In this post I am going to sum up the in-depth arguments and exegesis found throughout my articles and rebuttals, which I provided in relation to the Trinitarian implications of Psalm 110. The links to all of this material will be posted at the conclusion of this series.

DAVID’S HEAVENLY ADON

The Holy Spirit revealed to and through David that there is another divine Person enthroned alongside of YHVH in heaven as David’s Lord, and by extension the Lord of all creation:

“Of David. A Psalm. Yahweh says to my Lord (Adoni): Sit at My right hand Until I put Your enemies as a footstool for Your feet.’” Psalm 110:1

To be seated at YHVH’s right hand is to be seated upon the heavenly throne along with YHVH, since the God-breathed Scriptures are clear that YHVH is on his throne in heaven:

“He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord (Adonay) mocks them.” Psalm 2:4

“For the choir director. Of David… Yahweh is in His holy temple; Yahweh’s throne is in heaven; His eyes behold, His eyelids test the sons of men.” Psalm 11:4

“Of David… Yahweh has established His throne in the heavens, And His kingdom rules over all.” Psalm 103:19

At the same time, the sacred writings are emphatic that YHVH alone reigns in/from heaven over all creation, and YHVH is the only heavenly Lord that the believers have and are to look to:

“Who is like Yahweh our God, The One who sits on high,” Psalm 113:5

“The heavens are the heavens of Yahweh, But the earth He has given to the sons of men.” Psalm 115:16

“To You I lift up my eyes, The One enthroned in the heavens! Behold, as the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, As the eyes of a servant‑girl to the hand of her mistress, So our eyes look to Yahweh our God, Until He is gracious to us.” Psalm 123:1-2

“Let them praise the name of Yahweh, For His name alone is set on high; His splendor is above earth and heaven.” Psalm 148:13

David himself acknowledged that YHVH is his one and only Lord whom he trusts in:

“A Mikhtam of David. Keep me, O God, for I take refuge in You. O my soul, you have said to Yahweh, ‘You are my Lord (Adonay); I have no good without You.’” Psalm 16:1-2

Hence, the only way for there to be another heavenly Lord reigning alongside of YHVH is if that other Lord is both distinct from and identical with YHVH.

In other words, Psalm 110:1 furnishes OT evidence that the one true God of Israel exists as a plurality of divine Persons.  

[N]EW [T]ESTAMENT EXEGESIS OF PS. 110:1

The Christian Scriptures identify Jesus Christ as this other Lord whom David confessed and worshiped:

“And Jesus began to say, as He taught in the temple, ‘How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David? David himself said in the Holy Spirit, “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand, Until I put Your enemies beneath Your feet.’” David himself calls Him “Lord”; so in what sense is He his son?’ And the large crowd enjoyed listening to Him.” Mark 12:35-37

Jesus’ questioning was intended to bring out the significance of the Holy Spirit revealing to David that the Messiah is his Lord, even though he is supposed to be his Son.

Jesus’ point was that if the Messiah were merely a physical descendant of David, then he could not be David’s Lord.

And yet that is precisely who the Messiah is, i.e., the Lord and Son of David:

“Then they came to Jericho. And as He was leaving Jericho with His disciples and a large crowd, a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the road. And when he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, ‘Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!’ And many were sternly telling him to be quiet, but he kept crying out all the more, ‘Son of David, have mercy on me!’ And Jesus stopped and said, ‘Call him here.’ So they called the blind man, saying to him, ‘Take courage, get up! He is calling for you.’ And throwing off his outer garment, he jumped up and came to Jesus. And Jesus answered him and said, ‘What do you want Me to do for you?’ And the blind man said to Him, ‘Rabboni, I want to regain my sight!’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Go; your faith has saved you.’ Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road.” Mark 10:46-52

Christ was getting his opponents to see that the Messiah is more than a human being, since he is also the unique divine Son of God who is essentially one with the Father, a fact which God’s Spirit had already made known to David:

“I, Jesus, sent My angel to bear witness to you of these things for the churches. I am the ROOT AND the DESCENDANT of David, the bright morning star.” Revelation 22:16

That is why David could worship his own physical offspring whom God the Father exalted to reign with him as the Lord of all creation:

“Men, brothers, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. And so, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to set one of the fruit of his body on his throne, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither forsaken to Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured out this which you both see and hear. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Until I put Your enemies as a footstool for Your feet.”’ Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ⁠—this Jesus whom you crucified.” Acts 2:29-36

“As for the word which He sent to the sons of Israel, proclaiming the good news of peace through Jesus Christ⁠—He is Lord of all⁠—you yourselves know the thing which happened throughout all Judea, starting from Galilee, after the baptism which John proclaimed. You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. And we are witnesses of all the things He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They also put Him to death by hanging Him on a tree. God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He appear, not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. And He commanded us to preach to the people, and solemnly to bear witness that this is the One who has been designated by God as Judge of the living and the dead. Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” Acts 10:36-43

Here are some other NT references which apply Psalm 110:1 to the risen and exalted Jesus:

“But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him and said to Him, ‘Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ And Jesus said, ‘I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’” Mark 14:61-62

“So then, the Lord Jesus, after He had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them, and confirmed the word by the signs that followed.” Mark 16:19-20

“This One God exalted to His right hand as a Leader and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God gave to those who obey Him.” Acts 5:31-32

“But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; and he said, ‘Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.’” Acts 7:55-56

“Now the main point in what is being said is this: we have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the holy places and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.” Hebrews 8:1-2

“but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until His enemies are put as a footstool for His feet” Hebrews 10:12-13

“fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Hebrews 12:2

The following example is most interesting:

“who is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power; who, having accomplished cleansing for sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high… But of the Son He says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, And the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness above Your companions.’ And, ‘You, Lord, in the beginning founded the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands; They will perish, but You remain; And they all will wear out like a garment, And like a mantle You will roll them up; Like a garment they will also be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.’ But to which of the angels has He ever said, ‘Sit at My right hand, Until I put Your enemies As a footstool for Your feet?” Hebrews 1:3, 8-13

The inspired writer not only cites and alludes to Psalm 110:1 and 113:5, he even has God the Father glorifying the risen Son with the words of the following Psalm,

“A Prayer of the afflicted when he is faint and pours out his complaint before Yahweh. O Yahweh, hear my prayer! And let my cry for help come to You… But You, O Yahweh, abide forever, And the remembrance of Your name from generation to generation… Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. Even they will perish, but You will remain; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.” Psalm 102:1, 12, 25-27

Thereby identifying Christ as that very same YHVH whom the Psalmist praised for beingthe unchangeable Creator and Sustainer of all creation!

No wonder Thomas could glorify the risen Jesus,

“And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, ‘Peace be with you.’ Then He said to Thomas, ‘Bring your finger here, and see My hands; and bring your hand here and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing. Thomas answered and said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God (ho Kyrios mou kai ho Theos mou)!’ Jesus said to him, ‘Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are those who did not see, and yet believed.’” John 20:26-29

In virtually the exact same way that the Psalmist magnifies YHVH:

“Stir up Yourself, and awake to my justice And to my cause, my God and my Lord.” Psalm 35:23

“Wake up! And pay attention to my trial, my God and my Lord (ho Theos mou kai ho Kyrios mou), to my case!” Psalm 34:23 (“Psalms (and Prayer of Manasses),” translated by Albert Pietersma, A New English Translation of the Septuagint, published by Oxford University Press in 2009, including corrections and emendations made in the second printing (2009) and corrections and emendations made in June 2014, p. 564)

Like David beforehand, Thomas knew that the Messiah who is Jesus is YHVH in the flesh, being God’s uniquely begotten Son who is one with the Father in essence.

With the foregoing in perspective, we can now proceed to the next part of the discussion: DAVID’S MULTI-PERSONAL LORD PT. 2.

The Quran claims that there are verses within it whose meanings are known only to Allah:

It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’an). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkam (commandments, etc.), Al-Fara’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers, etc.)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials, etc.), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari). S. 3:7 Hilali-Khan

Suffice it to say this verse raises difficulties for the Muslim view that the Islamic book is a perfectly clear revelation that has been perfectly preserved, for the following reasons.

First, what purpose does it serve to “send down” verses whose interpretation are known only to Allah? How do such passages benefit anyone seeing that no one knows what they mean?

After all, a person cannot be guided if s/he doesn’t know what a verse is actually instructing them to do. Therefore, where is the wisdom in “revealing” such unclear, incoherent texts? Doesn’t this prove that the Quran is a book of misguidance whose aim it is to deceive and mislead people?

Second, the Islamic scripture fails to provide a list of all the unclear texts from the clear ones, which is something necessary for the reader or reciter of the Quran to know if s/he wants to avoid focusing on those passages whose meanings are known only to the Islamic deity lest they incur the wrath of their lord.

Therefore, why does the Quran fail to distinguish the clear texts from the unclear ones as a safeguard to prevent Muslims from seeking to interpret the unclear verses?

To reiterate the severity of this problem, a Muslim must know just how many of the Quran’s ayat are unclear. Are there 20 unclear passages, or 30, 100, 1,000, or perhaps even 6,000? The Muslim scripture fails to provide such details.

The third problem that Muslims face is that the so-called Islamic “revelation” repeatedly asserts that it is an unambiguous book that explains everything in detail:

Thus doth God MAKE CLEAR His Signs to you: In order that ye may understand. S. 2:242 Y. Ali

And thus do We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) IN DETAIL, that the way of the Mujrimun (criminals, polytheists, sinners), may become manifest. S. 6:55 Hilali-Khan

It is He Who has set the stars for you, so that you may guide your course with their help through the darkness of the land and the sea. We have (indeed) explained IN DETAIL Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, Revelations, etc.) for people who know. It is He Who has created you from a single person (Adam), and has given you a place of residing (on the earth or in your mother’s wombs) and a place of storage [in the earth (in your graves) or in your father’s loins]. Indeed, We have EXPLAINED IN DETAIL Our revelations (this Qur’an) for people who understand. S. 6:97-98

Thus We explain variously the Verses so that they (the disbelievers) may say: “You have studied (the Books of the people of the Scripture and brought this Qur’an from that)” and that We may make the matter clear for the people who have knowledge. S. 6:105 Hilali-Khan

[Say (O Muhammad)] “Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has sent down unto you the Book (The Qur’an), EXPLAINED IN DETAIL.” Those unto whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth. So be not you of those who doubt. S. 6:114 Hilali-Khan

And this is the Path of your Lord (the Qur’an and Islam) leading Straight. We have DETAILED Our Revelations for a people who take heed. S. 6:126

Say (O Muhammad): “Who has forbidden the adoration with clothes given by Allah, which He has produced for his slaves, and At-Taiyibat [all kinds of Halal (lawful) things] of food?” Say: “They are, in the life of this world, for those who believe, (and) exclusively for them (believers) on the Day of Resurrection (the disbelievers will not share them).” Thus We explain the Ayat (Islamic laws) IN DETAIL for people who have knowledge. S. 7:32 Hilali-Khan

Certainly, We have brought to them a Book (the Qur’an) which We have explained IN DETAIL WITH KNOWLEDGE, – a guidance and a mercy to a people who believe. S. 7:52 Hilali-Khan

Thus do We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) IN DETAIL, so that they may turn (unto the truth). S. 7:174 Hilali-Khan

And this Qur’an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel), etc.], and A FULL EXPLANATION of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) – wherein there is no doubt from the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns, and all that exists). S. 10:37 Hilali-Khan

But if they repent, perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat, then they are your brethren in religion. (In this way) We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) IN DETAIL for a people who know. S. 9:11

Alif Lam Ra. This is a Book, whose verses have been made firm and free from imperfection and then they have been expounded in detail. It is from One Wise, and All-Aware. S. 11:1 Shakir

Indeed in their stories, there is a lesson for men of understanding. It (the Qur’an) is not a forged statement but a confirmation of Allah’s existing Books [the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel) and other Scriptures of Allah] and A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF EVERYTHING and a guide and a Mercy for the people who believe. S. 12:111

A. L. R. These are the Ayats of Revelation, – of a Qur’an that makes things clear. S. 15:1 Y. Ali

One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring thee as a witness against these (thy people): and We have sent down to thee the Book EXPLAINING ALL THINGS, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims. S. 16:89 Y. Ali

He sets forth for you a parable from your ownselves, – Do you have partners among those whom your right hands possess (i.e. your slaves) to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you? Whom you fear as you fear each other? Thus do We explain the signs IN DETAIL to a people who have sense. S. 30:28 Hilali-Khan

We verily, have made it a Qur’an in Arabic, that you may be able to understand (its meanings and its admonitions). S. 43:3 Hilali-Khan

By the manifest Book (this Qur’an) THAT MAKES THINGS CLEAR, S. 44:2 Hilali-Khan – Cf. Q. 2:187, 219, 266; 3:103, 118; 4:26, 176; 5:89; 24:18, 58-59, 61; 57:17

A Book whereof the Verses are explained IN DETAIL; A Qur’an in Arabic for people who know. S. 41:3 Hilali-Khan

Here is another version of this last passage:

A scripture whose verses PROVIDE THE COMPLETE DETAILS, in an Arabic Quran, for people who know. Khalifa

Therefore, how could Muhammad then come along and recite Q. 3:7, stating that not everything in the Quran is perspicuous and perfectly explained without this blatantly contradicting all of the aforementioned verses?

The problem becomes even more compounded when we realize that even the meaning of this particular text is itself not so clear since Muhammad’s companions were divided over its precise interpretation.

For instance, some of Muhammad’s personal followers who learned the recitation of the Islamic scripture directly from him read this passage differently, so that it isn’t merely Allah who knows the meaning of the unclear verses. Rather those who are grounded in knowledge also know what these texts mean. According to these Muslims, the verse should actually be read in the following manner:

“… but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah AND those who are firmly grounded in knowledge. Say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.”

In order to help the readers appreciate the gravity of the problem I will let one of Islam’s greatest scholars, historians and commentators explain the situation more thoroughly:  

The interpreters disagreed over the interpretation of that, as to whether [the words] those well-grounded in knowledge (al-rasikhun fi’l-‘ilm) is in coordination with the noun “God,” affirming that they have knowledge of the interpretation of its ambiguous verses; or whether they are part of a new sentence, meaning “Those well-grounded in knowledge say, ‘We believe in the ambiguous verses and affirm that knowledge of [their interpretation] is known by none save God.’”¹

OPINION: Some of them said: The meaning of that is: None knows the interpretation of that save God, Singular is He, the only one with knowledge of this. As for those well-grounded in knowledge, they are the subject of a new sentence, the predicate of which is: [They] say, “We believe in the ambiguous and clear verses, and all of that is from God.”

An account of those who said that:

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Hakam–Khalid b. Nizar–Ibn Abi Mulayka–Aisha said, concerning His statement And those well-grounded in knowledge say, We believe in it, “Part of their grounding in knowledge is that they believe in the clear and ambiguous verses, but they do not know their interpretation.”

Al-Hasan b. Yahya–‘Abd al-Razzaq–Ma’mar–Ibn Tawus–his father said: Ibn ‘Abbas would say, None knows its interpretation save God. Those well-grounded [in knowledge] say, We believe in it.”²

Yunus [b. ‘Abd Al-A’la]–Ibn Wahb–Ibn Abi’l-Zinad–Hisham b. ‘Urwah [b. al-Zubayr] said, “My father would say, concerning the verse None knows its interpretation save God. And those well-grounded in knowledge, ‘Truly those well-grounded in knowledge do not know its interpretation. Instead they say, We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’”

Ibn Humayd–Yahya b. Wadih–‘Ubady Allah–Abu Nahik al-Asadi said, concerning His statement None knows its interpretation save God. And those well-grounded in knowledge, “You coordinate this sentence when it should be separated into two sentences: None knows its interpretation save God; and, Those well-grounded in knowledge say, We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord. The outer limit of their knowledge is the statement they have said [in this verse].”

Al-Muthanna–[al-Fadl] ibn Dukayn–‘Amr b. ‘Uthman b. ‘Abd Allah b. Mawhab–‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz said, concerning and those well-grounded in knowledge, “The outer limit of the knowledge of those well-grounded in knowledge, regarding the interpretation of the Qur’an, is that they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’”  

Yunus [b. ‘Abd al-A’la]–Ashhab–Malik [b. Anas] said, concerning His statement None knows its interpretation save God, “Then there begins a new sentence: Those well-grounded in knowledge say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’ They do not know its interpretation.”

OPINION: Others said: Rather, the meaning of that is: And none save God and those well-grounded in knowledge know the interpretation of that, and that [these people], with their knowledge of this and grounding in it, say, We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.

An account of those who said that:

Muhammad b. ‘Amr [al-Bahili]–Abu ‘Asim [al-Nabil]–‘Isa [b. Maymun]–Ibn Abi Najih–Mujahid–Ibn ‘Abbas said, “I am among those who knows its interpretation.”

Muhammad b. ‘Amr [al-Bahili]–Abu ‘Asim [al-Nabil]–‘Isa [b. Maymun]–Ibn Abi Najih–Mujahid said, “Those well-grounded in knowledge know its interpretation and say, We believe in it.”

Al-Muthanna–Abu Hudhayfa [Musa b. Mas’ud]–Shibl–Ibn Abi Najih–Mujahid said, “Those well-grounded in knowledge know its interpretation and say, We believe in it.”

[Anonymous]–‘Ammar b. al-Hasan–Ibn Abi Ja’far–his father–al-Rabi’ said, “Those well-grounded in knowledge know its interpretation and say, We believe in it.”

Ibn Humayd–Salama–Ibn Ishaq–Muhammad b. Ja’far b. al-Zubayr said, “None knows its interpretation, which [God] intends–What does He intend?¹–save God and those well-grounded in knowledge [who] say, We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord. Then they harmonize the interpretation of the ambiguous verses with the clear verses, for which there is only a single interpretation, which they know. The Book [of God] becomes settled by their interpretation, parts of it verifying other parts. [Its] argument becomes effective, [its] case clear; falsehood is driven away by it, and disbelief is demolished.”¹

As for those who adopted the first opinion, who said that those well-grounded in knowledge do not know the interpretation of [the ambiguous verses] and that God merely informed [us] of their faith and belief that [these verses] come from God, they put those well-grounded in knowledge in the nominative case on account of it being the subject [of a nominal sentence], the predicate of which is, [they] say, We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord. (This is the opinion of the Basrans.) As for the opinion of some of the Kufans, they said that [those well-grounded in knowledge is in the nominative case] because rasikhun is the backward referent (‘a’id) from their mention [as the subject of the verb] [they] say (yaqulun).² Another Kufan said that [rasikhun] is in the nominative case because of the sentence that is predicated of them, namely [they] say.³   

As for those who adopted the second opinion and claimed that those well-grounded [in knowledge] know the interpretation [of the ambiguous verses], they coordinate between those well-grounded [in knowledge] and God; this coordination then explains why [those well-grounded in knowledge] is in the nominative case.⁴

TABARI SAID: The correct opinion, in our estimation, is that [those well-grounded in knowledge] is in the nominative case on account of them [being the first part] of a sentence, the predicate of which is [they] say, on the basis of what we have clarified previously. They do not know the interpretation of the ambiguous verses that God (Mighty and Majestic is He) mentioned in this verse. [This is further substantiated] by what has reached me concerning the [irregular] reading OF UBAYY: Those well-grounded in knowledge say [yaqulu instead of yaqulun], as we mentioned above ON THE AUTHORITY OF IBN ‘ABBAS, WHO RECITED IT THIS WAY TOO. Also [consider] the [irregular] reading OF ‘ABD ALLAH [B. MAS‘UD]: “Its interpretation is only with God. Those well-grounded in knowledge say.”¹ (Tabari: Selections from The Comprehensive Exposition of the Interpretation of the Verses of the Qur’an, translated by Scott C. Lucas [The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute For Islamic Thought and The Islamic Texts Society, 2017], Volume 1, pp. 238-242; bold and capital emphasis mine)

¹ The ambiguity is due to the fact that the particle waw can mean, among other things, “and” or it can indicate the beginning of a new sentence. In the former case, it is called waw ‘atf (“the waw of coordination”) and, in the latter, waw isti’naf (“the waw that initiates a new sentence”). The interpretation of the waw in wa’l-rasikhun fi’l-‘ilm determines whether human beings who are “well-grounded in knowledge” have access to the interpretation of the ambiguous verses of the Qur’an, or whether this knowledge is restricted exclusively to God. According to Suyuti, VERY FEW Sunni scholars have read this as a waw of coordination and MOST believe that those well-grounded in knowledge DO NOT HAVE ACCESS to the interpretation of the ambiguous verses. See Suyuti, al-Itqan fi’ulum al-Qur’an, naw’ 43 (fi’l-muhkam wa’l-mutashabih). Among the Mutazila, Qadi ‘Abd al-Jabbar accepts both interpretations as valid, while Zamakhshari (d. 528/1134) prefers the reading of a waw coordination; see Qadi ‘Abd al-Jabbar, Tanzih al-Qur’an ‘an al-mata’in, 58; and Mahmud b/ ‘Umar al-Zamakhshari, al-Kashshaf ‘an haq’aiq al-tanzil, ed. Mustafa Ahmad, 4 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1986 [1966]), 1:338.  

² Ibn ‘Abbas transfers the verb yaqulun, which follows those well-grounded in knowledge in the orthodox reading of the Qu’ran, to yaqulu immediately prior to those well-grounded in knowledge, so that it reads wa-yaqulu’l-rasikhuna fi’l-‘ilm. The only conceivable interpretation of this irregular reading is that the waw initiates a new verbal sentence. (Ibid., p. 239; bold and capital emphasis mine)

¹ This is part of a long report that is found in Guillaume, 273.

² In other words, since rasikhun is the backward referent of the subject “they” of the verb yaqulun and subjects of verbs are in the nominative case, rasikhun is therefore in the nominative case.

³ In other words, rasikhun is the first part (mubtada’) of a nominative sentence, the predicate (khabar) of which is [they] say. The default case of the first part of the nominative sentence in Arabic is the nominative. This is also the opinion of al-Farra’, who says rasikhun is in the nominative case because of yaqulun, not because the Divine Name Allah, which precedes it, is in the nominative case; Ma’ani al-Qur’an, 1:191.

⁴ Since “God” is one of the subjects of the verb “knows” in the sentence, None knows its interpretation save God, it is in the nominative case; anything coordinated with the word “God” by a conjunction would necessarily be in the nominative case as well, according to the rules governing conjunctions in Arabic. (Ibid., p. 241)

¹ Arabic: in ta’wiluhu illa ‘ind Allah wa’l—rasikhuna fi’l-‘ilm yaqulun. Notice that in this [Masud’s] irregular reading, the Divine Name Allah is in the genitive case, while rasikhun is in the nominative case, which renders IMPOSSIBLE the reading of the waw as coordinating God and those well-grounded in knowledge. The irregular readings of Ubayy and Ibn Mas’ud are found in al-Farra’, Ma’ani al-Qur’an, 1:191. (Ibid. p. 242; the comments in brackets along with the bold and capital emphasis are mine)

I highlight the variant readings listed by al-Tabari to help the readers better appreciate and understand the various ways Muhammad’s companions and/or their followers recited the verse, and how they affect the meaning of the text.

The Uthmanic recension which Muslims follow today reads this way: wa’l-rāsikhūna fī‘l-ʿil’mi yaqūlūna.

And yet the Qurans of Ibn Abbas and Ubayy b. Kabb read it this way: wa-yaqulu’l-rasikhuna fi’l-‘ilm.

There is another important difference found between the Quran of ibn Masud with that of Uthman’s. The Arabic of the Uthmanic text reads in ta’wiluhu illa l-lahu, whereas that of ibn Masud’s reads in ta’wiluhu illa ‘ind Allah:

Compare:

UTHMAN: ta’wīlahu illā l-lahu wal-rāsikhūna fī l-ʿil’mi yaqūlūna.

IBN MASUD: ta’wīlahu illā ‘ind Allah wal-rāsikhūna fī l-ʿil’mi yaqūlūna.

The words ‘ind Allah makes this a genitival phrase (“with Allah”) whereas rasikhun is in the nominative case, and therefore becomes the subject of a new sentence. Ibn Masud’s reading reinforces the fact that there is no possible way of coordinating or grouping those grounded in knowledge with Allah in knowing the meaning of the unclear verses.

Therefore, we have two different readings coming from the very eye and ear witnesses of Muhammad, men who learned the Quran directly from their so-called prophet, that contradict each other.

Q. 3:7 is either stating that no one knows the meaning of the unclear verses except Allah. Or the passage actually teaches that Allah AND those grounded in knowledge both know the meanings of the ambiguous texts of the Quran. Both can’t be correct since one cancels out the other.

So, which is it Muslims? What is this Quranic passage actually saying? Is the Quran claiming there are texts whose meanings are known to no one else besides Allah? Or is the meaning of these verses known to BOTH Allah AND men who are firmly grounded in the knowledge of the Quran?

Even more devastatingly, how could these individuals who all learned the “revelation” directly from Muhammad be so confused and get it so wrong? Did Muhammad fail to communicate his point clearly, and therefore failed in his mission to guide his community aright? Or were his followers such terrible disciples that they constantly misheard and/or misunderstand what their “prophet” was teaching them?

We will leave it to the followers of Muhammad to sort out this mess which they have been duped into thinking is a revelation from the true God.

FURTHER READING

A QURANIC VARIANT THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE

A QURANIC VARIANT THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE PT. 2

The Quran insinuates that the Jews viewed the angel Gabriel as their enemy. This is derived from the following verse:  

Say (O Muhammad): “Whoever is an enemy to Jibrael (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur’an) down to your heart by Allah’s Permission, confirming what came before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] and guidance and glad tidings for the believers. S. 2:97 Hilali-Khan

Here’s how the Islamic expositors interpreted this text:

Then Allah, Exalted is He, revealed the following verse about the saying of one of the Jews, ‘Abdullah Ibn Suriyyah, that Gabriel was the enemy of the Jews, saying: (Say) O Muhammad!: (Who is an enemy to Gabriel!) is automatically an enemy to Allah. (For he it is who hath revealed to your heart) sent Gabriel to you with the Qur’an (by Allah’s leave) by Allah’s command, (confirming) affirming the Oneness of Allah (that which was before it) of the Book, (and a guidance) from error (and glad tiding) good news (to believers) that Paradise will be theirs. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=2&tAyahNo=97&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)

(Say (O Muhammad, to mankind): Who is an enemy to Gabriel!…) [2:97]. Sa‘id ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Zahid informed us> al-Hasan ibn Ahmad al-Shaybani> al-Mu’ammil ibn al-Hasan ibn ‘Isa> Muhammad ibn Isma‘il ibn Salim> Abu Nu‘aym> ‘Abdullah ibn al-Walid> Bukayr> Ibn Shihab> Sa‘id ibn Jubayr> Ibn ‘Abbas who said: “The Jews came to the Prophet and said: ‘O Abu’l-Qasim! We would like to ask you about a few things; we shall follow you if you answer them. Who, among the angels, comes to you? For there is not a single prophet except that an angel comes to him with a message and revelation from his Lord, glorified and majestic is He, so who is the angel who comes to you?’ He said: ‘it is Gabriel’. They said: ‘That is the one who comes down with war and fighting. He is our enemy. If you had said: Michael, who comes down with rain and mercy, we would have followed you’. And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed (Say (O Muhammad, to mankind): Who is an enemy to Gabriel! For he it is who hath revealed (this Scripture) to thy heart by Allah’s leave) up to His saying (Then, lo! Allah (Himself) is an enemy to the disbelievers) [2:98]”. (‘Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=2&tAyahNo=97&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)

VIII: His words, “Anyone who is the enemy of Jibril.” (2:97)

‘Ikrima said, “The meaning of ‘Jibr‘, ‘Mik‘, and ‘Saraf‘ is ‘slave’ [i.e. in Jibril, Mika’il and Israfil] and ‘il’ means ‘Allah’.”

4210. It is related that Anas said, “When ‘Abdullah ibn Salam heard of the arrival of the Messenger of Allah in Madina while he was gathering fruit in some land, he went to the Prophet and said, “I will ask you about three things WHICH ONLY A PROPHET KNOWS. What is the first sign of the Final Hour? What is the first food that the people of the Garden will eat? And for what reason does a child resemble his father or his mother?” He said, “Jibril has just informed me about them.” He said, “Jibril?” He replied, “Yes.” He said, “That is the enemy of the Jews among the angels.” He recited this ayat: “Say, ‘Anyone who is an enemy to Jibril should know that it was he who brought it down upon your heart, by Allah’s authority.'” “The first sign of the Final Hour will be a fire which will gather people from the east to the west. The first food that the people of the Garden will eat will be the extra bit of the liver of the fish. When the man’s discharge comes first, the child will resemble him. If the woman has a discharge first, then it will resemble her.” He said, “I testify that there is no god but Allah and I testify that you are the Messenger of Allah. O Messenger of Allah, the Jews are a calumnious people. If they know about my Islam before you ask them about me, they will slander me in your presence.” The Jews came and the Messenger of Allah said, “What kind of man is ‘Abdullah ibn Salam among you?” They said, “The best of us, and the son of the best of us, and our master and the son of our master.” The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “What would you think if ‘Abdullah were to become Muslim?” They said, “We seek refuge with Allah from that!” ‘Abdullah came out to them and said, “I testify that there is no god but Allah and I testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” They said, “The worst of us and the son of the worst of us,” and began to disparage him. He said, “This is what I feared, Messenger of Allah.” (Aisha Bewley, The Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, Chapter 68. Book of Tafsir; bold capital emphasis mine)

The Jews are the Enemies of Jibril

Imam Abu Ja`far bin Jarir At-Tabari said, “The scholars of Tafsir AGREE that this Ayah (2:97-98) was revealed in response to the Jews who claimed that Jibril (Gabriel) is an enemy of the Jews and that Mika’il (Michael) is their friend.” Al-Bukhari said, “Allah said…

(Whoever is an enemy of Jibril (let him die in his fury)). `Ikrimah said, “Jibr, Mik and Israf all mean, worshipper, while il means, Allah”. Anas bin Malik said, “When `Abdullah bin Salam heard of the arrival of the Prophet in Al-Madinah, he was working on his land. He came to the Prophet and said, `I am going to ask you about three things which nobody knows EXCEPT a Prophet. What will be the first portent of the Hour What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle’ Allah’s Messenger said, (Jibril has just told me the answers.) `Abdullah said, `He (i.e. Jibril), among all the angels, is the enemy of the Jews.’ Allah’s Messenger recited the Ayah…

(Whoever is an enemy to Jibril (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur’an) down to your heart). Allah’s Messenger then said, (The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be the caudate lobe of the liver of fish. As for the child resembling his parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and his discharge is first, the child will resemble the father. If the woman has a discharge first, the child will resemble her side of the family.) On that `Abdullah bin Salam said, `I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and you are the Messenger of Allah.’ `Abdullah bin Salam further said, `O Allah’s Messenger! THE JEWS ARE LIARS, and if they should come to know about my conversion to Islam before you ask them (about me), they will tell a lie about me.’ The Jews came to Allah’s Messenger and `Abdullah went inside the house. Allah’s Messenger asked (the Jews), (`What kind of man is `Abdullah bin Salam’) They replied, `He is the best among us, the son of the best among us, our master and the son of our master.’ Allah’s Messenger said, (What do you think if he would embrace Islam) The Jews said, `May Allah save him from it.’ Then `Abdullah bin Salam came out in front of them saying, `I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.’ Thereupon they said, `He is the evilest among us, and the son of the evilest among us.’ And they continued talking badly about him. Ibn Salam said, `This is what I feared, O Messenger of Allah!.”’ Only Al-Bukhari recorded this Hadith with this chain of narration. Al-Bukhari and Muslim recorded this Hadith from Anas using another chain of narration.

Some people say that `il’ means worshipper while whatever word that is added to it becomes Allah’s Name, because `il’ is a constant in such conjunction. This is similar to the names `Abdullah, `Abdur-Rahman, `Abdul-Malik, `Abdul-Quddus, `Abdus-Salam, `Abdul-Kafi, `Abdul-Jalil, and so forth. Hence, `Abd’ is constant in these compound names, while the remainder differs from name to name. This is the same case with Jibril, Mika’il, `Azra’il, Israfil, and so forth. Allah knows best. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 2:97-98 https://www.alim.org/quran/tafsir/ibn-kathir/surah/2/97; bold and capital emphasis mine)

What makes the hadith from al-Bukhari, which is also cited by Ibn Kathir, rather interesting is that, if Abdullah bin Salam was right that the Jews are liars, then what does this say about his credibility seeing that he himself was a Jew? Doesn’t this prove that he too was lying to Muhammad in order to make him look stupid?

This is confirmed by the fact that, if Ibn Salam was correct that only a prophet would know the answers to his questions, then how could he possibly know whether Muhammad’s answers were right when he himself wasn’t a prophet?

Besides, which medical doctor or embryologist would argue that the reason a child will resemble either his father’s or mother’s side of the family will be determined by which parent has a sexual orgasm first?

The Jews of Muhammad’s time were obviously making fun of him, exposing him for the fraud that he was, since they would have never viewed Gabriel as an antagonist or hostile angel when their own religious texts and tradition praise him as one of those spirit creatures assigned to intercede for them.

Note, for instance, the manner in which the book of Daniel describes him:

“And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.” Daniel 8:15-19 Authorized King James Version (AV) 

“And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my God; yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.” Daniel 9:20-23 AV

In fact, the rabbinic tradition even went as far as to claim that there was one instance where Gabriel reproved and corrected God!

The rabbis then discussed how Gabriel could be so audacious as to rebuke God. Here’s their explanation:

§ Abaye said to Rav Dimi, who descended to Babylonia from Eretz Yisrael: How do you explain this verse in the West, Eretz Yisrael: “Do not proceed hastily to litigation, lest you know not what to do in the end of it, when your neighbor has put you to shame. Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another” (Proverbs 25:8–9)?

Rav Dimi explained as follows: At the time that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Ezekiel: Go say to Israel: “Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite” (Ezekiel 16:3), the spirit Paskonit, which is another name for the angel Gabriel, said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, were the patriarch Abraham and the matriarch Sarah to come now and stand before You, would you speak to them in such a manner and put them to shame? Is it not stated: “Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another”?

The Gemara asks: But does the angel Gabriel have so much authority that HE CAN REPROVE GOD IN SUCH A MANNER? The Gemara answers: YES, as Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: He, the angel Gabriel, has three names: Piskon, Itmon, and Sigron. He is called Piskon because he splits [sheposek] words AND ARGUES WITH GOD ON HIGH. He is called Itmon because he conceals [she’otem] the sins of the Jewish people. And he is called Sigron because once he closes [shesoger] his arguments on behalf of the Jewish people, no one reopens the discussion. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 44b https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.44b.4-6?lang=bi; capital emphasis mine)

And here’s another rendering of the foregoing rabbinic tradition:

Abaye asked R. Dimi:⁸ To what do ye in ‘the West’ relate the following verse: Go not forth hastily to strife, for what wilt thou do in the end thereof when thy neighbour hath put thee to shame. Debate thy cause with thy neighbour, but reveal not the secrets of another?⁹ — [He answered]: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Ezekiel, Go and say unto Israel, An Amorite was thy father, and thy mother was a Hittite,¹⁰ the intercessory¹¹ spirit said before the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Sovereign of the Universe! if Abraham and Sarah came and stood before Thee, wouldst Thou say [this] to them and put them to shame?’ Debate thy cause with thy neighbour,¹² but reveal not the secret of another!¹³ But has he so much license?¹⁴ — YES, For R. Jose son of R. Hanina said: He has three names: Pisakon, Itamon, and Sigaron.¹⁵ Pisakon, BECAUSE HE ARGUES AGAINST THE MOST HIGH;¹⁶ Itamon, because he hides the sins of Israel, Sigaron, because when he concludes¹⁷ a matter, none can reopen it.¹⁸

8. R. Dimi often carried Palestine exegesis to the Babylonian schools.
9. Prov. XXV, 8-9.
10. Ezek. XVI, 3.
11. [H] lit., ‘an arguing spirit, — an additional name of the Angel Gabriel, WHO ALWAYS INTERCEDED ON BEHALF OF ISRAEL. V. however p. 99, n. 6.
12. I.e., reproach him alone.
13. Do not take up anothers’ shame.
14. To reproach God so freely!
15. [H] from [H] ‘to split;’ [H] from [H] ‘to lock’; and [H] from [H] ‘to close’. So at least according to the Talmudic interpretation which follows.
16. Lit., ‘he splits words upwards.
17. I.e., when his words are of no effect.
18. No others can successfully intercede. Kohut suggests that they are of Arabic origin. Pisakon denoting shame; Itamon, sin, and Sigaron, pain, an angel being in charge of each of these three things. Hence in his opinion, [H] does not denote Gabriel but the Spirit of Shame. V. ‘Aruch Completum, vol. I, p. 63. (Sanhedrin 44; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Pay close attention to the footnote:

11. H] lit., ‘an arguing spirit, — an additional name of the Angel Gabriel, WHO ALWAYS INTERCEDED ON BEHALF OF ISRAEL. V. however p. 99, n. 6.

Since the Jews believed that Gabriel was a mighty angelic creature powerful enough to correct God, and the spirit who interceded for them, how could they then turn around and tell Muhammad that he was their enemy?

The answer is obvious. These Jews were mocking Muhammad, exposing him for a fool for believing every fairytale and lie which he heard from others.

Interestingly, the Muslim sources themselves admit that the Jews were ridiculing Muhammad for the purpose of exposing him as a fraud since they knew he was a deceiver and a false prophet:

About this time the Jewish rabbis showed hostility to the apostle in envy, hatred, malice, because God had chosen His apostle from the Arabs. They were joined by men from al-Aus and al-Khazraj who had obstinately clung to their heathen religion. They were hypocrites, clinging to the polytheism of their fathers denying the resurrection; yet when Islam appeared and their people flocked to it they were compelled to pretend to accept it to save their lives. But in secret they were hypocrites whose inclination was towards the Jews because they considered the apostle a liar and strove against Islam.

It was the Jewish rabbis who used to annoy the apostle with questions and introduce confusion, so as to confound the truth with falsity. The Quran used to come down in reference to these questions of theirs, though some of the questions about what was allowed and forbidden came from the Muslims themselves… (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], p. 239; bold emphasis mine)

Little wonder that the Quran quotes unbelievers as saying that Muhammad was an “ear,” meaning someone who listened and parroted what others were saying, no matter how silly, ridiculous, foolish, or unbelievable:

And among them are men who hurt the Prophet (Muhammad) and say: “He is (lending his) ear (to every news).” Say: “He listens to what is best for you; he believes in Allah; has faith in the believers; and is a mercy to those of you who believe.” But those who hurt Allah’s Messenger (Muhammad) will have a painful torment. S. 9:94 Hilali-Khan

Muhammad simply repeated the fables and lies which the Jews and others told him as if they were revelations sent down to him from God.  Little did he realize that it would be these same fairytales and falsehoods that he parroted as part of his scripture, which would end up exposing him as a fraud and antichrist.

FURTHER READING

ALLAH AND MUHAMMAD FAIL EMBRYOLOGY

Allah and his Messenger Fail A Scientific Test

Jamal Badawi’s Misinformation and Misquotations – Part 5 

According rabbinic tradition, there was a certain instance when angel Gabriel reproved and corrected God. The rabbis then discuss that Gabriel had authority to do so because of his greatness and position:

§ Abaye said to Rav Dimi, who descended to Babylonia from Eretz Yisrael: How do you explain this verse in the West, Eretz Yisrael: “Do not proceed hastily to litigation, lest you know not what to do in the end of it, when your neighbor has put you to shame. Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another” (Proverbs 25:8–9)?

Rav Dimi explained as follows: At the time that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Ezekiel: Go say to Israel: “Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite” (Ezekiel 16:3), the spirit Paskonit, which is another name for the angel Gabriel, said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, were the patriarch Abraham and the matriarch Sarah to come now and stand before You, would you speak to them in such a manner and put them to shame? Is it not stated: “Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another”?

The Gemara asks: But does the angel Gabriel have so much authority that HE CAN REPROVE GOD IN SUCH A MANNER? The Gemara answers: YES, as Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: He, the angel Gabriel, has three names: Piskon, Itmon, and Sigron. He is called Piskon because he splits [sheposek] words AND ARGUES WITH GOD ON HIGH. He is called Itmon because he conceals [she’otem] the sins of the Jewish people. And he is called Sigron because once he closes [shesoger] his arguments on behalf of the Jewish people, no one reopens the discussion. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 44b https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.44b.4-6?lang=bi; capital emphasis mine)

Here’s another version:

Abaye asked R. Dimi:⁸ To what do ye in ‘the West’ relate the following verse: Go not forth hastily to strife, for what wilt thou do in the end thereof when thy neighbour hath put thee to shame. Debate thy cause with thy neighbour, but reveal not the secrets of another?⁹ — [He answered]: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Ezekiel, Go and say unto Israel, An Amorite was thy father, and thy mother was a Hittite,¹⁰ the intercessory¹¹ spirit said before the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Sovereign of the Universe! if Abraham and Sarah came and stood before Thee, wouldst Thou say [this] to them and put them to shame?’ Debate thy cause with thy neighbour,¹² but reveal not the secret of another!¹³ But has he so much license?¹⁴ — YES, For R. Jose son of R. Hanina said: He has three names: Pisakon, Itamon, and Sigaron.¹⁵ Pisakon, BECAUSE HE ARGUES AGAINST THE MOST HIGH;¹⁶ Itamon, because he hides the sins of Israel, Sigaron, because when he concludes¹⁷ a matter, none can reopen it.¹⁸

8. R. Dimi often carried Palestine exegesis to the Babylonian schools.
9. Prov. XXV, 8-9.
10. Ezek. XVI, 3.
11. [H] lit., ‘an arguing spirit, — an additional name of the Angel Gabriel, who always interceded on behalf of Israel. V. however p. 99, n. 6.
12. I.e., reproach him alone.
13. Do not take up anothers’ shame.
14. To reproach God so freely!
15. [H] from [H] ‘to split;’ [H] from [H] ‘to lock’; and [H] from [H] ‘to close’. So at least according to the Talmudic interpretation which follows.
16. Lit., ‘he splits words upwards.
17. I.e., when his words are of no effect.
18. No others can successfully intercede. Kohut suggests that they are of Arabic origin. Pisakon denoting shame; Itamon, sin, and Sigaron, pain, an angel being in charge of each of these three things. Hence in his opinion, [H] does not denote Gabriel but the Spirit of Shame. V. ‘Aruch Completum, vol. I, p. 63. (Sanhedrin 44; bold and capital emphasis mine)

So there you have it. Rabbis went as far as to claim that Gabriel is such a mighty and powerful angelic being that he has the authority to reprove and correct God himself!