper. There are no mistakes on this exam." Can you imagine
the teacher letting that rest? The teacher would probably not sleep until
uncovering some inconsistency after a challenge like that. It is not the
way human beings speak. They do not offer challenges like that. But here
we have it in the Qur'an, a direct challenge saying. "If you have a
better idea as to where this book came from, here"s all you need to
do. Find some inconsistencies."
There
are critics who make the attempt, critics who try to say the Qur'an
contains inconsistencies. A publication that came to my attention recently
suggested that the Quran was contradictory on the subject of marriage,
because in one place, it says: "Don"t marry more than one wife
unless you can provide for them all," and in another place it says:
"Don"t marry more than four." They see this as a
contradiction. What they have is a counter-distinction. In one case, the
qualification for marrying more than one has been given. In the other
case, a limitation on how many may be married is given. There is no
contradiction.
Critics
are too quick to grab hold of something, give it an interpretation, and
then offer it as an excuse to escape the reality of this document.
For
critics who would attack the Qur'an and insist it contains mistakes, we
can use the same method as in our reply to Christians who claim that Jesus
is on record as claiming to be equal to God. Remember the three categories
of evidence offered. The evidence offered was insufficient, ambiguous or
impossible.
You
see, if someone cites a verse from the Qur'an, trying to show that it is a
mistake, we only need to show that the verse cited is insufficient to
establish that there is a mistake or we need to show that the verse cited
has other meanings than the one given by the critic or we can demonstrate
that the verse cited cannot possibly have the interpretation which the
critic is giving it. It will always fall into one of these three
categories.
Attributing
to the Devil
I
had the experience, on one occasion, describing some of the contents in
the Qur'an to a man who did not know the book I was talking about. He sat
next to me, with the cover turned over. I just told him about the book,
what it contained and told him it was not the Bible. His conclusion was,
the book was miraculous. This man was a minister in a Christian Church. He
said, "Yes, that book could not possibly have originated with the man
and therefore it must come from the devil, because it's not the
Bible."
The
Qur'an comments on this suggestion in chapter twenty-six, verse
two-hundred and elevm as to those who would suggest that the book came
from the devil. It points out that it does not quite suit him, does it? Is
this how the devil misleads people? He tells them, worship none but God,
he insists that they fast, that they practice charity. Is this how the
devil misleads people?
Compare
the attitude of someone like this, to the attitude of the Jews who knew
Jesus and opposed him until the very end. There is an episode reported in
the Bible where Jesus raised a man from the dead, one Lazarus, who had
been dead for four days. When Lazarus came out of the tomb, alive again,
those Jews who were watching what did they do? Did they suddenly say that
this man is a true prophet and become believers? No, the Bible says they
immediately discussed among themselves that "since this man is
working on his signs soon everyone will believe in him. We"ve got to
find a way to kill him," and they attributed his miraculous powers to
the devil. He raised that man by the power of the devil.
Now,
the Christians who read that episode will feel very sorry for those Jews
who had clear evidence right before their very eyes and attributed the
miracles to the devil. Does it not appear that they may be doing the same
thing when we illustrate what we have in the Qur'an and their final excuse
is only. "It originated with the devil."
A
Different Story
There
are those who insist that the Qur'an was copied, that it originated in
Christian and Jewish sources. As a matter of fact, a book published in
recent years called Worshipping the Wrong God has stated, as though it
were a fact, that after the first revelation of the Qur'an came to
Muhammad, peace be upon him, that his wife died and so he quickly married
a Jew and a Christian, and this is where he drew the rest of his sources
for his book.
Well,
they have the facts partly right. It was ten years after the first
revelation of the Qur'an that his wife died, and it was another ten years
after that when the Qur'an was virtually completed that he married a Jew
and a Christian.
Did
he copy from Jewish and Christian sources? In the Qur'an, the ruler of
Egypt
who opposed Moses is
known as Fir'aun, not Pharaoh. The Jews and Christians have always said
"Pharaoh". It is easy for an Arab to say "Pharaoh".
But in the Qur'an, it is Fir'aun, with an "n". Why? Surely the
Jews and the Christians who surrounded the Muslim community must have
teased them about that and said: "You"ve got the word wrong.
It"s "Pharaoh" and not Fir'aun." But they insisted on
it and it continues that way in the Qur'an, Fir'aun.
As
it happens, the historical writings of Herodotus, the Greek historian,
e)dst to this day, and Herodotus conunents on the ruler of
Egypt
, being in his day and
in the centuries before him, one man who went by the title of Fir'aun.
Did
the book copy from the Christian sources? The Qur'an insists that Jesus
was not crucified, that this was only an illusion, but that the Jews who
thought they crucified Jesus were mistaken because it was not really so.
Christians would have no part of that. As it happens, the idea that Jesus
was not really crucified is really very ancient and can be traced back to
the first century. But Christians who believed that were eliminated as
heretics within the first two-hundred years after the time of Jesus and
they were not teachin this doctrine anywhere around the
Arabian Peninsula
fourteen centuries
ago.
Could
the author of the Qur'an have been copying from Christian sources when he
says that Jesus spoke to man as a babe (
3:46
) and in later life?
The Arabic word used indicates that he was still speaking to man and
teaching to them in his forties. The Christians have always maintained
that Jesus was gone by the time he was thirty-three. It indicates that
there could have been no copying. In fad, a man would have to be stubborn
and insists on the points as explained in the Qur'an in the face of
Christian opposition who would have said: "No! No! It wasn"t
like that. We tell the story differently."
House
Cleaning
Now
we go to the words of the prophets themselves, which represent another
path that leads to Islam. In the Persian scriptures, which have been
around for thousands of years, we read:
"When
the Persians should sink so low in morality, a man will be born in
Arabia
whose followers will
upset their throne, religion and everything. The mighty stiff-necked ones
will be overpowered. The house which was built and in which many idols
have been placed will be purged of idols and people will say their prayers
facing towards it. His followers will capture the towns of the Farsi,
Entaus and
Balkh
, and other big places
round about. People will embroil with one another. The wise men of
Persia
and others will join
his followers." (Desature no.14)
The
Muslims recognise this very quickly because the Ka"abah, the building
which all Muslims face in prayers everyday, was at one time filled with
idols and it was part of the mission of Muhammad, peace be upon him, to
purge the house of idols. They were destroyed and the house sits there
cleansed of idols till today. It was in the next generation, after the
time of the Prophet that the wise men of
Persia
and others did join
his followers.
A
Prophet Like Moses
In
the Bible, in Deuteronomy chapter eighteen, we have the words of Moses who
reports that God told him that He would raise up a prophet, from among the
brothers of the Israelites, like Moses.
Christians
wish to apply this to Jesus, to say he was the prophet like Moses. It is
uncomfortable for them to recognise, however, that Jesus was not very much
like Moses and Jesus had no father, no wife, no children; he did not die
of old age, and he did not lead a nation; all these things Moses had or
did. But they say, well, Jesus will return; he will return as a victorious
person, and so he will be more like Moses. Do they really expect he will
return to also acquire a father and a wife and children and then die of
old age? Not usually. Moreover, Jesus was an Israelite. The passage of
scripture says that this prophet that was foretold would be raised up
among the brothers of the Israelites, not from the Israelites.
In
the third chapter of Acts, the disciple Peter speaks to a crowd of people
and explains that Jesus has been taken up and he is in heaven. He will
remain in Heaven and he cannot return until all the things that were
promised by God come to pass. So what are we still waiting for, does he
tell the crowd? He quotes this very saying of Moses, saying.
"For
God will raise up a prophet from among the brothers of the Israelites like
Moses..."
The
point is very clear. Christians like to see this prophet as being Jesus.
But read carefully Acts chapter three, what it says is that Jesus awaits a
return. He cannot return until the fulfilment of this prophecy, that
another prophet has to come. Jesus spoke of it himself and the words
survived, just barely, but they survived in the Bible. Jesus spoke of God
sending another "Paraclete".
Paraclete
There
is a lot of argument over the meaning of this word "Paraclete".
For now we can leave that aside. What is a "Paraclete"? It does
not matter. The first letter of John shows that Jesus was a "Paraclete".
He is called a "Paraclete" and we have Jesus promising another
"Paraclete" is going to be sent.
We
lose a lot by this word "another" in English because it is
ambiguous. If someone's car breaks down, and it is a Toyota, and I say,
"I'II go and get you another car," maybe I mean, "I'II go
and get you another Toyota because this one you have is broken," or
maybe I mean, "Forget Toyota, they're no good; I'II go and get you a
Datsun." It is an ambiguous word.
But
the Greeks had a word for it. When they meant "another" of the
same kind, they said aloes. When they meant another of a different kind,
they said heteroes. The important thing here is that, when Jesus, who was
himself a Paraclete, said "God will send you another Paraclete"
he used the word aloes, not heteroes.
Christians
want to say that this other "Paraclete" that has been sent was
different from Jesus. It was not a man, it was a spirit. What Jesus said
was: "God will send you another one like me, another man."
Muslims believe that Muhammad is the fulfilment of this prophecy by Jesus.
The Qur'an says that this man is mentioned in the scriptures of the Jews
and the Christians (see 7:157).
Christians
came to expect the return of Jesus because of a Jewish misunderstanding.
"Messiah" and "Son of Man" have been given special
significance by the Jews, even though many people were called by this same
name as in the Bible. The Jews came to expect a victorious leader. When
Jesus did not turn out to be quite what many expected, they hatched the
idea that he would return some day and fulfill all these prophecies.
Followers
of Jesus
Suppose
that someone observed Jesus two-thousand years ago, and he left this
planet, or he went to sleep for two-thousand years and returned today to
look for the followers of Jesus, who would he find? Who would he recognise?
Christians? I conclude with just this food for thought: the Bible says
very clearly that Jesus used to fast. Do Christians fast? Muslims fast; it
is obligatory one month every year. The Bible says that Jesus prayed by
touching his forehead to the ground. Do Christians pray in this manner?
Muslims do. It is characteristic of their prayer and no one on earth is
probably ignorant of that fact.
According
to Jesus, he told his disciples to greet one another with the expression,
"Peace be with you." Do the Christians do that? Muslims do,
universally, whether they speak Arabic or not. The greeting for one to
another is Assalamu'alaikum (peace be with you).
The
brother of Jesus in the Book of James, stated that no man should suggest
what he is about to do or highlight his plans for the next few days in
anyway without adding the phrase "if God wills." Do not say
"I will go here and there, do this and that" without adding the
phrase "if God wills." Do Christians do that? Muslims do,
whether they speak Arabic or not. If they so much as suggest they are
going downtown to pick up some groceries, they will add, Insha-Allah,
which in Arabic means, "If God wills."
These
conclude my thoughts on this subject. May Allah guide us always closer to
the truth.
|
