Tag: christianity

FIRSTBORN OF CREATION REVISITED… AGAIN!

The following is taken from the monumental work titled The Incarnate Christ and His Critics: A Biblical Defense, authored by Robert M. Bowman Jr. & J. Ed Komoszewski, published by Kregel Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2024, Part 2: Like Father, Like Son: Jesus’ Divine Attributes, Chapter 13. Was Christ the First Creature?, pp. 255-263.

In my estimation this is THE best and most comprehensive exposition and defense of the biblical basis for the Deity of Christ. Every serious Trinitarian Christian student of the Holy Bible, apologist, and/or theologian must have this book in the library.

FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATION (COLOSSIANS 1:15)

In Colossians 1:15, the apostle Paul calls God’s Son “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” Throughout church history, the expression “the firstborn of all creation” has been one of the most popular proof texts against the deity of Christ—perhaps the most popular. But what does it mean?

Competing Interpretations of “the Firstborn of All Creation”

The alternative Christologies we are considering throughout this book have offered varying interpretations of Colossians 1:15. Latter-day Saints believe it refers to Jesus as the literal firstborn of God’s billions of spirit sons and daughters who lived in heaven before becoming mortals on earth.22

This is the official LDS interpretation of the verse, expressed in a statement published in 1916 by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles.23

Jehovah’s Witnesses contend that the expression “the firstborn of all creation” means that Christ was “the first creation by Jehovah God.”24 Specifically, the Watchtower Society teaches that Christ in his prehuman state was the archangel Michael. Historically, Jehovah’s Witnesses have emphasized Colossians 1:15 as one of their main proof texts against the deity of Christ. Danny Dixon, a non-Jehovah’s Witness advocating an Arian Christology, also appeals to Colossians 1:15–16 to defend this position, though without identifying Jesus as Michael.25

Unitarians take a radically different approach to the interpretation of Colossians 1:15, while still regarding it, as Kegan Chandler asserts, as “one of the strongest evidences against the deity of Christ.”26 Since Unitarians do not believe that Christ existed before his human life, they cannot take “firstborn of all creation” to mean the first creature chronologically. Here is how Chandler interprets the verse:

To say that Jesus is “the first born of all creation” (v. 15b) furthermore places him squarely within the realm of created things. The designation “firstborn” means simply that he is preeminent within that group, that he has priority among the other subjects in that category.27

Finally, we may briefly mention how Oneness Pentecostal leader and theologian David Bernard interprets the expression “firstborn of all creation.” He also denies that Christ preexisted his human life, and so interprets the expression to mean that Christ is “the firstborn of the spiritual family of God that is called out of all creation” and that he is “first in power, authority, and preeminence, just as the eldest brother has preeminence among his brothers.”28 This Oneness interpretation of Colossians 1:15 is quite similar to the Unitarian interpretation, despite their theological differences.

Before discussing the meaning of Colossians 1:15, we might pause to reflect on just how differently the various alternative Christologies interpret this verse. It has been taken to mean that Jesus Christ is the first spirit offspring of God and a heavenly Mother (Latter-day Saints), the first creature God made (Jehovah’s Witnesses), a man exalted by God to the position of preeminent member of creation (Unitarians), and God’s self-manifestation in a human being who is thereby the preeminent human being (Oneness Pentecostals). Members of these groups (especially Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses) sometimes think that their understanding of Colossians 1:15 is obviously correct, and they often assert that orthodox Christians reject that understanding because of their theological bias. Evidently, though, freedom from an orthodox perspective does not make the meaning of the text obvious or easy to determine. Such is often the case with proof texts used by critics of the doctrine of the incarnation.

Interpreting Colossians 1:15 in Context

Words vary in their precise meaning and connotation depending on context. If we want to understand what Paul meant by the expression “firstborn of all creation,” then, we need to read it in context. This means looking at what the passage says leading up to that expression as well as what it says in the lines following it. Here is the statement in its context (translating very literally):

12 giving thanks to the Father, who qualified you for the share of the inheritance of the saints in the light;

13 who delivered us from the domain of the darkness and transferred [us] into the kingdom of the Son of his love,

14 in whom we have the redemption, the forgiveness of sins;

15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation,

16 because in him all things were created— in the heavens and on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rules or authorities— all things have been created through him and for him;

17 and he is before everything, and all things in him hold together.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might become preeminent in everything. (Col. 1:12–18)

This passage strongly emphasizes Christ’s relationship to God the Father as his Son. Note the references to “the Father” (v. 12) and “the Son of his love” (v. 13). Between these references Paul says that the Father has qualified Christians “for the share of the inheritance of the saints in the light.” The idea here is that the Father’s beloved Son is the primary heir of this “inheritance” from the Father, and yet those redeemed in Christ are graciously invited to receive a “share” of that inheritance. The other key theme that introduces our passage is that of kingdom or rule: we have been rescued from the domain or authority (exousia) of darkness and transferred into the kingdom (basileia) of God’s beloved Son (vv. 13–14).

It is in this context of Father, Son, kingdom, and inheritance that we should understand the word “firstborn” (prōtotokos). Although the literal meaning of the word is the first offspring born to a biological parent, the cultural significance of the word is that of the father’s primary heir. In ancient Israel and the ancient Mediterranean world generally, the firstborn son in a family was customarily the father’s primary heir, inheriting the largest or best portion of his estate (and sometimes all of it). In the context of the preceding explicit reference to an “inheritance” and the use of the titles Father and Son, this significance of firstborn as the primary heir is clearly the point of the term “firstborn.” As God the Father’s beloved Son, Christ rules the divine kingdom. Probably the main Old Testament text influencing this reference to Jesus as the “firstborn” is God’s promise to David to establish his kingdom forever above all other rulers: “And I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth” (Ps. 89:27). The title “firstborn” thus has clear messianic significance, in which, according to Paul, the Messiah (Christ) rules over all creation.

This understanding of Paul’s meaning is amply confirmed by what follows. Immediately after calling the Son “the firstborn of all creation,” Paul says that “in him [the Son] all things were created.” Paul here distinguishes the Son from the creation by stating that all things were created in the Son, which means he was not one of the members of those created things. The words “all creation” (pasēs ktiseōs, v. 15)29 and “all things were created” (ektisthē ta panta, v. 16) are clearly synonymous in what they signify: pasēs and panta are two different grammatical forms of the same adjective meaning “all” or “every,” and ktiseōs (“creation” or “creature”) is the noun corresponding to the verb ektisthē (“were created”). In the Greek text, as in most English versions, these two expressions are separated by only three words, “for in him” (hoti en autō). Thus, Paul clearly is not including the Son in the category of “all creation.” Instead, he is saying that “all creation” was created in the Son.

Paul goes on at the end of verse 16 to say that “all things were created through him and for him.” Now Paul has distinguished the Son from the created things using three similar phrases: all things were created “in him . . . through him and for him” (en autō . . . di’ autou kai eis auton). The last part of this statement about the Son closely parallels what Paul says about God in another epistle (translating literally):

. . . all things through him and for him have been created. (Col. 1:16b)

. . . through him and for him [are] all things. (Rom. 11:36)

If all things were created in, through, and for the Son, then the Son is not one of the created things. It is that simple. Paul’s statement does not mean that the Son was God’s first creature, as Jehovah’s Witnesses claim. As Murray Harris has pointed out, “If Paul had believed that Jesus was the first of God’s creatures to be formed,” verse 16 “would have continued ‘for all other things were created in him.’”30 Notoriously, in order to fix this problem and circumvent the clear teaching of verses 16–17 that the Son Jesus Christ is not part of the created world, the Watchtower added the word “other” four times in these two verses (as well as once in verse 20) in its New World Translation (NWT):

Because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all other things, and by means of him all other things were made to exist. (Col. 1:16–17 NWT)31

In an article that appeared the same year as the first edition of the NWT, the publishers explained the reasoning behind their addition of the word other to the passage:

But now trinitarians confront you with Paul’s words at Colossians 1:15– 20 according to the King James Version. They argue that, if Jesus Christ was before all things and all things consist by him and were created by him and for him, then he must be the very same as the Almighty, Most High God, or be one person with God. But we must harmonize these verses with all the other scriptures that Jesus Christ was God’s Son and a creation of His. So the Greek word here must be rendered in the sense of “all other.” Note, then, how the New World Translation blasts the trinitarian argument.32

One could not ask for a more candid explanation: the translators added the word other to make Colossians 1:16 cohere with their theological assumptions (supposedly validated by other biblical passages). Read the passage (even in the NWT) without adding other and the text clearly affirms that absolutely every created thing was created in, through, and for the Son.

Jehovah’s Witnesses defend these insertions by pointing to other places in the Bible where the word “other” seems to be implied by the context. “But how could Jesus be a creature if ‘in him all things were created’? At times the Bible uses the word ‘all’ in a way that allows for exceptions.”33 None of the supposed exceptions supports the Watchtower’s rendering of Colossians 1:16–17. If anything, their examples actually undermine their conclusion. Perhaps the text most commonly cited in this regard (as in the article just cited) is Paul’s statement, “But when it says, ‘all things are put in subjection,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him” (1 Cor. 15:27). However, Paul is definitely not saying that God is a member of the category denoted by “all things”; quite the contrary. He is saying that God is outside or apart from that category. This is why English versions—including the NWT— uniformly translate the expression as “all things” (or “everything”) and not “all other things.”34 So this text is in no sense precedent for what the NWT does in Colossians 1:16–17. The issue is not whether the word “other” can ever be implied or even added to a translation to make for more idiomatic or smoother English (e.g., Luke 13:2, 4). The issue is whether it is proper to add the word in order to make a text say the opposite of what it would mean without it. That is what the NWT does in Colossians 1:16–17. Where Paul says that all things were created in, through, and for the Son, the NWT attempts to convey the idea that the Son is one of the things that were created.

In three of the four places the NWT has “all other things,” Paul uses the specific expression ta panta (Col. 1:16 [bis], 17b), which is the nominative (subject) neuter plural form with the article (“the all [things]”).35 As A. T. Robertson pointed out in his Greek grammar almost a century ago, the neuter plural was commonly used “in a collective sense for the sum total,” like the English “the all,” citing Colossians 1:16 as an example.36 That is, the neuter plural refers to the totality or whole category, and thus does not allow exceptions. Although the expression ta panta can be used in other contexts, when it is used in the context of creation (as is explicitly the case here), it is a standard Jewish expression referring to the totality of God’s creation (Gen. 1:31; Neh. 9:6; Eccl. 3:11; 11:5; Job 8:3 LXX; Jer. 10:16; 51:19 [28:19 LXX]; 3 Macc. 2:3; Wis. 1:7, 14; 9:1; Sir. 18:1; 23:20; 43:26; Acts 17:25; Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 3:9; Heb. 1:3; 2:10; Rev. 4:11). An excellent example appears in 3 Maccabees: “Lord, Lord, king of the heavens and sovereign of all creation [pasēs ktiseōs] . . . you, the creator of all things [ta panta]” (3 Macc. 2:2–3a NRSV). This text uses the same two expresions we find in Colossians 1:15–16a and in the same context of the creation of the world. As Richard Bauckham points out, the expression “belongs to the standard rhetoric of Jewish monotheism, in which it constantly refers, quite naturally, to the whole of the created reality from which God is absolutely distinguished as its Creator and Ruler.”37 By placing the Son outside the category of “the all” that was created, Paul excludes the notion that Christ was the chronologically first of all creatures.

In verse 17 Paul again distinguishes the Son from the created order, stating, “and he is before everything.” Paul uses the word translated here “before” (pro) eleven other places in his epistles, always with the temporal meaning of “before” (Rom. 16:7; 1 Cor. 2:7; 4:5; 2 Cor. 12:2; Gal. 1:17; 2:12; 3:23; Eph. 1:4; 2 Tim. 1:9; 4:21; Titus 1:2). For that reason, virtually all commentators agree that “he is before everything” expresses primarily the idea that the Son existed prior to everything that was created as well as secondarily the idea that he has priority of rank over all creation, with this second idea being entailed or implied by the first.38 The Unitarian claim that Paul means only “supremacy of rank rather than priority in time”39 is not a tenable interpretation. We have here, then, yet another clear statement of the Son’s personal preexistence before creation. This finding is not only a problem for Unitarianism; it is also a problem for Oneness Pentecostalism, which regards the Son as strictly the human manifestation of the Father.

To sum up what we have said so far, Colossians 1:16–17 tells us three things of relevance to interpreting what Paul means in 1:15 by “firstborn of all creation”: (1) the Son is distinct from “all creation”; (2) the totality of all things in creation were created in, through, and for the Son; and (3) the Son exists before everything that was created. On the basis of these three ideas in verses 16–17, commentators in recent decades have reached a consensus that the expression “firstborn of all creation” cannot mean that the Son was the first being in creation to be created or born.40 This “partitive genitive”41 interpretation of “all creation” (in which the “firstborn” is the earliest “part” of all creation) is the view assumed by the Arians in the fourth century. Jehovah’s Witnesses and other modern Arians also assume that “all creation” is partitive.

The LDS interpretation of “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 is similar to the Arian view, but it understands Christ to have been the first literal son born to our “heavenly Parents” (Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother) rather than the first being whom God created. The problem with this view (beyond the unbiblical theology it presupposes) is that Paul uses the term firstborn to express the Son’s relation to “all creation,” not his relationship to God or to other supposed spirit children. Had Paul intended to identify Christ as the chronologically first of many sons, he could easily have said something like “the firstborn of the sons of God.” Such a wording would have followed a recognizable (and undeniably partitive) form used in the Old Testament (reflected literally in the NKJV: “the firstborn of your/our sons,” Exod. 22:29; 34:20; Neh. 10:36; “the firstborn of the children of Israel,” Num. 3:46, 50; 8:17, 18). Alternatively, if Paul had meant to use the word literally to mean the first one born to heavenly Parents, he could have said something like “the firstborn of God.” This wording (which is not partitive) would also have used a familiar form in the Old Testament (“Reuben the firstborn of Israel,” Exod. 6:14; 1 Chron. 5:1, 3; “the firstborn of Pharaoh,” Exod. 11:5; 12:29; “Er, the firstborn of Judah,” 1 Chron. 2:3; etc.). He said nothing like these things.

The near consensus view among scholars now is that Paul means that “the firstborn” has, as the Father’s heir, dominion or rulership over “all creation.”42 This “genitive of subordination” is found in other places in the New Testament, as when Christ is called “the ruler over the kings of the earth” (Rev. 1:5 NET, NKJV), where of course Christ is not one of the earthly kings, or when God is called “King over the nations” (Rev. 15:3 NET).43 A good Old Testament example is the statement that the king of Egypt made Joseph “ruler of all his possessions” (archonta pasēs tēs ktēseōs autou, Ps. 104:21 NETS). Conceptually, Paul’s description of the Son as “the firstborn of all creation” parallels the statement in Hebrews that the Son was “the heir of all things” (klēronomon pantōn, Heb. 1:2), which also uses the genitive of subordination.

Based on such considerations, a large number of contemporary English versions translate the second part of Colossians 1:15, more traditionally translated as firstborn “of all creation” (ESV, NABRE, NASB, NJB, NRSV), as firstborn “over all creation” (CEB, CSB, LEB, NEB/REB, NET, NIV, NKJV, NLT).44 Chandler criticizes the NIV for its rendering (apparently unaware of how many other versions do the same), suggesting that bias against the idea of Christ being part of the creation was the reason.45 In fact, careful exegesis of the passage has led most interpreters and a majority of recent translators to the same interpretation.

22. Pyle, I Have Said Ye Are Gods, 360–61; Andrew C. Skinner, “The Premortal Godhood of Christ: A Restoration Perspective,” in Jesus Christ: Son of God, Savior, ed. Paul H. Peterson, Gary Layne Hatch, and Laura D. Card (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, BYU, 2002), 50–78, accessed online at rsc.byu.edu.

23. “The Father and the Son: A Doctrinal Exposition.”

24. “Colossians Study Notes—Chapter 1,” in NWT (Study Edition), at Col. 1:15.

25. Danny André Dixon, “An Arian Response to a Trinitarian View,” in Son of God, by Irons, Dixon, and Smith, 32.

26. Chandler, The God of Jesus, 300.

 27. Chandler, The God of Jesus, 301.

28. Bernard, Oneness of God, 119.

29. The KJV translated this expression “every creature,” but every modern version we reviewed says “all creation.” For a detailed explanation of why “all creation” is correct, see G. K. Beale, Colossians and Philemon, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2019), 86.

30. Murray J. Harris, Colossians and Philemon, rev. ed., EGGNT (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 40.

31. Earlier editions of the NWT enclosed “other” in these verses in brackets, as was done with added words in other places in the Bible, but later editions, as well as the major 2013 revision, dropped all use of brackets.

32. “Further Enrichment of Understanding,” Watchtower, 15 Oct. 1950, 396.

33. “Jesus Christ as ‘the Firstborn of All Creation,’” Awake! (April 8, 1979): 29.

34. This mistake also appeared in Stafford, Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, 3rd ed., 384.

35. In Colossians 1:17a, which we translated, “and he is before everything,” Paul uses the genitive pantōn (which could be masculine or neuter), as required by the use of pro (“before”), without the article, rather than the nominative ta panta with the article, perhaps emphasizing that Christ exists prior to all beings such as those mentioned in 1:16.

36. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th ed. (New York: George H. Doran, 1923; reprint, Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), 653–54.

37. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 23.

38. See esp. David W. Pao, Colossians and Philemon, ZECNT (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 98; Beale, Colossians and Philemon, 95–96.

39. Buzzard, Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian, 190.

40. A partial exception is James Dunn, who holds that firstborn “can mean first created being and/or that which has precedence over creation,” with the former possibility assuming a direct relationship between Colossians 1:15 and texts about wisdom being created (Prov. 8:22 LXX; Sir. 1:4; 24:9). Yet Dunn also says that the church fathers were correct to prefer “begotten” to “created.” See James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 90. In our view and that of many scholars today, Dunn’s view overstates the role of wisdom motifs in Colossians 1:15–20.

41. That is, this interpretation understands the expression pasēs ktiseōs, which is in the genitive case, is an example of the partitive use of the genitive.

42. E.g., Morna D. Hooker, “Colossians,” in Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, ed. James D. G. Dunn and John W. Rogerson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 1406; C. H. Talbert, Ephesians and Colossians, Paideia (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 187; Douglas J. Moo, The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, PNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 119–20. For an especially thorough discussion see Beale, Colossians and Philemon, 86–91, esp. 90–91.

43. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 103–4.

44. The BBE paraphrases “coming into existence before all living things.” A few versions include both temporal priority and supremacy: “He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation” (NLT); “He is the first-born Son, superior to all creation” (CEV, GNT).

45. Chandler, The God of Jesus, 355.

FURTHER READING

JWS ADMIT: JESUS IS THE ETERNAL CREATOR!

JESUS CHRIST: SUPREME OVER ALL CREATION

CHRIST: THE OFFSPRING OF CREATION?

CHRIST & CREATIO EX NIHILO

IS PROTOTOKOS INTRINSICALLY A SO-CALLED “PARTITIVE WORD”?

REV. 3:14 REVISITED… ONE MORE TIME!

A HYMN TO THE DIVINE CHRIST

HOW MANY THEOIS IN THE NT?

GOD GAVE JESUS LIFE?

JOHN’S EGO EIMI SAYINGS REVISITED

A careful examination of the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, typically known as the Septuagint (LXX), with that of John’s Gospel will conclusively prove that Jesus’ “I AM” statements are clearly intended to identify him as the human incarnation of YHWH God (cf. John 1:1-18). The way in which John has communicated Christ’s words into the Greek tongue makes it obvious that the Apostle is making a direct connection with the “I AM” sayings of YHWH in the Hebrew Bible, specifically the book of Isaiah.

In the following chart, I cite from the LXX version of Isaiah in order to help readers see how Jesus’ “I AM” statements deliberately echo that of YHWH’s.


“Therefore shall my people know my name in that day for I am he, the one who is speaking to you (ego eimi autos ho lalon).” Isaiah 52:6 LXX  

“All the nations are gathered together, and princes shall be gathered out of them: who will declare (anangelei) these things? or who will declare (anangelei) to you things from the beginning? Let them bring forth their witnesses (martyras), and be justified; and let them hear, and declare the truth. Be my witnesses (martyres); and I too am a witness (martyrs), says the Lord God, and the servant whom I have chosen (exelexamen)so that you may know, and believe, and understand that I am he (hina… gnote pisteusete… hoti ego eimi): before me there came to be (egeneto) no other god, nor shall there be any after me. I am God, and besides me there is none who saves. I declared (anengeila) and saved; I reproached, and there was no stranger among you: You are my witnesses; I too am a witness, says the Lord God.” Isaiah 43:9-12       
“The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming’ (who is called Christ). ‘When he comes, he will proclaim (anangelei) all things to us.’ Jesus said to her, ‘I am he, the one who is speaking to you (ego eimi autos ho lalon).’” John 4:25-27 New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (NRSVUE)  

“Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, ‘He told me everything I have ever done.’ So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them, and he stayed there two days. And many more believed because of his word. They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world.’” John 4:39-42 NRSVUE  

“In your law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is valid. I am (ego eimi) the one testifying (martyron) about myself, and the Father who sent me testifies (martyrei) on my behalf.” John 8:17-18  

“He said to them, ‘You are from below, I am from above; you are from this world, I am not from this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he (pisteusete hoti ego eimi).’” John 8:23-24 NRSVUE  

“So Jesus said, ‘When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I am he (gnosesthe hoti ego eimi) and that I do nothing on my own, but I speak these things as the Father instructed me. And the one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what is pleasing to him.’” John 8:28-29 NRSVUE    

“‘Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad.’ Then the Jews said to him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?’ Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham came to be (genesthai), I AM (ego eimi).’ So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.” John 8:56-59  

“Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands and that he had come from God and was going to God (pros ton theon)… ‘I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen (exelexamen). But it is to fulfill the scripture, “The one who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.” I tell you this now, before it occurs, so that when it comes to be you may believe that I am he (hina hotan genētai pisteusete hoti ego eimi).’” John 13:3, 18-19
       

What makes the septuagintal rendering of Isa. 43:10 rather intriguing is that the servant is depicted as being distinct from both YHWH and the nation of Israel, whereas in the Hebrew version the servant and Israel are equated:

“You are my witnesses, says the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” NRSVUE

“Be my witnesses; and I too am a witness, says the Lord God, AND the servant whom I have chosen so that you may know, and believe, and understand that I am he.” LXX

Notice how the LXX gives the impression that the servant whom YHWH has chosen is personally distinct from the Israel that is summoned to also bear witness to YHWH being the only God that exists.

This comports with the fact that in Isaiah there are two servants, both of whom are called Israel, namely, the nation and the specific individual whom the NT and later Jewish tradition identifies as Messiah (Cf. Isa. 42:1-7; 49:1-10; 50:4-6; 52:13-15; Matt. 8:14-17; 12:17-21; Luke 22:37; Acts 8:30-35; 1 Peter 2:21-25).

Jesus’ ego eimi statements in John 13:19 is also significant in light of its context where John tells us that the Son “had come from God and was going to God (pros ton theon).”

These words deliberately the Prologue where Jesus is identified as the eternal Word who was with God (pros ton theon) from before the creation of all things:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (pros ton theon), and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God (pros ton theon). All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people… The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through him, yet the world did not know him… And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.” John 1:1-4, 9-10, 14

Elsewhere in John, Christ plainly speaks of his coming down from the Father to enter into the world, and of his leaving the world to go back to the Father:

“‘I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures but will tell you plainly of the Father. On that day you will ask in my name. I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf, for the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. I came from the Father and have come into the world; again, I am leaving the world and am going to the Father (pros ton patera).’ His disciples said, ‘Yes, now you are speaking plainly, not in any figure of speech! Now we know that you know all things and do not need to have anyone question you; by this we believe that you came from God.’ Jesus answered them, ‘Do you now believe?’” John 16:25-31 NRSVUE

Note, once again, John’s use of the preposition pros, which again points us to Jesus being the divine, uncreated Word who was pros (“with”) God from before the creation.  

In fact, the Lord makes this very same point in his prayer to the Father:

“So now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world existed… for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you, and they have believed that you sent me… Father, I desire that those also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory, which you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.” John 17:5, 8, 24 NRSVUE

Here, Jesus affirms that he personally existed alongside the Father where they both shared the same glory from before the creation the world. This is why he could say that he had come forth from the Father and was now returning back to the glory that he had shared alongside of him.

Nor is this the only time where Christ spoke of his prehuman, heavenly existence with the Father:

“No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.” John 3:13 NRSVUE

“‘for I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me but raise it up on the last day. This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day.’ Then the Jews began to complain about him because he said, ‘I am the bread that came down from heaven.’ They were saying, ‘Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, “I have come down from heaven”?’” John 6:38-42 NRSVUE

“Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?” John 6:62 NRSVUE

“Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God, and now I am here. I did not come on my own, but he sent me.’” John 8:42 NRSVUE

Clearly, then, Jesus’ ego eimi saying in John 13:19 means much more than “I am the Messiah who was foretold by the prophets.” The context shows that Christ is deliberately echoing the “I AM” sayings of YHWH found throughout Isaiah, specifically in Isa. 43:10, in order to make it known to his disciples that they were beholding the God of Israel himself in human flesh.  

FURTHER READING

JESUS CHRIST: ISRAEL’S ANI WAHO WHO SAVES

JESUS: THE I AM HE INCARNATE

Even More Proof That Jesus is Jehovah God Most High! Pt. 2

Jesus as the Great I AM

Jesus as the Great I AM Excursus

The Early Church Fathers On John 8:58

MATERIAL FOR THE ANDANI DISCUSSION

In this post I will show how the Quran attests that the Christianity delineated within the New Testament is the true religion of Jesus Christ, revealed and preserved by God.  

1. JESUS’ FOLLOWERS WERE TO BE VICTORIOUS TILL THE RESURRECTION DAY.

Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee SUPERIOR to those who reject faith, TO THE DAY OF RESURRECTION: Then shall ye all return unto Me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.” S. 3:55 Y. Ali

O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah: as said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the Disciples, “We are Allah’s helpers!” then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, AND THEY BECAME THE ONES THAT PREVAILED. S. 61:14 Y. Ali

The Muslim exegetes list Paul as among those whom Allah empowered to spread the true message of Jesus, which is why he prevailed:

“God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.’ (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’)

“Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage which is Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of the Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.” (The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Karachi Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth Impression 1995], p. 653; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Now it makes sense to include Paul among those sent out to proclaim the true religion of Jesus. This is because Paul could not have hijacked and/or perverted the teachings of Christ without this implying that the Apostle prevailed against Allah by managing to defeat the true followers of Jesus, something which the aforementioned Quranic ayat emphatically affirm did not, and could never, happen.   

Interestingly, this is the same sirah which identifies John’s Gospel as the inscripturation of the Gospel that God had given to Jesus for his followers:

“Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted FROM WHAT JOHN THE APOSTLE SET DOWN FOR THEM WHEN HE WROTE THE GOSPEL FOR THEM FROM THE TESTAMENT OF JESUS SON OF MARY: ‘He that hateth me hateth the Lord. And if I had not done in their presence works which none other before me did, they had not sin: but from now they are puffed up with pride and think that they will overcome me and also the Lord. But the word that is in the law must be fulfilled, “They hated me without a cause” (i.e. without reason). But when the Comforter has come whom God will send to you from the Lord’s presence, and the spirit of truth which will have gone forth from the Lord’s presence he (shall bear) witness of me and ye also, because ye have been with me from the beginning. I have spoken unto you about this that ye should not be in doubt.’

“The Munahhemana (God bless and preserve him!) in Syriac is Muhammad; in Greek he is the paraclete. (Ibid., pp. 103-104; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Ibn Ishaq references John 15:23-16:1 as the Gospel which Christ Jesus passed on to his disciples.

Again, this makes perfect sense in light of the claims of Q. 3:55 and 61:14 since John’s Gospel could not have been spread and been widely embraced if it didn’t come from one of Jesus’ true followers whom Allah swore would and did overcome the disbelievers, a dominance that would be theirs and those who follow their message till the day of resurrection. If John’s Gospel isn’t authentic then this means that the message of Christ’s followers was lost and/or perverted, and therefore Allah either failed or lied to Jesus since he failed to preserve what he had sent the disciples to preach throughout the world.   

2. MUHAMMAD CONFIRMS WHAT WAS WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS.

Children of Israel, remember My blessing wherewith I blessed you, and fulfil My covenant and I shall fulfil your covenant; and have awe of Me. And believe in that I have sent down, confirming that which is with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And sell not My signs for a little price; and fear you Me. And do not confound the truth with vanity, and do not conceal the truth wittingly. And perform the prayer, and pay the alms, and bow with those that bow. Will you bid others to piety, and forget yourselves while you recite the Book? Do you not understand? S. 2:40-44 Arberry  

When there came to them a Book from God, confirming what was with them — and they aforetimes prayed for victory over the unbelievers — when there came to them that they recognized, they disbelieved in it; and the curse of God is on the unbelievers. S. 2:89 Arberry   

The medieval Muslim exegete al-Qurtubi states that the above verse refers to the Torah and the Gospel being with them at Muhammad’s time:

‘Them’ means the Jews, and the ‘Book’ here is the Qur’an, while ‘what is with them’ refers to the Torah and Gospel. The word for ‘praying for victory’ here (yastaftiḥūn) comes from the root fataḥa and implies the opening of something which is locked, and is used, for instance, for the opening of a door. An-Nasā’ī reports that Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī said that the Prophet said, ‘Allah gave victory to the community because of its weak members by means of their supplication, prayer and sincerity.’ An-Nasā’ī also reports from Abud-Dardā’ that the Messenger of Allah said, ‘Help me in seeking out the weak. They are supported. You are provided for on account of the weak among you.’ Ibn ‘Abbās reported that the Jews of Khaybar fought the tribe of Ghaṭafān and were defeated and so the Jews used this supplication, saying, ‘We ask You by the right of the unlettered Prophet whom You promised to send us at the end of time to make us victorious against them.’ They then defeated the tribe of Ghaṭafān. But when the Prophet was indeed sent, they rejected him and so Allah revealed this. (Tafsir al-Qurtubi: Juz’ 1: Al-Fātiḥah & Sūrat al-Baqarah 1-141, translated by Aisha Abdurrahman Bewley [Diwan Press, 2019], Volume 1, pp. 338-339; bold emphasis mine)

Elsewhere al-Qurtubi cites a sound narration where Muhammad admitted that the Jews and Christians had the Torah and the Gospel in their possessions:

and pay heed to what is in it,

This means ‘reflect and observe Allah’s commands and warnings in it and do not neglect that and waste it’. It is the same with all the Divine Books: you must act according to them and not just recite them on the tongue. To do otherwise is to waste them. This is what is stated by ash-Sha‘bī and Ibn ‘Uyaynah as will be discussed later. (2:101) An-Nasā’ī related from Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī that the Messenger of Allah g said, ‘The worst of people is an impious man who recites the Qur’an and pays no heed to any of it.’ So he explained that the goal is to put it into action. Mālik said, ‘The Qur’an can be recited by someone who has no good in him. This was an obligation for those before us just as it is obliged for us.’ Allah says: ‘Follow the best that has been sent down to you from your Lord.’ (39:55) So He commanded us to follow His Book and act by it, but we have abandoned it just as the Jews and Christians did. There remain people with many books and copies of the Qur’an who do not benefit from that at all because they are dominated by ignorance, desire for power, and the following of appetites. We find in at-Tirmidhī that Abu-d-Dardā’ said, ‘We were with the Prophet and he looked towards heaven and said, “This is a time in which knowledge will be snatched away from its people until they have none left.” Ziyād ibn Labīd al-Anṣārī asked, “How can it be snatched away from us when we recite the Qur’an! By Allah, we recite it and our women and children recite it.” He replied, “May your mother be bereft, Ziyād! I consider you to be like those in who know the Torah and Gospel WHICH the Jews and Christians HAVE. What help was it to them?”’ An-Nasā’ī transmitted it from Jubayr ibn Nufayr from ‘Awf ibn Mālik al-Ashja‘ī by a sound path. (Ibid., pp. 295-296; bold emphasis mine)

Here’s another version of the aforementioned hadith:

41 Chapters on Knowledge

(5) Chapter: What Has Been Related About Knowledge Leaving

Narrated Jubair bin Nufair:

from Abu Ad-Darda who said: “We were with the Prophet when he raised his sight to the sky, then he said: ‘This is the time when knowledge is to be taken from the people, until what remains of it shall not amount to anything.” So Ziyad bin Labid Al-Ansari said: ‘How will it be taken from us while we recite the Qur’an. By Allah we recite it, and our women and children recite it?’ He said: ‘May you be bereaved of your mother O Ziyad! I used to consider you among the Fuqaha of the people of Al-Madinah. The Tawrah and Injil ARE WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS, but what do they avail of them?‘” Jubair said: “So I met ‘Ubadah bin As-Samit and said to him: ‘Have you not heard what your brother Abu Ad-Darda said?’ Then I informed him of what Abu Ad-Darda said. He said: ‘Abu Ad-Darda spoke the truth. If you wish, we shall narrated to you about the first knowledge to be removed from the people: It is Khushu’, soon you will enter the congregational Masjid, but not see any man in it with Khushu’.’”

Grade: SAHIH (Darussalam)

Reference: Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2653

In Book Reference: Book 41, Hadith 9

English translation: Vol. 5, Book 39, Hadith 2653 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/41/9; capital emphasis mine)

More on the Gospel’s availability a little later.

We’re not done with the Quran’s witness just yet:

And when they were told, ‘Believe in that God has sent down,’ they said, ‘We believe in what was sent down on us’; and they disbelieve in what is beyond that, yet it is the truth confirming what is with them. Say: ‘Why then were you slaying the Prophets of God in former time, if you were believers?’ S. 2:91 Arberry

Say: “Who was an enemy to Gabriel, so that he descended it on your heart/mind with God’s permission, confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), and (a) guidance and a good news to the believers.” S. 2:97 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/st19.htm)

When there has come to them a Messenger from God confirming what was with them, a party of them that were given the Book reject the Book of God behind their backs, as though they knew not, S. 2:101 Arberry

You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming what is with you, before We obliterate faces, and turn them upon their backs, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-men, and God’s command is done. S. 4:47 Arberry

And this the Koran was/is not that it be fabricated from (by) other than God, and but confirmation (of) what (is) between his (Prophet Mohammad’s) hands (tasdeeqa allathee bayna yadayhi), and detailing/explaining The Book, no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) from the creations all together’s/(universes’) Lord. S. 10:37 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/10/st19.htm)

In their narration/information (stories there) had been an example/warning to those of the pure minds/hearts (it) was not an information/speech to be fabricated and but confirmation (to) which (is) between his hands (tasdeeqa allathee bayna yadayhi) and detailing/explaining/clarifying every thing, and guidance, and mercy to (a) nation believing. S. 12:111 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/12/st19.htm)

And those who disbelieved said: “We will never/not believe with this the Koran, and nor with what (is) between its hands (bayna yadayhi).” And if you see/understand if the unjust/oppressive (were) made to stand/suspended at their Lord, some of them return to some the saying/words/opinion and belief, those who were weakened say to those who became arrogant: “Where it not for you, we would be believers/believing.” S. 34:31 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/34/st19.htm)

And what We inspired/transmitted to you from The Book, it is the truth confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), that truly God (is) with His worshippers/slaves expert/experienced (E), seeing/knowing. S. 35:31 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/35/st19.htm)

3. THE PROPHETIC SCRIPTURES WERE IN EXISTENCE AT MUHAMMAD’S TIME.

The Quran instructs folks inquire of the messengers who came before Muhammad:

Ask those of Our Messengers We sent before thee: Have We appointed, apart from the All-merciful, gods to be served? S. 43:45 Arberry

Now the only way anyone could possibly ask these messengers who were no longer on earth is by consulting their scriptures which they left behind. This is precisely how the Muslim exegetes interpreted this text:

And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before you Did We ever appoint besides the Compassionate One that is to say any other than Him gods to be worshipped? It is said that this is to be understood literally in other words that God gathered for him all the messengers on the Night of the Journey; but it is also said that this meant that he should ask any communities belonging to either of the two Peoples of the Scripture. According to one of the two opinions he never asked anyone since the point of this command to ask is to affirm to the idolaters of Quraysh that no messenger or scripture ever came from God with the command to worship any other than God. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=43&tAyahNo=45&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)  

(And ask those of Our messengers) such as Jesus, Moses and Abraham; this was on the night when he was taken up to heaven and he led in prayer 70 prophets, among whom were Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Allah commanded His Prophet, saying: ask them (whom We sent before thee) O Muhammad: (Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped beside the Beneficent) did We command that any other deity beside the Beneficent be worshipped? It is also said that this means: ask those unto whom We sent the messengers before you, i.e. the people of Book, did We appoint any other deities beside the Beneficent to be worshipped? And it is also said that this means: ask them, did the messengers bring anything other than the profession of Allah’s divine Oneness; the Prophet did not have to ask because he was certain that Allah did not appoint any other deities to be worshipped beside Him. (Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas  https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=43&tAyahNo=45&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)

45 This verse is understood to mean that when the Prophet met all of the other prophets on the Night Journey (see 17:1c; introduction to Sūrah 53), he was to ask them this question (JJ), or that he was to ask it of the People of the Book (JJ, Ṭ), in which case some say there is an implied “unto whom” (ilayhim) in the verse so that it could be rendered, “Ask those before you [unto whom] We sent from among Our messengers” (Ṭ). The verse can also be understood as a purely rhetorical question, reaffirming that all of the messengers called their people to the same truths to which the Prophet Muhammad calls his people, as in 16:36: We indeed sent a messenger unto every community, “Worship God, and shun false deities!” (IK). (The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary , editor-in-chief Seyyed Hossein Nasr, HarperOne, 2015; bold emphasis mine)

I.e.. “look into the earlier revelations and ask thyself”. (Muhammad Asad Footnote: 38 https://www.alim.org/translation/asad/43/)

That is, by examining their Message, and asking the learned among their real followers. It will be found that no Religion really teaches the worship of other than Allah. (Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Footnote: 4648 https://www.alim.org/translation/yusuf-ali/43/; bold emphasis mine)

3B. CHRISTIANS OF MUHAMMAD’S TIME HAD THE GOSPEL.

And We sent after (following) on their tracks with Jesus, Mary’s son confirming for what (is) between his hands from the Torah/Old Testament (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati), and We gave him the New Testament/Bible in it (is) guidance and light, and confirming to what (is) between his hands from the Torah/Old Testament (wa’musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati), and guidance and a sermon/advice/warning to the fearing and obeying. And the New Testament’s/Bible’s people should judge/rule with what God descended in it, and who does not judge/rule with what God descended, so those, they are the debauchers. S. 5:46-47 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st19.htm)

Al-Qurtubi noted a variant reading, which a minority accepted as genuine:

Al-A’mash and Hamzah read ‘judge’ as ‘yahkumu’ with a lam attached to the beginning, meaning ‘in order to’, and the others read it in the apocopate form: yahkum, as a command. In the first reading, the words are connected to ‘We gave him’ and it is not permitted to stop, implying ‘We gave him the Gospel so that his people would judge by what Allah revealed in it.’ If it is read as a command, then it is like the words: ‘Judge between them.’ (5:49), starting a new sentence meaning: ‘Let the people of the Gospel judge at that time.’ Now it is abrogated. It is said that it is a command to the Christians to now believe in Muhammad. The obligation to believe in him is found in the Gospel. Abrogation is conceivable in secondary rulings, not in basic principles. Makki said, ‘The command IS PREFERRED because THE MAJORITY have it and because of what comes after it is a threat which indicates that it is an obligation from Allah Almighty for the people of the Gospel.’ An-Nahhas said, ‘What I believe to be correct is that they are both good readings because Allah only revealed a Scripture in order for it to be acted on and He commanded that people should act by what is in it. So both are sound.’ (Tafsir al-Qurtubi: Sūrat al-Mā’idah, translated by Aisha Bewley [Diwan Press, 2021], Volume 6, pp. 173-174; bold and capital emphasis mine)

3C. THE QURAN IS SUPPOSED CONFIRMATION THESE SCRIPTURES IN ARABIC.

Then, We gave Musa (Moses) the Book [the Taurat (Torah)], to complete (Our Favour) upon those who would do right, and explaining all things in detail and a guidance and a mercy that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. And this is a blessed Book (the Qur’an) which We have sent down, so follow it and fear Allah (i.e. do not disobey His Orders), that you may receive mercy (i.e. saved from the torment of Hell). Lest you (pagan Arabs) should say: “The Book was only sent down to two sects before us (the Jews and the Christians), and for our part, we were in fact unaware of what they studied.” Or lest you (pagan Arabs) should say: “If only the Book had been sent down to us, we would surely have been better guided than they (Jews and Christians).” So now has come unto you a clear proof (the Qur’an) from your Lord, and a guidance and a mercy. Who then does more wrong than one who rejects the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah and turns away therefrom? We shall requite those who turn away from Our Ayat with an evil torment, because of their turning away (from them). [Tafsir At-Tabari, Vol. 8, Page 95]S. 6:154-157 Hilali-Khan

And from before it (is) Moses’ Book, a leader/example, and mercy, and that (is a) confirming Book (in an) Arabic tongue/speech, to warn/give notice (to) those who caused injustice/ oppression, and good news to the good doers… They said: “You our nation that we heard/listened to a Book (that) was descended from after Moses, confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), it guides to the truth and to (a) straight/direct road/path.” S. 46:12, 30 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/46/st19.htm)

4. JEWS AND CHRISTIAN WERE TO ACT UPON ALL THE REVELATIONS GIVEN TO THEM.

Had they followed the Laws of the Old and New Testaments and what was revealed to them from their Lord, they would have received Our bounties from above and below in abundance. Some of them are modest people, but many of them commit the worst sins… (Muhammad), tell the People of the Book, “You have nothing unless you follow the Old and New Testaments and that which (the Quran) God has revealed to you.” Whatever has been revealed to you (Muhammad) from your Lord will only increase their disbelief and rebellion (against you). Do not grieve for the unbelieving people. 5:66, 68 (Muhammad Sarwar https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st23.htm)

Here’s another translation:

And if that they took care of the Torah/Old Testament, and the Bible/New Testament and what was descended to them from their Lord, they would have eaten from above them and from below their feet; from them (is) a nation economizing/moderate , and many from them what they were making/doing became bad/evil/harmful… Say: “You The Book’s people, you are not on a thing, until you keep up the Torah/Old Testament and the Bible/New Testament , and what was descended to you from your (P) Lord.” And what was descended to you (S/M) from your Lord increases (E) many of them tyranny/arrogance, and disbelief, so do not grieve/sadden on the nation, the disbelieving. (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st19.htm)

To the Christians, this would mean that they were to act upon the writings of the New Testament, and not just the Gospel. As the following Muslim expositors acknowledge:

(If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel) if they had accepted what is in the Torah and the Gospel and demonstrated the traits and description of Muhammad contained therein (and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord) and had they elucidated that which their Lord had explained to them in the Torah and the Gospel; it is also said that this means: if they had believed that ALL the scriptures and messengers are from their Lord, (they would surely have been nourished from above them) through rain (and from beneath their feet) through vegetation and fruit. (Among them) among the people of the Book (there are people who are moderate) a group of just and upright people, i.e. ‘Abdullah Ibn Salam and his followers, the monk Bahirah, the Negus and his followers, and Salman al-Farisi and his fellows, (but many of them are of evil conduct) evil is what they do in terms of concealing the traits and description of Muhammad. Among such people are Ka’b Ibn al-Ashraf, Ka’b Ibn Asad, Malik Ibn al-Sayf, Sa’id Ibn ‘Amr, Abu Yasir, and Judayy Ibn Akhtab. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Q. 5:66 https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=66&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; emphasis mine)

(Say) O Muhammad: (O People of the Scripture!) i.e. the Jews and Christians. (You have naught) of the religion of Allah (till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel) until you truly believe in what is in the Torah and the Gospel (and that which was revealed unto thee (Muhammad) from your Lord) in ALL Scriptures given to all messengers. (That which is revealed unto you (Muhammad) from your Lord) the Qur’an (is certain to increase the contumacy) constancy in disbelief (and disbelief) and firmness in disbelief (of many of them) of their disbelievers. (But grieve not for the disbelieving folk) do not be saddened for their destruction in their state of disbelief, if they do not believe. (Ibid., Q. 5:68 https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=68&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; emphasis mine)

For a Christian to uphold all the scriptures s/he would have to implement and act upon the canonical books of the New Testament, since these are all a part of what was revealed to them. There’s simply no way around it.

4B. MUSLIMS ARE TO BELIEVE IN THE REVELATION GIVEN TO THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS.

Muhammad and his followers are commanded to believe in all the revelation given to the Jews and Christians:

The Messenger believes in what was sent down to him from his Lord, and the believers; each one believes in God and His angels, and in His Books (wa’kutubihi) and His Messengers; we make no division between any one of His Messengers. They say, ‘We hear, and obey. Our Lord, grant us Thy forgiveness; unto Thee is the homecoming.’ S. 2:285

O believers, believe in God and His Messenger and the Book He has sent down on His Messenger and the Book which He sent down before. Whoso disbelieves in God and His angels and His Books (wa’kutubihi), and His Messengers, and the Last Day, has surely gone astray into far error. S. 4:136  

Dispute not with the People of the Book save in the fairer manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say, ‘We believe in what has been sent down to us, and what has been sent down to you; our God and your God is One, and to Him we have surrendered.’ S. 29:46

Note that Muhammad and his followers were to have the same attitude and belief in the previous scriptures that they have towards the Quran. What this entails is that Muslims must believe that the books in the possession of the Jews and Christians have been preserved, just as they believe about the Quran.

After all, it is an act of kufr (disbelief) to deny that the Quran has been corrupted. Therefore, since Muhammad’s followers are adopt this same view of the previous scriptures this means that it is an act of rebellion and disbelief to argue that the previous revelations have been corrupted.  

Moreover, this attitude towards the scriptures includes believing in all the revelations not mentioned in the Quran by name. That is because the latter expressly teaches that there are messengers whose names are not to be found in the Muslim scripture:

Say you: ‘We believe in God, and in that which has been sent down on us and sent down on Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the Tribes, and that which was given to Moses and Jesus and the Prophets, of their Lord; we make no division between any of them, and to Him we surrender.’ S. 2:136 Arberry

We have revealed to thee as We revealed to Noah, and the Prophets after him, and We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, Jesus and Job, Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and We gave to David Psalms, and Messengers We have already told thee of before, and Messengers We have not told thee of; and unto Moses God spoke directly – S. 4:163-164 Arberry

Therefore, the Muslims are to consult the Jews and Christians in order to know who these other messengers were, and what revelations were given to them.

In other words, the Quran is indeed confirming the books of the Old and New Testament canons since these would have been the revelations which they had in their possession at Muhammad’s time.

Again, there’s simply no way around this for the Muslim who desires to honest and faithful to what his/her scripture actually teaches.

FURTHER READING

INJIL, IBN ABBAS & Al-BUKHARI

THE QURAN’S GOSPEL

THE QURAN ON INSCRIPTURATION

THE GOSPEL THAT IS WITH THEM

THE UNCLEAR QURAN: WHAT IS THE INJIL?

MUHAMMAD’S CONFUSION ABOUT THE SCRIPTURES

THE APOSTLE PAUL IN EARLY ISLAMIC EXEGESIS

PAUL IN THE EARLY ISLAMIC SOURCES REVISITED

THE UNCLEAR QURAN: WHAT IS THE INJIL?

The Quran repeatedly asserts that it is a book that fully explains everything contained therein:

Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than God? – when He it is Who hath sent unto you the Book, explained in detail.” They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it hath been sent down from thy Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt. S. 6:114 Y. Ali

This Qur’an is not such as can be produced by other than God; on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book – wherein there is no doubt – from the Lord of the worlds. S. 10:37 Y. Ali

There is, in their stories, instruction for men endued with understanding. It is not a tale invented, but a confirmation of what went before it, – a detailed exposition of all things, and a guide and a mercy to any such as believe. S. 12:111 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

A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; – a Qur’an in Arabic, for people who understand; – S. 41:3 Y. Ali

The Muslim scripture further attests that Jesus was given the Gospel:

“And He will teach him the Book, the Wisdom, the Torah, the Gospel,” S. 3:48 Arberry

When God said, ‘Jesus Son of Mary, remember My blessing upon thee and upon thy mother, when I confirmed thee with the Holy Spirit, to speak to men in the cradle, and of age; and when I taught thee the Book, the Wisdom, the Torah, the Gospel; and when thou createst out of clay, by My leave, as the likeness of a bird, and thou breathest into it, and it is a bird, by My leave; and thou healest the blind and the leper by My leave, and thou bringest the dead forth by My leave; and when restrained from thee the Children of Israel when thou camest unto them with the clear signs, and the unbelievers among them said, “This is nothing but sorcery manifest.” S. 5:110 Arberry

Then We sent, following in their footsteps, Our Messengers; and We sent, following, Jesus son of Mary, and gave unto him the Gospel. And We set in the hearts of those who followed him tenderness and mercy. And monasticism they invented — We did not prescribe it for them — only seeking the good pleasure of God; but they observed it not as it should be observed. So We gave those of them who believed their wage; and many of them are ungodly. S. 57:27 Arberry

The Islamic text states that the Gospel was in existence at Muhammad’s time, and that Christians were expected to live and judge by it:   

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah before him and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah before it, as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing. So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what God has sent down therein. Whosoever judges not according to what God has sent down — they are the ungodly. S. 5:46-47 Arberry

Had they performed the Torah and the Gospel, and what was sent down to them from their Lord, they would have. eaten both what was above them, and what was beneath their feet. Some of them are a just nation; but many of them — evil are the things they do. S. 5:66 Arberry

The Quran is also aware of certain teachings found in the Gospel:

Say: ‘People of the Book, you do not stand on anything, until you perform the Torah and the Gospel, and what was sent down to you from your Lord.’ And what has been sent down to thee from thy Lord will surely increase many of them in insolence and unbelief; so grieve not for the people of the unbelievers. S. 5:68 Arberry

God has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of God; they kill, and are killed; that IS a promise binding upon God IN the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than God? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph. S. 9:111 Arberry    

Muhammad is the Messenger of God, and those who are with him are hard against the unbelievers, merciful one to another. Thou seest them bowing, prostrating, seeking bounty from God and good pleasure. Their mark is on their faces, the trace of prostration. That is their likeness in the Torah, and their likeness IN the Gospel: as a seed that puts forth its shoot, and strengthens it, and it grows stout and rises straight upon its stalk, pleasing the sowers, that through them He may enrage the unbelievers. God has promised those of them who believe and do deeds of righteousness forgiveness and a mighty wage. S. 48:29 Arberry

The Muslim scripture is even aware that the Gospel was sent down after the time of Abraham:

People of the Book! Why do you dispute concerning Abraham? The Torah was not sent down, neither the Gospel, but after him. What, have you no reason? S. 3:65 Arberry

The word Injil is always used for the Christian revelation, and particularly associated with Jesus. This word also occurs only in Medinan passages, with the exception of 7,156/157 which is traditionally regarded as late Meccan though it seems to have some Medinan references. The origins of Injil are clearly the Greek euangelion, Evangel, Good News, Gospel (Old English god-spel). Whether it entered Arabic from Syriac or Ethiopic has been debated, but the Ethiopic wangel has a long vowel like Injil and this suggests that the word was brought over by Abyssinian Christians and it was probably in widespread use in Arabia before Muhammad’s time.1

Herein lies the problem.

Despite claiming that it is a scripture which explains all things in detail, the Quran fails to identify what the Gospel given to Jesus happens to be.

For instance, is the Gospel the revelation which Jesus proclaimed orally? Or does it also encompass the deeds of Christ, and not just to what he preached?

Does the Gospel mentioned in the Quran also refer to its eventual inscripturation, which became the means by which Jesus’ proclamation was preserved? After all, how could the Christians of Muhammad’s day live and judge by the Gospel if the term does not encompass the written component of the revelation given to and through Christ?

And since the only Gospel that the Christians of Muhammad’s day possessed are the four Gospels of the New Testament canon, wouldn’t this, therefore, prove that the Muslim scripture confirms the canonical Gospels as the preserved words of God?

Or does the Quran have in mind the diatessaron, which was a harmonization of the four Gospels into Syriac, composed by the Assyrian pupil of Justin Martyr named Tatian around 170 AD?

This Gospel harmony was what the Syriac speaking Christians went by until the fifth century AD when the Peshitta was produced, which contained a translation of all four of the Gospels separately.

How does any Muslim actually know?       

The Islamic scholar George Parrinder’s statements exemplify the confusion that academics in the field face in trying to figure out the Gospel that the Quran has in view:  

Whether Injil must be understood narrowly of the Gospel that Jesus preached, or more widely of the New Testament, the Christian scriptures, is a difficult question. Jesus brought the Gospel, but Christians later had the ‘Injil in their possession’. (7,156/157). This is a complex matter, and discussion must be deferred till later when consideration is given to the relationship between the words of Jesus and the four Gospels written by the evangelists, and the interdependence of the teaching and the life of Jesus.

The word Gospel (Injil) occurs twelve times in the Qur’an, as follows:

3,2/3: ‘He sent down the Torah and the Gospel aforetime as guidance for the people.’

3,43/48: ‘He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel.’

3,58/65: ‘Why do ye dispute about Abraham, seeing that the Torah and the Gospel were not sent down till after his time?’

5,50/46: ‘We gave (Jesus) the Gospel, containing guidance and light, confirming the Torah which was before it, and as guidance and admonition to those who show piety.’

5,51/47: ‘Let the people of the Gospel judge by what God hath sent down therein; if any do not judge by what God hath sent down, they are the reprobate.’

5,70/66: ‘If they had established the Torah and the Gospel, and what has been sent down to them from their Lord, they would have eaten from above and from beneath their feet.’

5,72/68: ‘O People of the Book, ye have nothing to stand upon until ye establish the Torah and the Gospel and what has been sent down to you from your Lord.’

5,109/110: ‘I have taught thee the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel.’

7,156/157: ‘The Gospel in their possession, urging them to what is reputable, and restraining them from what is disreputable, making good things allowable for them and foul things forbidden, relieving them of their burden and the shackles which have been upon them.’

9,112/111: ‘A promise binding upon him in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an.’

48,29: ‘What they are compared to in the Gospel is a seed which puts forth its shoot.’

57,7: ‘We gave (Jesus) the Gospel.’

In the Meccan sura 19,31/30 comes the word attributed to Jesus: ‘He hath bestowed on me the Book’. The above verses show that Jesus was given all the truths enshrined in the sacred books, the Torah and the Wisdom. Ibn Ishaq said that ‘in the Gospel is what Jesus brought in confirmation of Moses and the Torah he brought from God.’1

The holy books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are seen as belonging to a sacred succession; they are not outdated, but all bring divine truth to give guidance to men. Sura 3,2/3, addressed to Muhammad, says: ‘He hath sent down to thee the Book with the truth, confirming what was before it, and he sent down the Torah and the Gospel aforetime as guidance for the people, and he sent down the Furqan’. The Furqan is ‘discrimination’ or ‘revelation’. According to Zamakhshari it is used of the whole class of heavenly books, as in 21,49/48: ‘We gave to Moses and Aaron the Furqan and illumination.’ But in 3,2/3 and 25,’ and elsewhere it seems to be used of the Qur’an: ‘Blessed be he who hath sent down the Furqan upon his servant. ‘ In this sense the Qur’an is the Furqan as discrimination or criterion of truth, to make clear what went before. It is not an abrogation of previous scriptures, but a confirmation and a touchstone of truth, making clear what they meant: ‘This Qur’an is not such as to have been invented apart from God; but it is a confirmation of what is before it, and a distinct setting forth of the Book in which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.’ So also 2,98/97: ‘ Gabriel – verily he hath brought it down upon thy heart with the permission of God confirming what was before it.’ (Geoffrey Parrinder, Jesus in the Qur’ān [OneWorld Publishers, Oxford England, Reprinted 1996], 15. Gospel (Injil), pp. 142-144; bold emphasis mine)

Parrinder believes that the Muslim book does not differentiate between the Gospel of Jesus and the Gospels which the Christians possessed:

Behind the written books is the heavenly original or archetype, the ‘Mother of the Book’ (umm al-kitab). ‘Lo it is in the Mother of the Book in our presence, exalted, wise.’ (43,3/4; 3,5/7; 13,39) And again: ‘A messenger from God reciting sheets kept pure, in which are Books true.’ (98,2) Messengers may be thought of as receiving books from God, copies of the heavenly original, as some of the apocryphal epistles said that Jesus had a book which he revealed to his disciples.1

There is no suggestion in the Qur’an that the Gospel given to Jesus was different from the canonical Gospels held by Christians. This is a matter of importance, in view of later Muslim polemic. Indeed the Qur’an enjoins the ‘people of the Gospel’ to ‘judge by what God hath sent down therein‘. (5,51/47) It speaks of ‘ the Gospel in their possession’ (7,156/157) and urges them to follow the messenger spoken of in it. The Qur’an itself is sent down to confirm the Book which was before it, and to act as a ‘protector over it’. (5,52/48) (Ibid., p. 145; bold emphasis mine)

Parrinder also mentions Muslims who reject the idea of the Quran proclaiming that the text of the previous Scriptures has been corrupted:

Later Muslim writers spoke of the ‘corruption’ (tahrif) of the scriptures by Jews and Christians. The Ebionites, JudeoChristians, had already accused the Jews of corrupting their scriptures. Muslim writers differed in their opinions about what had been done. Some scholars (e.g. Biruni) declared that Jews and Christians had actually altered the text of the Bible. But others (Tabari, Ibn Khaldun, etc.) said that they had interpreted the words incorrectly. It was argued that tahrif meant to change a thing from its original nature, but no man could possibly corrupt words that came from God. So at the most Christians could only corrupt by misrepresenting the meaning of the word of God. Muslims could do the same with the Qur’an and Jews with the Torah. The Gospel was in its original purity, but it was possible to distort its meaning by unsound arguments. This was the teaching of Bukhari, and sura 3,72/78 was quoted to show that the Jews might misinterpret the scriptures yet these remained intact: ‘A part of them twist their tongues in the Book, that ye may think it to be a bit of the Book, though it is not a bit of the Book Be ye rabbis in virtue of your teaching the Book, and in virtue of your having studied it. ‘

In modern times some popular polemic may blame Christians for corrupting the Gospel, yet there are Muslim commentators who prefer the view that exposition has been at fault rather than any tampering with the text. Sayyid Ahmad Khan, who wrote the first commentary on the Bible by a Muslim, followed this viewpoint and he tried to bring Christian and Muslim exegesis into agreement. Another writer says: ‘In the Koran tahrif means either false interpretation of the passages bearing upon Mohammed or non-enforcement of the explicit laws of the Pentateuch. As for the text of the Bible, it had not been altered… No rival text is assumed.’1

There remains the difficult problem of the relationship between the Gospel, the Good News that Jesus taught, and the record of his words in the four Gospels. There is no evidence that Jesus ever wrote a line of his teaching. Muslims also believe that Muhammad was illiterate and hence the written Qur’an was recorded by his followers; secretaries like Zaid ibn Thabit collected the written and oral fragments from ‘scraps of parchment and leather, tablets of stone, ribs of palm branches, camels’ shoulder-blades and ribs, pieces of board, and the breasts of men’. A similar process took place with the Gospel, though it had long been written down by the time of Muhammad. The canonical Gospels had been separated by the church from apocryphal legends. The first evangelists collected their material, as Luke says, from eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, and they tried to trace ‘the course of all things accurately from the first’. (Lk. 1,2f.)  (Ibid., pp. 146-147; bold emphasis mine)

What the foregoing highlights is that the only thing clear about the Quran is that it is far from being a perspicuous scripture. Rather, it is a confused, incoherent, unintelligible mishmash of fables and instructions that make absolutely no sense without the aid of sources external to itself.

As the Iranian scholar of Islam Ali Dashti put it:

“Unfortunately the Qor’an was badly edited and its content are very obtusely arranged. All students of the Qor’an wonder why the editors did not use the natural and logical method of ordering by date of revelation, as in ‘Ali b. Abi Taleb’s copy of the text.” (Dashti, Twenty-Three Years: A study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad (Allen and Unwin, London, 1985), p. 28; bold emphasis mine)

And:

“Among the Moslem scholars of the early period, before bigotry and hyperbole prevailed, were some such as Ebrahim on-Nazzam who openly acknowledged that the arrangement and syntax of the Qor’an are not miraculous and that work of equal or greater value could be produced by other God-fearing persons.

“Pupils and later admirers of on-Nazzam, such as Ebn Hazm and ol-Khayyat, wrote in his defence, and several other leading exponents of the Mo’tazelite school shared his opinion. They saw no conflict between the theses of on-Nazzam and the statements in the Qor’an. One of their arguments is that the Qor’an is miraculous because God deprived the Prophet Mohammad’s contemporaries of the ability to produce the like of it; in other times and places the production of phrases resembling Qor’anic verses IS POSSIBLE AND INDEED EASY.

“It is widely held that the blind Syrian poet Abu’l-‘Ala ol-Ma’arri (368/979-450/1058) wrote his Ketab ol-fosul wa’ l-ghayat, of which a part survives, in imitation of the Qor’an.

“The Qor’an contains sentences which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries; foreign words, unfamiliar Arabic words, and words used with other than the normal meaning; adjectives and verbs inflected without observance of the concords of gender and number; illogically and ungrammatically applied pronouns which sometimes have no referent; and predicates which in rhymed passages are often remote from the subjects. These and other such aberrations in the language have given scope to critics who deny the Qor’an’s eloquence. The problem also occupied the minds of devout Moslems. It forced the commentators to search for explanations and was probably one of the causes of disagreement over readings.” (Pp. 48-49)

“To sum up, more than one hundred Qor’anic aberrations from the normal rules and structure of Arabic have been noted. Needless to say, THE COMMENTATORS STROVE TO FIND EXPLANATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THESE IRREGULARITIES. Among them was the great commentator and philologist MAHMUD OZ-ZAMAKHSHARI (467/1075-538/1144), of whom a Moorish author wrote: ‘This grammar-obsessed pedant has committed a shocking error. Our task IS NOT TO MAKE THE READINGS CONFORM TO ARABIC GRAMMAR, but to take the whole of the Qor’an as it is AND MAKE THE ARABIC GRAMMAR CONFORM TO THE QOR’AN.’

“Up to a point this argument is justifiable. A nation’s great speakers and writers respect the rules of its language in so far as they avoid modes of expression which are not generally understood and popularly accepted, though they may occasionally find themselves obliged to take liberties. Among the pre-Islamic Arabs, rhetoric and poetry WERE WELL DEVELOPED and grammatical conventions WERE ALREADY ESTABLISHED. The Qor’an, being in the belief of Moslems superior to all previous products of the rhetorical genius, must contain the fewest irregularities.

“Yet the Moorish author’s censure of Zamakhshari is open to criticism on the ground that it reverses the usual argument. This is that the Qor’an is God’s word because it has a sublime eloquence which no human being can match, and that the man who uttered it was therefore a prophet. The Moorish author maintained that the Qor’an is faultless because it is God’s word and that the problem of the grammatical errors in it MUST BE SOLVED BY CHANGING THE RULES OF ARABIC GRAMMAR. In other words, while most Moslems answer deniers by citing the Qor’an’s eloquence as proof of Mohammad’s prophethood, the Moorish author, having taken the Qor’an’s divine origin and Mohammad’s prophethood for granted, held all discussion of the Qor’an’s wording and contents to be inadmissible.” (Pp. 50-51)

“Neither the Qor’an’s eloquence nor its moral and legal precepts are miraculous. The Qor’an is miraculous because it enabled Mohammad, single-handedly and despite poverty and illiteracy, to overcome his people’s resistance and found a lasting religion because it moved wild men to obedience and imposed its bringer’s will on them.” (Ibid., p. 57; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Dashti further stated that,

“The Qor’an contains many instances of confusion between the two speakers, God and Mohammad, in the same verse… Among these many passages are some, like the above, which can be easily explained, but also others which present great difficulty… The presence of confusions between God and the Prophet in the Qor’an cannot objectively be disputed. Sometimes God speaks, giving to the Prophet the command ‘say’ (i.e. to the people). Sometimes the sentence structure proves that it is the Prophet who speaks, expressing devotion to God. The impression conveyed by the Qor’an is that a hidden voice in Mohammad’s soul or subconscious mind was continually impelling him to guide the people, restraining him from lapses, and providing him with solutions to problems.” (Ibid., pp. 150-151)

Finally:

“Confusion between God’s and Mohammad’s words is again apparent in two verses of sura 10 (Yunos). ‘And if your Lord so wished, all the dwellers on the earth would believe together. Are you going to compel the people to be believers?’ (verse 99). ‘It is only (possible) for a soul to believe with God’s permission. And He inflicts vileness on those who are intelligent’ (verse 100). In verse 99 the words are from God and addressed to the Prophet, but in verse 100 the words appear to be Mohammad’s, a sort of self-consolation followed by an explanation of the obduracy of the polytheists who would not heed his teaching.” (Ibid., p. 152)

FURTHER READING

What kind of book is the Injil?

Did Allah give a Greek Injil to the Jews?

Incompleteness and Incoherence of the Qur’an

Analysis of the White versus Zawadi Debate [Part 1]

THE QURAN’S GOSPEL

THE GOSPEL THAT IS WITH THEM

THE QURAN ON INSCRIPTURATION

MATERIAL FOR THE ANDANI DISCUSSION