The debate continues to rage between Christianity on the one hand and Islam on the other.  Charges upon charges are leveled between the two groups, hoping to convince each other of the superiority of their respective religious positions.

Due to this, many Muslims have taken up the pen in the attempt to disprove the divine inspiration of the Bible by exposing the apparent contradictions contained therein. Volumes of books have been written on this very subject, hoping to demonstrate the fact that the Bible cannot be the inerrant word of God.

Although the charges leveled against the Bible have been refuted time and again, Muslims continue to consistently present these same arguments.  In this study we will not be dealing with the charges presented by Muslims against Christianity, but will deal specifically with the contradictions and inconsistencies contained within the Quranic revelation.

The object in doing so is to show Muslims the futility in presenting charges against the Bible which only hinders the Islamic position, since the very same accusations can be used against Muslims to disprove the Quran, Muhammad and Islam. The Quran, Hadith and Islamic expositors will be quoted at length here to emphasize the point more clearly that the Quran does contain contradictions, fables and historical inaccuracies within its pages.  (At the conclusion of our study we will present several book titles that deal primarily with answering the alleged contradictions presented against the Bible by both the secular and religious communities.)

CONTRADICTIONS

Contradiction 1

The length of a day

Q. 22:47:

“And surely a day with your Lord is a thousand years of your counting.”

This passage contradicts Q. 70:4:

“To Him the angels and the Spirit mount up in a day whereof the measure is fifty thousand years.”

Ibn Abbas, considered the premiere Islamic interpreter, was incapable of reconciling these passages together:

Abu Ubaid said “A certain man asked Ibn Abbas about a day whose measure was 50,000 years to which he answered: “‘They were two days which Allah has mentioned in His Book. Allah alone knows what they are.  I do not know what they are, and I am afraid to say about them that which is not according to my knowledge.’”

Ibn Abu Mulaika stated: “I struck the camel till I entered upon Said ibn Al-Musayyab. He was asked about this (matter), but he knew not what to say. Therefore I said to him: ‘Should I not tell what I heard Ibn Abbas say?’ And I told him so Ibn Musayyab said to the inquirer: ‘Behold Ibn Abbas, who is more knowledgeable than me avoided to speak about it.’” (1: pt. 5, pp. 215, 216; citing Al-Qurtubi and Al-Razi)

Contradiction 2

The Day of Judgement

The Quran indicates that human beings will be questioned on the day of reckoning:

“So We shall question those unto whom message was sent, and We shall question the envoy.” S. 7:6 

“And halt them, to be questioned.” S. 37:24

Yet Q. 55:39 contradicts these passages:

“On that day none will be questioned about his sin, neither man nor jinn.”

Contradiction 3

The creation of the Heavens and Earth

Q. 41:9-12:

“Say: Is it that ye deny Him who created the earth in two days… and bestowed blessings on the earth and measured there in all things to give them nourishment in due proportion in four days… Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been a smoke: He said to it and to the earth: ‘Come ye together willingly or unwillingly’… so He completed them as seven firmaments in two days.”

These verses imply that God completed the heavens and the earth in eight days (2+4+2) and that the heavens were fashioned after the earth. Yet other passages suggest that the heavens were created before the earth and that it took six, not eight, days to complete their formation:

“What are ye the more difficult to create or the heaven (above)? (God) hath constructed it on high. He raised its canopy, and He hath given it order and perfection… and the earth, moreover, hath He extended (to a wide expanse).” S. 79:27-28, 30

“Your guardian – Lord is God, who created the heavens and the earth in six days.” S. 7:51

“Verily your Lord is God, who created the heavens and the earth in six days.” S. 10:3

Contradiction 4

Noah’s family and the Flood

According to Q. 21:76, Noah and his family were saved from the flood:

“(Remember) Noah, when he cried (to us) aforetime: We listened to his (prayer) and delivered him and his family from great distress.”

And:

“And Noah verily prayed unto Us and gracious was the Hearer of his prayer, and We saved him and his household from the great distress, and made his seed the survivors…” S. 37:75-77

Yet in Q. 11:42, 43 and 66:10 we are told that Noah’s wife and one of his sons were not saved:

“… and Noah called out to his son, who had separated himself (from the rest): ‘O my son! embark with us, and be not with the unbelievers!’… and the waves came between them, and the son was among those overwhelmed in the flood.”

And:

“God sets forth, for an example to the unbelievers, the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut: They were (respectively) under two of our righteous servants, but they were fake to their (husbands), and they profited nothing before God on their account, but were told: ‘Enter ye the fire along with (others) that enter!’” S. 66:10

Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his translation, The Holy Quran, tries to explain:

“Evidently his (Noah) contemporary world had been so corrupt that it needed a great flood to purge it, ‘None of thy people will believe except those who have believed already; so grieve no longer over their evil deeds.’ But there were evil ones in his own family. A foolish and undutiful son is mentioned in xi. 42-46. Poor Noah tried to save him and pray for him as one of his family, but the answer came: ‘He is not of thy family: for his conduct is unrighteous.’ We might expect such a son to have a mother like him, and here we are told that it was; Noah’s wife who was also false to the standards of her husband, and perished in this world and in the Hereafter.” (Ibid., p. 1573, fn. 5546)

Contradiction 5

The dwellers of Paradise

Q. 56:11-14 states that few of the later believers will enter paradise:

“Those are they who will be brought nigh in gardens of delight; a multitude of those of old and a few of those of later time…”

This is contradicted by verses 39 and 40:

“… a multitude of those of old and a multitude of those of later time.”

Contradiction 6

The Position of the Jews and Christians

Q. 5:82-83 holds Jews as hostile enemies to the Muslims whereas Christians are held in highest regard:

“Thou wilt find the most vehement of mankind in hostility of those who believe (to be) the Jews and idolators. And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say: ‘Lo! We are Christians.’ That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud…”

Yet verse 51 puts both Jews and Christians on the same list of people whom Muslims are to avoid:

“O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who take them for friends is one of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.”

The question a Muslim must ask is whether Christians are their brethren or are they to be avoided at all costs, since a person does not avoid associating with his brother.

I have more to say in the next segment: The Quran’s Manifold Blunders Pt. 2.

Muslims have attempted to explain away Q. 9:29, which exhorts Muhammad’s followers to fight the disbelievers until they have been subdued, by arguing that the historical context of the passage shows that the fighting which is prescribed here is solely defensive in nature. They claim that the Byzantine Emperor was planning to march out against the Muslims, and that Muhammad was permitted to gather his soldiers to fight them at a place called Tabuk.

There are several problems with this fanciful tale and desperate attempt of trying to explain away the clear-cut instruction of Q. 9:29 to subjugate solely because of what they believe.

First, the immediate context itself shows that the only reason why Muhammad ordered his men to attack other people is because of their religious beliefs:

O ye who believe! it is only the idolaters who are unclean; they shall not then approach the Sacred Mosque after this year. But if ye fear want then God will enrich you from His grace if He will; verily, God is knowing, wise! Fight those who believe not in God and in the last day, and who forbid not what God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who do not practice the religion of truth from amongst those to whom the Book has been brought, until they pay the tribute by their hands and be as little ones. The Jews say Ezra is the son of God; and the Christians say that the Messiah is the son of God; that is what they say with their mouths, imitating the sayings of those who misbelieved before.- God fight them! how they lie! They take their doctors and their monks for lords rather than God, and the Messiah the son of Mary; but they are bidden to worship but one God, there is no god but He; celebrated be His praise, from what they join with Him! They desire to put out the light of God with their mouths, but God will not have it but that we should perfect His light, averse although the misbelievers be! He it is who sent His Apostle with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it prevail over every other religion, averse although idolaters may be! S. 9:28-33

According to the above, Muslims are commanded to fight the following groups of people:

Those who do not believe in the Allah of the Quran, or hold to the view of the end times as taught in the Muslim sources.

Those who do the things which Muhammad has declared forbidden.

Those who believe that Allah has an offspring.

Those who have taken their rabbis and monks as lords in the place of Allah.

Those who would question or criticize Islam with their mouths.

Yet the one group that is not listed here are those who have attacked or oppressed the Muslims. It is rather ironic that the passage nowhere informs Muslims to fight those who have fought and oppressed them, which is what it surely would say if the context were one of self-defense.

The reason why it fails to mention such oppressors is because the context is clear that the only reason why Muhammad commanded his followers to fight people of other faiths is because of their religious views. Muhammad could not allow for other religions to coexist along with his, and therefore decided to force people to either convert or pay the jizyah as an acceptance of the fact that they have been subdued and humiliated since Islam is destined to dominate over all other religious views.

Second, it was Muhammad who initially threatened the Byzantine Emperor by sending him a letter warning him to convert or suffer the consequences:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas… Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allah’s Apostle which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows: “In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah’s Statement:)

‘O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).’ (3:64)

Abu Sufyan then added, “When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha) (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him. Then I started to become sure that he (the Prophet) would be the conqueror in the near future till I embraced Islam (i.e. Allah guided me to it).” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 1, Number 6 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7)

The noted historian al-Tabari provides additional details (much of which is simply mythical and clearly embellished):

According to Ibn Humayd – Salamah – Muhammad b. Ishaq – Khalid b. Yasar – a very old Syrian, who said: When Heraclius was about to leave the land of Syria for Constantinople because of the report he received about the Messenger of God, he assembled the Romans and said: “People of the Romans, I shall present certain matters to you. Consider what I have decided.” “What are they?” they asked. He said: “You know, by God, that this man is a prophet who has been sent [sic]. We find him in our book [sic]. We know him by the description whereby he has been described to us. Let us follow him, that our life in this world and the next may be secure.” They said, “Shall we be under the hands of the Arabs, when we are mankind’s greatest kingdom, most numerous nation, and best land?” He said, “Then let me give him TRIBUTE⁴⁵³ each year, SO THAT I CAN AVERT HIS VEHEMENCE FROM ME AND FIND REST FROM HIS WARFARE BY MEANS OF MONEY THAT I GIVE HIM.” They said, “Shall we concede to the Arabs [our own] HUMILIATION AND ABASEMENT BY A TAX THAT THEY TAKE FROM US when we are mankind’s most numerous nation, greatest kingdom, and most impregnable land? By God, we will never do it!” He said, “Then let me make peace with him on condition that I give him the land of Syria and that he leave me with the land of al-Sha’m.” … They said to him: “Shall we give him the land of Syria, when you know that it is the navel of al-Sha’m? By God, we will never do it!” They having refused, he said, “By God, you shall see that, if you hold back from him, you will be defeated in your own city.”…

⁴⁵³. Arabic jizyah, later the technical term for the poll tax paid by members of protected minorities, here is used in the general sense of tribute… (The History of al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, translated by Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany, NY 1997], Volume VIII, pp. 106-107; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Pay careful attention to what is being said here. Heraclius’ statement that he would pay tribute or jizyah in order to avoid any warfare with Muhammad simply confirms that Muhammad actually threatened him and his empire with violence and bloodshed if the Byzantine emperor refused to embrace Islam.

Further notice that the people realized that paying such tribute was a sign of their humiliation and abasement, providing clear evidence that it was Muhammad who antagonized and harassed his enemies not the other way around.

Muhammad even threatened and harassed the Christian tribe of Ghassan, a group that was in league with the Byzantines:

In this year the Messenger of God sent out messengers. He sent out six persons in the month of Dhu al-Hijjah, three of them setting out together: Hatib b. Abi Balta‘ah of Lakhm, a confederate of the Banu Asad b. ‘Abd al-Uzza, to al-Muqawqis; Shuja‘ b. Wahb of the Banu Asad b. Khuzaymah, a confederate of Harb b. Umayyah and veteran of Badr, to al-Harith b. Abi Shimr al-Ghassani; and Dihyah b. Khalifah al-Kalbi to Caesar…

According to Ibn Ishaq: The Messenger of God sent Shuja‘ b. Wahb, a member of the Banu Asad b. Khuzaymah, to al-Mundhir b. al-Harith b. Abi Shimr al-Ghassani, the ruler of Damascus.

According to Muhammad b. ‘Umar al-Waqidi: He wrote to him via Shuja‘:

Peace be with whoever follows the right guidance and believes in it. I call you to believe in God alone, Who has no partner, AND YOUR KINGDOM SHALL REMAIN YOURS.

Shuja‘ b. Wahb brought the letter to him, and he read it to them. Al-Mundhir said: “Who can wrest my kingdom from me? It is I who will go against him!” The Prophet said, “His kingdom has perished.” (Ibid., pp. 98, 107-108; bold and capital emphasis mine)

And:

⁴²³… The mission was to the ruler of the Banu Ghassan, an Arab tribal kingdom with its capital at Busra (Bostra) in Syria. The Ghassanids were Monophysite Christians and ruled as a client state of the Byzantine Empire… (Ibid., p. 98)

In light of the foregoing, it really doesn’t come as a surprise that the Ghassanite ruler killed Muhammad’s messenger for bringing such a threatening letter (assuming, of course, that these Islamic tales are recounting actual historical events):

“Another example of Muhammad’s interest in the north is the expedition that set out for Syria and was defeated by Byzantine troops and their Arab allies at Mu’tah in Jordan during the month of Jumada I, A.H. 8 (August-September 629). Al-Tabari’s account, which relies almost entirely on Ibn Ishaq, says nothing about the causes of the expedition. Al-Waqidi (W, II, 755) indicates that the immediate occasion was the killing by Shurahbil b. ‘Amr al-Ghassani (the Banu Ghassan were allies of the Byzantines) of a messenger whom Muhammad had sent to the ruler of Busra in Syria. Thus, although the motive for this mission remains a mystery, the immediate motive for the expedition was retaliation…” (Ibid, p. xviii)

Nor would it have been wrong for the Byzantines to march out against the Muslims in light of such threats, even though they didn’t. In fact, imagine what Muhammad’s response would have been to someone bringing a letter which threatened his life and the lives of his followers.

Third, the Muslim scholars themselves readily admit that the only reason why Muhammad chose to attack Tabuk was because he wanted to collect jizyah from them to make up for all the loss of revenue they incurred by prohibiting the disbelievers from entering into Mecca in order to make their annual pilgrimages:

“According to the scholars of Sirah, this battle took place in Rajab, in the 9th year of Hijra.

Occasion of the Battle

When Allah, Most High, ordered the believers to prohibit the disbelievers from entering or coming near the sacred Mosque. On that, Quraish thought that this would reduce their profits from trade. Therefore, Allah Most High, compensated them and ordered them to fight the people of the Book until they embrace Islam or pay the Jizyah… Therefore, the Messenger of Allah decided to fight the Romans IN ORDER TO CALL THEM TO ISLAM…” (Ibn Kathir, The Battles of the Prophet, translated by Wa’il ‘Abdul Mut’aal Shihab [Dar al-Manarah, El-Mansoura, Egypt: Second edition 2001], pp. 183-184; capital emphasis mine)

It had nothing to do with the Byzantines threatening the Muslims.

In fact, the following hadith shows that the people whom the Muslims were ordered to fight were, for the most part, caught off guard since they didn’t know why they were being attacked:

Narrated Jubair bin Haiya: ‘Umar sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. When Al-Hurmuzan embraced Islam, ‘Umar said to him. “I would like to consult you regarding these countries which I intend to invade.” Al-Hurmuzan said, “Yes, the example of these countries and their inhabitants who are the enemies of the Muslims, is like a bird with a head, two wings and two legs; If one of its wings got broken, it would get up over its two legs, with one wing and the head; and if the other wing got broken, it would get up with two legs and a head, but if its head got destroyed, then the two legs, two wings and the head would become useless. The head stands for Khosrau, and one wing stands for Caesar and the other wing stands for Faris. So, order the Muslims to go towards Khosrau.” So, ‘Umar sent us (to Khosrau) appointing An-Numan bin Muqrin as our commander. When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, “Let one of you talk to me!” Al-Mughira replied, “Ask whatever you wish.” The other asked, “Who are you?” Al-Mughira replied, “We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life: we used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:– ‘Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master.’” (Al-Mughira, then blamed An-Numan for delaying the attack and) An-Nu’ man said to Al-Mughira, “If you had participated in a similar battle, in the company of Allah’s Apostle he would not have blamed you for waiting, nor would he have disgraced you. But I accompanied Allah’s Apostle in many battles and it was his custom that if he did not fight early by daytime, he would wait till the wind had started blowing and the time for the prayer was due (i.e. after midday).”  (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3159)

The response of the Persian contingent shows that the real reason why Muslims chose to attack other nations is not because they posed a threat to Islam, but rather because Muhammad had convinced his followers that it was their duty to conquer people for Allah until they either believed or, in the case of those whom Muhammad considered to be people that had received a divinely-inspired scripture, to pay the jizyah as a sign of them being subjugated and humiliated by Allah and his messenger.

After all, Muhammad himself is reported to have said that Allah had specifically sent him for the purpose of fighting against everyone until they embraced Islam:

(17) CHAPTER. (The Statement of Allah, “But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism] and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat⁽¹⁾ then leave their way free.”) (V. 9.5).

25. Narrated Ibn ‘Umar: Allah’s Messenger said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people till they testify La ilaha ilallah wa Anna Muhammad-ur-Rasul Allah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah), and perform As-Salat [Iqamat-as-Salat (prayers)] and give Zakat so if they perform all that, then they save their lives and properties from me except for Islamic laws, and their reckoning (accounts) will be with (done by) Allah. (The Translations of the Meanings of Sahih al-Bukhari (Arabic-English), translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh-Saudi Arabia, 1997], Volume 1: Ahadith 01 to 875, 2 – The Book of Belief (Faith), p. 66)  

This brings us to our fourth point.

As we just saw from the above examples, the Muslim sources are clear that jihad is intended to be offensive in nature since one of its purposes is to cause the religion of Islam to become dominant by abolishing all other worldviews and ideologies and/or subjecting those who refuse to embrace it.

As one leading Salafi scholar put it when explaining the nature and extent of shirk:

“That the Prophet came to people who had differences in their (objects of) worship: from them were the worshippers of angels. And from among them were the worshippers of the prophets and the pious. And from them were the worshippers of trees and the stones. And from them were the worshippers of the sun and the moon. But the Messenger of Allah fought them all, and did not consider the differences between them.

“And the proof of this (that he fought all of them) is in His, the Exalted’s, saying:

‘And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion [i.e., worship], all of it, is for Allah.’ [Surah al-Anfal, verse 39]” (An Explanation of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s Four Principles of Shirk, Translation and commentary by Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi [Al-Hidaayah Publishing & Distribution, 2002], p. 52)

And:

“In the first verse, Allah states to, ‘…fight them until there is no tribulations (fitnah), and the religion is only for Allah.’ The meaning of fitnah in this verse is shirk, as Ibn ‘Abbas stated. SO ALL TYPES OF SHIRK MUST BE FOUGHT AGAINST. No distinction is made between those who worship Jesus Christ or those who worship Rama and Krishna. All false deities and objects of worship MUST BE DESTROYED, and only the religion of Allah–based on the pure worship of Allah–CAN REMAIN. This verse is like an introduction to the verses that follow. It also shows that THE TRUE PURPOSE OF JIHAD (fighting in the way of Allah) IS SO THAT ONLY ALLAH BE WORSHIPPED AND SHIRK ELIMINATED.” (Ibid, pp. 53-54; bold and capital emphasis mine)

And here is what one of the leading manuals on the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence says concerning this issue:

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.  And it is the lesser jihad.  As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet said as he was returning from jihad,

“We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad.”

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1)  “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);

(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (4:89);

(3)  “Fight the idolaters utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such Hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat.  If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them.  And their final reckoning is with Allah.”;

and the hadith report by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet, including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. The former consist of the ones he personally attended, some twenty-seven (others say twenty-nine) of them. He fought in eight of them, and killed only one person with his noble hand, Ubbay ibn Khalaf, at the battle of Uhud. On the latter expeditions he sent others to fight, himself remaining at Medina, and these were forty-seven in number.

THE OBLIGATORY CHARACTER OF JIHAD

o9.1 Jihad is communal obligation… When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others…

and Allah Most High having said:

“Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives.  Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind.  And to each Allah has promised great good.”  (Koran 4:95)…

o9.3 Jihad is also obligatory for everyone able to perform it, male or female, old or young when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims…

o9.8 The caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4)… until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled.”  (Koran 9:29),

… The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…” (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, In Arabic with Facing English text, Commentary and Appendices Edited and Translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller [Amana Publications, Beltsville, Maryland, Revised Edition 1994], p. 599-603; bold emphasis mine)

With the foregoing in perspective, it is absolutely undeniable that passages such as Q. 9:29 do command Muslims to attack people who have done them no harm, solely because they hold to other religious beliefs. The purpose of such fighting is to cause Islam to become dominant over all other ideologies and worldviews which, because of the sovereign grace of our risen Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, shall never happen.

In this post I will wrap up the case for Satan causing Muhammad to commit shirk by praising the three goddesses whom the pagans worshiped as the daughters of Allah.  

Al-Tabari, one of Islam’s greatest commentators and historians, relays two versions of the story:

Satan Casts a False Revelation on

the Messenger of God’s Tongue

The Messenger of God was eager for the welfare of his people and wished to effect a reconciliation with them in whatever ways he could. It is said that he wanted to find a way to do this, and what happened was as follows.

Ibn Humayd – Salamah – Muhammad b. Ishaq – Yazid b. Ziyad al-Madani – Muhammad b. Ka’b al-Qurazi: When the Messenger of God saw how his tribe turned their backs on him and was grieved to see them shunning the message he had brought to them from God, he longed in his soul that something would come to him from God which would reconcile him with his tribe. With his love for his tribe and his eagerness for their welfare it would have delighted him if some of the difficulties which they made for him could have been smoothed out, and he debated with himself and fervently desired such an outcome. Then God revealed:

By the Star when it sets, your comrade does not err, nor is he deceived; nor does he speak out of (his own) desire…

and when he came to the words:

Have you thought upon al-Lat and al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?

Satan cast on his tongue, because of his inner debates and what he desired to bring to his people, the words:

These are the high-flying cranes; verily their intercession is accepted with approval.

When Quraysh heard this, they rejoiced and were happy and delighted at the way in which he spoke of their gods, and they listened to him, while the Muslims, having complete trust in their Prophet in respect of the messages which he brought from God, did not suspect him of error, illusion, or mistake. When he came to the prostration, having completed the surah, he prostrated himself and the Muslims did likewise, following their Prophet, trusting in the message which he had brought and following his example. Those polytheists of the Quraysh and others who were in the mosque likewise prostrated themselves because of the reference to their gods which they had heard, so that there was no one in the mosque, believer or unbeliever, who did not prostrate himself. The one exception was al-Walid b. Al-Mughirah, who was a very old man and could not prostrate himself; but he took a handful of soil from the valley in his hand and bowed over that. Then they all dispersed from the mosque. The Quraysh left delighted by the mention of their gods which they had heard, saying, “Muhammad has mentioned our gods in the most favorable way possible, stating in his recitation that they are the high flying cranes and that their intercession is received with approval.”

The news of the prostration reached those of the Messenger of God’s companions who were in Abyssinia and people said, “The Quraysh have accepted Islam.” Some rose up to return, while others remained behind. Then Gabriel came to the Messenger of God and said, “Muhammad, what have you done? You have recited to the people that which I did not bring to you from God, and you have said that which was not said to you.” Then the Messenger of God was much grieved and feared God greatly, but God sent down a revelation to him, for He was merciful to him, consoling him and making the matter light for him, informing him that there had never been a prophet or a messenger before him who desired as he desired and wished as he wished but that Satan had cast words into his recitation, as he had cast words on Muhammad’s tongue. Then God cancelled what Satan had thus cast, and established his verses by telling him that he was like other prophets and messengers, and revealed:

Never did we send a messenger or a prophet before you but that when he recited (the Message) Satan cast words into his recitation (umniyyah). God abrogates what Satan casts. Then God established his verses. God is knower, wise.

Thus God removed the sorrow from his Messenger, reassured him about that which he had feared and cancelled the words which Satan had cast on his tongue, that their gods were the high flying cranes whose intercession was accepted with approval. He now revealed, following the mention of “al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other,” the words:

Are yours the males and his the females? That indeed were an unfair division! They are but names which you have named, you and your fathers.

to the words:

to whom he wills and accepts.

This means, how can the intercession of their gods avail with God?

When Muhammad brought a revelation from God canceling what Satan had cast on the tongue of His Prophet, the Quraysh said, “Muhammad has repented of what he said concerning the position of your gods with God, and has altered it and brought something else.” Those two phrases which Satan had cast on the tongue of the Messenger of God were in the mouth of every polytheists, and they became even more ill-disposed and more violent in their persecution of those of them who had accepted Islam and followed the messenger of God.

Those of the Companions of the Messenger of God who had left Abyssinia upon hearing that Quraysh had accepted Islam by prostrating themselves with the Messenger of God now approached. When they were near Mecca, they heard that the report that the people of Mecca had accepted Islam was false. Not one of them entered Mecca without obtaining protection or entering secretly. Among those who came to Mecca and remained there until they emigrated to al-Madinah and were present with the Prophet at Badr, were, from the Banu Abd Shams b. Abd Manaf b. Qusayy, Uthman b. ‘Affan b. Abi al-‘As b. Umayyah, accompanied by his wife Ruqayyah the daughter of the Messenger of God; Abu Hudhayfah b. ‘Utbah b. Rabi‘ah b. Abd Shams, accompanied by his wife Sahlah bt. Suhayl; together with a number of others numbering thirty three men.

Al-Qasim b. Al-Hasan – al Husayn b. Daud – Hajja – Abu Ma‘shar – Muhammad b. Ka‘b al-Qurazi and Muhammad b. Qays: The Messenger of God was sitting in a large gathering of Quraysh, wishing that day that no revelation would come to him from God which could cause them to turn away from him. Then God revealed:

By the Star when it sets, your comrade does not err, nor is he deceived…

and the Messenger of God recited it until he came to:

Have you thought upon al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?

when Satan cast on his tongue two phrases:

These are the high-flying cranes; verily their intercession is to be desired.

He uttered them and went on to complete the surah. When he prostrated himself at the end of the surah, the whole company prostrated themselves with him. Al-Walid b. al-Mughirah raised some dust to his forehead and bowed over that, since he was a very old man and could not prostrate himself. They were satisfied with what Muhammad had uttered and said, “We recognize that it is God who gives life and death, who creates and who provides sustenance, but if these gods of ours intercede for us with him, and if you give them a share, we are with you.”

That evening Gabriel came to him and reviewed the surah with him, and when he reached the two phrases which Satan had cast upon his tongue he said, “I did not bring you these two.” Then the Messenger of God said, “I have FABRICATED things against God and have imputed to him words which He has not spoken.” Then God revealed to him:

And they indeed strove hard to beguile you away from what we have revealed to you, that you should invent other than it against us…

to the words:

and then you would have found no helper against us.

He remained grief stricken and anxious until the revelation of the verse:

Never did we send a messenger or a prophet before you… to the words… God is knower, wise.

When those who had emigrated to Abyssinia heard that all the people of Mecca had accepted Islam, they returned to their clans, saying, “They are more dear to us”; but they found that the people had reversed their decision when God cancelled what Satan had cast upon the Messenger of God’s tongue. (The History of al-Tabari, translated and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt and M.V. McDonald [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany, NY 1988], Volume 6, pp. 107-112; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Here, again, are the verses that al-Tabari indicates were supposedly sent down as a consequence of Muhammad reciting the words of Satan:

Verily, they were about to tempt you away from that which We have revealed (the Qur’an) unto you (O Muhammad), to fabricate something other than it against Us, and then they would certainly have taken you a friend! And had We not made you stand firm, you would nearly have inclined to them a little. In that case, We would have made you taste a double portion (of punishment) in this life and a double portion (of punishment) after death. And then you would have found none to help you against Us. S. 17:73-75 Hilali-Khan

Never did We send a Messenger or a Prophet before you, but; when he did recite the revelation or narrated or spoke, Shaitan (Satan) threw (some falsehood) in it. But Allah abolishes that which Shaitan (Satan) throws in. Then Allah establishes His Revelations. And Allah is All-Knower, All-Wise: That He (Allah) may make what is thrown in by Shaitan (Satan) a trial for those in whose hearts is a disease (of hypocrisy and disbelief) and whose hearts are hardened. And certainly, the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.) are in an opposition far-off (from the truth against Allah’s Messenger and the believers). S. 22:52-53 Hilali-Khan

With that in mind, the most authentic and authoritative collection of sunni traditions provides tacit support for the historicity of this event. Imam al-Bukhari records two narratives which attest that all the pagans prostrated along with Muhammad when the latter finished reciting surat-Najm, chapter 53, the very surah that contained Muhammad’s praise of the three goddesses:  

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet I prostrated while reciting An-Najm and with him prostrated the Muslims, the pagans, the jinns, and all human beings. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 19, Number 177 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=19&translator=1&start=0&number=177)

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet performed a prostration when he finished reciting Surat-an-Najm, and all the Muslims and pagans and Jinns and human beings prostrated along with him. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 385 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=60&translator=1&start=0&number=385)

It makes absolutely no sense to argue, as some Muslims do, that the reason why all the pagans fell down in worship at Muhammad’s recital of surah 53 is because of its beauty and majesty, since they had never done so before or afterwards for any other surah.

The irrationality of such a claim is further seen from the fact that this surah in its current form contains a severe rebuke and condemnation of the pagans for their belief in and worship of female deities. Why, then, would they all bow down after hearing Muhammad renounce them and the three daughters of Allah?

The more sensible explanation is that Muhammad’s recital of surat-Najm initially included the praise of the three goddesses which Satan inspired him to recite:

“Surat-an-Najm” is the same Surah 53 which Muhammad was reciting according to the narratives we have quoted. What else could have prompted all present, both Muslims and pagans, to prostrate behind Muhammad but the concession made to the Meccan goddesses? One can understand the Muslims following any lead Muhammad gave (see the quote from Ibn Ishaq) but it is hard, if not impossible, to believe that the pagan Meccans would have joined Muhammad in worship at the end of the Surah if he had quoted it as it now stands with such a vehement denunciation of these same goddesses by name. The story does appear to have a compelling historical foundation. (John Gilchrist, Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, 3. The Nature of Muhammad’s Prophetic Experience, Satan’s Interjection and its Implications)

Moreover, and contrary to the claims of some Muhammadans, there is even solid historical evidence that Ibn Ishaq, the man who wrote the earliest extant biography on Muhammad’s life in the eighth century, e.g., Sirat Rasulullah (“The Life of the Messenger of Allah”), included this incident in his work. And yet, this story of Muhammad’s compromise was subsequently removed by Ibn Hisham, the Muslim who edited and reworked Ibn Ishaq’s sirah in the ninth century AD.

In fact, Ibn Hisham admitted to omitting material from Ibn Ishaq’s sirah that he felt was either weak or too embarrassing to the character of Muhammad:    

“… There is, in the Qarawiyun mosque library at Fez in Morocco, a manuscript entitled Kitab al-Maghazi (Book of the Campaigns) which, among other sources, contains a record of lectures given at one time by Ibn Ishaq on the life of Muhammad which includes the story of the concession made by Muhammad to the pagan Meccans. The narrative is very similar to that in Tabari’s work except that the actual ‘satanic verses’ are only referred to and not actually quoted in the text.” (Gilchrist, Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, pp. 117ff.)

And in support of the statements of Gilchrist, not what the renowned Islamist and the very scholar who translated Ibn Ishaq’s sirah into English, Alfred Guillaume, noted in regards to this manuscript find in the library at Fez:

The Verse Inserted into the Koran at the Instigation of Satan

Ms. fo. 56b; T. pp. 1192f.; S. p. 229; I.H. p. 241; L. p. 161

There can be little doubt that Ibn Hisham cut out some of the text which came to him because he gives no reason for the sudden conversion of the people of Mecca and leaves it unexplained. The full story hitherto has been known only from Tabari’s who quoted Ibn Ishaq on the authority of Salama. In that version it is made clear that it was the prophet’s desire to end the estrangement between him and his people and to make it easier for them to accept Islam that prompted him to yield to the suggestion of Satan and add the words “These are the exalted cranes (gharaniq) whose intercession is to be hoped for” (or, in another version, “approved”).

The manuscript agrees with Salama’s report from Ibn Ishaq that the emigrants returned from Abyssinia because they heard of the conversion of Quraysh in consequence of the concession to polytheism, but strangely enough it does not quote the offending words. Presumable they were deliberately omitted and readers must have known what they were because otherwise the narrative would be unintelligible. Two verses are referred to, but the second is not quoted. In view of its interest I give a translation of the manuscript: “(The emigrants) remained where they were until they heard that the people of Mecca had accepted Islam and prostrated themselves. That was because the chapter of The Star (53) had been sent down to Muhammad and the apostle recited it. Both Muslim and polytheist listened to it silently until he reached his words ‘Have you seen (or, “considered”) al-Lat and al-Uzza?’ They gave ear to him attentively while the faithful believed (their prophet). Some apostatized when they heard the ‘saj’ of the Satan and said ‘By Allah we will serve them (the Gharaniq) so that they may bring us near to Allah’. The Satan taught these two verses to every polytheist and their tongues took to them easily. This weighed heavily upon the apostle until Gabriel came to him and complained to him of these two verses and the effect that they had upon the people. Gabriel declined responsibility for them and said ‘YOU RECITED to the people something which I did not bring you from God and YOU SAID what you were not told to say’. The apostle was deeply grieved and afraid. Then God send down by way of comfort to him: ‘Never did we send an apostle or a prophet before you but when he wished Satan cast a suggestion into his wish’ as far as the words ‘Knowing, Wise’’ (Sura 22:51).

Ibn Kathir gives a fantastic reason for the conversion of the Meccans and says that Ibn Ishaq’s tradition is not sound. He says that he himself has not quoted the story of the gharaniq because there might be some who heard it for the first time and would not be able to take a right view of it.

Suhayli with his customary honesty makes no bones about it. He says that the cause of the return of the emigrants was as we have heard, and he also tells that besides Ibn Ishaq, Musa ibn ‘Uqba handed on the tradition. He says that traditionists reject this hadith, and those who accept it have ways of explaining it. One of these, he says, namely that Satan spoke of the words which were broadcast through the town but the apostle did not utter them, would be excellent were it not for the fact that the tradition asserts that Gabriel said to Muhammad “I did not bring you this”. (Alfred Guillaume, New Light on the Life of Muhammad [Manchester University Press], pp. 38-39 https://books.google.com/books?id=tNHnAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=instigation%20of%20satan&f=false; bold and capital emphasis mine)

With the foregoing in perspective, it is abundantly clear that the evidence for the devil moving Muhammad to praise the daughters of Allah, thereby causing him to commit the unforgiveable sin of associating others with the Islamic evidence, is massive and overwhelming. Therefore, Muslims cannot be conveniently brush aside or ignored this story as a fabrication, especially when it originated from within the Islamic community, being taught and passed on by some of Islam’s greatest and earliest scholars.

FURTHER READING

THE FRAUD THAT IS ALI ATAIE: THE SATANIC VERSES PT. 3

I am reposting this from the following site: What we probably don’t know about St. Jerome is just .

What we probably don’t know about St. Jerome is just what we need to know

Meg Hunter-Kilmer – published on 09/28/17

He was singularly agitated, impatient, and proud … but that’s not why he’s a saint.

You probably know a few things about St. Jerome. He was a Church Father, the one who translated the Bible into Latin directly from the Hebrew texts of the Old Testament, instead of relying on the Greek translation known as the Septuagint.

You also probably know about his temper.

Generally speaking, those are the things we mention when we talk about St. Jerome. We don’t say that Jerome once had a temper and then he conquered it; no, we share scathing (but eloquent) insults from a man some have dubbed “the great name-caller,” perhaps remarking that if Jerome won a halo there’s hope for us.

Indeed—Jerome is a wonderful witness of God’s mercy poured out on the most persistent sinners. But we don’t canonize people simply for being recipients of mercy; we canonize them for being witnesses of how that mercy can transform us, and that’s exactly what Jerome is.

Born in the middle of the 4th century in central Europe, Jerome was the son of Christian parents but wasn’t baptized until he was nearly 20. During his years of school, he walked with one foot in this world and one in the next.

Gradually Jerome became more and more a Christian, but while his academic work was theological, his free time was spent with great pagan literature. Until one night, when Jerome dreamed that he stood before the judgment seat of God. “Who are you?” the Lord asked. “I am a Christian,” Jerome responded. “No, you are no Christian. You are a Ciceronian. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also,” came the reply. Convicted, Jerome stepped away from the worldly things that had consumed him and began in earnest the pursuit of holiness.

Jerome became a monk and a great ascetic. When tempted by sins of the flesh, he turned to the arduous study of Hebrew as a distraction. He was a spiritual director for many women, a few of whom themselves became saints, and took great care to educate them in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin as well as in theology. He wrote prolifically, his eyes fixed on the Word of God, always seeking to bring it to God’s people.

Nor were his good works merely intellectual. Jerome moved to Bethlehem and opened both a school and a home for pilgrims so that (according to his follower St. Paula), “should Mary and Joseph visit Bethlehem again, they would have a place to stay.” When Rome was sacked, Jerome lamented the steady stream of refugees pouring into the Holy Land and he stepped up to help. “I have put aside my commentary on Ezekiel and almost all study,” he wrote. “For today we must translate the precepts of the Scriptures into deeds; instead of speaking saintly words, we must act them.”

But for all this, he was an angry man. He wrote insult after insult about heretics and saints alike. He loathed Ambrose and attacked Augustine, who, being more naturally charitable, said of Jerome, “What Jerome is ignorant of, no mortal has ever known.” He hated the heresies of Arius and Origen and he hated anyone who seemed to embrace them.

More than anything, though, Jerome hated his anger. He was harder on his own faults than he was on anyone else’s; in one letter attempting to reconcile with an estranged aunt, Jerome cried, “Woe to me, wretch that I am!” He was desperate to defeat his temper and went to great lengths to do it, even carrying a stone around with him with which to beat himself when his anger threatened to overcome him. Pope Sixtus V, passing by a painting of St. Jerome holding this rock, commented, “You do well to carry that stone, for without it the Church would never have canonized you.”

This line of Pope Sixtus points strikingly to the genius of Jerome. More than just intellectual ability, Jerome offers us a witness of mundane penitence. No repentant prostitute or Satanist, Jerome was just an ordinary man with a temper. He prayed for his entire life to be released from the vice of anger, which he called “the door by which all vices enter the soul,” but to no avail. Still, Jerome never gave up. Again and again, he sought forgiveness. Again and again he tried to hold his tongue, to calm his nerves. Though he was unparalleled in scriptural knowledge, he deferred to the authority of the Church on the question of which books belong in the Bible, humbling himself under the authority of Christ himself. By God’s grace, he sought peace and patience and humility, despite being singularly agitated, impatient, and proud.

Ultimately, this is what makes St Jerome a great saint. It’s not his translations or commentaries, not his letters or controversies. It’s the fact that he never stopped trying to be a Christian in deed as well as in name; in heaven, he has finally succeeded.

On September 30, the feast of St. Jerome, let’s ask his intercession for perseverance in our pursuit of holiness, whatever setbacks we may encounter. St. Jerome, pray for us!