Christian-critics

Share

In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
DEDICATED TO
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
AND TO
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.
*

CHRISTIAN–CRITICS

There are many sites on the Internet listing what they call the “truth” about Islam. The presentations on these sites are vast on text and void on substance. There is no charge against Allāh, the Prophet Mohammad, Islam, and the Qur’an that is not refutable.                                    To respond to all the charges of the critics is not only a monumental undertaking but pointless –as many are frivolous and are utilized, seemingly, to overwhelm uninformed Muslims. A response is given to those that seem to require a comment. The last few are somewhat more interesting.                                                                                                           ~

The following is a response to the site
“Answering Islam”
(Responses are done in “blue”).

1. In Qur’an 8:43 Allāh showed the Prophet a vision that the enemy was few instead of showing them as many, in which the event the Prophet and Muslims would have been discouraged and disputed in their decision. In doing so was Allāh using deception to achieve His aim?
   This vision, relating to the battle of Badr, showing the 313 Muslims against 1,000 enemies, was not about the enemies actual numbers but their military strength: in other words though the enemies were three times more in number, militarily they were few (weak). Instead of showing the Prophet the enemies physical number, which might have distressed any soldier at such an odds, Allāh, the Wise, showed him the enemies weakness. And that those who fight in the cause of Allah are assisted by Allāh–(See Qur’an 8:66).

   Whereas Allāh does not lie/deceive, according to the Bible God lied/deceived. God promised that man would live 120 years: “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years”–(Genesis 6:3). While some Biblical personalities, such as Noah, Abraham, and Ishmael lived over this 120 years, how many Popes –who sit in Jesus’ and Peter’s seat– and other supposedly righteous individuals lived to be a hundred years? And how many ordinary people? The majority barely makes it to eighty or ninety.

   According to the Bible God “lied” to Abraham about giving him Palestine. In Genesis 17:8 God says to Abraham:   “And I will give unto thee, and thy seed after thee, the land where thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan (Palestine), for an everlasting possession.” According to the Bible, this promise to Abraham did not come to pass; it says about Abraham and the elders of Israel : “These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off”–(Heb. 11:13). Acts 7: (3)-5 says: “And He (God) gave him (Abraham) no inheritance in it (Palestine), NO, NOT SO MUCH AS TO SET HIS FOOT UPON; Yet He promised that He would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him.”
Clearly, it is the Bible that attributes lying to God. (See
Islam-and lying).

2. In Sura 19:26 God tells Mary to say that she is fasting when in fact she is eating water and dates. 
   This is not deception. Fasting means refraining temporarily from a thing. Abstaining from speech/conversation is also a form of fasting; as the verse conveys: “So eat and drink and cool the eye. Then if thou seest any mortal, say: Surely I have vowed a fast to the Beneficent, so I will NOT SPEAK to any man today.” Clearly, avoiding speech is the “fast;” much like Zacharias being told to not speak except by signs_Qur’an 3:40).
Allah does not “lie;” man does, and also does not think.   .

3. In Sura 34:12-14, the critic says that God keeps the Jinns working by fooling them that Solomon is still alive.
   This “worm that ate away at Solomon’s staff” is an allegorical expression. Reason would dictate that a King’s palace would not have a literal “worm” inside. And if did (or gotten in somehow) it would have taken probably days if not weeks to gnaw away at Solomon’s staff before Solomon could have fallen to the floor, alerting his servants that he was dead. In that time rigor mortis would have already set in and his body starting to decompose and would surely have been noticed by his servants. What this statement means is, as Muhammad Ali explained: “The reference in the creature of the earth that ate away his staff is to his son’s weak rule, under whom the kingdom of Solomon went to pieces. It appears that Solomon’s successor, Rehoboam, led a life of luxury and ease, and instead of acting on the advice of the older men, he yielded to the pleasure-seeking wishes of his companions (1 Kings 12:13), and it is to his luxurious habits and easy mode of life that the Holy Qur’ån refers when it calls him a creature of the earth. The eating away of his staff signifies the disruption of the kingdom. The jinn, as already remarked, mean the rebellious tribes who had been reduced to subjection by Solomon, and who remained in subjection to the Israelites for a time, until the king-dom was shattered. This instance, as well as the one following, contains a warning for the Muslims as to the result of falling into luxury and ease, by which, however, they benefited little; the ultimate fate of the respective kingdoms of the Umayyads and Abba-sides was the same as that of Solomon’s kingdom. See also 38:34a.” (To view M. Ali’s translation of the Qur’an go to www.muslim.org).

3a. Allāh sending a crow to show Cain how to bury the murdered Abel–(Qur’an 5:27-31).
   This Adam family was primitive man. Cain killing Abel was the first act of murder in creation. It is not uncommon then for Cain to not know what to do or how to hide his brother’s body. Thus Allāh sending this bird to scratch the ground to make a hole is knowledge.

(The view has been expressed that two birds were sent as example to fight; with one killing the other in imitation of Cain killing Abel; and then scratching the ground and covering the dead bird in demonstration for Cain to ob-serve and follow. Though this was said to be a vision not an actual happening, the reason being that Allāh would not have one bird unjustly killing another).  

There is nothing wrong in Cain following this bird. Man’s observation of the bird has led to the develop-ment of the field of aviation. Man is also studying other animals.

4. Sura 4:157 says Jesus didn’t die, he wasn’t crucified, it only looks like he was dead. This is no “lying.”
   This statement negates both the Jewish claim that they “killed” Jesus, and the Christian’s claim that Jesus was crucified. Jesus only appeared to be dead. He was unconscious. In those days no one checked for pulse; once you’re limp you’re dead; this is how God saved him from death and why his legs were not broken. (If Jesus is a sacrifice for sins as animals are/were sacrifices, then Jesus should not  have been crucified on a “stake;” he  should have been bound, as Abraham had  bound Ishmael, and slaughtered on an  altar as animals are/were).

5. The critic wrote: “Sura 48:27 relates: “Truly did God fulfill the vision for his Apostle. You shall enter the Sacred Mosque, if God wills (In sha’ Allah), with minds secure, heads shaved, hair cut short, and without fear. For He knew what you did not know…”
   Muhammad told his men that he had a vision of making the pilgrimage before they set out toward Mecca to do it. The Meccans stopped them at Hudaibiya and wouldn’t let them do the pilgrimage, but a treaty was made which would allow the Muslims to do the pilgrimage in the future. According to the Hadith some of the Muslims were very upset because the dream was not fulfilled, at which point this verse was given, promising that it would be fulfilled in the future.
But the biggest problem is this phrase “if God wills” in the middle of a prophetic word from the mouth of God?”
“Insha Allāh” has two significances: (1) It is a reminder to man that man has no foreknowledge and can do nothing of himself. (2) As the Qur’an is a guidance, a Muslim, when intending to perform a good act in the future, is required to base this act on Allāh granting him at that time life and well-being: “And say not of anything, ‘I will do that tomorrow,’ Unless Allāh please”–(Qur’an 18:23-24).  

6. The Account of Noah: The Bible clearly teaches that all of Noah’s sons came into the ark with him. (Genesis 6:9-10, 7:1, 7:7). However, in the Qur’an one of Noah’s sons did not come into the ark–(Sura 11:42-43).
That the Qur’an here differs from the Bible shows that the Qur’anic claim of confirming past Scripture is false, is a lame-duck argument. Perhaps Noah had more than three sons.
The Bible says, after the Flood Noah’s three sons fruitify the world–(Genesis chapter 10). None of these sons went to Africa. Unless one of these sons was raisin-haired or it cropped up in one of their descendants, from where did the negro come? And if man is only 5,000 year old how it is that human remains that are nearly a million years old are found in Africa?
Thus, Noah seems to have had more than three sons; and maybe even daughters.
   Allāh saying that the Qur’an confirms past scriptures only means that Revelations were given to the prophets of old, not that it put the stamp of Divine approval on all its stories, (one such childish story is chapter eleven, the tower of Babel).
The Qur’an states, and research confirms, that only Noah’s people were drowned, not the entire world. It would be an injustice to destroy the entire world for the sins of Noah’s people.
Significantly, whereas Muslims are required by Allāh to believe in all His revealed Books, many of the stories in the Bible such as that prophets committed sins are not supported by the Qur’an. Allāh. tells us that all prophets were sinless. Whereas Muslims are to believe in past Scriptures, Allāh also tells us what not to believe, such as 
sonship of God, trinityGod incarnate, inherited sin, vicarious atonement, MariolatryKarma & Reincarnation, Polytheism, idolatry, Judaism’s “chosen people” to the exclusion of others.  

7. The Plagues of Egypt: The Bible records the nine plagues that God sent upon Egypt–(chapters 7-11), a “flood” was not one of these plagues. 
   That Arberry’s translation of the Qur’an shows that one of these signs was “flood” is incorrect. The Arabic word Tufaan, as Muhammad Ali explains, “is originally every accident that besets men on all sides (R), and hence it is also applied to flood or deluge. It also means death, or quick and widespread death; or death prevailing generally (LL). Hence it might mean plague causing excessive death or flood. Widespread death, as the true interpretation of tufaan, is also accepted by Bukhari (B. 65: vii).”–(M. Ali Qur’anic comm; 934. Muhammad Ali has explained these nine signs of Moses–Qur’an 7:130-134; comm; 935. His transla-tion of the Qur’an can be viewed online: www.muslim.org                            

8. Which son to sacrifice, Ishmael or Isaac? 
Though the Qur’an does not give the name of the son to be sacrificed, it is clear that this son was Ishmael. Abraham prayed for an heir and was promised and given a son–(Qur’an 37:100-102). Abraham had a vision to sacrifice this son, which was ransomed by an animal–(Qur’an 37:102-107). Next, Allāh says: “AND We gave him (Abraham) the good news of Isaac”–(Qur’an 37:112). Clearly, even though the first son was not named it could not be Isaac that Abraham was required to sacrifice. The birth of the first son and his sacrifice are noted first after which time Abraham was given news of the birth of Isaac. Thus it was Ishmael who was the intended sacrifice. And even before the birth of Isaac.

   Regarding the Biblical aspect. The promise of a son to Abraham from his prayer and the birth of Ishmael are the same as the Qur’an–(Genesis 15:1-4). Regarding the sacrifice, the Bible says it was Isaac–(Genesis 22:1-13); God says to Abraham: “Take now thy son, “thine only son Isaac”. Ishmael was fourteen years old when Isaac was born. Thus, at no time was Isaac Abraham’s “only son.” As Prof. ‘Abdul Ahad Dawud (the former Rev. David Benjamin Keldani) notes in his book Muhammad In The Bible, Jews, because of jealousy, ‘effaced’ the name of Ishmael from the “second, sixth, and seventh verses of the twenty-second chapter” of Genesis and inserted Isaac.

   Significantly, whereas the Qur’an states that Ishmael was consulted about this sacrifice, and consented to it willingly, according to the Bible Abraham, this prophet of God on a mission to do God’s bidding, LIED to Isaac, this “only son” whom he “loves,” when Isaac asked where the ram was that is to be sacrificed, instead of telling Isaac that he was to be sacrificed–(Genesis 22:7-8). Thus it must have been quite a struggle for Abraham to subdue and bind this shocked and betrayed son and forced him down onto the altar for sacrifice. Perhaps even having had to knock his son unconscious

   Also, after this sacrifice (which the Bible accords to Isaac) God told Abraham that He will multiply Abraham’s seed as the stars in heaven and the sands on the sea-shore–(Genesis 22:17). Now, Jews are no way in number as the stars and sands, but Muslims are. Another proof that this promise was to Abra-ham and ISHMAEL. And it is Muslims, not Jews or Christians, that commemorate this sacrifice.

   That Ishmael was a Divine gift is cemented in God’s statement that He will give Abraham a son “ALSO” of Sarah:   “And I will bless her (Sarah), and give thee (Abraham) a son ALSO of her”–(Genesis 17:16).   Interestingly, when Abraham was given the news of the birth of Isaac, he laughed and questioned such a happening–(Genesis17:16-17). It is hardly believable that a prophet of God would doubt the words of God.

   That the Qur’an does not state the site where this vision was given and where this intended sacrifice took place are immaterial. There are no lessons from such information. It is the lesson that matters: man’s –Abraham’s and Ishmael’s– unwavering faith in God. However, given the fact that Jews “efface(d)” the name of Ishmael and inserted Isaac in its place to glorify the Judaic branch of Abraham; it is not unlikely that the same was done regarding the place of this sacrifice –the place may very well have been altered from Marwah to Moriah.

   Be it Marwah or Moriah or wherever, that this sacrifice is commemorated at Minna and not at its actual site is of no consequence, it is the significance of it that is paramount: man is to submit himself to the Power that has sway over him in as much as he holds the animal in submission to himself.   Significantly, this sacrifice was instituted by the Prophet Mohammad. Thus, Muslims engaging in this sacrifice and in honor of Ishmael is no “wishful thinking.” It is Divine guidance and blessing.  

9. Jesus as Son of God:
It is not the Qur’an, it is the Bible that implies that in having a son “God had sex.” Begotten –as Jesus is said to be the “begotten” son of God– requires the joining of sperm and ovum. 

   The Qur’an referring to “son of God” is referring to the pagan doctrine introduced into the religion of Jesus, not of a metaphorical son. This is made clear in Qur’an 9:30. And as Muhammad notes: “We are here told that the Christian doctrine that Jesus Christ was the son of God was borrowed from earlier pagan people. Recent research has established the fact beyond all doubt. In fact, when St. Paul saw that the Jews would on no account accept Jesus Christ as a messenger of God, he introduced the pagan doctrine of sonship of God into the Christian religion, so that it might become more acceptable to the pagans”–(comm; 1051. Read also Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, The Sources Of Christianity in which KK has exposed the pagan nature of Christianity; this book may be obtained from www.muslim.org).

10. Hajj is pagan customs:
Some 2500 years ago, and long before idolatry in Arabia, Allāh instructed Abraham and Ishmael to raise and purify the Ka’ba for His future nation who will perform acts of worship there–(Qur’an 2:125; 22:26). If the Ka’ba later became under the possession of the idolaters who undertook the practice of making circuits (all be it naked) round the Ka’ba, and when the Ka’ba came into the control of Muslims who then observed this injunction to “compass” the Ka’ba that Allāh gave to Abraham and Ishmael, it cannot be said that Muslims copied this circuit round the Ka’ba from the idolaters; when in fact, it was the idolaters who adopted this act which was enjoined by Allah. The same applies to Lady Hagar running between the hills of Safa and Marwah.

   It is a subjugation of reason to entertain that Mohammad who as a majority of one fought life and limb against all forms of Paganism would, as a majority of at least tens of thousands and with worldly treasures at his command, imitate Paganism.(For full details on the rites and ceremonies of Hajj see Muhammad Ali Qur’anic comm’s; or Hajj/Pilgrimage to Makkah).
   Chapter 2:191-203 explains the Hajj, and those who are excused because of ailment. The “appointed days” mentioned in verse 203, are known as the “days of Tashriq,” the three days following the end of the Sacrifice. There are no contradictions in these verses. .  

11. Abrogation in the Qur’an:
There is no abrogation of verses in the Qur’an. (Muhammad Ali has dealt with this topic in his Qur’anic comm; 152; and in his The Religion of Islam. See also Malik Ghulam Farid’s comm.; 132).

   (a) Qur’an 2:142-144. The Qibla–direction Muslims face in prayer–was not changed from Jerusalem to Makkah. Allāh did not prescribed Jerusalem to be the Qibla then later changed it. As Jerusalem was the spiritual center of the Israelite prophets–a brother-hood of prophets to which Mohammad himself was a member–the Prophet Mohammad honored Jerusalem as the centre for worship, until he received Divine revelation to take the Ka’bah as Qibla.

   Qur’an 2:115, “so wherever you turn, there is Allāh.’s face (or purpose being one of the meanings of wajh). Surely Allāh is Ample-giving Knowing;” has nothing to do with the direction of prayer. As Muhammad Ali explains: “The previous verse (vs. 114) predicts disgrace for those who persecuted the Muslims; this one (vs. 115) predicts the Muslim conquests by which the enemy was to be disgraced. The concluding words, Allāh is Ample-giving, Knowing, also support this conclusion. The Muslims, who had been deprived of all they possessed and made utterly destitute, were promised ample gifts. The words whiter you turn, thither is Allāh’s purpose, point clearly to the Divine promise that all obstacles in the path of the Muslims will be removed and victory will follow their footsteps.” And which victory is history.    

   In Qur’an 2:177 Allāh says: “It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards the east and the West, but righteous is the one who believes in Allāh….and gives away wealth out of love for Him to the near of kin and the orphans….”  Clearly, this verse is not about a change in Qibla. Allāh is defining what righteousness is. He is telling us that rituals/prayers alone is no magic carpet to heaven, but that righteousness includes spending wealth to benefit the unfortunates: in other words “put your money where your prayer is.”  

   Qur’an 2:124-151 relates the story of Abraham and Ishmael building the Ka’bah and how the Ka’bah was made the Qibla. There is no abrogation. (See Muhammad Ali for explanation of these verses).
   These are some of the Biblical teachings that requires death that the Qur’an has abrogated:
-Whoever “secretly” entices another to follow an unknown God–(Deut. 13:6-10);
-a “stubborn and rebellious son”–(Deut. 21:18-21); married damsel without the “token of virginity”–(Deut. 22:20-21);
-a virginal damsel who lies with a man other than her “betrothed,”–(Deut. 22:23-24); a witch–(Ex. 22:18);
-whoever curses his father or mother–(Lev. 20:9);
-adulterers and homosexuals–(Lev. 20:10-12; Deut. 22:22; Lev. 20:13);
-a man who takes a “wife and her mother,” both–(Lev. 20:14);
-who commits bestiality–(Lev. 20:15-16); the adulteress–(John 8:3-5. Notably, Jesus did not abrogate stoning, see
Jesus and the adulteress).

   There is abrogation in the Bible:
-not to kill vs. Christians belief that God sent Jesus to be killed–(Ex. 20:13);
-not to bear false witness vs. agree with your adversary (which would include bearing false witness)–(Ex. 20:16; Matt. 5:25);
-not to commit adultery, adulterers to be killed vs. who is without sin cast the first stone–(Ex. 20:14; Lev. 20:10-12; John 8:7; Jesus is said to be the only one without sin);
-an eye for eye vs. turn the other cheek–(Deut; 19:21. Matt. 5:38);
-sell coat and buy sword vs. who takes up the sword shall perish by the sword–(Luke 22: 36; Matt: 26:52);
-forgive enemies vs. bring enemies and slay–(Matt. 6:14; 18:22; Luke 19:27);
-everyone dies for his own sin vs. Christ died for the sins of everyone as Christians say–(Gal. 6:4-7; 2 Chr. 25:4. Rom. 14:12; Deut; 24:16; Ezek; 18:20);
-love enemies vs. empowering Joshua (and Moses) to slaughter–(Matt. 5:44; Josh. 6:21);
-bless them that curse you vs. cursing a blameless tree–(Matt. 5:44; 21:18-19; Mark 11:20. I know, I know, the fig tree didn’t curse him, so he is free to curse the blameless tree that he –as he is said to be God- created);
-follow law vs. law is a curse–(Ex. 20:1-17; Matt. 5:17; 19:17-19; 23:2-3; Gal. 2:16; 5:2-4);
-preach only to Jews vs. preach to all nations–(Matt.7:6; 10:5-6; 15:24-26. Luke 19:10; 22:28-30; John 17:9. Matt. 28:19-20. Mark 16:15).

   The critics of Islam seem unaware of the fact that verses of the Qur’an are of basic and allegorical in meaning; as to the background to which verses were revealed; that even during his lifetime sayings were forged in the name of the Prophet–perhaps it is for this reason that the Prophet said that whatever sayings of his contradicts with the Qur’an is to be discarded– and that prior to Qur’anic revelation on a subject the prophet was required to follow the Judaic law.
The Qur’an was revealed over the long period of twenty-three years. P
rior to Qur’anic revelation on a subject the Prophet followed the Judaic law. As in the case of stoning for adultery and death to homosexuals as required by the Bible (and both of which were abrogated by the Qur’an).
Allāh speaking about abrogation does not mean that one verse of the Qur’an replaces another; but to verses of the Qur’an replacing that of past Scriptures.

(b) Qur’an 4:7 which says that male and female inheritors are to receive “a share”, whereas 4:11 institutes the exact portion. There is no abrogation here. The former stating that males and females have “a share” of what “parents and the near relatives leave,” whether this share “be little or much;” whereas the latter details that which we are to bequeath to our “children” as well as to parents and brothers.

   The above verses do not abrogate those of Qur’an 2:180-182. These verses (2:180-182) express that the “will” should be just; and those who changed this “will” afterwards have committed a “sin;” but if the testator erred or was unjust in his “will” there is no blame on the executor if he “effects an agreement between the parties (beneficiaries).”  

(c) Qur’an 73:2, Allāh instructs the Prophet to rise at nigh and recite the Qur’an half the time of the night or “less;” whereas 73:20 instructs him to read as much as is easy for him. There is no abrogation. The former, as the context shows, deals with the Prophet praying alone, by himself, and the latter about him leading others in prayer some of whom might be “sick among you, and others who travel …and others who fight in Allāh’s way.”

(d) Qur’an 4:15 says to imprison women guilty of lewdness; Qur’an 24:2 says adulteresses are to be flogged 100 strokes. There is no abrogation. Sura 4:15 is about female homosexuals (lesbians); whereas 24:2 is about adulterers. The reason male homo-sexuals are treated more leniently than female homosexuals is that Islam views womanhood as the “symbol of purity” and motherhood as the “gateway to Paradise.” In relation to the lofty benefits that Allāh has conferred upon her, woman has greater responsibility than man: a woman’s/mother’s conduct impacts more on children and on society than the father’s.

(e) There is no abrogation/discrepancy between Qur’an 2:178, 5:48, and 17:33. As careful reading shows, Qur’an 2:178 is about the Islamic law on murder; Qur’an 5:48 is about the Judaic law; and Qur’an 17:33 speaks about killing one unjustly, where details for such murder is given in Qur’an 2:178.

   That “there is life in retaliation”–(Qur’an 2:179) is an indisputable truth. Society cannot be safe unless murderers (and other criminals) are removed. To ‘give the other cheek’ to incorrigible offenders is not mercy and forgiveness, it is stupidity. Give the other “cheek” and society will be over-run by the “dead-weight” of murderers, rapists, thieves, robbers, pushers and users, etc….

(g) Qur’an 2:168-174. In verse 168 Allāh tells us to “eat the lawful and good things from what is in the earth, and follow not the footsteps of the devil;”

in verse 172 He tells us to “eat of the good things We have provided you with, and give thanks to Allāh;” and in verse 173 Allāh details the forbidden “He has forbidden you only what dies of itself, and blood….” There is no abrogation. Qur’an 16:114 is the same as 2:173. And Qur’an 16:124 is about the Jewish Sabbath.

(h) Fasting/Ramadan: In Qur’an 2:182-187 Allāh enjoins fasting; and explains it, stating, “But whoever among you is sick or on a journey, (he shall fast) a like number of other days. And those who find it extremely hard may effect redemption by feeding a poor man”–(vs. 184). This exemption of feeding the poor does not ‘allow a rich man to buy himself out of the fast.’ The stipulation is clear; fasting has to be “extremely hard.” Pretension may fool man it does not fool Allāh.

   Verse 185 does not abrogate verse 184. Verse 184 points out that it is better to feed the poor as well as fast when there is no “hardship.” Verse 185 adds the clause “So whoever of you is present in the month (of fasting),” and does not mention the condition of making “redemption by feeding the poor man.”

(i) Qur’an 2:240 is not abrogated by 2:234. Qur’an 2:34 says that widows are to wait four months and ten days before seeking to remarry; whereas Qur’an 2:240 requires that widows be left a year’s residence and maintenance.

(i) Qur’an 9:5 and 47:4 which allows fighting the pagans do not abrogate the verses on tolerance. This fighting the pagans and slaying them is not “intolerance.” Allāh does not punish a people before sending them a warner. In the early years the Disbelievers are called to reform. But they not only reject the Prophet’s call, they persecute and militate against him. The logical response was to defend.

   Retribution does not abrogate compassion. When the situation requires retribution force is applied; when clemency is beneficial compassion is applied. Isn’t this the same with modern Emperors –first verbal warnings are given against the transgressor; next sanctions are applied; then, if need be, force is resorted to?  Force and forgiveness are everpresent in the Qur’an. Either is used as the situation dictates.

(j) In Qur’an 87:6-7 Allāh says: “We shall make thee recite so thou shalt not forget–except what Allāh please.” The expression “except what Allāh please” does not refer to Divine Revelation; this pertains to everyday life. It is poor cerebrating to entertain that Allāh would give Qur’anic revelations which is gui-dance for all people and for all time and then have him forget it upon its revelation or soon after. It could no be that the Prophet would later forget it–even if this was so it would have been pointless, as it was the practice of the Prophet to have verses written down upon their revelation.

   The Prophet’s forgetfulness in daily matters is not without its benefit. Two occasions of the Prophet’s forgetfulness that proved beneficial to Muslims, (1) Upon given the night in Ramadan when the first Revelation of the Qur’an came (known as the night of Qadr, and which Muslims observe as the 27th night), the Prophet came out to inform his followers but found two of them quarreling. Because of this the Prophet forgot the date and told the Muslims to search for this night in one of the odd night in the last ten days of Ramadan. This is a blessing, in that Muslims instead of observing one night observes at least five (or the full ten). (2) It was once pointed out to the Prophet that he offered one less rakah (sequence) in his prayer. To rectify this mistake the Prophet made two sijdahs (prostrations) and the usual two salaams (recitals to the right and left shoulders, respectively). This is a blessing to Muslims. But for the Prophet’s forgetfulness, Muslims making similar mistakes would have been at a loss as to how to correct their error of forgetfulness. Perhaps these instances of the Prophet’s forgetfulness are of Divine artistry for the benefit of Muslims).    

   How aptly Allāh points out that there is no discrepancy in the Qur’an, only a lack of meditating on it–(Qur’an 4:82). The Prophet is the only person who could decide if verse(s) were abrogated. And he gave no such teaching.  There is no Divine support for abrogation; there is no Prophetic support for abrogation; there is no logical support for abrogation.

12. Days to create:
In Qur’an 7:54 Allāh says the world was created in six days and Qur’an 41:9-12 give the impression that it was created in eight days. There is no contradiction. 
Muhammad Ali comments:

“The making of the earth in two days and the making on it of the mountains, rivers and of plant and animal life in four days is really one continuous process, there being six days or six stages in all. The first stage is the throwing off of the cosmic matter called the earth; the second stage is the cooling off of its surface; the third is the making of the mountains; the fourth is that of blessing it by waters and making in it rivers; the fifth and the sixth stages are spoken of as the ordaining of foods, being, in the first place, the growth of plant life and, in the second, the growth of animal life, culminating in the creation of man. That the creation in six days does not refer to the time actually taken in making the heavens and the earth, which is still going on, is noted even by the earlier commentators.” (Read M. Ali Qur’anic commentary #’s 46, 894a, 2199, 2201; Yusuf Ali #’s 1031, 4477; Malik Ghulam Farid #’s 2623, 2626).

The Arabic word yaum as noted by Muhammad Ali means a period of time–from a moment to 1,000-50,000 years–(Q. 55:29; 22:47; 70:4), “it indicates a period of time, whatever period it may be, and this is the proper signification.”–(Qur’anic comm. #8, Qur’an 1:3). Thus, Allāh created the heavens and the earth in six periods not six of our days. Significantly, it is not necessarily so that Allāh created each stage immediately after creating the previous one; thousands or millions or billions of years may have passed between each stage.

Quick or Slow Creation? The critic wrote: “Allah creates the heavens and the earth in six days [7:54] and many Muslims want to be modern and scientific, and make that six eons, but then again, He creates instantaneously [2:117], “Be! And it is”.” 
   Allāh saying “Be, And it is” does not mean that things materialize instantaneously. Only that when Allah commands “Be,” no one or nothing can prevent His will from manifesting; and that the process for such a creation begins to manifest. While this creation is to us millions of years, in the sight of Allāh it, creation, is but a “twinkling of an eye”–(Qur’an 54:50). (See M. Ali Qur’anic comm. # 163. Yusuf Ali comm. #120. Malik Ghulam Farid comm. # 140).
As noted above, the Arabic word yaum means a period of time–from a moment to 1,000-50,000 years–(Q. 55:29; 22:47; 70:4), “it indicates a period of time, whatever period it may be, and this is the proper signifi-cation.” Thus, Allāh created the heavens and the earth in six periods not six of our days. Significantly, it is not necessarily so that Allāh created each stage immediately after creating the previous one; thousands or millions or billions of years may have passed between each stage.

Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30].
   Muhammad Ali explains 2:29: “Thumma generally denotes then or afterwards, and it is a particle denoting order and delay, but there are many examples of its use in which it implies neither order nor delay. Accor-ding to Akh and other authorities, thumma has often the meaning of waw, i.e., and (LL). For the statement that the earth was made after the heavens, see 79:30.  It is impossible to deal with the subject of the Quranic cosmogony within the limits of a footnote. But a few suggestions may be made here. In the first place, it should be noted that the word sab’a, which signifies the number seven, is also used in a vague manner, as meaning seven, or more, several or many (LL). According to LA, the Arabic equivalents of the numbers seven, seventy, and seven hundred are all used to indicate a large number by the Arabs: “The mention of seven and seventy and seven hundred is frequent in the Qur’ån and the sayings of the Holy Prophet, and the Arabs used them to signify a large number and multiplicity”. Similarly Az explains the word sab‘ina, meaning seventy, as occurring in 9:80, as being “used to signify a large number and multiplicity, not indi-cating exactness in number” (LA). Hence the seven heavens may signify a large number of heavens. Secondly, the significance of the word sama’, which means only what we see above us, should not be lost sight of. R makes the meaning very clear when he says: “Every sama’, i.e. heaven, is a heaven in relation to what is beneath it and an earth in relation to what is above it”. Thirdly, in 65:12 it is affirmed that as there are seven heavens so there is a like number of earths, which corroborates the conclusion drawn above. Fourthly, the seven heavens are on one occasion called the seven ways (23:17), and in this sense the orbit of a planet may be called its heaven. In fact, this interpretation makes the significance of 65:12 very clear, for each of the seven earths will thus have a heaven for it. The seven earths together with our earth would thus make up the eight major primary planets of the solar system. Or, the seven heavens may be taken to apply to the whole starry creation, and the reference may in this case be to the seven magnitudes of the stars which may be seen by the naked eye.
   One point more may be noted here. The sama’ or the heaven is plainly called dukhan, i.e. smoke or vapour, in 41:11.”

Calling together or ripping apart? The critic stated: “In the process of creation heaven and earth were first apart and are called to come together [41:11], while 21:30 states that they were originally one piece and then ripped apart.
   In Qur’an 41:11 Allāh says the heaven was dukhan (“smoke, vapour or gaseous matter”). So, if Allāh con-verts this vapour into one solid mass and then separates them into two–heaven and earth–there is no contradiction between 41:11 and 21:30.
   However, 21:30 is not about the creation of the heaven and the earth, which some have termed the “Big bang” theory. This verse is, likely, tied in to 44:10-15: “So wait for the day when the heaven brings a clear drought,” which is about the drought that covered Arabia, brought on by a prayer of the Prophet–(Bokhari Vol 6, # 297). Qur’an 21:30 which reads “Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were closed up (causing the drought), so We rent them (sent rain). And We made from water everything living. Will they not then believe?”

   The disbelievers requested the Prophet to pray for the end of the drought. Which the Prophet did. Yet they did not believe. Hence the closing words Will they not then believe? after witnessing the drought and its end. It would seem strange to say to un-schooled and backward disbelievers “Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, so We rent them” in reference to the ceation/cosmogony of the earth. But it is reasonable to say this to people who witnessed the famine (brought on by a closing up of the heavens and earth) and ended (by renting or opening them) with a shower of rain. The disbelievers had no scientific knowledge to “see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, so We rent them” but they were eyewitnesses and had experienced the drought to be asked “Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, so We rent them;” Will they not then believe after what they have seen and lived through? (Both chapters, 21 and 44, are of the mid-Makkan period.    

13. The critic states: “There was a series of Hadiths designed expressly to give the impression that Muhammad had forgotten part of the revelations. The reports were specific and detailed enough to identify the actual wording of the verses in question. Anas is reported in the two Sahih’s (i.e. al-Bukhari and Muslim) as declaring: There was revealed con-cerning those slain at Bi’r Ma’una a Quran verse which we recited until it was withdrawn: “Inform our tribe on our behalf that we have met our Lord. He has been well pleased with us and has satisfied our desires.’ (“al-Itqan by Jalal al Din).”
   These hadiths were “designed expressly” by whom? Hadiths cannot be “designed”: Hadiths are sayings of the Prophet. And by whom were this verse “withdrawn”? What was the motive in with-drawing this verse (one does not do a thing without expecting some gain)? Who can dare “withdraw” a verse from the Qur’an when the Qur’an was sequenced by the Prophet, rehearsed yearly (and twice in the last year of the Prophet) by the Angel Gabriel, and was both memorized by several Muslims and written down upon its revelation; and when Allāh declared that He will guard the Qur’an from corruption? 
   This claim is an absurdity even on the face of it: all of the companions of the Prophet would have had to agree to have this verse “withdrawn” from the Qur’an; and for sure none of the Caliphs would have agreed to such a desecration of the Qur’an. And if Mohammad had “forgotten part of the revelations” it is boggling that these ‘reporters’ came to know of it.
   And why would Muslims want to remove a verse from the Qur’an which brings solace to the families of slain members; and which would act as an encouragement to enlist more “jihadists” in the cause of Allāh; and also confirms the truth of Allāh that martyrs of Islam inherit paradise?

14. In Qur’an 6:54 and 10:64, Allāh says “And there is none to change the words of Allāh.”
This does not mean that the Bible has not been “altered and corrupted. That the Bible has been “altered and corrupted” has already been shown and even admitted to by Christians.

   That “none can change the words of Allāh” does not allude to the “purity” of the Bible, but that no one can change the decree of Allāh, as the context of these verses show.
   Allāh instructing Muslims to believe in past Scriptures only means the He gave Books to prophets prior to Mohammad. Not that He sanctions all that is in these past Books. As already stated, whereas Allāh has told us to believe in past Scriptures he also tells us what not to believe, such as Divinity of Jesus, Mariolatry, etc;.

15. Mercy: In Qur’an 6:12 Allāh reveals that He has ordained mercy on Himself; and in verses 35-39 speaking about those who reject truth that He leaves in error whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases.
   There is no inconsistency or contradiction. Verse 12 means that it is the nature of Allāh to be merciful; and verses 35-39 show that Allāh has the power to give guidance or leave in error those who reject truth. Allāh implores us in loving compassion-ate terms to forgive us our sins: “Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allāh; surely Allāh for-gives sins altogether. He is indeed the Forgiving, the Merciful”–(14:10; 39:53). Allāh is Merciful, Loving-kind; is the Forgiving, the Loving–(2:195; 11:90; 85:14). Clearly, only he/she can have mercy and for-giveness that wants mercy and forgiveness.

   Qur’an 14:4 says Allāh does not give guidance to all, even though He could. This is no contradiction.
   Man has free will. Though Allāh has the power to guide, man has to want guidance. If you offer pay-ment to an able-bodied man in return for work and he rejects your offer; and you see this man in need of food will you go and give him money though it is in your power to do so, or will you prefer that he works for his money or come and ask? Man must first seek mercy/guidance in order to receive.
   Significantly, whereas Allāh has ordained mercy for himself and forgives sins without the need for some “satisfaction.” The Christian God needs “satisfaction” –the blood of an innocent man– in order to forgive sins.

   Interestingly, the Bible says “If we say that we have fellowship with him (God)….If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:6, 9).
If forgiveness is obtained through confession of sins why do Christians need a vicarious atoner? And if one has fellowship with God how can he/she be a sinner? Fellowship with God means to be righteous.

16. Allāh tells us in His Qur’an 5:82: “Thou wilt certainly find the most violent of people in enmity against the believers to be the Jews and the idolaters; and thou wilt find the nearest in friendship to the believers to be those who say, We are Christians. That is because there are priests and monks among them and because they are not proud.” Whereas in Qur’an 5:51 Allāh tells Muslims to “take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends of each other. And whoever amongst you take them for friends he is indeed one of them. Surely Allāh guides not the unjust people.”
   There is no inconsistency or contradiction in these statements. The Christians, notwithstanding their attributing Divinity to Jesus, is closer to Muslims in that they also accept Jesus whereas Jews reject Jesus outright. Also, there are many Christians when pre-sented with the truth of Islam are accepting it; as were evident in the early days of Islam in such coun-tries as Egypt, North Africa, Syria, Persia among others.

   That Jews and Christians are friends of the other. From the inception of Islam Jews were inimical towards the Prophet. They joined forces with idolaters against Muslims. Christians also fought against Muslims.
Jews and Christians have helped each other steal
Palestine from Muslims.
Jews colluded with Britain and France and attacked Egypt to wrestle control of the Suez Canal from Egypt.
Britain sliced Jordan out of Syria and carved Kuwait out of Iraq.
France carved Lebanon out of Syria and placed it under Maronite Christian domination.

   Britain held Egypt, Sudan, Aden, Iraq, and Nigeria.
Italy savaged Libya.
Bosnia is still trying to recover from Serbia’s onslaught.
Iraq is yet to rise from the rubble of American bombarding (for oil and hegemony?)
Christians are yet aiding Jews to occupy Palestine.
Perhaps investigation may reveal that Jews and Christians are working behind the scenes against Muslims– Muhammad Husayn Haykal has noted in his book The Life of Muhammad regarding Jewish opposition to Muslims that
“Their opposition and hostility were never open”–(p. 207. Italics/emphasis added). 
   Muslims are not forbidden to have good social relations with non-Muslims–(Qur’an 60:8-9); only that Muslims are not to have them involved in their private affairs. It is doubtful that Jews and Christians allow Muslims into their private matters.

   That “Jews and Christians have ever protected each other, except that they agree on the authenticity of the Old Testament.”
Not even Christians “agree on the authenticity of the Old Testament;” some having expunged many books as being “apocryphal.” 
The Bible cannot be “authentic” when Christians rely on the Greek text and Jesus spoke NO Greek, but Aramaic and/or Hebrew.
The Bible cannot be “authentic” when it is riddled with errors, a fact admitted to by Christians. (Christians usually say that these errors have been corrected. To whom did God give authority to correct these errors, and what are the natures of these corrections? A “corrected” Book cannot be said to be “authentic”). (See
Bible corrupt & obsolete).

17. Qur’an 6:14, 163; 39:12 say that Muhammad was the first to bow down in Islam (be a Muslim); Qur’an 2:132 and 3:67 says Abraham and his sons were Muslims; Qur’an 28:52-53 say that earlier pro-phets were Muslims; Qur’an 3:52 says the disciples of Jesus were Muslims; Qur’an 7:143 Moses says he is first of the believers; Qur’an 26:51 says some of Pharaoh’s people say they are first of the believers; and Qur’an 2:37 says Adam also received words from Allāh.
   There is no contradiction in Mohammad being said to be the first to bow down in Islam (to be a Muslim) when individuals prior to him had already been described as Muslims. All it means is that Mohammad is the first among his people to bow down in Islam (be a Muslim).

   There are many instances in the Qur’an that show that Muslims have assurance of eternal life in heaven here and now–(Qur’an 33:35; 4:124; 41:8; 46:15-16; 52:17; 64:9). On the opposite, Christians are yet gazing at the sky to see Jesus coming with news of their houses in heaven. Jesus does not know if he will be going to heaven and if he will secure a place for his followers: Jesus says If I be lifted up from the earth”–(John 12:32); If Jesus knew he would have said after’ or ‘when’  I be lifted up. In fact, not only did Jesus (this God and son of God) not know “if” and “when” he will be going to heaven, but by his own pronouncement seems he was “in danger of hell fire;” he tells his people: “whoever shall say Thou fool shall be in danger of hell fire”–(Matt. 5:22); yet he calls the Jews “fools”–(Matt. 23:17, 19; Luke 24:25).

   Jesus says: “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself”–John 14:2-3). Here again, Jesus, like his uncertainty in going to heaven, is not certain “if” he is going to prepare a place for his followers. And as Jesus has not yet returned all those Christians who died and will die before his alleged return will not get taken.

   Again, Jesus said: “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom”–(Matt. 16:28). This must be the “miracle of the ages” that for two thousand years these “some standing” people are yet living, waiting for Jesus to return. On the opposite, Mohammad tells us clearly that Allāh has already prepared Gardens and “mansions” for us. All we need do is believe in Allāh and do good deeds and Paradise is ours–as easy and simple as that; no uncertain trip to heaven and back and no vague promise. And the promise of Allāh is ever true–(Qur’an 19: 60-61; 31:8-9; 39:20; 61:12).

18. In Qura’n 34:50 Allāh commands the Prophet Mohammad to “Say : If I err, I err only to my own loss.”
This is no “severe factual error” in the Qur’an nor does it contradict a “number of other verses.” What is meant is that if the Prophet acted outside of Divine Revelation and goes astray it is to his own loss. The second clause of the verse verifies this, it says: “and if I go aright, it is because of what my Lord reveals to me. Surely He is Hearing. Nigh.”

19. There are no “great number of problems and inconsistencies between the several accounts of Adam’ creation, Allah’s command to (Iblis, Satan to) prostrate before Adam, Satan’s refusal, etc,”. 
   Allah recounts in the Qur’an 7:11 His creating of man and saying to the angels to make submission to Adam. To this, Iblis refused to make submission. This command by Allāh, God, to Iblis to make submission to Adam (which some interprets to mean to “worship” Adam) is not of literal meaning.
Some verses of the Qur’an are of literal meaning –which forms the general guidance– and some verses are of allegorical meaning–(Qur’an 3:6). For example, the prophet Joseph had the vision that eleven stars and the sun and the moon were “prostrating/making obeisance” to him; which was in fact his eleven brothers and parents honoring him, or that he, Joseph, would be on a high status above them –the
“eleven stars and the sun and the moon” did not prostrate before Joseph; Joseph’s brothers and par-ents did not literally prostrate themselves to him or “worship” him.

   Allāh did not ask Iblis to “worship” Adam, but to bow down to or make obeisance to him (in a token of respect on account of him, [man in general] being superior to all creations). This is not “worship”. Men, especially those receiving knighthood, bow in such honor/respect to royalty–this is not “worship” of royalty. We also stand in respect/honor of the national anthem, and at the raising of the flag–this is not “worship” of the anthem or flag.
   However, if for whatever reason Allāh had commanded Iblis to literally “worship Adam, who was Iblis to disobey the command of God? Employees of a company are commanded not to punch the time card of another, but if the owner commands one employee to punch the card of another, that em-ployee has no right to question the purpose of, or to refuse to comply with the order of the owner. If he does refuse he is subject to discipline.
It is to be noted that Iblis’ reason for disobeying the command of Allāh was not because Iblis honors that God alone is to be worshipped, but because Iblis considered himself superior to Adam: him being created from “fire” whereas Adam was created from “dust”–(Qur’an 7:12).

Can angels disobey? In Qur’an 16:49-50 and 66:6 Allāh says Angels do as they are commanded; and in Qur’an 2:34 when He commanded the Angels to bow to Adam, Iblis (Satan) disobeyed.
   This is no contradiction. Iblis is a Jinn not Angel–(Qur’an 7:12). However, being among the Angels when Allāh gave the com-mand to bow, it was expected of him also to obey. It is without doubt that a Muslim who is observing the marriage or funeral service of a Christian acquaintance (or vice versa) would stand and sit as required by the priest, as a mark of respect. If one, then, can give respect to earthly leaders by following their instructions, God, the Creator, merits the highest respect. 
   Seemingly, in His command to bow, Allāh did not single out “angels” specifically: He did not say ““angels,” Be submissive to Adam;” only that He gave the command to the angels, “Be submissive to Adam;” and as Satan was among them at the time, the command included him.
Iblis did not refuse to bow because he was of the impression that Allāh only meant Angels were to bow. He refused the commandment because he considered himself to be of a higher creation than Adam–(Qur’an 7:12). This shows that Iblis was cognizant of the fact that he also was required to bow down.

20. Did Mohammad see Allāh?
Mohammad did not see Allāh. Qur’an 53:1-18 and 81:15-29 is about the Prophet seeing the Angel Gabriel. ‘Aisha, the Prophet’s wife, upon being asked if the Prophet had seen Allāh, God, replied: “Know that if somebody tells you one of the following three things, he is a liar: Whoever tells you that Muhammad (peace be on him) saw his Lord, is a liar.” Then she recited the Verse: “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision. He is the Most Courteous Well-acquainted with all things.” ‘It is not fitting for a human being that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration or from behind a veil”–(Qur’an 6:103; 42:51). ‘Aisha added: “But the Prophet (peace be on him) saw Gabriel in his true form twice.”” –(Bokhari, Vol. 6, # 378). 

   The two other things that ‘Aisha said about the Prophet is that he did not know what the future holds–(cf. Qur’an 31:34); and that he did not conceal any part of Allah’s revelation–(cf. Qur’an 5:67).

21. That Allāh sent warners to every people and that Abraham and Ishmael built the Ka’ba does not contradict Mohammad being sent to a people who never had a messenger before–(Qur’an 10:47, 16:35-36, 35:24; 2:125-129; 28:46, 32:3, 34:44, 36:2-6).
The Prophet Mohammad came to the Arabs who were yet to receive guidance–(Qur’an 28:46; 32:3; 34:44; 36:6), and to unite all peoples under one sys-tem–(7:158; 13:7; 21:107; 34:28). Abraham and Ishmael did not come to the Arabs –there were no Arab people then– only to build the Ka’ba.

   The prophet Hud was sent to the ancient tribe of ‘Ad, which “extends from Oman to Hadramaut.”
   Allāh saying in Qur’an 54:18 that he sent on the Ad people “a furious wind in a day of bitter ill-luck;” whereas in Qur’an 41:16 and 69:7 He says that this wind lasted for “seven nights and eight days,” is no contradiction. The “a” day only means that it was a day of ill-luck for them when this windstorm began. The storm lasted “seven nights and eight days.”

   The prophet Salih was sent to the Thamud who “occupied the territory……which forms the southern boundary of Syria and the northern one of Arabia.” (M. Ali Qur’anic comm; 903; 911).

   There is no record of Ishmael having been given a Book. Not all prophets were given Books. There is no record in the Bible or Qur’an of John the Baptist and Zaccharias having been given individual Books.

22. Food in Hell: In Qur’an 88:6 Allāh says the food of the inmates of Hell will be “only” thorns (dhari); in Qur’an 69:36 their food will be “only” washings (ghislin)(from their bodies); and in Qur’an 37:66 that they will eat of the tree of Zaqqum. There are no contradictions between these statements.
   There are seven gates to Hell* and thus seven classes of sinners and each class will be subjected to conditions relating to the sin–(Qur’an 15:43-44).
  Qur’an 88:6 refers to those who only disbelieved in the message, as noted in verse 23. Qur’an 69:36 refers to those who disbelieved in Allāh and did not feed the poor, as verses 33-34 state. Qur’an 37:66, as the beginning of the section shows, refers to those who engaged in false worship, having forged a lie against Allāh (compare with 6:21-24), hence, thorns in the mouth.
*(Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has detailed this in his book Introduction To The Study Of The Holy Qur’an. See Hell).    

23. Who causes death? In Qur’an 4:97; 16:28, 32; 32:11; 47:27, Allāh reveals that Angel(s) “causes” certain people to die, and in Qur’an 39:42 Allāh says that He takes the “souls” of men at death and at time of sleep.
   There is no conflict. Careful reading shows that Angel(s) “causes death,” whereas Allāh “takes the souls.” Even if angels take the souls also, this is only so by the leave of Allāh.
That Angel(s) cause certain people to die, does not mean that these Angel(s) are/were worshipped by these people. There are legions that do not worship Allāh yet Allāh causes them to die. These Angel(s) causes these people to die through the power of Allāh as the text shows, much like Jesus having performed miracles through the power of Allāh–(Qur’-an 3:48. Luke 11:20; John 8:28; 11: 42). Allāh gives the permission to the Angel(s) to cause these deaths; much like a supervisor executing the command(s) of the President.

   Qur’an 35:1, that Angels have 2, 3, or 4 pairs of wings, whereas Gabriel had 600 wings–(Bukhari, Vol; 4, # 455)–does not mean that Angel(s) have limbs like a bird: “It is a symbol of power enabling these immaterial beings to execute their functions, and in Arabic the word janah stands for power, as you say huwa maqsus al-janah (lit., he has the wing clipped) meaning he is one who lacks strength or power or ability or he is impotent (T, LL)–(Muhammad Ali comm.; 2050). 
   Thus, Angels having wings, and various number of wings, signifies their varying power of flight or their speed. A spaceship/rocket has no wings yet it is perhaps the fastest in flight/speed.

24. Spirit and Gabriel:
There is no confusion concerning the identity of the Spirit and Gabriel.  The Angel Gabriel is the Holy Spirit, and known also by the term Faithful Spirit–(Qur’an 2:87, 97; 16:102; 26:193).
   There is confusion among Christians as to the identity of the Holy Spirit. Prof. ‘Abdul-Ahad Dawud (the former Rev. David Benjamin Keldani):  “The Holy Spirit, in all the Christian literature of diverse languages, has not a fixed gender. He, she, it are all commonly used as the personal pronouns for the Holy Ghost.” “Should we presume that the Holy Ghost and God are two distinct entities and that the Holy Ghost speaks of himself and also what he hears from God? The words of Jesus clearly refer to some messenger from God (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:7, 13). He calls him the Spirit of Truth, and so the Qur‘an speaks of Muhammad, “Nay, he has come with the Truth and verified the apostles” (Qur’an 37:37).” 
   Whereas, “The religion professed by any of the companions of the Apostle of Allāh in the first years of the Hijrat is to-day professed in its entirety by every Muslim*. This cannot be said * of the baptismal religion. More than sixteen Ecumenical Councils have been summoned to define the religion of Christianity**,only to be discovered by the Synod of the Vatican in the nineteenth century that the mysteries of the “Infallibility” and the “Immaculate Conception” were two of the principal dogmas, both unknown to the Apostle Peter and the Blessed Virgin Mary!*. Any faith or religion dependent upon the deliberations and decisions of General Synods–holy or heretical–is artificial and human*. The religion of Islam is the belief in one Allāh and absolute resignation to His will, and this faith is professed by the angels in heaven and by the Muslims on earth*. It is the religion of sanctification and of enlightenment, and an impregnable bulwark against idolatry.” (Muhammad In The Bible, pp. 190 f/n; 6; 191-192). 
   *Italics/emphasis added.   **Italics, Dawud’s; emphasis added.

The critic wrote, “In Qur’an 2:221 Allāh forbids Muslims to marry idolatrous women; and calls Christians idolaters and unbelievers (Qur’an 9:28-33), but still allows Muslims to marry Christian women (Qur’an 5:5).”
   Qur’an 9:28-33 do not refer to Christians as “idolaters;” only that they follow the pagan doctrine of son of God.
  In Qur’an 2:221 marriage to idolatrous women are forbidden “until they believe.”   Whereas (in 5:5) Christian women, though they associate relations to Allāh –giving Him a son– are not idolaters.

27. Unbelievers and reward: In Qur’an 9:17, 69; Allāh says the works of the unbelievers are in vain; and in Qur’an 99:7 says everyone will “see” their good and evil.
   There is no contradiction. This only states that we will “see” in our records even the smallest evil or good that we did.

   In Qur’an 9:28-33 Allāh says idolaters are “unclean;” and in Qur’an 5:17, 72-73; Allāh says those who take Jesus to be son of God are disbelievers; and in Qur’an 2:62 says that Jews, Christians and Sabians who believe in Allāh would have their reward.
There is no contradiction between Qur’an 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 and 2:62. Qur’an 2:62 refers to those who followed their prophets prior to the advent of Islam, and to these later religionists who died without knowing about Islam (as they could not be charged as having rejected Islam) and followed their Scriptures. Jews and Christians who follow the Prophet Mohammad would be rewarded twice–(Qur’an 28:54).

   Islam is the oldest religion, the natural religion, and the only religion from Allāh God–(Qur’an 41:11; 30:30; 5:4). Whoever reverts to Islam is returning to his and her birthright. Whoever rejects Islam/Mohammad is going to Hell–(Cf. Qur’an 3:85; 9:113).  

28. Islam and peace:
Islam is dedicated to peace even in the face of possible deception by the enemy: “And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it And if they intend to deceive, then surely Allāh is sufficient for thee;” “So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allāh allows you no way against them”–(Qur’an 8:61-62; 4:90).

29. Fighting All People Until They Do What? 
Until they accept that Muslims have the right to worship Allāh: “And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is only for Allāh. But if they desist, then there should be no hostility, except against the oppressors”-(Qur’an 2:193).
Mohammad was not sent to force religion on any-one; only to teach the message–(Qur’an 3:20; 5:95, 102; 13:40; 16:82; 24:54; 29:18; 46:35; 64:12). “The truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve”-(Qur’an 18:29).
There is no compulsion in religion–(Qur’an 2:256; 6:107; 9:6; 17:7; 18:6, 29; 76:3; 109:1-6). “Then maybe thou wilt kill thyself with grief, sorrowing after them, if they believe not in this announcement-(Qur’an);” “And if thy Lord had pleased, all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them. Wilt thou then force men till they are believers?;” “…thou art  not one to compel  them. So remind by means of the Qur’an…”-(Qur’an 18:6; 10:99; 50:45).

Can They Disbelieve in the Last Day and be Safe?
Yes! As noted above, Mohammad was sent to teach not to impose religion. “And if anyone of the idolaters seek thy protection, protect him till he hears the word of Allāh, then convey him to his place of safety. This is because they are a people who know not”-(Qur’an 9:6).

30. Muslims and parents:  In Qur’an 17:23-24, 31:14-15, 29:8, etc. Allāh enjoins Muslims to be kind to parents even if they are disbelievers; in Qur’an 9:23 He forbids Muslims to “take not your fathers and your brothers for friends if they love disbelief above faith;” and in Qur’an 58:22 says “”Thou wilt not find a find a people who believe in Allāh and the latter day loving those who opposeAllāh and the Messenger, even though they be their fathers or their sons….” 
   In 9:23 Muslims are enjoined only against including disbelieving parents and brothers in their affairs. In 58:22 Allāh did not forbid parent/children friendship: He only states that believers will not love non-believers.
   Parents and children can have different ideology and yet be honorable to the other. And people can have different views and still be friends. 
   The Prophet was “friend” (and “mercy”) to all that did not militate against him: one of his uncle –Abu Lahab (real name, ‘Abd al-Uzza)– was an inveterate enemy of Islam; and another–Abu Talib, who raised him– was a devout idolater. Yet Mohammad did not estrange himself from them. .

31.How many mothers does a Muslim have?  
(How many mothers and fathers does Jesus have? How many fathers do Christians have?)  In Qur’an 58:2 Allāh says only she who has given birth to us is our mother; in Qur’an 4:23 He says we are forbidden to marry our mothers including those who suckled us (as some biological mothers did not suckle their children but gave them to wet-nurses) and in Qur’an 33:6 Allāh says that the wives of the Prophet are our mothers. 
   She who has given birth to us is our biological mother. Those who have suckled us (wet-nurses) are also our mothers as we have nourished from them. Wouldn’t you honor the one that nursed you as a mother? The wives of the Prophet are our spiritual mothers. 
   If God Who is the Creator of all and is “Spirit,” if He can have a “physical” mother–as Christians say that Mary is the mother of God–surely, Muslims can have “spiritual” mothers.

   How many fathers do Christians have? Christians have three fathers: their biological father, God, and their priests (Fathers).
   How many fathers and mothers does Jesus have? According to Christians/the Bible Jesus had two fathers, Joseph and God. And according to the Gospels Jesus had a legion of mothers: Mary, his biological mother, and those who do God’s work as Jesus declared –as Jesus spoke, one told him that his mother and brethren were waiting for him, “But he (Jesus) answered and said unto him that told him, “Who is my mother? And who are my brethren ….Behold my mother and my brethren! For whoso-ever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother”–(Matt. 12:46-50. Mark 3:31-35. It is rather intriguing that Jesus/the Gospels would view the righteous Mary, whom God blessed and chose among all the women of the world to be annunciated, as not doing God’s work).
   However, since Christians are not doing God’s work –not following Jesus: as Jesus did not teach Trinity, Divine sonship of God, God-incarnate, inherited sin, and vicarious atonement– but follow paganism* Jesus’ mothers are limited to Mary and those women of his time who followed his teaching.

*(Son of God belief is a remnant of paganism–(Qur’an 9:30. Research has uncovered this truth; Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has given details in his revealing book The Sources of Christianity.
Muhammad Ali notes on Qur’an 9:30: “when St. Paul saw that the Jews would on no account accept Jesus Christ as a messenger of God, he introduced the pagan doctrine of sonship of God into the Christian religion, so that it might become more acceptable to the pagans.”
Maurice Bucaille comments about St.(?)
Paul, “He was considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought by the latter’s family and by the apos-tles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle around James. Paul created Christianity at the expense of those whom Jesus had gathered around him to spread his teachings”–The Bible, The Qur’an And Science, p.52).

32. And it just doesn’t add up: The critic wrote:“Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur’anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property.”
Muhammad Ali explains these verses: (Verse 11a) “By females are here meant the female children. When the daughters are the sole heirs they are entitled to a share of two-thirds. The share of two-thirds to which “more than two” daughters are entitled remains the same even when the daughters are two only; a single daughter being entitled to one-half as made clear further on. Compare v. 176, where two sisters are mentioned but they include more than two.

   11b. This is the second case, and it deals with the question of inheritance when the deceased is survived by parents. In this case the parents first take their respective shares, and the residue goes to the children, if there are any, failing which, the share of the parents is increased. But in case the deceased has brothers, the mother receives the same share as she would have received if the deceased had children. It may be noted that in all cases the payment of bequests and debts takes precedence of the shares of the heirs.

   (Verse 12a). This is the third case, and it deals with the question when the deceased leaves a husband or a wife with or without children. The husband or the wife takes his or her share first, as in the case of parents, and the residue goes to the children.
   If there are parents as well as husband or wife and children, the first two would take their shares first, and the residue would go to the children, whether males alone or females alone or males and females mixed. The two-thirds share for two or more daughters can only be given when there are neither parents, nor husband or wife; otherwise they take the residue, as in the case of sons or sons and daughters.
   Practice is against this, and brings in ‘aul to solve the difficulty. The ‘aul was first legalized by ‘Ali, the fourth Caliph, who, being questioned about the share of a wife, the other heirs being the two parents and two daughters, gave the answer “without pre-meditation” that the wife’s one-eighth had become one-ninth, for the two parents should take one-third, the two daughters two-thirds, and the wife one-eighth, which make up nine-eighths, and hence ‘Ali decided that each of the heirs should take less than was due, so that the proportion might remain the same (T). The difficulty would not have arisen if there had been sons instead of daughters or sons along with daughters. If ‘Ali had decided to give the residue to the two daughters after taking away the wife’s one-eighth and the parents’ one-third as he should have done in the case of two sons or a son and a daughter, the question of ‘aul would not have arisen.

   12b. Commentators are of opinion that by a brother or a sister here is meant a brother or a sister on the mother’s side and that the case of real brothers and sisters, or brothers and sisters on the father’s side, is dealt with in v. 176 of this chapter. The reason for this is that here as well as in v. 176, the property to be inherited is that of a kalålah, and it is generally supposed that a kalålah is one who has neither parents nor children. But as a matter of fact kalålah bears two meanings. It means the person who has no children whether he has parents or not, and it also means the person who has neither children nor parents. It is derived from kalla which means he became tired or fatigued, and therefore its primary significance would be the person who has no children. I‘Ab is reported to have explained this word as meaning one who does not leave offspring whether he leaves parents or not. ‘Umar also is reported to have said that kalålah is one who has no children, that is all; see Gharå’ib al-Qur’ån. Hence it is more reasonable to take the kalålah spoken of here as being different from the kalålah spoken of in v. 176. The kalålah in the present case is one who has no children but has parents, and therefore the brothers and sisters are not the only heirs and their share is only one-sixth, while the kalålah spoken of in v. 176 is one who leaves neither children nor parents, and therefore the brothers and the sisters take the whole of the inheritance.”  (To view Muhammad Ali’s translation of the Qur’an online: www.muslim.org).

33. Mary and Angels: In Qur’an 3:42, 45 Angels–(plural) spoke to Mary, and in Qur’an 19:17-21 the Roohanaa spoke to Mary.        There is no contradiction. Roohanaa means Our spirit. That in 3:42, 45 “angels” (plural) spoke whereas in 19:17-21 “He” (singular) spoke; may be likened to a group of people in a delegation repre-sented by a leader; the words of the leader can be reported as “they” said (meaning the leader as speaking on behalf of the delegation), and also reported as “he” said. Both conveying the same sense. In fact, Qur’an 3:42-46, is clear on this; here are the verses:
“And wh
en the Angels said: O Mary…
                          She said…… He said…..”

(It is  mindblowing that Christians pick at grammar in the Qur’an and do not pay attention to the lies, falsehood and blasphemy they follow. How rightly Jesus summed it up: they strain at a gnat and swallow a camel).  

34. How many years in a Day? In Qur’an 22:47 and 32:5 Allāh says a day is a thousand years “of what you reckon;” and in Qur’an 70:4 He says Angels “ascend to Him” in a day the measure of which is fifty thousand years.
   There is no “numerical discrepancy.” As their contexts show, Qur’an 22:47 and 32:5 refer to the count of “time;” whereas Qur’an 70:4 refers to the measure of “distance.”
   Figuratively, a day of Allāh is a very long time in human terms. As stated above, the Arabic word yaum as noted by Muhammad Ali means a period of time–from a moment to 1,000-50,000 years–(Q. 55:29; 22:47; 70:4), “it indicates a period of time, whatever period it may be, and this is the proper signification.” –(Qur’anic comm.. # 8, Qur’an 1:3). 
   Thus, Allāh created the heavens and the earth in six periods not six of our days. Significantly, it is not necessarily so that Allāh created each stage immediately after creating the previous one; thousands or millions or billions of years may have passed between each stage.

   In Qur’an 56:7 Allāh mentions “three” groups of people in the Hereafter–those on the “right hand,” those on the “left hand,” and the “foremost;” and in Qur’an 90:18-19 and 99:6-8 he mentions “two” groups–those on the “right hand,” and those on the “left hand.” There is no conflict. Qur’an 56:7 states the three groups of people, the “foremost” being those souls that have attained perfection, nafs mut-ma’innah–(Qur’an 89:27-28), whereas Qur’an 90:18-19 and 99:6-8 details only between men of a lesser degree, as their contexts show.

35. The critic states: What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], “sounding” (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37].”
These verses are to be read in their contexts. And 52:35 merely questions if the disbelievers think they came into being by chance or if they are the creators. 

   Man was created from “nothing” in that in the beginning there was nothing.
Loose clay is “dust.” “Water” is the basis of all forms of life. Molded earth when dry becomes “sounding” like “burned clay.”
In the procreative process, the life germ is in the form of “a drop of thickened fluid,” which, when united with ovum forms into “blood clot.”

36. Nothing omitted from Qur’an: Allāh revealed that He has left nothing out of the Qur’an–6:38, 114; 12:111, 16:89.
   Allāh omitting nothing from the Qur’an simply means that He has given us the guide-lines necessary for our moral, social, intellectual, and spiritual developments.

37. To Intercede or Not To Intercede?  In Qur’an 2:122-123, 254; 6:51; 82:18-19; Allāh says that there will be no intercession; whereas in Qur’an 20:109; 34:23; 43:86; 53:26; He says intercession will be granted.
   The verses speaking that there will be no intercession relates to intercession from members among themselves. Only Allāh can grant the power to intercede. This position is clearly stated in Qur’an 20:109; 34:23; 53:26. Allāh granting intercession does not “undermines Allāh’s Omniscience.” A parent allowing an elder child to plea for a younger sibling does not undermine the parent’s authority.

38.Where is Allah and His Throne? 
The Throne of Allāh is not a physical object. The Arabic word ‘arsh, as noted by Muhammad Ali, “is used to indicate might or power and authority and dominion;” “the ‘arsh of God is one of the things which mankind know not in reality but only by name, and it is not as the imaginations of the vulgar hold it to be.” The true significance of ‘arsh (throne) “is power or control of the creation.”–(comm.; 895).
   Allāh is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. Being Omnipresent, Allāh is closer to us than our life vein–(Qur’an 50:16). Allāh is on the Throne of Power in that as the Creator of all He is the All-knowing, the Omniscient–(57:4). Allāh’s Throne on the water signifies His having power over creation–(11:7).
   That a day of Allāh is 1,000 years–(Qur’an 22:47; 32:5) and 50,000 years–(Qur’an 70:4). As already explained as their contexts show, the former refers to the count of “time” whereas the latter refers to the measure of “distance.” Or, these “years” may be figurative expressions meaning a very long time.

   To the critic’s question “Where is Allah and His Throne? We ask in turn, Where is the Christian’s God and His Throne that Jesus is sitting with Him? 
   Christians believe, as the Gospel says (though this is a “forgery” in the Bible) that Jesus was taken to heaven and “sat on the right hand of God”–(Mark 16:19). So, where is God located for Jesus to ascend to sit ‘on His right hand’? 
   Significantly, according to the Bible two other prophets, Enoch and Elijah, also ascended to heaven –and these two were not killed/died before ascending, making them greater than Jesus in this respect– which would put at least three individuals who have ascended to God and are now sitting “on the right hand of God.”

39. The origin of calamity? : The critic questions: “Is the evil in our life from Satan [38:41], Ourselves [4:79], or Allah [4:78]?”
Muhammad Ali explains: “Good and evil, or benefits and misfortunes, proceed from Allåh; but while He sends benefits from Himself, i.e. out of His beneficence, no evil or misfortune afflicts a man unless his own hands have called for it. There is no discrepancy in the two statements, the one made at the end of the last verse — All is from Allåh — and the other made here. The previous verse states that the hypocrites attributed their misfortunes to the Prophet; they are told that misfortunes were sent by Allåh. This verse tells them that, though sent by Allåh, the immediate cause of these misfortunes was to be found in their own doings.”

The Bible teaches that whatever we receive –good and evil– is from God: “A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven”–(John 3:27); and that deeds are written in a book: “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works…and they were judged every man according to their works–(Rev.20:12-13. Christians who trumpet that heaven is secured through “belief” in the mythical “crucified Christ” and regard “works” as “dirty rags” must ponder this statement of their Bible, which they claim to believe in). 

In Qur’an 38:41 it is not Allāh who says that evil comes from Satan; Allāh is stating what Job said: “And remember Our servant Job. When he cried to his Lord: The devil has afflicted me with toil and torment.”

   Allah sends the devil against us (Qur’an 19:83) in the sense that He has given Iblis respite till the Resurrection to lure us away from Godliness. We are tried through good and evil–(Qur’an 21:35. Isaiah 45:7; Amos 3:6). 
   The Bible tells us that even Jesus, who is said to be God, was tempted by the devil: “Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil”–(Matt. 4:1). And, Jesus taught his followers to pray to God to “lead us not into temptation–(Matt: 6:13).   Does God lead people into “temptation”?  

41.Will there be inquiry in Paradise?  Qur’an 23:101 says about the “wicked” that on the Day of Judgment “there will be no ties of relationship among them that day, nor will they ask of one another;” Qur’an 52:17-25 says about the “dutiful” that “they will advance to each other, questioning;” and 37:22-27 says about the wrong doers and their associates, and what they worshipped that on their way to Hell they will be questioned: “And some of them will turn to others mutually questioning,” the led would accuse the leader of having misled them and the leader defending that they followed by choice. 
   Clearly, there is no case that the Qur’an contradicts itself in saying that on the Day of Judgment no one will speak yet other verses show people speaking. The contexts clearly show the classes of people spoken of and the situations.  

42. Does Allah forgive shirk?  In Qur’an 4:48, 116, Allāh says He “forgives not setting up partners with Him;” and in Qur’an 4:153; 25:68-71, He says that He “pardoned” Jews for worshipping the golden calf, and those who repent and do good..
   Qur’an 4:48, 116 refer to those who die “setting up partners” with Allāh. Those who repent and do good are forgiven.

   That “Abraham committed this sin of polytheism as he takes moon, sun, stars to be his Lord–(Qur’an 6:76-78, yet Muslims believe that all prophets are without any sin.”
   Abraham was not then a prophet. A man is not charged for acting out of ignorance. Allāh showing Abraham “the kingdom of the heavens and the earth” “signifies granting him an insight into the Divine laws of nature working in the kingdom of the heavens and the earth. This insight had convinced him that Allāh was the real controller of the universe and Supreme above all, while the sun, the moon, and stars and other heavenly bodies, which the Sabeans worshipped, were only His creation and subject to His laws”–(M. Ali comm.; 791).
H
owever, as careful reading of the verse shows Abraham did NOT “take the moon, sun, stars to be his Lord.” He questioned his “sire” why THEY were doing so. Here is the verse: “And when Abraham said to his sire, Azar: ‘Takest THOU idols for gods? SURELY I SEE THEE AND THY PEOPLE IN MANIFEST ERROR”-(Qur’an 6:75). And in verses 77-78 Abraham was merely doubting that the star and moon could be his Lord. 

   The Bible also says all prophets were righteous: “As he (God) spake by the mouth of His holy prophets, which have been since the world began”–(Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21).
The Bible also says Noah was “just” and “perfect”–(Gen. 6:9). Abel was “righteous”–(Heb. 11:4); Zaccharias and his wife were “righteous” and “blameless”–(Luke 1:5-6); all prophets were “holy”–(Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21).
Thus, there were others, and before Jesus, that were holy and sinless and perfect. But Jesus says that all from Adam down–which would include Abraham and these other righteous prophets– they were thieves and robbers: “All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers”–(John 10:8).
 
   Interestingly, Jesus says only God is good; he says to the man that addressed his as “Good Master”: “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, GOD*–(Matt. 19:17, Mk. 10:18); thus no one, including Jesus, is good: one who is not good cannot be perfect or sinless –such a one cannot be God or son of God or “die” for the sins of others.

*(Regarding this saying of Jesus “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.” Muhammad Ali exposes in his book The Religion of Islam that: “Commenting on the well-known confession of Christ, “Why callest thou me good, (Mk. 10:18) Dummelow says that in the Revised Version of Matthew, Christ’s reply is, “Why askest thou me concerning that which is good”; and adds: “The author of Matthew….altered the text slightly, to prevent the reader from supposing that Christ denied that He was good.” (Even their forgery is clumsy: who better is there to tell, or to ask “what is good” than God or the son of God).                                          

   That Allāh says He is the God of all; yet in Qur’an 109:3 He instructs the Prophet Mohammad to say to the disbelievers: “Nor do you serve Him Whom I serve.”
This is no contradiction.

   Allāh is the God of all. Mohammad worshipped Allāh God: The One and Only; The Eternal, Absolute, on Whom all depend; Who begets not; nor is begotten; The Incomparable; Who has no partner; Who incarnates not; Who has no “chosen people” to the exclusion of others; and Who forgives sins without the need for some “satisfaction.”
Disbelievers worship non-existent Gods.  Christians worship paganism.

43. Jews worshipping the golden calf:  Qur’an 2:54 and 20:91 show that Jews repented for worshipping the golden calf after Moses’ return from the mountain; and in Qur’an 7:149, that they repented before Moses’ return.
   There is no contradiction. As Muhammad Ali explained: “The Israelites repentance, though mentioned first, was subsequent to Moses’ return…In fact, the order here is not historical, but one connecting the repentance with the sin, mentioning the events which brought about the repentance afterwards”–(comm; 945).
   That Aaron was not guilty of worshipping this calf, as the critic claimed (citing Qur’an 7:151), is made clear by the fact that it was Moses’ who prayed for his and Aaron’s forgiveness. Thus, prayer could not have been for the forgiveness of worshipping the calf, because Moses did not worship the calf for him to pray for such forgiveness. This forgiveness, as Muhammad rightly points out, “was not sought for any fault in any connection with calf-worship….Forgiveness here, as frequently elsewhere in the Qur’an, is equivalent to the Divine protection, which every man should seek against the frailties and shortcomings of human nature”–(comm; 947. See MA’s comm; 380 for a full explanation of the word ghafr. It is misunderstanding of the meaning of this word that, applying to the Prophet Mohammad, gives the false belief that the Prophet had sinned and was praying for forgiveness of such sin).          

44. Was Jonah cast on the desert shore or not?: In Qur’an 37:145 Allāh says that Jonah was cast on a naked (or desert) shore where Allah gave him shade; and in Qur’an 68:49 Allāh says: “had not favor from his Lord reached him, he would certainly have been cast down on naked ground while he was blamed.” 
   There is no contradiction. While both verses mention the place as as being “naked.”  The  first verse informs that  Allah cast Jonah on the shore of the river where He gave Jonah shade from a gourd. Whereas the latter verse say that if Allāh had not saved him and given him shade, his accusers would have cast him on a ground devoid of any protection (“naked”).

45. Messengers were never sent to other than their own people?  “So it is claimed in Sura 14:4 and 30:47,” the critic wrote, “However, the Bible and the Qur’an, and the Muslim traditions confirm that Jonah was sent to a different nation.”
   There is no place in the Qur’an (or Bible) that says Jonah was sent to a people other than his own. All it says is that Jonah fled, likely being angry at his people (it is absurd to say that a prophet would believe he can flee form God–Qur’an 21:87-88); but Allāh brought him back to his people–(Qur’an 37:139-148).
   The statement of 37:147, “And We sent him to a hundred thousand or more” is not to be taken that Jonah was sent to another people; this “hundred thousand or more” is only a reference to the population of Jonah’s people–(Compare with Jonah 4:11).

46. Moses and the Injil (Gospel)? The critic says: “Jesus is born more than 1,000 years after Moses, but in 7:157 Allah speaks to Moses about what is written in the Injil [the book given to Jesus].”
   Clearly, this critic is confused. Qur’an 7:157 is not about Moses or Jesus. Qur’an 7:157 reads: “Those who follow the Messenger-Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel. He enjoins them…….”
   Moses is not the Ummi (unschooled) prophet of this verse. Moses could not be said to be mentioned/foretold in the Torah when the Torah was given to him. Likewise Jesus could not be said to be this Ummi prophet. It would be absurd to say that Jesus is mentioned/foretold in the Gospel when the Gospel was given to him. Only a future prophet can be mentioned or foretold by Jesus in the Gospel of Jesus.
The Ummi Prophet mentioned/foretold in the Torah and the Gospel, as shown in other presentations, is 
Mohammad..

47. Slandering of chaste women: In his Qur’an 24:5 Allāh says that those who repent after slandering chaste women are forgiven; and in Qur’an 24:23 that they are not.
    There is no contradiction. The latter verse refers to those who continue to spread this evil or does not repent.  
(If the critics should meditate on the verses of the Qur’an, as Allāh requires, they would spare themselves much grief, and would have utilized their hours beneficially than trying to find non-existent flaws in the Qur’an).
   As stated. Even if the charges against Allāh, the Prophet Mohammad, Islam, and the Qur’an are proved, yet this would not make Jesus God or son of God or Trinity or vicarious atoner or that mankind inherited sin from Adam –and these are cardinal doctrines. These doctrines have no Divine foundation; no prophetic foundation; no logical foundation; and they are repugnant to reason. Son of God dying for the good of man is patent paganism. And whoever rejects Islam/ Mohammad is going to Hell.

48. Record on Judgment Day?: In Qur’an 69:25 Allāh says that on Judgment Day the sinners will be given their books in the “left hand;” and in Qur’an 84:10 that they will be given it “behind his back.”
   “Left hand” and “behind his back” are figurative expressions. Allāh created man to test/try him. Sinners given their books in the “left hand” or “behind his back” signifies their failure of this test/ trial.  

49. Qur’an pure Arabic: Allāh says the Qur’an is pure Arabic–(Qur’an 16:103); “but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it,” the critic contends.
The English language is made up of some fifteen percent of foreign words, this does not invalidate it from being called English. (One is yet to hear of the English language referred to with a prefix. And the English language is ever-changing: words being added to it, and perhaps even being deleted from it).
   And what makes you think these words in the Qur’an are “non-Arabic”? It may very well be that these “non-Arabic” words are Arabic words incorporated into those “non-Arabic” languages. As Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out in his book Introduction To The Study of the Holy Qur’an, “no one of the languages of the world, excepting that of the Hedjaz, is spoken now in the form in which it existed at the time of the Holy Prophet. Even if other sacred Books had come to us in their original purity, we could hardly give to their teachings the precise meaning which attached to them in the days of their Revelation. In short, we cannot read the mind of their teachers on account of the change of language. But the Qur’an was given to us in a language which is still living and has remained unchanged and is unchangeable, and for this reason its message can be understood even to-day as conveying the same exact purport, expressed at the time of the first delivery. Arabic can, therefore, claim to be the only language for a Religion from God, since it does not change with the centuries.” 
   And “almost all the words in the Arabic language possess such a wealth of meaning as cannot be found in any other tongue –a fact which renders valuable service to religion in explaining its truths.”
“Every word contains in it a reason for which it has been selected and does convey a particular idea.” (pp. 61, 62, 63. Italics/emphasis added).

50. Do not say, “Three”!?  In Qur’an 4:171 Allāh says “And do not say Three (Trinity). Desist, it is better for you. Allāh is only one God. Far be it from His glory to have a son.” The critic says “It is impossible to recite Sura 4:171 without transgressing the command contained in it;” (i.e. since the “Three” is in the verse, and you cannot recite the verse without saying “Three”).
   This is criticism of the Qur’an? Such is the Christian’s/critic’s desperation to malign Islam. 

It is clear that Allāh is calling on Christians to entomb the blasphemous belief of Trinitythe THREEin-one God doctrine. Which some Christians consider, rightly, a “senseless God-dishonouring doctrine.”

   Do not say “three” simply means: do not say that Allāh God is made up of three-beings-in-one. It is a lie. A fabrication. Something you do not know about. A doctrine that God did not reveal. A doctrine Christ did not teach. A doctrine concocted by Athanasius and others at the Council of Nicaea more than three hundred years after Christ.

51. The infinite loop problem: The critic wrote: Sura 26:192,195,196: “It (the Qur’an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, … in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur’an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets).” Now, the ‘earlier writings’ are the Torah and the Injil for example, written in Hebrew and Greek. HOW can an ARABIC Qur’an be contained in books of other languages? (How do you know that the original of these Books were/are not in Arabic language in the Divine scheme?) Furthermore, it would have to contain this very passage of the Qur’an since the Qur’an is properly contained in them. Hence these earlier writings have to be contained in yet other earlier writings and we are in an infinite loop, which is absurd.”
   The Bible is said to be translated into more than a hundred languages. Accepting for the sake of argument that the Bible is in its “pristine purity;” wouldn’t all these non-Hebrew translations of the Bible be rightly said to be contained in the Hebrew Bible? 
   However, Allāh saying that the Qur’an is in “the writings of the earlier prophets” does not mean that every word of the Qur’an is in these Books; as careful reading of these verses, 192-196, show, it mentions the Qur’an as being revealed to the Prophet to teach in “plain Arabic language” and that the Prophet as “WARNER” was mentioned by Allāh in previous Scriptures, in His covenant with these prophets–(Qur’an 3:80; Deut; 18:18-19, 33:2; John 14:16; 16:12-13). The next verse (197) clarifies this even further; it says: “Is it not a sign to them that the learned men of the Children of Israel know it?” –the Israelite Fathers knew very well that the prophecies in various books of the Bible relate to the Prophet Mohammad.

   Regarding the claim that, “Furthermore, it would have to contain this very passage of the Qur’an–(“It (the Qur’an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, … in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur’an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets)”–since the Qur’an is properly contained in them. Hence these earlier writings have to be contained in yet other earlier writings and we are in an infinite loop, which is absurd.”
If an author writes his hundredth book and makes a reference in it that this hundredth book was mentioned in his previous ninety-nine books why must there be another book before the first book (of this hundred that he has written)?

52. Is the Torah like the Qur’an, or is it not?  The critic wrote: “The Muslim claim of the corruption of the Bible leads to a contradiction between S. 2:24 and 17:88 on the one hand, and 28:49 and 46:10 on the other.”
   In Qur’an 2:23-24 and 17:88 Allāh calls on the disbelievers to produce a chapter, or a book, like the Qur’an; in Qur’an 28:48-49 and 46:10 Allāh conveys that the Torah and the Qur’an is from Him. This does not mean that the Bible is not corrupted. This has been proven; and admitted to by Christians themselves.
   Whereas the Qur’an was memorized and written down upon its revelation and the Angel Gabriel rehearsed it with the Prophet annually and twice in the year of the Prophet’s death–Bokhari Vol. 4, # 819. Contrastingly, “(The Old Testament) were written in several languages over a period of more than nine hundred years, based on oral traditions. Many of these works were corrected and completed in accordance with events or special requirements, often at periods that were very distant from one another.” “A Revelation is mingled in all these writings, but all we possess today is what men have seen fit to leave us. These men manipulated the texts to please them-selves, according to the circumstances they were in and the necessities they had to meet.” “(The Gospels) the foremost authority was the oral tradition as a vehicle for Jesus’s words and the teachings of the apostles. The first writings to circulate were Paul’s letters and they occupied a prevalent position long before the Gospels”; “contrary to what certain commentators are still writing today, before 140 A.D. there was no witness to the knowledge that a collection of Gospel writings existed. It was not until circa 170 A.D. that the four Gospels acquired the status of canonic literature.” “The abundance of literature concerning Jesus led the Church to make certain excisions while the latter was in the process of becoming organized. Perhaps a hundred Gospels were suppressed. Only four were retained and put on the official list of neo-Testament writings making up what is called ‘Canon’.” “The majority of Chris-tians believe that the Gospels were written by direct witnesses of the life of Jesus and therefore constitute unquestionable evidence concern-ing the events highlighting His life and preachings.” “Unfortunate-ly, the authors of the Gospels were not eye-witnesses of the data they recorded.” “As far as the decades following Jesus’s mission are concerned, it must be understood that events did not at all happen in the way they have been said to have taken place and that Peter’s arrival in Rome no way laid the foundations for the Church. On the contrary, from the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the Second century, there was a struggle between two factions. One was what one might call Pauline Christianity and the other Judeo-Christianity.” “Paul is the most contro-versial figure in Christianity. He was considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought by the latter’s family and by the apostles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle around James. Paul created Christianity at the expense of those whom Jesus had gathered around him to spread his teachings…Paul’s style of Christianity won through definitively, and created its own collection of official texts.”2
And Jehovah’s Witnesses in their Awake magazine of September 8, 1957, headlined “50,000 Errors in the Bible?” notes: “Recently, a young man purchased a King James Version Bible thinking it was without error. One day when glancing through a back issue of Look he came across an article entitled “The Truth About the Bible,” which said that “as early as 1720, an English authority estimated that there were at least 20,000 errors in the two editions of the New Testament commonly read by Protestants and Catholics. Modern students say there are probably 50,000 errors.””3 (For more on this see
Bible corrupt & obsolete).
    Whereas Allāh tells us to believe in the Scriptures prior to the Qur’an, He also tells us what not to believe, such as Divinity of Jesus, Trinity, inherited sin, vicarious atonement, karma and reincarnation, polytheism, idolatry, and “chosen people” to the exclusion of others.   The Torah given to Moses is not the same as that which is passing for the Bible. 
   The Torah was the best guidance for the Israelites for that period of time; the Qur’an is the best guidance for mankind for all time.

53. Should Jews and Christians follow the Bible or the Quran? 
Not only has the Bible been altered, but the Judeo-Christian religions are not as comprehensive as Islam; and their doctrines of “chosen people” to the exclusion of others, Divinity of Jesus, Trinity, inherited sin, vicarious atonement are not only unGodly but are repugnant to reason. God calls followers of the Bible to reason: “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool”–(Isaiah 1:18). Blind faith is no passport to Paradise–Reason is the door to God.
   If Jews and Christians were following the Bible they, naturally, would realize that the Prophet Mohammad is/was the inheritor of all the prophetic blessings in the Bible, and would now be following the Qur’an. Many of their best men realized this and accepted Islam. Islam is superior to all other religions

54. “An old woman” and God’s character : The critic wrote: “About the story of Lot: “So we delivered him and his family, – all except an old woman who lingered behind.” [Sura 26:170-171] And again: “But we saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. [Sura 7:83]. Either this is a contradiction or if indeed Lot’s wife is derogatorily called “an old woman” then this does not show much respect for her as a wife of a prophet.
   Reference to an aged woman, wife of prophet or not, as “an old woman” could hardly be deemed “derogatory.” Is reference to an aged man as “an old man” derogatory?
   Jesus, who is worshipped as God, cursed a helpless, blameless fig tree –this is “derogatory.” Jesus labels non-Jews (which would include the critic, if he is not Jewish) as “dogs” and “swine.” –this is “derogatory.” Jesus addresses his mother, “Woman, what have to do with thee?”-(John 2:4), –this is derogatory. 

More problems with the story of Lot: The critic wrote about Lot: “”And his people gave NO answer but this: They said, “Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!” [Sura 7:82 & 27:56]. Yet: “But his people gave NO answer but this: They said: “Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth.” [Sura 29:29]. Obviously these answers are different.” 
   What is meant is, the people of Lot were adamant against Lot, even to the point of having him cause their destruction. There are no “problems with the story of Lot” or with the Qur’an. There are “problems” only with people not understanding the Qur’an and not “meditating” on its verses. The story of various incidents are not reported in their entirety in each instance. (See Abul A’la Mawdudi explanation in the next topic).

55. Did Abraham smash the idols? The critic notes: “The accounts of Abraham, Suras 19:41-49, 6:74-83 differ quite a bit from Sura 21:51-59. While in Sura 21 Abraham confronts his people strongly, and even destroys the idols, in Sura 19 Abraham shuts up after his father threatens him to stone him for speaking out against the idols. And he seems not only to become silent, but even to leave the area (“turning away from them all”).
   It is doubtful that Abraham contentioned with his father about idol worship on only one occasion. More plausibly, after disputing with his father/people at least a few times, his stance became fiercer, and finally to the point of destroying their idols.
   What is to be borne in mind is that the Qur’an is not a story-book as the Bible is. It does not narrate in sequence, or give all details of the same event in all relative verses. Abul A’la Mawdudi explains:

“The Qur’an is a complete and the most perfect code of life and provides humanbeing with a comprehensive and unerring intellectual and practical guidance. It offers the best way of life to be established here in this world and guarantee the success and affluence in the life Hereafter.”

   “Unlike conventional books, the Qur’an does not contain information, ideas and arguments about specific themes arranged in a literary order. That is why a stranger to the Qur’an, on his first approach to it, is baffled when he does not find the inunciation of its theme or its division into chapters and sections or separate treatment of different topics and separate in-structions for different aspects of life arranged in a serial order. …He finds that it deals with creeds, gives moral instructions, lays down laws, invites people to Islam, admonishes the disbelievers, draws lessons from historical events, administers warnings gives good tid-ings, all blended together in a beautiful manner. The same subject is repeated in different ways and one topic follows the other without any apparent connection. Sometimes a new topic crops up in the middle of another without any apparent reason. The speaker and the addressees, and the direction of the address change without any notice. ”

   “The reader may be saved from all these difficulties, if he is warned before-hand that “The Book he is going to study is the only book of its kind in the whole world: that its literary style is quite different from that of all other books: that it’s theme is unique and that his pre-conceived notion of a book cannot help him understand the Qur’an”.

   “The SUBJECT it deals with is MAN: it discusses those aspects of his life that lead either to his real success or failure.
   The CENTRAL THEME that runs throughout the Qur’an is the exposition of the Reality and the invitation to the Right Way based on it. It declares that Reality is the same that was revealed by Allah Himself to Adam at the time of his appointment as vicegerent, and to all the Messengers after him, and the Right Way is the same that was taught by all the Messengers. It also points out that all theories contradictory to this Reality, invented by people about Allah, the universe, man and his relations with Allah and the rest of His creation, are all wrong and that all the ways of life based on them are erroneous and lead to ruinous consequences.
   The AIM and OBJECT of the revelations is to invite man to that Right Way and to present clearly the Guidance which he has lost because of his negligence or has perverted by his wickedness.
   If the reader keeps these three basic things in mind, he will find that in this Book there is no incongruity in the style, no gap in the continuity of the subject and no lack of inter-connection between its various topics. As a matter of fact, this Book is not irrelevant anywhere with regard to its Subject, its Central Theme and its Aim. From its very beginning to its end, the different topics it deals with are so intimately connected with its Central Theme that they may be likened to the beautiful gems of the same necklace, despite their different colours and sizes. The Qur’an keeps the same object in view, whether it is relating the story of the creation of the earth or of the Heavens or of man or is referring to the manifestations in the universe or stating events from human history. As the aim of the Qur’an is to guide man and not to teach nature study or history or philosophy or any other science or art, it does not concern itself with these latter subjects. The only thing with which it is concerned is to expound the Reality, to remove misunderstandings and misconceptions about it, to impress the Truth upon the minds, to warn them of the consequences of wrong attitudes and to invite humanity to the Right Way. The same is true of the criticism of the creeds, of the moral systems, of the deeds of men and communities and of its discussions of the problems of meta-physics etc. That is why it states or discusses or cites a thing only to the extent relevant to its aims and objects and leaves out unnecessary and irrelevant details and turns over and over again to its Central Theme and to its invitation round which every other topic revolves. When the Qur’an is studied in this light, no doubt is left that the whole of it is a closely reasoned argument and there is continuity of subject throughout the Book.” (An Introduction To The Qur’an, pp. Foreword, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7).

56. Pharaoh’s repentance in the face of death? The critic: states: “According to Sura 10:90-92, Pharaoh repented “in the sight of death” and was saved. But Sura 4:18 says that such a thing can’t happen.” 
   As careful reading of the verses show, Pharaoh was NOT saved. His BODY was saved for future generations, to be an example to those who militate against Allāh God.  

   Qur’an 7:124 and 20:71 note Pharaoh telling his magicians that he will “crucify” them for  their believing in Moses. One source  comments that there was no “crucifixion” at  that point in history.
    But the Bible shows that  “crucifixion” was in vogue before and during  Moses’ time: “(Interpreting a dream, Joseph said), “Pharaoh…shall hang thee on a tree”–(Gen. 40:19); and the Book of Moses says:   “His body shall not remain all night upon the  tree…(for he that is hanged is accursed of  God)–(Deut. 21:23).
“Crucifixion” does not  mean hanging on a literal tree. In those days there was no “cross;” crucifixion was done by  hanging the individual on a limb/trunk of a tree or pole. This is made clear by Paul who  says: “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse  of the law…for it is written, Cursed is  everyone that hangeth on a tree”–(Galatians   3:13). And Jesus was NOT hanged on a literal  tree!).        

57. Guiding to truth?  The critic wrote: “Say: ‘God – He guides to the truth; and which is worthier to be followed …?” [Sura 10:35] But how much is left over of this worthiness when we also read: “Allah leads astray whom he pleases, and he guides whom He pleases, …” [Sura 14:4]. And how do we know in which of Allah’s categories of pleasure we fall? How sure can a Muslim be that he is one of those guided right and not one of those led astray?
A Muslim can be sure that “he is one of those guided right” because the path to Paradise is clearly shone in the Qur’an.

Only good is from Allāh–(Qur’an 4:79). Guiding and “leading astray” are contradictions. Allāh does not “lead” astray but He “leaves” to stray (or leaves in error) those who reject His guidance. 
Muhammad Ali has pointed out the error in the belief that Allāh, God “leads astray.”

“A great misconception regarding the teach-ings of the Qur’an is that it ascribes to God the attribute of leading astray. Nothing could be farther from the truth. While al-Hadi or the One Who guides, is one of the ninety-nine names of Allah, as accepted by all Muslims, al-Mudzill, or the One Who leads astray, has never been recognized as such. If leading astray were an attribute of God, as guiding certainly is, the name al-Mudzill should have been included in the list of His names, as al-Hadi is. But the Qur’an, which repeatedly says that God’s are all the excellent names, could not ascribe to Him what it has plainly ascribed to the Devil, viz., the leading astray of men.
..
..It is impossible that God, Who is so solicitous for the guidance of man, should Himself lead him astray. Guiding and leading astray are two contradictions which could not be gathered together in one being.”
“The mistaken idea that God leads people astray arises out of a misconception of the meaning of the word idzlal when it is ascribed to God.” (The Religion of Islam, pp. 323, 324, 325).(See
Islam-predestination).

58. Will Christians enter Paradise or go to Hell?  The critic states: “Sura 2:62 and 5:69 say “Yes”, Sura 5:72 (just 3 verses later) and 3:85 say “No”.”
   That Jews, Christians and Sabians who believe in Allāh would have their reward–(Qur’an 2:62; 5:69), refers to those who followed their prophets prior to the advent of Islam, and to these later religionists who died without knowing about Islam –as they could not be charged as having rejected Islam– and followed their Scriptures. Jews and Christians who follow the Prophet Mohammad would be rewarded twice–(Qur’an 28:54).
   As no religion can be shown to be superior than, or equal with, Islam, whoever rejects Islam/Mohammad is going to Hell–(Cf. Qur’an 3:85; 9:113; 30:30).Islam is superior to all other religions.

59. God alone or also men? Clear or incomprehensible?  The critic wrote: “The Qur’an is “clear Arabic speech.” [16:103] Yet “NONE knows its interpretation, save only Allah.” [3:7]. Actually, “men of understanding do grasp it.” [3:7]” 
   A legal document also is in clear English language but does everyone understand it, but the learned? Verses of the Qur’an are of basic meaning or allegorical as stated in Qur’an 3:7. Muhammad Ali has explained this verse in detail. See his translation of the Qur’an on the Internet:  www.muslim.org

60. When/how are the fates determined? The critic quotes the Qur’an: “The night of power is better than a thousand months. The angels and spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees.” [97:3, 4] “Lo! We revealed it on a blessed night.” [44:3] To Muslims, the “Night of Power” is a blessed night on which fates are settled and on which everything relating to life, death, etc., which occurs throughout the year is decreed. It is said to be the night on which Allah’s decrees for the year are brought down to the earthly plane. In other words, matters of creation are decreed a year at a time. Contradicting this, Sura 57:22 says, “No affliction befalls in the earth or in your selves, but it is in a Book before we create it.” This means it is written in the Preserved Tablet, being totally fixed in Allah’s knowledge before anyone was created. All of the above is contradicted by “And every man’s fate We have fastened to his own neck.” This says that man alone is responsible for what he does and what happens to him. [17:13].”
   Things that are decreed a “year” before their occurrence are in a Preserved Tablet,” or “in a Book” before they are created. Humans also have plans for their, and nation’s, futue laid out well in advance.  

   Chapter 97 of the Qur’an reads:

  1. Surely We revealed it on the Night of Majesty
  2. And what will make thee comprehend what the Night of Majesty is?
  3. The Night of Majesty is better than a thousand months.
  4. The angels and the Spirit descend in it by the permission of their Lord–for every affair–
  5. Peace! it is till the rising of the morning. (M. Ali trans.)

   Verse 1 informs that the revelation of the Qur’an began on the night of Qadr–which is one of the odd nights in the last ten nights of the month of Ramadan. To be presented with the Divine gift of Light is indeed an honorable occasion.
   Verse 2 calls our attention to the grandness of this Night in which this Qur’an, the complete blueprint for our moral, social, intellectual, and spiritual living, was revealed.
   Verse 3 tells us that this Guidance which brings man out of Darkness into Light is better than a man’s entire lifetime (1000 months, or more than 83 years, or a man’s lifetime. Without doubt, to be given eyes [Light] is better than living a life in blind-ness [Darkness]. A blind who receives sight would likely remember this day as the best or grandest of all in his life).
   Verses 4 and 5 tell that on this Night of Majesty –the revelation of the Qur’an– that the angels and the Spirit came with guidance in all matters of life (in every affair) –moral, social, intellectual, and spiritual. And that Muslims who observe the anniversaries of this Night of Majesty in worship, for having been given a lifetime of Light, receive “peace” from Allāh.

   Sura 57:22 which says, “No affliction befalls in the earth or in your selves, but it is in a Book before we create it” Book here refers to Divine knowledge. Though afflictions are from Allāh, man has choice in his belief and actions; the following verses make this clear:
Have We not given him (man) two eyes, and a tongue and two lips, and pointed out to him the two conspicuous ways (of good and evil)?(90:8-10).
So He reveals to it (the soul) its way of evil and its way of good, he is indeed successful who purifies it, and he is ruined who corrupts it.(91:8-10).
Whoever does good it is for himself, and whoever does evil, it is against himself…But whoever repents after his wrong-doing and reforms, Allah will turn to him (mercifully). Surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.(45:15; 5:39).
-“
And wrong not men of their dues, and act not corruptly in the earth, making mischief;” “And whatever misfortune befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought;” “Surely Allah enjoins justice and the doing of good…and He forbids indecency, and evil and rebellion;” “O men…follow not the footsteps of the devil. Surely he is an open enemy to you” –(Qur’an 26:183; 42:30; 16:90; 2:168)

   Again, Allāh God instructs us to pray: “Guide us on the right path” and “My Lord, increase me in knowledge”–(Qur’an 1:5; 20:114). Clearly, the God who gives guidance, and Who increases His servants in knowledge could not predestine the actions of those servants –a robot or a puppet has no need of, or use for guidance and knowledge. Neither could Islam, which advocates pursuit of knowledge, be said to be backward or non-progressive.
  As noted elsewhere, the Bible teaches that whatever we receive–good and evil–is from God: “A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven”–(John 3:27).

   Qur’an 17:13 which says, “And every man’s fate We have fastened to his own neck.” Allāh has given man the choice between good and evil. His actions (his “fate” which his own hands have wrought) are inseparable from him: in this respect his fate/action is “fastened to his neck”).

61. Wine: Good or bad?  The critic : “Strong drink and… are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. [5:90, also 2:219]. Yet on the other hand in Paradise are rivers of wine [47:15, also 83:22, 25]. How does Satan’s handiwork get into Paradise?”
   Even in this life we have “alcohol free” champagne, “alcohol free” wine, etc. Consider how much purer the benefits are in Paradise –the place of highest purity. However, the Qur’anic expressions on Paradise are figurative expressions–(Qur’an 32:17). See Heaven or Paradise.

62. Good News of Painful Torture?  The critic writes: “Obviously, announcing torment and suffering to anyone is bad news, not good news. However, the Qur’an announces the good news of painful torment [3:21, 4:138, 9:3, 9:34, 31:7, 45:8, and 84:24].”
This is amusing. This critic should talk to addicts who were cleaned up. 

   Hell is not a torture chamber. As dross is removed from gold in the furnace; Hell is a purifier of spiritual dross. Explaining the “painful” treatment to an addict or a patient that will eventually make him whole is good news.
Imagine yourself in the gutter from addiction. You are put in rehab. You curse and holler and scream and kick and shake and rattle and roll. Afterwards, you emerge like a newly minted shilling. You will be so joyed you might kiss the feet of the doctors and nurses and all else for ridding you of your social dross
–for putting you through this “hell” of a treatment. You will never again want to take ano-ther toke or smack or slug. Ridding one of spiritual dross is a “favor”–yes, Hell, as Allāh, the Merciful revealed, is a favor to sinners–(Qur’an 55:41-45).

63. Preferred for Hell? The critic:“S. 17:70 says that Allah prefers (all) the children of Adam over many of his creatures, but S. 98:6 declares the majority of men to be the worst of creatures, many of them being even created specifically for Hell (S. 7:179).
   No one is created “specifically” for Hell. As careful reading of the verse shows these men and jinn refused Divine guidance; thus by their own actions they are destined for Hell. Allāh being Omniscient knew that there will be rejecters: Here’s the verse:

“And certainly We have created for hell many of the jinn and men–they have hearts wherewith they understand not, and they have eyes where-with they see not, and they have ears wherewith they hear not. They are as cattle; nay, they are more astray. These are the heedless ones”–(Qur’an 7:179).  

   Man and Jinn were created to serve Allāh. Jinn and man were not created for Hell. Hell was created for “heedless” men and jinn (like the incorrigible critics and those who try to mislead). As noted above Hell is a reformatory for the evil-doers.

64. Will all Muslims go to Hell?
In Qur’an 19:71 Allāh says “And there is not one of you but shall come to it (Hell). This is an unavoidable decree of thy Lord” 
   This does not mean that “every Muslim will go to Hell.” That “all” will be brought to Hell could only meant that “all” will see for himself/herself the truth of the Hell of which they guarded against. That the righteous will not go to Hell is clearly stated in the next verse (verse 72): “And We shall deliver those who guard against evil, and leave the wrongdoers therein on their knees.”

65. Will Jesus burn in Hell?  The critic wrote: “Jesus is raised to Allah, [Sura 4:158], near stationed with him [Sura 3:45], worshiped by millions of Christians, yet Sura 21:98 says, that all that are worshiped by men besides Allah will burn in Hell together with those who worship them.”
   Only those who sought the worship of men will burn in Hell. Jesus did not seek the worship of men: Jesus taught men to worship Allāh God. One is not responsible for what others attribute to Him. 
   Jesus says “he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath NEVER FORGIVENESS, but is in danger of ETERNAL DAMNATION”–(Mark 3:29). And since to attribute to God things for which He gave no authority –that Jesus is God, son of God, Trinity, vicarious atoner, inherited sin– is blasphemy, those who worship Jesus “will burn in Hell.”

66. Is Jesus God or Not?  The critic states: “In Sura 16:17, 20-21 and S. 25:3 we find a criterion to distinguish the true God from false gods. Yet, according to S. 3:49, 55, 4:157-158, 5:110, 6:2, and 38:71-72 Jesus satisfies the definition and should be considered true Deity.”
   More evidence of Christian confusion and/or blind faith. Yet the Bible calls to reason–(Isaiah 1:18).
   In Qur’an 3:48-49, Allāh recounts Jesus performing miracles though “Allāh’s permission.”  Reason would dictate that “true Deity” does not need anyone’s “permission” to perform miracles. The Bible also shows that Jesus performed miracles through the power of God–(Luke 11:20; John 8:28, 11:42; Acts 2:22. Qur’an 3:48).
There were many besides Jesus who performed miracles:
-Moses transformed a stick into a serpent; Moses parted the river–(Exodus 7:10; 14:21)
Elijah resurrected a child; and divided the river Jordan–(1 Kings 17:17-23; 2 Kings 2:7-8)
Elisha parted the river Jordan; and resurrected a child–(2 Kings 2:12-14; 2 Kings 4:32-36)
Joshua made the sun and the moon stand still–(Joshua 10:12-13).

  Even things performed miracles:
   -the river Jordan healed Namaan (2 Kings 5:9-14)
-Elisha’s dead bones  reliven a dead man (2 Kings 13:20- 21)
-The pool at Bethesda had the power to cure (John 5:2-4)
   -The statue of a brass serpent had the power to preserve life (Num.1:8-9)
-Balaam’s ass spoke to Balaam (Num. 22:28, 30)
-Even False Christ’s and false prophets can perform miracles (Matt. 24:24)
a fire came from heaven and consumed Solomon’s burnt offering (2 Chr. 7:1)
-Nostradamus is said to have made prophecies
-And Jews believed that one days’ supply of oil lasted for eight days (Hanukkah, the Jewish festival of Lights).
   If the performing of miracles makes the performer “God” then all these individuals and things must also be “Gods.”

   In Qur’an 3:55 (also 4:157-158) Allāh tells about Him causing Jesus “to die” and to “exalt” him. Reason would prevail that “true Deity” cannot “die” and does not need anyone to “exalt” him.
According to the Bible, God also took to heaven Elijah and Enoch, and these did not die. Thus, Enoch and Elijah must each be a bigger “Deity” and really “true Deity” than Christ. 

   (Jesus told the devil only God is to be worshipped and served: he did not say “I” am to be worshipped and served–Matt. 4:10. See Jesus-as God).

    In Qur’an 6:2 and 38:71; Allāh says He created us from “clay”/“dust.” Jesus also was created from “clay”/“dust.” Jesus was flesh and blood as all men; even if we take that he was of “virgin” birth he was yet human, as his mother was. If he was not, then all the cloned creatures (and humans) would also be of “virgin” birth and not be flesh and bones.

   Jesus was “word” of God in that he was a “promise” to Mary. There are numerous words of Allāh God. In fact, the words of God are so numerous that if all the trees were made into pens and all the seas plus seven more were added to make ink to write the words of Allāh, they would all be exhausted and yet the words of Allāh would not be written–(Qur’an 18:109; 31:27).
Adam, Eve, and Melchisedec, having no parents, are greater than Jesus in the matter of their creation, yet Divinity is not ascribed to them. In fact, from this critic’s reasoning (or non-reasoning) Adam, Eve, and Melchisedec must be the three biggest “Deity” and the three “true Deity.” (See
Jesus-word of God). 

67. Is Jesus Like Adam?  The critic inquired: “S. 3:59 makes this claim, but how many aspects of likeness are there really?”
   (Adam has two meanings: it refers to the first man created, and also to man in general).  Let’s see how many likeness there are between Jesus and Adam, the first man created:
(1) Adam and Jesus both were flesh and blood.
(2) Both ate food and needed all the same necessities –food, air, sleep, drink, answer the calls of nature; etc.
(3) Both died. (See
Jesus-birth miracle or mechanix).
(4) Both worshipped Allāh God.
(5) Both were fatherless (according to Christians who believed Jesus was of “virgin” birth, though not all Christians believe this).
(6) Both were prophets.
(7) Both had a wife (see
Jesus-had a wife). 

68. Can there be a son without a consort?  The critic wrote: “Allah cannot have a son without a consort [Sura 6:101], but Mary can have a son without a consort because that is easy for Allah [Sura 19:21].”
   Yes! Because Allāh is Creator, and of what He wills and Mary is not. Allāh cannot have a consort because all that are created are His servants. A consort is one of the same species and of the opposite sex. And as Allāh is one of a kind He could not have a consort; and thus He could not have a son. (Allāh created Adam and Eve without parents. And according to the Bible Melchisedec also had no parents).
Allāh saying in Qur’an 39:4 that if He had desired to take a son “He could have chosen those He pleased out of those whom He has created.” There is no contradiction between this verse and 16:101 where He questioned How could He have a son when He has no consort?” In the Bible there are many, such as Adam and David, that are metaphorical sons of God. (See
Jesus-son of God). 

69. Did Jesus Die already? : The critic wrote: “Sura 3:144 states that all messengers died before Muhammad. But 4:158 claims that Jesus was raised to God (alive?).”
   Qur’an 3:144 did not say that “all” messengers before Mohammad died; only that “messengers have already passed away before him.”  That Jesus also died, though not on the cross, and that Jesus was not raised physically to Allāh is a voluminous subject, and is discussed in the presentation Jesus-birth miracle or mechanix.

70. One Creator or many? :The critic: “The Qur’an uses twice the phrase that Allah is “the best of creators” [23:14, 37:125]. What other creators are in mind? On the other hand, many verses make clear that Allah alone is “the creator of all things” [e.g. 39:62]. There is nothing left for others to be a creator of. 
   This is only to show that all that Allāh creates are perfect; not that there are other creators to compare with.

71. From among all nations or from Abraham’s seed?  The critic wrote: “Sura 29:27 states that all prophets came from Abraham’s seed. But 16:36 claims that Allah raised messengers from among every people. 
   Qur’an 29:27 does not state that “all” prophets came from Abraham’s seed. Only that Allāh ordained prophethood and the Book among his seed: “And we granted him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained prophethood and the Book among his seed.” 

72. Marrying the wives of adopted sons? : The critic wrote: “It is important that Muslims can marry the divorced wives of adopted sons [Sura 33:37], yet it is forbidden to adopt sons [Sura 33:4-5].”
   Qur’an 33:4-5 do not forbid the adopting of sons; only that these adopted sons are not your real sons: these adopted sons are to be called by the names of their biological fathers: “nor has He (Allāh) made those whom you assert (to be your sons) your sons….Call them by the names of their fathers; this is more equitable with Allāh.” (See Islam-adoption).

73. Messengers Were Sent Only to Their Own People? The critic states: Sura 14:4 states that never was a messenger sent except in the language of his own people. Yet, the Quran itself claims that Jesus is supposed to be a sign to all people, that the Torah and Gospel are for all people, that Moses was sent to Pharaoh of Egypt, and that Muhammad is sent to all of mankind. The hadith also claim that Noah was sent to “the inhabitants of the earth”. 
   Even though Jesus was sent wholly and solely only for Jews  Jesus was a sign to all people in that being from God, and as God is the God of all, we are to believe in him. The same applies to the Torah and Gospel. (It is a requirement of Islam for Muslims to believe in all the prophets and Books of Allah).
Noah was sent only to his people–(Qur’an 25:37; 29:14; 71:21-27). Every nation is an “inhabitant of the earth.”
 Whereas, prior to Mohammad, every prophet’s mission and Book was limited to his period and people. Mohammad’s mission was universal and eternal to the Day of Judgment –through Mohammad, Allah “completed” His favor to man and “perfected” religion”-(Qur’an 5:3). (See Qur’an; Islam)       

74. Messengers Amongst the Jinns and Angels? The critic postulates: “Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21] but there seemingly are messengers from Jinns and Angels [6:130; 11:69, 77; 22:75; etc., see article for details].”
(The Biblical “Lord” has different shades of meaning:(1) master, (2) prophet/teacher (3) husband (4) God).
That only men was sent as messengers refer to those that was sent to teach man: messengers such as Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad.
The Angels that came to Abraham and Lot (and other prophets)–(Qur’an 11:69, 77, 22:75) were messengers of a different rank, they were not sent to teach man but to bring revelation to prophets. 
Even a King’s (Potiphar’s) servant is called messenger–(Qur’an 12:50). Notably, Jinn carry more than one meaning, as Muhammad Ali explained in his notes to Qur’an 6:129 and 72:1. (See his translation of the Qur’an:
www.muslim.org).

75. A Messenger from among the beasts?  That “Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21]. Yet, the Qur’an also speaks about a beast that is a messenger from Allah to men [S. 27:82].”
   This “beast” (or “creature”) is explained by Muhammad Ali:  By the creature from the earth that will speak to them are evidently meant people who are bent low upon earth. These people are the materialistic nations of the West who have lost all sense of the higher values of life. The coming forth of the dabbat al-ard is one of the signs of the approach of the Hour according to the Hadith. But the Hour may mean either the day of Judgment or the doom of a people, and this verse gives us an indication that the Hour in this case stands for the doom of a nation; because here it is spoken of as being a punishment for not believing in the Divine messages.” (Comp; Qur’an 18:102-104).

76. Solomon listening to ants? The critic: “In Sura 27:18-19 Solomon overhears a “conversation of ants”. Is this possible based on our knowledge about the mode and complexity of ant communication?”
   If Balaam’s ass can speak to Balaam–(Numbers 22:28-30); surely Solomon, a greater prophet, can listen to ants. 
   However, that these are/were not literal ants is explained by Muhammad Ali: “Many of the fables regarding Solomon have been due to a misconception of the word naml. It should be noted that wadi-l-Naml cannot be properly translated as valley of the ants, for Naml is a proper noun, and according to T* (see under the root wady), the valley of the Naml is situated between Jibrin and ‘Asqalan. And Namlah is the name of a tribe, like Mazin, which literally signifies the eggs of the ants. Namil means a clever man (T). The name Namlah used to be given to a child in whose hands an ant was placed at its birth, because it was said a child would be wise and intelligent (T). And the Namlah are plainly spoken of as a tribe in the Qamus, which says under the word barq, Abriqah is of the waters of Namlah. (See also Muhammad Ali’s commentary to 27:16-21 about Solomon’s alleged speaking to “birds” and alleged threatening to kill a “bird” Muhammad Ali’s translation of the Qur’an with notes and commentaries can be viewed on the Internet: www.muslim.org) (*Taj al-‘Arus (Dictionary), by Imam Muhibb al-Din Abu-l-Faid Murtada.

77. The stars and the moon:The Qur’an teaches that “there are seven heavens one above the other [67:3, 71:15], and that the stars are in the lower heaven [67:5, 37:6, 41:12], but the moon is depicted as being in/inside the seven heavens [71:16], even though in reality the stars are much further away from the earth than the moon,” the critic wrote.
   What are “seven” heavens? Muhammad Ali explained “seven heavens” as noted in Qur’an 2:29:
“It is impossible to deal with the subject of the Quranic cosmogony within the limits of a footnote. But a few suggestions may be made here. In the first place, it should be noted that the word sab’a, which signifies the number seven, is also used in a vague manner, as meaning seven, or more, several or many (LL). According to LA, the Arabic equivalents of the numbers seven, seventy, and seven hundred are all used to indicate a large number by the Arabs: “The mention of seven and seventy and seven hundred is frequent in the Qur’ån and the sayings of the Holy Prophet, and the Arabs used them to signify a large number and multiplicity”. Similarly Az explains the word sab’ina, meaning seventy, as occurring in 9:80, as being “used to signify a large number and multiplicity, not indi-cating exactness in number” (LA). Hence the seven heavens may signify a large number of heavens. Secondly, the significance of the word sama’, which means only what we see above us, should not be lost sight of. R makes the meaning very clear when he says: “Every sama’, i.e. heaven, is a heaven in relation to what is beneath it and an earth in relation to what is above it”. Thirdly, in 65:12 it is affirmed that as there are seven heavens so there is a like number of earths, which corroborates the conclusion drawn above. Fourthly, the seven heavens are on one occasion called the seven ways (23:17), and in this sense the orbit of a planet may be called its heaven. In fact, this interpretation makes the significance of 65:12 very clear, for each of the seven earths will thus have a heaven for it. The seven earths together with our earth would thus make up the eight major primary planets of the solar system. Or, the seven heavens may be taken to apply to the whole starry creation, and the reference may in this case be to the seven magnitudes of the stars which may be seen by the naked eye. One point more may be noted here. The sama’ or the heaven is plainly called dukhan, i.e. smoke or vapour, in 41:11”.

78. All things are made in pairs? The critic states: “Sura 51:49 claims that everything is created in pairs. But this is not true! There are quite a number of things that have no counterpart and species where only one gender exists.”
  That “There are quite a number of things that have no counterpart and species where only one gender exists.” Is this an absolute certainty? Has man discovered all things in creation? Has some of these “one gender” things have the partner within their own systems; which partners would be their “pair”?
   Qur’an 51:49 reads: “And of everything We have created pairs”. Heaven is the “pair” of the earth; life is the “pair” of death; day is the “pair” of night; Paradise is the “pair” of Hell; knowledge is the “pair” of ignorance. 
   Allāh also reveals that He “created pairs of all things, of what the earth grows, and of their kind and of what they know not” –(Qur’an 36:37).

79. The critic questioned: “Selling Joseph for a few Dirhams? (before coins were even invented)”–Qur’an 12:20. 
   Allāh saying that Joseph was sold for a few “dirhams” “before coins were even invented” is only to emphasize the insignificant price for which Joseph –a human– was sold: the dirham being the currency used by the Arabs. 
   Notably: “The history of coins extends from ancient times to the present.” “In a tomb of Shang Dynasty dating back to 11th century BC shows what may be the first cast copper money.” “The most famous and widely collected coins of antiquity are Roman coins and Greek coins.”
   “Historically, the word “dirham” is derived from the name of a Greek coin, the Drachma; the Byzantine Empire controlled the Levant and traded with Arabia, circulating the coin there in pre-Islamic times and afterward. It was this currency which was initially adopted as an Arab word; then near the end of the 7th century the coin became an Islamic currency bearing the name of the sovereign and a religious verse.” (Source: Internet. Italics/emphasis added).

   Interestingly, whereas the critic tries to cast aspersions on the Qur’an for using the “pre-Islamic” dirham, the Christian’s God and son of God, Jesus, says to “Agree with thine adversary” before he has you thrown in jail where you will remain “till thou hast paid the uttermost FARTHING”–(Matthew 5:25-26).
There was no “farthing” in Jesus’ time (1 BC). The Farthing is an English/British coin which came into existence more than a thousand years AFTER Jesus. According to Wikipedia the first English farthing was “minted in silver in the 13th century;” and the first British farthing was “minted in 1714.” (Emphasis added)

  (In the story of Joseph there is an incident [Qur’an 12:24-27] of the King’s wife chasing  after Joseph to seduce him: “And they raced  with one another to the door, and she rent his shirt from behind, and they met her husband  at the door.” The wife charged that Joseph  tried to seduce her but Joseph denied; “He   said: She sought to seduce me. And a witness  of her own family bore witness: If his shirt is  rent in front, she speaks the truth and he is of the liars. And if his shirt is rent behind, she   tells a lie and he is of the truthful.”
(T
o this the Skeptics Annotated Quran states: “Stupid  tests   like this can only be found in the Quran  (or the Bible or the Book of Mormon).”
However, though this test may not be  “stupid” if the garment was torn –from the front  would indicate she was trying to fight him off;  and from behind would indicate she grabbed  at him while he was fleeing–  it is NOT Allāh who suggested this “test.” As careful reading  of the verse shows this “test” was proposed  by a “witness” of the King’s wife’s own family.  Allāh only recounted the incident. See 
Christians-Internet).

80. “The anachronistic title al-`Aziz given to Potiphar,”–(Qur’an 12:30).
Allāh referring to Potiphar as Aziz (Chief) is no anachronism. Aziz means “mighty, powerful, strong,” which title–Chief– is suitable to a ruler of any period. Joseph, when put in charge of Potiphar’s treasury was also hailed as Aziz–(Qur’an 12:78). Potiphar is also referred to as malik (king/master)–(Qur’an 12:43).                

81. SAUDAH: The critic wrote: “Ibn Kathir also said: “Concerning Q. 4:128 ‘Aisha said: ‘It concerns the man who has two wives. One of them has become old or is ugly and he does not like her company much, so she says: “Do not divorce me, and you are free from your obligations towards me.”’” This Hadith is established in the Two Sahihs. What the verse seems to say that their reconciliation, on the condition that she gives up some of her rights, and the acceptance of the husband of that is better than complete separation, just as the Prophet kept Sauda on the condition that she gave her day to ‘Aisha and did not divorce her but kept her amongst his wives and this was done in order that his nation might take him as their example and that this act is lawful and permissible.” (Please note: this “highlighted” section is NOT the words of ‘Aisha or the hadith, it is the words of the commentator, Ibn Kathir-NGBA).
Now the picture is clear; ‘Aisha became the love of Mohammad, and Sauda became the servant of the daughters of the prophet. And after so many years where Sauda cooked, washed, mended, served the prophet and his daughters and comforted the prophet in his sorrows after the death of his first wife, when Sauda became old Mohammad wanted to divorce her for no reason except that she became old and unattractive. Bokhari Vol 3, # 259, 583; Vol 6, # 318.”
   Regarding the claim that “Ibn Kathir also said: “Concerning Q. 4:128 ‘Aisha said: ‘It concerns the man who has two wives. One of them has become old or is ugly and he does not like her company much, so she says: “Do not divorce me, and you are free from your obligations towards me,” does not refer to Saudah and the Prophet. ‘Aisha did not say her statement was in reference to the Prophet wishing to divorce Saudah. The Prophet did not keep Saudah “on the condition that she gave her day to ‘Aisha and did not divorce her.”

   To understand this relation between the Prophet, Saudah and ‘Aisha reading of Qur’an 4:128 and the hadith of Bokhari Vol; 7, # 134 and 139 are neces-sary; the following is stated in Bokhari Vol. 7, #134 and 139:
   (96) CHAPTER. ‘If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part…’ ([Qur’an] 4:128).
   [Hadith] 134: Narrated ‘Aisha (Allāh be pleased with her) regarding the verse:- ‘If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part…’ ([Qur’an] 4:128). “It concerns the woman whose husband does not want to keep her with him any longer, but wants to divorce her and marry some other lady, so she says to him: ‘Keep me and do not divorce me, and then marry another woman, and you may neither spend on me, nor sleep with me.’ This is indicated by the statement of Allāh (The Most High):-

‘There is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between them both and (such) settlement is better.” ([Qur’an] 4:128).”

   This Qur’anic verse (4:128) and this hadith are NOT about the Prophet and Saudah. There is no instance in the Prophet’s life of any of his wives “fearing cruelty or desertion” from him; or of him declaring that he wanted to divorce any of his wives –even though he had the option of taking on or putting off any wives he desired–(Qur’an 33:50-51) and when he did neither; nor could the Prophet had divorced or wanted to divorce Saudah when she became “old and unattractive” because after he was given the choice to take on or put off any wives he desired Allāh forbade him to take or put away any of his wives after this choice, except for “slave” wives–(Qur’an 33:52). This Qur’anic verse, as its import shows, is of a general nature and not specifically directed in a matter relating to the Prophet. The following statement in Bokhari Vol, 7 # 139 makes the matter even clearer.

   Regarding Saudah giving up her time to ‘Aisha, Bokhari notes Vol; 7, # 139 notes:
(99) CHAPTER. (What is said regarding) the woman who gives up her turn with her husband to one of his other wives, and how to divide the turns.
[Hadith] 139. Narrated ‘Aisha: Saudah bint Zam’a gave up her turn to me (‘Aisha), and so the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him) used to give me (‘Aisha) both my day and the day of Saudah.”  
   Clearly these two hadiths–139, and 134 which is coupled to Qur’an 4:128–are NOT related to each other. There is no reference to any “fears (of) cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part.” 
   In all probability Saudah gave up her time because of her advanced age. According to Bokhari Vol; 6 # 318, Saudah was a “fat huge lady,” and “a widow of advanced age,” as Muhammad Ali notes, when the Prophet married her.

   It is preposterous to charge that the Prophet divorced, or wanted to divorce, Saudah because she became “old and unattractive” when she was “old and unattractive” to begin with, at the time of her marriage to the Prophet. Thus, Saudah could not have feared cruelty or desertion by the Prophet because she had become “old and unattractive.”
   It is preposterous to entertain that the Prophet would divorce or want to divorce any of his wives because they had become “old and unattractive,” seeing that many of his wives were widows and with children when he married them. Moreover, a divorce in the sight of Allāh is a shameful deed; it is doubtful that the Prophet, who is/was the best exemplar, would then divorce, or want to divorce, Saudah, which would not only be a shameful deed but would set a poor example for his community. To divorce one’s wife because of her age and/or looks could hardly be exemplary. 
   Men also lose their looks. If man is justified in leaving his wife because of age and looks, then women, seeing that they have rights as the rights against them–(Qur’an 2:228), would also be justified to leave husbands that have become “old and unattractive.”

   If the Prophet was a voluptuary–as the critics are fond of portraying him–and if he wanted to divorce any of his wives because she had become “old and unattractive” it is not credible that he would have held on to marriage-ties to widows and to the “old and unattractive” seeing that Allāh gave him the right to divorce any or all of his wives in favor of those whom he “pleases” and “desires”–(Qur’an 33:51). And lustful old men relish vestal nubiles.

   Whereas a divorce is the last resort in Islam–it is better for the couple to part in friendship than live in misery–Christianity teaches, “whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery”–(Matt. 5:32. So the woman that puts away the man causes him to commit adultery; and the woman that marries him that is divorced is guilty of adultery).
According to Christianity, it is better that the couple should go to their graves in marital misery than have bliss with another man; and that the divorced woman should spend her remaining (fifty years or more) of life denying her God-instilled feminine desires.
This is the lunacy that the Christian is trumpeting above Islam.

   The critic notes that the Prophet recommended to his followers the act of “thighing” –simulated intercourse– with their child brides.
   The Prophet Mohammad was born into a custom that engaged in child marriages. As he could not change a practice of society until he received Divine revelation, the Prophet, in recommending “thighing” was anticipating an end to intimacy with young girls; and by marrying ‘Aisha and delaying consummation of his marriage to her for five years, he was hoping to rid society of pre-teen marriages by his action. This practice did end, as Muhammad Ali notes, “there is no case on record showing that the marriage of a minor through his or her guardian was allowed by the Prophet after details of the law were revealed to him at Madinah”–(The Religion of Islam, p. 601).
Muslims who marry minors have no recourse to Islam for such a marriage. The Prophet’s marriage to ‘Aisha is no precedent for Muslims. The Prophet not only postponed consummation of his marriage to ‘Aisha for five years, he also married women of advanced age, and had their free consent. He was not pandering to prurient desire(s).(See
‘Aisha & Mohammad; ‘Aisha’s marriage-9 or 19?)

82. WOMEN: The critic wrote: “The Qur’an allows (or, perhaps, commands) men to beat their wives into subservience.”
    See Islam-wife-beating/chastisement
   Incidentally, whereas evil eyes are cast onto Islam’s light chastisement of the wayward wife; what method of punishment do Christians’ apply to the wayward/rebellious wife –she who does not want to “learn in silence with all subjection;” to be “ruled over” by her husband;” to “reverence her husband” as Christ; or to “submit” themselves unto their “husbands, as unto the Lord”? See Christianity-Women

   The critic asserts: “According to Muhammad, women lack common sense because their minds are deficient”: “[Muhammad said]: O womenfolk, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, Messenger of Allah, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the Holy Prophet observed: You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you. Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense and with religion? He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Your lack of common sense (can be well judged from the fact) that the evidence of two women is equal to one man, that is a proof of the lack of common sense.[10]
The Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said: “Yes.” He said: “This is because of the deficiency of her mind.”[11]

   Qur’an 2:282.   A woman’s testimony is half that of a man’s only in the area of business, as the verse clearly states, as business transactions were dominated by men. In advanced societies where women also are involved in business dealings such a practice is not required. However, this does not mean that the Qur’anic injunction is obsolete. There are (and may always be) societies the world over where women are not familiar with business dealings where this Qur’anic injunction may be applicable. 
   A woman’s testimony cannot be half of that of the man’s in every area of life. In Qur’an 24:6-9, (in the matter of the wife’s alleged infidelity) the testimony of the wife, supersedes that of the husband’s; and no court would dare to assert that a man’s testimony in all matters is inferior to that of the wife’s, or that the testimony of a man is “worth half” (or “one-fifth,” as per the verse) that of a woman’s. And, notably, a woman’s chastity is a more sensitive matter than business.

   That Mohammad said women are “deficient” in their minds and yet says that women will go to Hell (whether in majority or minority) is a contradiction. Allāh is Just; He holds one accountable only for what he/she is capable of understanding. A person who is “deficient” in mind cannot be held responsible for his/her actions. Thus, it would be an injustice for Allāh to send a person who is “deficient” in mind to Hell.
   That women are not “deficient” in their minds is also contradicted by the fact that men and women are/were created of the same essence–(Qur’an 4:1). Being created from the same kind one party cannot be “deficient” than the other. Though the thinking or reasoning of one or the other can be. 
   Clearly, the critic misinterprets the Prophet’s saying.

   That the Prophet said the majority of people in Hell would be women because they are “ungrateful” to their husbands. Can anyone disprove this? We would have to wait till Judgment Day to know. Why then carp at Mohammad? And if this is a truth, it is not Mohammad who has given woman “little hope for the afterlife.” She has done so herself.

(Whereas the Christian castigates Mohammad for his sayings.
   Jesus says “a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven”–(Matt. 19:23) The Christian should castigate Jesus for his saying against the rich. Surely there are “rich” who are honest and just and even righteous.
  Jesus says his generation of Jews was “evil and adulterous”–(Matt. 12:39). The Christian should castigate Jesus for his saying against Jews.
Jesus says the wicked is “cursed” and shall go into “everlasting fire” and into “everlasting punishment” –(Matt. 25:41-46). The Christian should castigate Jesus for his saying against the wicked.
J
esus says to the Jews: “Ye serpents, ye gene-ration of vipers, how can ye escape the dam-nation of hell?”–Matt. 23:33) The Christian should castigate Jesus for his insult and condemnation of the Jews.

The Christian should castigate Christianity for labeling women as ‘defilers’ of men–(Revelation 14:3-4) For more on women see Christianity-Women.

   That Mohammad said the “ungrateful” wife will go to Hell, “though he never suggests that ungrateful husbands will receive similar punishment. 
   Husbands are the maintainers of wives –feed, house, and clothe her (though she cooks and washes and cleans). In what way are the husbands “ungrateful” to wives? (Though perhaps it can be attested that women have said to their husbands words to the effect that “you have never done anything for me” it is doubtful that it can be attested that men have said to their wives words to the effect that “you have never done anything for me).
The Prophet and Caliphs would not utter words degrading to Woman seeing Allāh has conferred honor upon her, and for us to “Speak what is best”–(Qur’an 17:53). Muslims are not allowed even to revile false gods–(6:108). What is to be remembered is, even during the lifetime of the Prophet sayings were forged in his name. Whatever contradicts the Qur’an is to be discarded.

   The critic opined: “However, even if these women were to stop cursing and to start thanking their husbands, their prospects for the afterlife would still leave much to be desired. According to Muhammad, Muslim women can look forward to an eternity of standing in corners, waiting for men to come and have sex with them.”
Wouldn’t these women also enjoy the sex?
   However, the rewards of Paradise are figurative expressions: “So no soul knows what refreshment of the eyes is hidden for them: a reward for what they did”–(Qur’an 32:17). And the Prophet Mohammad explained: “Allah says, I have prepared for My righteous servants that which no eye has seen and no ear has heard, and which the heart of man cannot conceive”–(Bokhari Vol. 6, # 302, 303). 
   And what is the Christian heaven like? Whereas in Paradise Muslims will see Allāh, and in the Qur’an the joys of Paradise are detailed –this Muslim Paradise is criticized as one of sensuality; though sexual joy in the bed of marriage is Divinely lawful on the earthly plain there is no difficulty if it should be allowed in the spiritual plain; and though carnal pleasure in the conjugal bed is a form of worship of God–(Gen. 1:28. Qur’an 25:54; 16:72; 24: 32); yet the ignorant revile this blessed union as vulgar– Christians do not know what heaven would be like.

   Like in other things, the Christians’ God/son of God, Christ, have left his flock to wander in “darkness and misunderstanding.”
Though his so-called followers have depicted their heaven in a picturesque landscape of people walking about, standing and sitting, with some reading books with the predator and prey nesting together (obviously a depiction of Isaiah 11:6-7 which says that the lamb and calf and wolf and lion shall dwell together: “the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb…and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
This must be a cruel joke on the lion or these lions would have to be out-fitted with dentures of incisors and molars for stripping and grinding hay, and have their carnivorous systems redesigned to process and evacuate hay). In other words the Christian heaven is
B-O-R-I-N-G.
Small wonder the Christian is obsessed with Mohammad’s “particularly active sex life” –to borrow the words of one critic– and the gardens of “virgins” the Muslims will have. The Christian is envious to boot.

(A survey should be done among Christians –men and women– to find out how many prefer to lax in heaven reading past-time stories and watching lions stripping hay instead of being in the Muslim Paradise of joys beyond human comprehension, robed in princely raiment, lounging on couches of velvet savoring “wine” from goblets of gold and silver and enjoying “an eternity” of “sex.” And don’t forget to query the priests).

83. The critic wrote : “The Qur’an permits Muslims to have sex with their female captives and slaves (i.e. those “whom their right hands possess”).
   The Believers must (Eventually) win through—Those who humble themselves In their prayers; Who avoid vain talk; Who are active in deeds Of charity; Who abstain from sex, Except with those joined To them in the marriage bond, Or (the captives) whom Their right hands possess—For (in their case) they are Free from blame.[16]
Not so those devoted To Prayer—Those who remain steadfast To their prayer; And those in whose wealth Is a recognized right For the (needy) who asks And him who is prevented (For some reason from asking); And those who hold To the truth of the Day Of Judgment; And those who fear The displeasure of their Lord—For their Lord’s dis-pleasure Is the opposite of Peace And Tranquility—And those who guard Their chastity, Except with their wives And the (captives) whom Their right hands possess—For (then) they are not To be blamed.[17]
The Muslim practice of having sex with captured women is reported often in the Hadith.
   “Thus, the Qur’an permits men to have sex with their female captives (whose husbands were some-times still alive[22]), and the Hadith provides examples of when this was practiced. Yet we must follow this fact through to its logical conclusion. The Muslims decided to have sex with their captives, whom they were later going to sell. These captives were women whose husbands and families had been exterminated by the Muslims. Would these women gladly consent to sexual intercourse with the men who had killed their families? Probably not. But since the Qur’an and Muhammad authorized sex with these captives, it is highly probable that Muhammad allowed Muslims to rape their captives.”
   The Bible says Sons of God saw daughters of men and took them as wives (and there is no mention of any marriage ceremony; wives here mean to have sex loosely): If this is how the Biblical sons of God behave why carp at Mohammad who was no son of God but a mortal for allowing his warriors carnal release with captives. (Why didn’t the daughters of God come to earth and cavort with sons of woman, or were these daughters in bondage like earthly daughters?–Exodus 21:7).

   The Christian’s Bible said that Sarah could not have children so she told her husband, Abraham, to “go into my maid (Hagar); it may be that I may obtain children by her”–(Genesis 16:1-4). There is no mention of Hagar’s consent being given. Was Hagar a willing participant or because she was a “hand-maid” she was forced into “sex”? If she was forced into having “sex,” then, to use the critic’s words, “it is highly probable that” Hagar was a victim of “rape”. In fact, according to the Christian logic, Hagar was not only a victim of “rape” but was impregnated. And not only “rape” and impregnated but was also cast out with her child; and even cast into a desolate place. And the critic carp at Mohammad for doing less.

   Whereas the Christian tries to stigmatize Mohammad as villain for allowing his followers to have sex with female prisoners, yet this is what the Christians’ Bible, and as Jesus is said to be God this is what “Jesus” says to do: “thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself”–(Deut. 20:12-14).
   And as the Bible (“Jesus”) allows its followers to enslave non-Jews, wonder what these Biblical Jewish captors did with all those young, sensuous women and budding girls?
Thus, to use the words of the Christian critic, “These captives were women whose husbands and families had been exterminated by” Biblical warriors. “Would these women gladly consent to sexual intercourse with the men who had killed their families? Probably not. But since the” Bible (“Jesus”) “authorized” that the victors take them “unto thyself” “it is highly probable that” the Bible (“Jesus”) “allowed” its followers “to rape their captives.” (See
Christianity-Sex Slaves & Prepubescent Girls).

   David, the father of the Christians’ God/son of God (and whose Psalms the Christians sing at the top of their voices and in melodious tones) “lay” with Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba, and then sent Uriah to the battlefront so he could make her his wife–(2 Samuel 11:1-27). And the Christian slings mud at Mohammad whom he considers a “fraud.” (See ‘Aisha & Mohammad).

   Judah, the grandfather of the Christians’ God/son of God (and who is a founder of a tribe of nations– one of the twelve tribes of Israel) “tangoed” with his daughter-in-law, Tamarr, and fathered her child; and the Christian pens off at Mohammad.

   That the Prophet allowed his followers to have intimate relations with captive women must have been before revelations on the subject were given; in which event he was following the Jewish and Christian Scripture, which, as noted, allows the taking of women into ownership. Why then pen poison at Mohammad for doing that which the Bible sanctions? (For more on this topic see Answering Islam critic).

   Regarding the critic’s claim that “The Qur’an permits Muslims to have sex with their female captives and slaves (i.e. those “whom their right hands possess”).
   Allāh says: “Go not near to fornication/adultery”–(Qur’an 17:32; 25:68). Going not near to fornication/adultery means to not even indulge in acts that lead to them –such as amoral speech, touching. intent staring, and being in seclusion with a member of the opposite sex. It is sheer ignorance for the critic(s) of Islam to say that the Qur’an allows Muslims “to cohabit” with their female slaves, when the Qur’an forbids adultery and fornication.

   Qur’an 23:1-6 states: “Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers…And who restrain their sexual passions –except in the presence of their mates or those whom their right hands possess…” It is a mistake to believe that this verse sanctions concubinage with slave-girls. As Muhammad Ali explains, “slave-girls, when taken as wives, did not acquire the full status as a free wife, and hence they are spoken of distinctly.”
   However, this verse is not about the man having sexual intercourse. As Muhammad Ali explained, “It may, however, be added that hifz al-farj in a wider sense means the covering of parts of the body which it is indecent to expose, and in this connection it must be borne in mind that according to Islamic rules of decency, the exposure of such parts of the body, as are generally exposed in ballrooms and theatres, is disallowed, but a certain degree of freedom is allowed to women in the presence of their husbands and female servants and to men in the presence of their wives and male servants.” Thus, the verse speaks about the man being in the presence of his wife and in the presence of his male servants, not in the presence of his female servants. (As shown above, it is the Bible that allows its followers to have sexual intercourse with captives–Deut.20:12-17).

   That women slaves are to be taken as mates in marriages only is made clear in the next verses.
   In Qur’an 4:3 and 4:25 Allāh makes it clear that slave-girls are to be married:
-“And
marry not the idolatresses until they believe”–(Qur’an 2:221);
-“
marry such women as seem good for you, two, or three, or four; but if you fear you will not do justice, then (marry) only one or that which your right hand possess”–(Qur’an 4:3);
-“And whoever among you cannot afford to
marry free believing women, (let him marry) such as your believing maidens as your right hands possess”–(Qur’an 4:25);
-“And
marry those among you who are single, and those who are fit among your males slaves and your female slaves”  (Qur’an 24:32).
   And the Prophet Mohammad taught: “The man shall have a double reward who has a slave-girl and he trains her in the best manner and he gives her the best education, then he sets her free and marries her”–(Bokhari Vol. 4 # 655; & 3:720).

   Again, Allāh says: “Surely prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil”–(Qur’an 29:45); and adultery, whether with slave-girls or with the free, is indecency. It would be a contradiction of the most glaring kind for Allah to enjoin decency, chastity, and to instruct us to come not near to adultery/ fornication and still sanction “concubinage.”
   It would be a contradiction of the most glaring kind for Allah to enjoin chastity, to instruct us to come not near to adultery/fornication and still sanction “concubinage.” And there are no contradictions in the Qur’an–(4:82).

   Conversely, Whereas Islam requires freeing of captives–(Qur’an 47:4), and Mohammad had no concubines, the Bible and Christian’s God, Jesus, as noted above, commanded the Biblical Fathers: “thou shalt smite every male thereof: But the women, and the little ones…shalt thou take unto thyself” –(Deut.20:12-17.).
There must have been quite a haul of attractive women and budding girls “who serviced” the “sexual desires” of their Biblical captors.
Solomon had “three hundred concubines;” his son, Rehoboam, had “three score concubines” (plus their 318 wives)–(1Kings 11:3; 2 Chr. 11:21. And Solomon is said to be ‘wise’). These two alone reduce Mohammad’s “fifteen wives” to a mere speck on the horizon. And Christians mouth off about Mohammad’s noble marriages. (For more on this topic see Answering Islam critic).
   (Muhammad Ali has dealt at length on this topic in his The Religion of Islam. See also his Qur’anic commentaries #’s 536, 561, 1714, 1715. His translation of the Qur’an can be viewed online at: www.muslim.org).

   In pre-Islamic Arabia women had no rights to inheritance. Her daughters were buried alive. She could be inherited against her will, and deserted by her husband by his simply calling her his mother. He could suspend conjugal relations with her indefinitely by swearing that he will not be intimate with her. 
   Women could not be “worse of” under Islam than in “Pre-Islamic Arabia.” The Arab Woman before Islam did not enjoy “perfectly respectable” carnal relationships. It is not “perfectly respectable” carnal relationship where a man can desert his wife by saying to her “thou art to me as the back of my mother” –(Qur’an 33:4. M. Ali comm.)
   It is not “perfectly respectable” carnal relationship for a woman to have her conjugal rights suspended indefinitely by the oath of her husband not to have relations with her–(Qur’an 2:226. M. Ali comm.)
   It is not “perfectly respectable” carnal relationship to inherit women against their will–(Qur’an 4:19).
   It is not “perfectly respectable” carnal relationship to marry your father’s widow–(Qur’an 4:22).
   If Islam has saved even only one “unwanted female” from infanticide, this alone would establish its “superiority”; given the fact that no other religion can be shown to have ever saved any “unwanted female” from such a ghastly fate.
Islam abolished all these abominable practices.

   And what does Christianity say about Woman? The panoramic pen of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as he wrote in his Open Letters To The Bishops Of Salisbury & London :

“Before Islam, Woman was treated as a chattel. No religion or civilization had as yet raised her to the status that should have been her birthright. She was regarded as an evil but necessary appendage, and she received the worst treatment of all from Christianity. The story of the Temptation in the Book of Gene-sis, and the basic principle of the Church creed taken therefrom, damaged her position tremendously.

   In dealing with the status of Woman, Islam and Christianity stand poles apart. The one has raised her from the lowest possible depths to a level equal to that of man, at a time when her degradation knew no limit; the other thrust her back to thraldom at a time when she was beginning to emerge from it under Roman civilization. This civilization was struggling to raise her status when Christianity came like an icy blast and nipped the efforts in the very bud. This statement, though histori-cally accurate, will surprise many amongst those who are accustomed to listen to the very different story told by Christian writers. But if even Jesus does not seem to concern himself about the female sex, and if those who immediately followed him–and have since been looked upon as the builders of the Church, and filled with the Holy Ghost–did nothing to improve her condition, while their words and actions brought every odium on her; and if Christian States have continued this treatment for centuries, and, indeed until recent days, when Woman began to assert herself, how can they declare that Christianity brought an honourable position to Woman?

The Hebrew Law was unfavourable to her. The Divine command, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee,” had the effect of reducing her to the position of a chattel in the house, and so she was, in Judaic society. On the other hand, it must be remembered that Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it. Whenever something appeared to him as an abuse of the Law, he expressed his disapproval of it, and tried to reform it. But in the case of Woman his silence shows that the idea of ameliorating her lot never occurred to him, though the self-indulgence of his tribe was peculiarly damaging to womankind.     

   If Paganism supplied the idea of a suffering Deity and of a crucified Saviour, and the sad event in the life of Jesus favoured their incor-poration with Christianity, the legends of the Temptation in Genesis served as a beautiful connecting link between the two. It inspired the story of the Fall of Adam, and through him, the fall of the human race–a theory absolutely, and now admittedly, unknown to the Jews, but initiated by the writers of the Pauline literature to strengthen and explain the Pagan theory of redemption through blood. To that extent it acted well, but it was of no service to Woman. The whole blame of human perdition, by reason of this first sin, was laid at her door: “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, was in the transgression.” Woman consequently could not be in the good books of those who took these expressions as the Word of God and believed in the theory of the Fall of Adam. This explains the cruel attitude which the Early Fathers and the real builders of the Church adopted towards Woman, following, as they did, in the foot­steps of St. Paul. In fact, her disgrace at the hands of these Fathers was the true and logical sequel to the Chris-tian beliefs, of which the following is an illustration: “Do you know,” says Tertullian, when addressing Women, “that you are each Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age; the guilt, of necessity, must live too. You are the devil’s gateway; you are the unsealer of that tree; you are the first deserter of the Divine Law; you destroyed as easily God’s image.”  

   The Christian apologist of modern culture, while he sees in it mediaeval savagery and wantonness, cannot rationally deny that “the pious aspersions” of the Father were not without justification. The logic was simple and true. If it was believed that sin was a heritage and eternal condemnation its price–and so it is believed till to-day–then eternal condem-nation has come through Woman; she opened the door of all human sufferings. She is “the organ of the devil,” “a scorpion ever ready to sting,” “the poisonous asp,” “the malice of the dragon.” These are some of the blessings that Woman received from persons of exalted position in the Church, such as St. Bernard, St. Anthony, St. Jerome, St. Cyprian, and St. Paul, who seem to me to be at the bottom of it. His personalA grudge against the sex, in consequence of his suit being rejected by a young Jewish woman, the high priest’s daughter, perhaps was responsible for it. Say what you will, if “sin in nature” is the foundation-stone of the sacramental religion, which Christianity has become–the principle of at-onement and of the divinity of Christ are mere corollaries of it, and then Woman de-serves all that has been said by these Fathers. Present-day culture may not tolerate it, but her real redemption lies only in exposing the falsity of these beliefs. And was not the Holy Prophet, even on this very point, the real benefactor of Woman, seeing that he gave the lie to this crude theology, and took exception to the theory of sin in nature? He declared that every child was born sinless, and that in the case of the Temptation, man and woman were not respectively the tempted and the tempter, but both of them equally suffered and were equally deceived by the evil agency.  

   Just at the time when the Christian Church was so out­rageously trampling on womanhood, and the rest of the .world was treating her no less cruelly, Muhammad came to save the situation. He raised Woman to such a height as she had never dreamed of before –a height which leaves her nothing higher for which to strive.

   While the Christian Fathers were harping on the slogan that woman was made for man and not man for woman, Muhammad told the world that woman was the twin-half of man, in commenting upon the Qur-anic verse, that revealed in the following words the great truth that man and woman had come from the same essence and were one and the same in that respect: “O people! be careful of (your duty to) your Lord, Who created you from a single being and created its mate of the same (kind) and spread from these two, many men and women; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, by whom you demand one of another (your rights), and (to) the ties of relationship; surely Allah ever watches over you.” The Qur-an gave the name of mohsina to Woman, which meant that she was neither the “organ of the devil” nor his gate­way, but a rocky fortress against Satan; a lighthouse of virtue and continence that alone can save man from shipwreck while tossing among the stormy waves of passion. The Bible says: “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee,” but Muhammad says: “Woman is the sovereign of your house.” St. Paul may say: “Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection, for I suffer not a woman to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence”; but the Qur-an contradicts him when it says: “Woman has like rights with those of man, –the same is due to her as is due from her.” She is not “a scorpion ever ready to sting,” but “a garment of man as he is her garment”;B she is not the “instrument of iniquity,” as these Christian Fathers call her, but, in the words of the Qur-an,C a fountain of love and affection. Let Jesus say to his mother: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” –put whatever construction you like on these words and come with any explanation you please, people in Christendom even to-day reflect this utterance of their Master in their actions–the affluence of sons go hand in hand with the indigence of mothers in the West –mothers are discarded and disregarded– but a Muslim leaves no effort undone to pay all respect and reverence to his mother, because his Prophet Muhammad tells him: “Paradise lies at the feet of a mother.” Happy marriage may be a lottery in the West, as some assert, but it makes a wife, in a Muslim house, the dearest of friends, a counterpart of man susceptible to all healthy and salutary influences. It could not well be other­wise, seeing that we are bound to obey the Master who says: “The best of you are they who behave best to their wives.” Again he says: “The best of you before God and His creation are those who are best in their own families, and I am the best to my family.”

   “One of the disciples inquired of the Prophet as to what treatment should be meted out to a wife. He answered: ‘“Give her to eat when you eat yourself, and clothe her when you clothe yourself; and do not slap her on the face nor abuse her, nor separate yourself from her in displeasure.’”

Give your wife good counsel, and do not beat your noble wife like a slave.”

           “Admonish your wives with kindness.”

“A Muslim must not hate his wife; and if he be displeased with one bad quality in her, then let him be pleased with another which is good.”

Just a quarter of a century after the time when the council of Christian Fathers at Nicaea were discussing whether any female could enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, and with great difficulty they had come to the conclusion that she might enter into Paradise, but that she would have to be sexless, the Qur-an brought the gospel to her in the following words :­–

“Enter into Paradise, ye and your wives delighted.”
“But whoso doeth the things that are right, whether the male   or female, and is a believer, whether male or female, they shall enter into Paradise.”
“Whoso doth that which is right, whether male or female, him or her will we quicken to happy life”–(43:70;4:124; 16:97).                                                        

   When the world was doubtful whether any spiritual advancement was open to Woman at all, the Qur-an taught the following: “Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women, and the humble men and the humble women, and the almsgiving men and the almsgiving women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and the men who guard their private parts and the women who guard, and the men who remember Allah much and the women who remember­ –Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward”–(Qur’an, xxxiii. 35).    

It is only utter ignorance of Islam and blind prejudice against it that comes to the surface when our adverse critics assert that Woman, under Islam, does not possess a soul. It hardly needs any elaborate discussion to refute this piece of fool­hardiness. If a Man possesses a soul, Woman must possess one also, seeing that both are, according to the teaching of the Qur-an, of the same essence.”

A Epiph. Hae., xxx. 16, p. 14. Islamic Review, vol. xii, p. 232.   B–C Qur’an 2:187; 30:21]. (pp. 71-77).

   The Woman of Islam is not of servility as Judaism and Christianity teach–(Gen. 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:11); nor guilty of ‘transgression’–(1 Tim. 2:14); nor a “defiler” of man–(Rev. 14:4); nor wife just “to avoid forni-cation”–(1 Cor. 7:2). Allāh tells us both man and woman were created from the same medium–(Qur’an 4:1); both were deceived by the Devil–(2:36; 7:20-22); and has established marriage between man and woman–(25:54; 16:72; 24:32. That marriage is a sacred contract; that all avenues of reconciliation are to be explored before dissolution of a marriage; and that a divorce is the most shameful deed are proofs that there is no “easy” divorce in Islam). Man and woman, created from the same essence–(Qur’an 4:1) and instilled with the same laws –such as the five senses, and susceptibilities to hunger and diseases– one cannot be superior to the other; both have the same faculties and potentials. Whoever develops himself will be superior to the other. This verse shows that from the beginning man and woman are equal.

Man is to give reverence to the womb that bore him–(Qur’an 4:1)–not to the loins that emitted him. Reverence to the womb is not discrimination, but honor. Allah has listed honor to parents, especially mothers, after worship of Him–(6:152; 17:23; 31:14). The Prophet Mohammad says Paradise lies at the feet of mothers–not the feet of fathers. And that after worship of Allāh, next in line for our service is our mother; and three times over before service to our father: thus women have three degrees of excellence over men. Such esteems are not discrimination.      

   Men and women are garments to the other–(Qur’an 2:187)–to protect, beautify, comfort and keep each others flaws private; such considerations for the other are not oppression. Men and women are friends of one another–(9:71); friendship does not allow oppression. Women have rights similar to those against her–(2:228); people with mutual rights cannot oppress. Allāh has put love and compassion between man and woman, and that man may find peace of mind in her–(7:189; 30:21). It is not love and compassion and comfort to oppress. (That woman is a source of peace and comfort condemns marital rape. The man who forces himself upon his wife, abuses her, causes her distress or puts her under duress cannot find love and compassion and comfort and peace in her).

   The Muslim woman can earn, inherit and own property–(4:32, 7, 177). Whereas woman has exclu-sive right to utilize her earnings however she pleases –(4:4, 32), it is incumbent on man to maintain her–(4:34). That man has a degree of superiority over woman–(2:228) is no license to subjugate her. She has rights similar to those against her–(2:228). As every group requires a head, husbands, being the maintainers, are given a degree of superiority over the wives. Woman has moral and spiritual equality with man–(3:194; 4:124; 16: 97; 33:35; 40:40).  Islam liberated woman–(2:187; 4:19-22); exalts her–(4:1; 9:71-72); and has given her equality with man in financial, property, moral and spiritual matters–(4:32, 7-10, 176-177; 3:195; 33:35).  No Scripture or reformer has done anything remotely close to that which Islam/Mohammad has done for Woman.

Assessment: In his assessment of Mohammad the critic states:
“In the West, the status of women has greatly improved over the past few centuries. We can all be thankful that people in some areas of the Muslim world are seeing the change and are trying to adopt similar policies, in spite of Muhammad’s low opinion of women. We can only hope that those who want to heed the Qur’an will one day pick up the Bible and read the words of the Apostle Paul:
Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.[24] Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.[25]
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into the name of Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.[26]
That “In the West, the status of women has greatly improved over the past few centuries.” (Improved by whom? Certainly not by Christianity).

That the Bible/Christianity is the religion of love is Christian clap-trap and lip-talk. We often hear such musical Christian claims as “universal” brotherhood, love, spirit, values, teachings, tolerance, mercy, forgiveness, and egalitarianism. Belief is not to be confused with facts. The religion that stamps others “dogs” and “swine,” enslaves “heathen,” views woman as transgressor and defiler of man, subjugates wife and views her as an object of carnal release, relegate daughters into bondage, commands enemies be brought and slain, vilifies opposers as enemies, and prevents others from knowing God lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them” is on no moral or spiritual throne to make such lofty claims–Matt. 7:6; 15:26; Lev. 25:44; 1 Tim 2:11-14; Rev. 14:4; Gen. 3:16 and 1Cor, 7:1-2; Ex. 21:7.; Luke 19:27; Matt. 12:30; Mark 4:9-12.

Whatever fruits of bliss the Christian wom-an is enjoying did not come from any tree planted by Christ, but from the crops of modern culture. Jesus had nothing to say on behalf of the Slave, the Woman and the Orphan. That, he left for the Comforter, Mohammad the magnanimous, to do. Mohammad extricated Woman from the bog of degradation and sat her aloft on the throne of honor and left her nothing for which to strive; Mohammad liberated the Slave from the shackles of servitude and placed in his grasp the scepter of regality; Mohammad raised the Orphan from the dust of despair and sat him on the cushion of hope. Mohammad is the only Benefactor Woman, Slave, and Orphan have known. Such a lofty position for Woman could not have come from “Muhammad’s low opinion of women.”

   As noted, the critic wrote that Paul says: Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.[24] Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.[25]
(This does not mean that the Christian woman has equality with her husband. She does not, as will be shown shortly.
And for which Church did Christ gave himself up? Certainly not the current Church that is passing under his name. As already noted Christ did not teach Divine sonship, Trinity, inherited sin and vicarious atonement. Christ is only a figure-head in the Church. Christ, a Jew, and upholder of the Judaic law “loved” the temple/synagogue and “gave himself” [strove for] her betterment. People also “love” their dogs and cats and other pets.
For a larger entry see Christianity-Women).

   The critic also quotes Paul as saying: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into the name of Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.[26]
   Christ regards non-Jews as “dogs” and “swine.” Non-Semites are not “Abraham’s seed.” And what “promise”? And promised by whom? 
Intriguingly, Christians invariably quote not God or Jesus but Paul for support; this same 
Paul who was “considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought” and who “shanghaied” Jesus teachings and created his own “gospel” that Christ was crucified: “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel”–(2 Tim, 2:8; Gal. 1:6). Paul forged his own gospel and taught the unGodly doctrine of ‘blood sacrifice,’ which as already noted is a remnant of paganism. It is to be noted that the “Bible” is a compilation of sixty-six books and letters–thirty-nine of the Old Testament and twenty-seven books and letters of the New Testament. And, excepting for the four Gospels, of the remaining twenty-three books and letters, “More than half of the Acts of the Apostles …together with the letters written by him (St. Paul) or in his name, comprises one-third of the New Testament”5.

   Whereas Paul says, as the critic quotes, Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.[24] Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.[25]
Paul’s pronouncements are not only derogatory to woman (and slaves) but makes her a foot-stool of her husband. (For ease of identification I have noted Paul’s words in “brown).
   That the Bible/Christianity ameliorates the lot of woman is more wild talk. Whereas Allāh says that He created women to be our mates and has put love and compassion between us, and that men and women are friends and protectors of the other,  Christianity says
Christianity says man was not created for the woman but that woman was created for the man: “Neither was the man created for the woman; BUT THE WOMAN FOR THE MAN–(1 Cor. 11:9).
   –Christianity says woman is an object for sex: “It is GOOD for a MAN NOT TO TOUCH A WOMAN. Nevertheless, TO AVOID FORNICATION, let everyman have his own wife ….”–(1 Cor 7:1-2)
  –Christianity condemns woman as the transgressor: “And Adam was not deceived BUT THE WOMAN BEING DECEIVED WAS IN THE TRANSGRESSION”–(1 Tim. 2:14. Allah tells us that both Adam and Eve were deceived; and that they were forgiven–Qur’an–(2:36-37; 7:20-22)
Christianity says only man is the glory of God : “he is the IMAGE AND GLORY OF GOD: but the WOMAN IS THE GLORY OF THE MAN. For the man is NOT of the woman; but the WOMAN OF THE MAN”–(1 Cor. 11:7-8).
   –Christianity demands that wives submit to their husbands, and reverence their husbands as they reverence God: “WIVES, SUBMIT YOURSELVES UNTO YOUR OWN HUSBANDS, AS UNTO THE LORD”“As the Church is subject unto Christ,SO LET THE WIVES BE TO THEIR OWN HUSBANDS IN EVERY THING” – “And the wife see that SHE REVERENCE HER HUSBAND”–(Ephesians 5:22-23, 33).
   –Christianity mandates that servants obey their masters as they obey Christ (there are no provisions for their emancipation): “Servants, be OBEDIENTto them that are your masters according to the flesh, with FEAR AND TREMBLING, in singleness of your heart, AS UNTO CHRIST ” – “Servants OBEY IN ALL THINGS your masters, according to the flesh, not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God”–(Ephesians 6:5; Colossians 3:22). 
   –Christianity demands that wives learn in silence and subjection: “Let the woman learn in SILENCEwith ALL SUBJECTION. But I SUFFER NOT A WOMAN TO TEACH, NOR TO USURP AUTHORITY OVER THE MAN but to be IN SILENCE–(1 Tim. 2:11-12);

   –Christianity sells woman into bondage: “And if a man SELL HIS DAUGHTER to be a maidservant …”–(Exodus 21:7)
Christianity condemns Woman to a life of subjection to her husband: “Unto the woman He (God) said ….thy desire shall be to THY HUSBAND, and HE SHALL RULE OVER THEE–(Gen. 3:16). 
   And here is the classic woman-hater. Christianity condemns woman as the “DEFILER” of men. Speaking about the 144,000 who will sit with Jesus (who will be JEWS non-Jews, note well– and will all be MEN) the Bible says: “but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN; for they are VIRGINS”–(Rev: 14:3-4).
This is the lunacy Christians are clamoring to enthrone above Islam.
As noted above the Bible regards woman as “defiler” of man. The Answering Islam Christian critic and apologist on the Internet tried to show that this verse is of figurative meaning. However, that these 144,000 are literal “virgins” “not defiled” by literal “women” is substantiated by the Bible. See Christianity-144,000 virgins & Jesus).
   Surely, to place women in subjection and bondage, to view her as an object of sex, as the transgressor and as defiler of men are hardly expressions of “love.” And Christ as he declared came NOT TO CHANGE THE LAW but TO FULFIL IT–(Matthew 5:17). 
   Whatever lofty status the Christian Woman is enjoying is due only to the dictates of modern culture. Whereas, as already pointed out, Islam has ennobled woman, liberated her, and given her rights unparalleled in the history of religions. She has nothing more for which to strive.

Islam is the Great Liberator of Woman.
Islam is the only Liberator Woman has known.

   Only the peripheral Muslim and the unthinking
would embrace the useless and unGodly crucifix.

*

 NOTES

1. Ali, Muhammad, The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, pp. 78-80.  

2. Ibid; pp. 81-82.

3. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Qur’an And Science, pp. 251, 207, 7, 9, 77, 78, 49, 249, 50, 52-53.

4. Cited in Ahmed Deedat, Is the Bible God’s Word? p.13.  

5. Ency. Brit. 15th Ed. Vol. 13. Paul the Apostle, Saint; p. 1090.

Share