The author : Father Zakaria Boutros
The publisher: www.fatherzakaria.com
We have published before several books in this series, of them; God is one in holy trinity, the incarnation of Al-mighty God in the immaculate body of the Christ, the issue of crucifixion of the Christ, the issue of the veracity of the holy bible and its non falsification, in this book we will discuss with the grace of God the issue of: Is Barnabas' Bible the true bible?
Actually some Muslims are sticking to a book named Barnabas' Bible,
and saying that it is the true bible that was not forged, claiming that
the holy bible, we the Christians are using now is a forged bible
This book in your hand we had published to rebut such accusations,
strengthened by the definite proofs for its nullification
Asking God to use it for the benefit of many and to enlighten the mind
of those who are reading it, Amen
Part one
Introduction to
The spurious Barnabas' Bible
Chapter one
The story of that spurious bible
We can summarize the story of that spurious bible into the following
points:
1) The original version appeared on 1709 AC in Italian language by a
man named Kramer, he was a consultant of the King of Prussia
2) That king gave it as a gift to Prince Augean Savoy, who deposited
it in the library of Vienna on 1838 AC; it is still there till now
3) Dr: George Saiel, the great English scholar (in his English translation of the quran) said: a copy of the spurious Barnabas' Bible in Spanish language contemporary to the Latin ,was written by a man named Mustapha Al-Arnady, saying that he translated it from the original Italian version
N.B: it is well known that the gospels written by the Christ followers were written in Greek language, and not the Italian
4) It was translated to the Arabic language by Al-Said Khalil Saada on 1908 AC
5) It was published in Egypt by Al-Said Muhammad Rashid Reda
Chapter two
The trials of fallacious forgery and allegation
In all the religions
Isn't strange to have a spurious bible? How could someone fabricate a bible and claim that it is the true bible?
To answer this, we are saying that in all religions there are such trials for scepticizing people in their holy books and religions, in Islam there is:
1) The spurious quran written by Al-Fadl Bin Al-Rabie that is quite different from the quran in which Muslims believe
2) The fake intruded and spurious converses that are denied by Muslims
3) The false prophets who claimed the prophecy during the time of Muhammad like: Musilema the liar, Talha Bin Khoiled and a woman named Rabeh and others
So no wonder to see some fabricators claiming their books to be bibles, actually the bible has nothing to do with them
Chapter three
The reason behind the tenacity of some Muslims
In such spurious book
Some Muslims are tenacious in such spurious bible as being the true
bible for the following reasons:
1) It is saying that the Christ proclaimed that he is not God but he was just a prophet {this was mentioned in page 15, 26, 34, 68, 70, etc}
2) it mentioned that the Christ was not crucified and God had put his resemblance on Judas , so he was crucified in the place of Jesus, and Jesus was raised by God to heaven { this was mentioned in page 320-322}
3) It said that the Christ foretold about the coming of Muhammad who will be the Christ {page 77, 161, 85,110,270}
4) It claimed that the Christ proclaimed that this bible is considered the true bible and the other bible is the spurious bible {page 72,189}
So for those reasons, Some Muslims are tenacious in such spurious bible
and consider it the true bible!
Chapter four
The author of that spurious bible
Who is the author of that spurious bible?
1) The contents of that spurious bible is showing that its writer
didn't live in Palestine where the Christ lived as he is ignorant of the
nature of that region and also the social live particular to that region
2) His writings are showing that he lived in Spain as he described
the nature in Palestine by the nature surrounding him in Spain
3) That spurious bible is showing that the writer was a Jewish and not a Christian as:
+ In page 103 He said "God loves Israel as a lover"
+ In page 30 He said that the relatives of the Canaanite woman, the
daughter of whom, was cured by the Christ, all of them embraced the canon
of Moses
+ In page 38 He said that the ruler of the synagogue, the Christ had
cured his servant, had worshiped the God of Israel
You may know from that whereas the personage of the writer of that spurious
bible, regardless of his name
Chapter five
The history of writing of that spurious book
Actually dear reader, it is so easy to prove the time of writing
of that spurious bible, as Mr: khalil Saada who translated it to the Arabic
language on 1908 A.C, he wrote in the introduction of that spurious bible
saying:
{All the historians agree that Barnabas' Bible was written in the intermediary
ages}
1) Actually that spurious Barnabas' Bible did not exist till the fourteenth century as evident from the following:
1) All the Muslim historians till the end of fourteenth century documented that the Christian bible was that written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John ( Moroug Al-Zahab ( the prairies of gold ) by Abu Al-Hassen Al-Masoudy,part 1, page 161) and the book of the beginning and the end ( Al-Bedaya Wa-alnehaya) by Imam Emad El-Din ,part 2 , page 100}, the book of { Al-kawl Al-Abrizy} by the great scholar Ahmed Al-Maqriesy , page 18} and the book of {Al-Tarikh Al-Kamel ( the full history)} by Ibn Alathir , part 1, page 128}
2) This was confirmed by the recent references testifying that the gospels
are four, and never mentioning Barnabas' Bible ( the youth encyclopedia
by Dr; Fatima Muhammad , reviewed by Dr: Muhammad Khalifa Barakat) as it
mentioned that:
{The gospels are the first four books of the New Testament}
They are separate books, each of them is telling the life story of
the Christ as narrated by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John}
You can notice that it didn't mention that spurious book, named Barnabas'
Bible
3) If this bible attributed to Barnabas was existing prior to the fourteenth century so the ancient annotators like Imam Al-Tabry and Imam Ibn Kathir wouldn't differ in the identity of the person who was crucified , and they wouldn't put such numerous speculations saying that:
+ God had put the resemblance of the Christ on one of the disciples
named Surges
+ It was said that God had put the resemblance of the Christ on Judas
who surrendered him to the Jewish
+ It was said that God had put the resemblance of the Christ on one
of the roman soldiers
+ imam Al-Bidawy mentioned that; Titus the Jewish came into a house
where Iesa (Jesus) supposed to be there, but he didn't find him and God
had put the resemblance of Iesa (Jesus) on him , so when he went out they
thought that he was Iesa, therefore they took him and crucified him
+ It was said that God had put the resemblance of Iesa on another man;
therefore that man was crucified instead of Iesa
So I am saying that if that bible attributed to Barnabas existed before
the fourteenth century, the ancient Islamic annotators wouldn't differ
in the identity of the person who was crucified , and they would follow
what was mentioned in that spurious bible which specified that person who
was crucified saying that he was Judas
Chapter six
The attitude of Barnabas' Bible towards Islam
The alleged Barnabas' Bible contains many quotations from the Islamic
religion and also very serious contradictions with it
First:
The quotations of the spurious Barnabas' Bible from Islam
The writer of that spurious Bible quoted a lot of information present in the Islamic religion, of them:
1) In (page 61, 62) he quoted the sentence "No God but Allah, Muhammad
is the messenger of God"
2) In (page 54): Satan refused to prostrate to Adam, this is
quoted from" The Rocky Tract chapter (Surat Al-Hijr) 29-31: " when your
Lord said to the angels: "I am going to create a man from clay … then fall
down prostrating ,so, the angels prostrated, all of them together. Except
Satan, he refused to be among the prostrates"
3) In (page 8) he said that the Christ spoke while he was a toddler,
that's quoted from what was mentioned in The Family of Imran chapter (Surat
Aal-Imran) 46: "He will speak to the people in the cradle…" Mary chapter
(Surat Maryam) 24, 25:" Then he (Gabriel) cried unto her from below her,
saying: "Grieve not! Your Lord has provided a water stream under you, and
shake the trunk of date-palm towards you; it will let fall fresh ripe-dates
upon you."
Second:
The teachings of the spurious Barnabas' Bible contradicting with Islam
1) in page 100 it mentioned that the skies are nine and the tenth one is the paradise, this clearly contradicts with Islam as it is saying that the skies are only seven as mentioned in The Journey by Night chapter (Surat Al-Isra) 44: " The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein, glorify Him " it is known that the skies in Christianity are three :the sky of the outer atmosphere , the sky of the stars and the planets and galaxies or the outer space then the paradise as our teacher Saint Paul said in 2Corithians 12:2-4 " I know a man in Christ… such a one caught up into the third heaven…. he was caught up into Paradise…"so Barnabas' spurious Bible is contradicting with both Islam and Christianity
2) In page 85,110,270, it said the Christ proclaimed to the Jewish priests that he is not the messiah , but Muhammad who is coming after him will be the messiah , this contradict with Islam that never says that Muhammad is the messiah, but attested that the Christ is Iesa( Jesus) son of Maryam (Mary) as it was mentioned in many quran verses , as The Family of Imran chapter (Surat Aal-Imran) 45:" when the angels said: "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honor in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah."
Part two
Proofs for the nullification of that spurious bible
What proves nullification of that alleged Barnabas' Bible is that it
was not mentioned in:
Chapter one
The ancient codices and archaeology
That spurious bible was never mentioned in any codex of the ancient bible codices, dated to the pre Islam era as we explained in a previous book, to remind you we will mention it again:
Of those handwritten codices the followings:
1) The Vatican codex, preserved till now in the Vatican, dated to about
250 years before Islam
2) The Sinian codex that was discovered in Saint Catherine monastery
in Sinai, dated to more than 200 years before Islam, it is present now
in the British museum
3) The Alexandrian codex, dated to about 200 years also before Islam,
it is also present in the British museum
4) The wisps of Qumran Valley: as Abbas Mahmoud Al-Akad wrote in Al-helal
book, in December edition 1959, the opening editor, under the title:" the
treasures of Qumran Valley" he said: those archaeological wisps were discovered
in one of the caves of Qumran Valley, in eastern Jordan … wisps from 2000
years (that article was on1959) {i.e. before the appearance of Islam by
more than six centuries} , after spreading them for inspection they showed
that they include a complete copy of Isaiah book …and many other holy books,
those books are showing no minor difference between them and the holy books
we have nowadays not a single difference or change in the text
Have you seen my brother the testimony of the archaeology who never
lies for the veracity of the holy bible, and there is no single reference
for that spurious Barnabas' Bible,
What proves also the nullification of that alleged Barnabas' Bible
is the presence of:
Chapter two
The historical errors
In that spurious bible there are several historical errors, of them:
1) In page 30, the writer of that alleged bible mentioned that at the time of the Christ' birth ,Pilate was the governor of Judea
That's a grave historical error, as Pilate was not
the governor during the time of the Christ 'birth, but he was during the
time of the Christ' crucifixion, he ruled during the period from 26- 36
AC , that's had been affirmed historically ( look the simplified Arabic
encyclopedia, page 470) , stating that "Pilate was the one who crucified
the Christ "
But the governor at the time of the Christ' birth
was King Herod as mentioned in the true bibles (Matthew chapter 2), and
also in (the simplified Arabic encyclopedia, page 1926) as it was mentioned
that : "Herod the greatest ruled from 37 to 40 AC , during his time the
Christ was born"
2) In page 30 also he mentioned that at the time of the Christ' birth Caiaphas and Annas were the high priests of the Jewish
That's also a shameful historical error as those high priests
were at the time of the Christ' crucifixion and not at the time of his
birth, as mentioned in the true bibles (Luke 23) and also mentioned in
(the simplified Arabic encyclopedia, page 1410) as it said:" Caiaphas was
the high priest who headed the Sanhedrim that sentenced Jesus to death"
There are much more historical errors in that spurious bible, it will
take much time to mention them but we mentioned only two of them
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible:
Chapter three
The geographical errors
Also there are several geographical errors of them;
1) In page 19, 20,157,166 it mentioned that Nazareth and Jerusalem were two seaports over the sea coast
That's a disgraceful geographical error, as Nazareth is a town in the northern valleys of the land of Palestine and not a seaport and Jerusalem lies over the mountain in the middle of Palestine and not over the sea coast
2) In page 261 it said that the farms and valleys in Palestine are beautiful
in the summer season
That's a wrong statement that could never be written
by someone who lived in Palestine, as it is well known that Palestine was
Dependant on the rain water and the rain isn't
falling in Palestine in the summer season so how the farms were beautiful
And in fact they are dry deserts, that's another
proof affirming that the writer lived in another country not Palestine,
where there
Were rivers irrigating the plantation in the
summer season making the farm beautiful by their flowers and greenness
We are mentioning those two examples only among the geographical errors
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible
:
Chapter four
The Social errors
1) In (page 105) there is a description of the duels taking place between the lovers
In Fact, those duels were not known in Palestine
during the time of the Christ, they did not exist except in western Europe
Before the French revolution, i.e. before
the eighteenth century, those duels were known as knighthood,
That gives a clue for the homeland of the
writer and the time of writing of that spurious bible
2) In (page 218) it mentioned that Judas the Iscariot, when they took
him instead of the Christ (according to his allegation), they put
On him a white robe
In Fact, the white robe was a sign of grief for the dead people in Andalusia ( Spain name till the fifteenth century) { see Dhaher Al-Islam book by Mr.Ahmed Amen, part 3, page 8} that's affirming that the author of the alleged Barnabas' Bible had lived in Spain and not in Palestine, and he was not present during the time of the Christ , but in the fifteenth Gregorian century as mentioned in the simplified Arabic encyclopedia,( page 354)
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas'
Bible is:
Chapter five
The included blasphemies
1) It said in (page 54) that: God said to the angels of Satan:
repent and confess that I am your creator, they replied saying: we will
Neither repent nor prostrate to you as you are unfair,
but Satan is fair and innocent
In Fact, demons can't speak with God in such impudence
and blasphemy, that's from the imagination of that forger author
3) In (page 83) it said that Satan will annoy Al-Mighty God till he
knows that he was mistaking by expelling him from the heaven
4)
Have you ever seen a blasphemy and disbelief worse than that? How Dare Satan to tell God in his face such saying? It is possible for Satan to say blasphemies on God, but in God's presence he can never pronounce a single word, the holy bible is saying" The demons also believe, and shudder from the grandeur of God (James 2:19), they were shuddering in the presence of the Christ (Mark 5:7)
This was confirmed by the utterances of the Islamic scholars, among them Imam Muslim who said in (Mukhtar of Imam Muslim and Al-Nawawy explanation, page 571)" when Satan was looking at Iesa, The son of Maryam (Mary) he was melting like the salt in water"
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible
is:
Chapter six
The included superstitions
A big number of superstitions are included in that spurious bible,
of them:
1) In page 54, 55,188 it said that God created a mass of dust by which
he would create Adam but he left it for twenty five thousands
Years, then Satan spit on it, so Gabriel came and
lifted that spitting with some of that dust underneath, so by that way
man had
An umbilical pit in his belly
Actually those superstitions don't accord with the capability of God who orders the thing to be then it will be and he doesn't need 25000 years
Then, how did Satan spit? Had he got saliva and he had no material essence? The most amazing of all was the umbilical pit of the man being a result of Satan spitting, what an ignorance! Isn't the umbilicus of man a result of cutting of the umbilical stump that is nourishing the embryo inside the womb of his mother? Was Adam an embryo to have an umbilicus? The whole story is nothing but a superstition arising from ignorant imagination
2) in( page 60) he said : when Satan saw the horses in paradise he incited
them to smash by their legs ,that piece of dust that Gabriel raised from
the belly of Adam, then when the horses ran towards ,it God transformed
it into a barking dog so the horses were terrified and fled away
What superstitions are those stories: didn't God create the dog among
the creatures he created in the paradise? Did God need a dog to terrify
the horses? Wasn't he capable of terrifying them himself if he wished?
And what was the harm of that piece of dust for God to protect from the
horses? Superstitions and superstitions
5) In (page 75) he said that the wise Solomon prepared a banquet for all the creatures, and then a fish came over every food in the banquet and ate them
How could a fish eat all of that food? Unless it was a whale! But what brought a whale to the palace of King Solomon? Unless it was in a yacht in the middle of the sea! In that condition we would ask how did the ants and other similar insects cross the sea towards that amazing yacht? Aren't they superstitions fabricated by the imagination of a superstition specialist? Aren't they similar to the stories of {thousands of night and night (Alf Leila Wa Leila)? actually what was missing for the fabulist editor after every superstition is to say:" by that time Shahrzad realized that morning had come, so she stopped talking"
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible is
:
Chapter Seven
The included exaggerations
.
We will mention some of the exaggerations mentioned in that spurious
book, the alleged Barnabas' Bible, without commenting on them because of
limited time, but any sane person will easily realize the extent of that
spurious exaggerations
1) in page 35 he said: Adam and Eve wept on their sin for 100 years
2) in page 145 he said: during the time of Elijah there were 12 mountains
inhabited by 17,000 pharisaics ( knowing that pharisaics were not
existing at that time but five centuries after Elijah )
3) in page 148 he said: the prophets of Baal killed by Elijah were
10,000 men
4) in page 135 he said : God ordered thousand thousand ( a million)
angels for sentry of the Christ clothes
5) in page 152 he said: the number of Roman Gods were 28,000 gods
6) in page 22 he said: the number of prophets sent by God to the world
were 144,000 prophets
7) in page 213 he said: the people who had faith without deeds will
stay in hell for 70,000 years only
8) in page 82 he said: Angel Michael will strike Satan 100,000 strikes
, each of those strikes as strong as ten times the hell
9) in page 55 he said: each single eye will weep in hell tears more
than the Jordan river
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible
is:
Chapter eight
The included contradictions
In the alleged Barnabas' Bible there are internal contradictions among its fake verses, among them:
1) in (page 157 ) he said that Satan was showing an intense remorse for loosing the paradise , while in page 120 he said that Satan refused to say that 'O God, be merciful to me, the sinner that I am!'
Also there are many contradictions with the holy bible, of them:
2) in (page 65, 78, 89,305) he said that the Christ was replying everyone asking him a question about anything saying:" O crazy", ' O insane" which contradicts with the personage of the Christ who said: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble in heart"(Matthew 11:29)
3) In (page 98,244) he said that: King Herod and Pontius Pilate showed
every respect and appreciation to the Christ and the high priest prostrated
down to the feet of the Christ, that contradicts with what was mentioned
in the holy bible as the high priest was against the Christ and he incited
Pilate to condemn him and to sentence him for crucifixion
And what also proves the nullification of the alleged Barnabas' Bible
is:
Part three
The testimony of the Islamic scholars
For the nullification of Barnabas' Bible
Chapter one
Mister Muhammad Shafik Ghorbal
Concerning (Barnabas' Bible) it was mentioned in the Arabic encyclopedia known as (the simplified Arabic encyclopedia) under the supervision of the great scholar Muhammad Shafik Ghorbal, with the participation of many writers and thinkers of them: Sheikh Muhammad Abu Zahra, Dr: Ibrahim Madkor, Dr: Zaki Naguib Mahfûz, Dr: Muhammad Mustafa Helmi, Dr: Sohir Al- kalamawy ,Dr: Hassen Al-Saaty and others, it was published in Cairo on 1965 by Dar Al-kalam( the pen house) for press and publishing
It was mentioned in the statement of the manager of the publishing institution for that encyclopedia; Mr. Hassen Galal Al-Arousy {for every gracious work there is a person to foster, to care for and to support those caring for that work for its accomplishment, and this simplified Arabic encyclopedia is owed to president Jamal Abdul-Nasser, the president of the United Arabic Republic, as his Excellency kindley permitted issuing it in June 11, 1959, so the president agreement was the starting point for that work}
I am saying that it is so easy to rebut that issue of Barnabas' Bible
by definite proofs requiring no comment ,and that exactly what was mentioned
in the simplified Arabic encyclopedia concerning that issue page 354 it
said:
{Barnabas' Bible is a spurious book written by an European in the fifteenth
century, And in its description of the political and religious circumstances
in Jerusalem during the time of the Christ were grave mistakes, It stated
that Iesa proclaimed that he was not the Christ, but he came telling the
glad tiding of the coming of Muhammad who will be the Christ}
This statement acquires its value being mentioned in a scientific book, edited by; as Mr. Hassen Galal Al-Arousy stated literally : { the execution of that project is attributed to the board of managers of the encyclopedia , composed of the greatest Arabic scholars, helped by a big number of experts and specialists , they exerted great effort in pouring their enormous knowledge and scientific potentials in the simplified Arabic encyclopedia}
This statement in spite of being very short it fulfils the saying:" the best of speech is the short and informative one" we can extract from it the following facts;
1) What is known as Barnabas' Bible is nothing but a spurious book
2) Its writer is not one of the Christ followers as claimed by this
liar in his spurious book, but he was a
European
3) That book is not dating to the time of the Christ as claimed by
this scandalous man, but was written
In the fifteenth century
4) That book is full of grave political errors
5) Also it is full of grave religious errors
6) He claimed that the Christ denied being the Christ
7) He claimed also that the Christ said that he came telling the glad
tiding of the coming of Muhammad who will be the Christ!!!
Does any sane Muslim accept that saying??? Does any Muslim accept that Muhammad is the Christ???
So whoever believes in Barnabas' Bible is actually discrediting the
prophet of Islam and the noble quran that confirmed that Iesa is the Christ
and Muhammad is not the Christ!!!
Chapter two
Mr. Abbas Mahmoud Al-Akad
Mr. Abbas Mahmoud Al-Akad wrote in Al-Akhbar (the news) newspaper on 26/10/1959 saying:
1) Many phrases mentioned in that mentioned bible was composed in a
pattern which was not known before the publicity of
Arabic language in Andalusia and the nearby
areas
2) The description of hell in Barnabas' Bible depends on information
known lately and were not prevalent among Jews during the
Time of the Christ
3) Some of the phrases mentioned in it had leaked to the European continent
conveyed from Arabic sources
4) It is not accustomed for the Christ to proclaim the glad tiding
in front of thousands in the name of Muhammad the messenger of
God
5) In that bible it was mentioned repeatedly some errors that couldn't
be ignored by the Jewish who is knowing his books, and
Could never be uttered by the Christian who believes
in the accredited bibles and the Muslim who understand what included in
Barnabas' Bible as contradictions with the
texts of the quran like saying about Muhammad he is the messiah or the
Christ
Chapter three
Mr.Khalil Saada
Mr.Khalil Saada who translated that spurious Barnabas' Bible into the
Arabic language on 1908 AC, he wrote in his introduction of that spurious
book saying:
{All the historians agree that Barnabas' Bible was written in the intermediary
ages}
Chapter four
All the Islamic historians
The Islamic historians also testify that spurious Barnabas' Bible did
not exist till the fourteen Gregorian century as:
All the Muslim historians till the end of fourteenth century
documented that the Christian bible was that written by Matthew, Mark,
Luke and John ( Moroug Al-Zahab ( the prairies of gold ) by Abu Al-Hassen
Al-Masoudy,part 1, page 161) and the book of the beginning and the end
( Al-Bedaya Wa-alnehaya) by Imam Emad El-Din ,part 2 , page 100}, the book
of { Al-kawl Al-Abrizy} by the great scholar Ahmed Al-Maqriesy , page 18}
and the book of {Al-Tarikh Al-Kamel ( the full history)} by Ibn Alathir
, part 1, page 128}
Chapter five
Dr; Fatima Muhammad
That was also confirmed by the recent scientific references testifying
that the gospels( bibles) are four, and they didn't mention Barnabas' Bible(
the youth encyclopedia by Dr; Fatima Muhammad, revised by Dr; Muhammad
Khalifa Barakat ) as it mentioned the following;( the gospels( bibles)
are the first four books of the new testament , they are separate books
, each one of them is telling the life story of the Christ as narrated
by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John }
It is noticed here that she didn't mention that spurious book, named
Barnabas' Bible
Important Question
Why Barnabas' Bible wasn't printed and published by any Islamic organization throughout all these years if it is the true bible as they believe??? Whoever knows the answer let him tell me to expand my knowledge!!!
I think after all of these explanations and the definite proofs, not a single sane person would dare to claim that Barnabas' Bible is the true bible , apart from the ignorant and illiterate, those whom are described by the holy bible " my people perished for lack of knowledge"( Isaiah 5:13 )
We are asking God, beloved to protect you and ourselves from the ignorance
and perishing, Amen
.
Part Four
The spurious Barnabas' Bible
And the foretelling of Prophet Muhammad
The writer of Barnabas'Bible was telling that the Christ foretold about
the coming of Prophet Muhammad!
Also some bigots added that prophet Moses also foretold about Muhammad,
and they said that the other gospels foretold about Muhammad and not only
Barnabas'Bible
So did the Taurât (Old Testament) and the bible really foretell
about the coming of Prophet Muhammad?
Some Islamic annotators, among them Mr.: Rashid Reda in the Manar (the
beacon) exegesis, part 9, (page 230-300) tried to claim that there are
18 prophecies in the holy bible:{ i.e. the Taurât ( old testament)and
the new testament} foretelling about the coming of Prophet Muhammad!
Actually they are prophecies about the coming of the Christ and the
holy spirit , they tried to quote them, making them pointing to Prophet
Muhammad , but the sophisms in them are very obvious like sunshine in the
midday , it is really unnecessary to rebut them one by one as they really
don't deserve that effort , but I am just mentioning three of them as they
are the most known among Muslims, they are:
1) The claim that God told Moses about the illiterate prophet (Al-Omy) meaning Prophet Muhammad {The rangers' chapter (Surat As-Saffaat) 148-159}
2) The claim that the prophecy of Moses saying that" The Lord your God
will raise up to you a prophet from the midst of you, of
Your brothers, like me. You shall listen to
him"(Deuteronomy 18:15) is pointing to Muhammad
3)The claim that the Christ' saying about the Paraclete was pointing
to Prophet Muhammad {the Rank chapter (Surat As-Saff) 6}
So let us explain those verses in details
Chapter one
The quran verse saying that God spoke to Moses
About the illiterate prophet
Let us recognize those verses and discuss them quietly and logically
with all our respect to the creeds of others:
The Heights chapter (Surat Al-A'raf) 148: In the stories of Moses with
his people" And the people of Moses made in his absence, out of their ornaments,
the image of a calf. And when Moses returned to his people, angry and grieved…
(To his saying). And Moses chose out of his people seventy men … he said:
"O my Lord, if it had been Your Will, You could have destroyed them and
me before; … so forgive us and have Mercy on us, Certainly we have turned
unto you." He (God) said: My Punishment I afflict therewith whom I will
and My Mercy embrace all things. That I shall ordain for those who are
the pious, and give Zakât (alms); and those who believe in Our Ayât
(verses), those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet ( Al-Omy), they find
him written with them in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (bible).
Say "O mankind! Verily, I am sent to you all as the Messenger of Allah
- to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. No god but
him It is He who gives life and causes death. So believe in Allah and His
Messenger, the Prophet Al-Omy who believes in Allah and His Words, and
follow him so that you may be guided. "
Those are the quran verses telling about the Prophet (Al-Omy), so let
us discuss them with open mind and sound logic, through what was said by
the respected Islamic scholars themselves
First: Mr. Muhammad Aza Drouza in his book (the new exegesis (tafsir),
part 3, page 164) he said;
"Those two verses {telling about the Prophet (Al-Omy)} look contradicted
with the sequence of stories of the people of Israel"
We are asking;
1) What does that mean?
It means that the verse 157 saying" those who follow the Messenger,
the Prophet ( Al-Omy)" is not going with the contexture of the verses before
and after , so it is interceptive phrase, as Mr. Muhammad Aza Drouza said
, as what is the meaning of God's saying to Moses that the recompense is
not for his people but for the people of the Prophet ( Al-Omy )?
2) And what is meant by his saying: they find him written with them
in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (bible)?
That's very amazing for God to say these words!! Did bible exist during
the time of Prophet Moses for him to say: they find him written with them
in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (bible)?????!!!! Amazing
Second: for that reasons, most of the studiers are suggesting that
this verse was interpolated in the contexture, which is degrading the credibility
of the noble quran being miraculous in its enunciation
Third: the studiers are also saying that there was a misinterpretation, with good intention, in the reading of letters " the prophet Al-Omy' instead of the' the prophet Al-Aty' {N.B in Arabic language Al-Omy was interpreted as "the illiterate" while Al-Aty' means" the coming" and the Arabic pronunciation of both are very close), especially the writing at that time was without dots on the letters and actually that prophecy of Moses about the coming prophet it means the Christ , who declared himself in the gospel of John chapter 5, and verse 46,when he said "For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me."
Fourth; By saying that, we are not discrediting the noble quran, but explaining that the quran narrators weren't infallible, our proof for that is what was committed by Othman who burned six qurans as they were not showing congruence with the one he kept with him, that quran was known as Ottoman's quran, and as a result of that action many turbulences occurred in which Othman himself was killed for that reason ( see the simplified Arabic encyclopedia page 1187 , 1374)
Fifth; another fact that deserves mentioning it, is what we all know
about the style of quran which is repeating its doctrines again and again
in different chapters, aiming for stabilization and reminding , there are
many examples for that which is beyond our field of study now but we are
ready to specify for it another cession if you wish ,
Concerning the phrase of "the prophet Al-Omy" it doesn't exist in the
whole noble quran {which is composed of 114 chapters, and 6235 verses},
I am saying that that "the prophet Al-Omy" was never mentioned except in
one verse only, which proves really what was suggested by the studiers
about the interpolation of that phrase or the occurrence of a misinterpretation,
with good intention, in the reading of letters
Sixth; Actually the verse saying" they find him written with them in
the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (bible).",on inspecting the Taurât
( old testament) and the Injeel (New testament) we will not find any mentioning
of "the prophet Al-Omy "and of sure the Taurât ( old testament) and
the Injeel (New testament) that we have nowadays is the same that existed
during the time of prophet Muhammad and before him by more than two
hundred years , we had proved that in previous cessions
So dear listener it is obvious that the saying of "the prophet Al-Omy"
pointing to Prophet Muhammad is not true for the reasons previously mentioned
Chapter two
The claim that the prophecy of Moses about the lord who will raise up
A prophet from your brothers, was pointing to prophet Muhammad
Some proselytizers are claiming that prophet Moses by his saying in the book of Deuteronomy "your lord will raise up to you a prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him"(Deuteronomy 18:15) he was foretelling the coming of prophet Muhammad, their point of view is the suffix "of your brothers" means the Arabs, as they are brothers of the people of Israel descending from Ishmael the son of Ibrahim
So Let us discuss that quietly, with a sound logic:
First: Actually the expression" of your brothers" is a clarification
for the preceding suffix in the same verse" from the midst of you", So
let us go back to the text to read it with understanding as it says:" your
lord will raise up to you a prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers,
like me. You shall listen to him, so the expression " from the midst of
you" means that from the people of Israel, and the suffix " of your brothers"
came as a specification after a generalization meaning to specify that
the prophet will be from the tribe of Judah , which is one of the tribes
of the people of Israel, so he was considered a brother to them, actually
Ishmael is not amongst the tribes of the people of Israel , as Israel is
James, and Ishmael was not the son of James, but he was the son of Ibrahim
from Hagar, the Egyptian Handmaid, so he was considered an uncle for James
from half brother, so he couldn't be called "of your brothers"?, actually
it is a sophism, that is unacceptable by the holy bible studiers " ask
the people of the Scriptures if you do not know." {The Prophets chapter
(Surat Al-Anbiya')}
Second; there is also another remark in the verse said by Prophet Moses
,that's his saying:" to you" let us go back to the text of the verse to
clarify that suffix, as the verse is saying " your lord will raise up "to
you" a prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers, like me. You shall
listen to him" so to whom was he pointing by saying:" to you"? of course
he meant the people of Israel and not the people of Ishmael, as Prophet
Moses was speaking to the people of Israel to whom he was sent, so he was
saying "to you Israel" it is very obvious that Prophet Moses was not sent
to the Arabs, and he was not speaking to the people of Ishmael for the
suffix:" to you" to be considered pointing to the people of Ishmael
Third: Actually that prophecy said by Prophet Moses, he was pointing to the Christ, who declared that himself in John chapter 5, verse 46 " saying" For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me."
Have you seen beloved how that allegation is baseless and devoid of
any veracity
Beloved Let me quote to you from the noble quran this verse" And argue
not with the people of the Scripture, unless it is in a way that is in
good manner"{The Spider chapter (Surat Al-Ankabut) 46}
Chapter three
The claim that the Christ's promise about the Paraclete
Meaning the prophet Muhammad
What was the source of that claim?
1) It was mentioned in the noble quran in The Rank chapter (Surat As-Saff)
6: "And 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), said: "O Children of Israel!
I am the Messenger of Allah unto you confirming the Taurât (Torah)
which came before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after
me, whose name shall be Ahmed"
2) It was also mentioned in Ibn Hesham book of the prophetical biography,
part 1, page 248 as an exegesis for that verse his saying: Yuhnis the discipline
(meaning Apostle John) affirmed for the people of the bible that he (the
Christ) said: whoever hates me, hates the lord …from now on they became
arrogant and thought that they will overcome me …but what was said in the
scripture must be fulfilled that " they hated me with no reason "so when
the"Munhnma" will come ,who will be sent to you from God , the Holy Spirit
, who proceeds from the Father, he will testify about me." Ibn Hesham added
saying: "Munhnma" in Syriac language is Muhammad, and it is in Romanian
(Greek) language means Paraclitos, peace upon him"
Let us as usual, dear listener discuss this matter with open mind, without sensibility and with all the respect for the creeds of everyone
First: Actually the name of the Arabic prophet in the noble quran is "Muhammad" as mentioned in many quran verses, of them:
The Family of Imran (Surat Aal-'Imran) 144:" Muhammad is no more than
a Messenger and many Messengers have passed away before him"
The Confederates chapter (Surat Al-Ahzab) 40:"Muhammad is not the father
of any man among you"
Muhammad chapter (Surat Muhammad) 2:" and believe in that which is sent down to Muhammad"
Victory chapter (Surat Al-Fath) 29:" Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah"
That's the name of the prophet of Islam as mentioned repeatedly in many quran verses
Second; this verse mentioned in The Rank chapter (Surat As-Saff) 6, is the only verse in the whole noble quran {which is composed of 114 chapters, and 6235 verses as we mentioned before},I am saying that this is the only verse that mentioned Ahmed , and if you would allow me dear listener to remind you here by what I have mentioned before about that worth mentioning fact , what we all know about the style of the quran which is repeating the doctrines again and again in many chapters aiming for stabilization and reminding , the examples for that fact are numerous that is beyond our field of study { but we are ready to specify another cession for that if the listeners wish }, so mentioning the name Ahmed in this sole verse with no single mentioning in the whole quran chapters at all , would affirm what was suggested by the studiers ( as we mentioned before) about the interpolation of that name by the narrators ,By saying that, we are not discrediting the noble quran, but obviously the quran narrators weren't infallible from mistakes, our proof for that is what was committed by Othman who burned six qurans as they were not showing congruence with the one he kept with him, that quran was known as Ottoman's quran, and as a result of that action many turbulences occurred in which Othman himself was killed for that reason ( see the simplified Arabic encyclopedia page 1187 , 1374)as we mentioned before
Third: it is known that the noble quran has many recitations, and in one of these recitations, what is known as the recitation of Obay (see the reference of the French orientalist BLACHERE) named (LE CORAN) (part 2, page 909) in that recitation, as this orientalist said there is no mentioning of the name "Ahmed "Isn't that a proof that this name was interpolated by some narrators in some recitations and not the others???
Fourth: Concerning what was mentioned by Ibn Hesham in the prophetical biography, part 1, page 248, that we mentioned before about 'Ahmed "being the Paraclete, that the Christ spoke about in the gospel of the disciple John, we are saying that: the interpretation of the word Paraclete, as 'Ahmed " is a grave linguistic error and very exposed falsification, as the word Paraclete in Greek is pronounced PARAKLITOS, and its meaning is ( the comforter of the believers during the time of their existence in the evil word), but the falsification committed by Ibn Hesham for the Greek word was the result of replacing some letters in the Greek word to be PERIKLITIS, that means the innocuous thing ( Hamid or Mahmoud in Arabic language) from it the word Ahmad was derived, don't you see dear listener in that a trail of deliberate falsification for the word to coincide with the word mentioned in The Rank chapter (Surat As-Saff) 6, about" Ahmed"?
Fifth: Actually, Ibn Hesham was contradicting with the quran itself
when he said that the Rûh-ul-Qudus (Holy Spirit) means Ahmed, by
that he deviated from the spirit of the quran who said that the Rûh-ul-Qudus
(Holy Spirit) is the angel (Gabriel) as mentioned in the Bees chapter(
Surat An-Nahl) 102:"Say Rûh-ul-Qudus (Gabriel) has brought it down
from your Lord with truth"
All the quran exegesis for that verse agree that Rûh-ul-Qudus
is the angel Gabriel, as Imam Abdullah Yousef said in his tafsir( exegesis)
page 664" Rûh-ul-Qudus is the title of the angel Gabriel, through
whom the revelation of the noble quran came , so how did Imam Ibn Hesham
fall into such grave mistake?? Does any sane Muslim accept that??
Sixth: Actually the word PARACLITOS in Greek, as mentioned in the ancient
codices of the holy bible that are dating more than two hundred years before
the Islamic era , it means the comfortable spirit i.e. the holy spirit
that is comforting the believers in this evil world and transforming their
sadness to joy and peace and their weakness into strength as mentioned
in the Acts book, chapter1, verse 8:" But you will receive power when the
Holy Spirit has come upon you…"
Seventh: To proof the veracity of saying that of the Paraclete meaning the Holy Spirit, and not just a human, there are contextures mentioned in the holy bible in relation to the Holy Spirit, among them the Christ' saying about the Paraclete in John, chapter 14, verse16" he may be with you for ever" Is there any human, whoever he is could stay for ever ?
Eighth: Among the contextures also, the Christ' saying about the Paraclete, in the same previous reference, verse17, his saying:" "whom the world neither sees him nor recognizes him" does this match with any human, whoever he is? , as every human is visible and known , but the spirit is neither visible nor recognized
Ninth: Among the contextures also, the Christ' saying about the Paraclete, in the same previous reference, verse17, his saying:" But you recognize him, for he lives with you, and will be in you" does this match with a man coming after the Christ by six centuries ? So how the Christ was telling that he lives with you, as how does a human live inside the people, as the Christ was telling that he lives with you? Only the Holy Spirit, can live inside humans, if they seek him and open their hearts to him
Tenth: Among the contextures also, the Christ' saying about the Paraclete,
in the same previous reference chapter 16, verse 14, his saying:" He will
glorify me, for he will take from what is mine, and will declare it to
you" the Holy Spirit glorifies the Christ, so that person claimed by Ibn
Hesham to be the Paraclete, did he glorify the Christ, or instead he stripped
the Christ from the divine aspect?
From all of these we can realize that the Christ didn't speak about
"Ahmed" but about the Holy Spirit, who came unto the disciples and the
believers
Finally
I want to make it clear, beloved that the catchword of our writings is meeting on a common ground, not hating each other or fighting each others by the arrows of stupid argument that results into hostilities as the holy bible said, so I don't want to go through what is evoked by some concerning that subject , or they may think it is a delinquency of me not to point to it, but I don't want that subject to be our subject of discussion ,what I mean is that saying concerning the false prophets , mentioned by the Christ in Mathew , chapter 24, verse 5,11. As he said:" For many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Christ; and shall lead many astray…. And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray" as discussing such issue may hurt the feelings and increase the diversity and will not win souls, as we respect the creed of everyone and his opinion, and appreciate the value of everyone , wishing for everyone every blessing , happiness and grace
By this book we have concluded a series of amity book over the common ground, as we published books on:
1) How is God one in holy trinity?
2) How could God incarnate in a physical human form (in the Christ)?
3) The concept of titling the Christ as the son of God
4) The verity of crucifixion of the Christ
5) The non falsification of the Holy Bible
6) The alleged Barnabas' Bible
7) Did Moses and Iesa (the Christ) foretell about the coming of the
prophet Mohammed?
Hoping that I was able to answer the questions of the beloved Muslims who asked us about these issues in a way away from complexity and impeaching
Asking the lord to bless this humble effort, to be a blessing for many,
Amen
© jesusmarie.com pour la traduction française