The rejected stone

6.13: The rejected stone

From the promise in Genesis 21:13-18, Jesus (pbuh) spoke of the kingdom of God being taken away from the Jews and given to the rejected stone of  "Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast [him] out of the vineyard, and slew [him]. When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out [his] vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet." Matthew 21:33-46 Indeed, prophethood was transferred from the nation of the Jews to the Jews' rejected stone, the nation of the Arabs (Ishmael's nation, the nation of Muhammad pbuh). Some have misunderstood this verse to refer to Jesus (pbuh) as the rejected stone. This can be seen to be a misinterpretation by simply reading the above verse carefully. Jesus (pbuh), in this parable is obviously drawing a parallel between the actions of the Jews and their killing and stoning of previous prophets, or "servants" in this verse. "Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers" Matthew 23:31-32  In other words, Jesus (pbuh) is speaking to the Jews as a racial entity. The men standing before him did not kill, beat, and stone the previous prophets, rather their forefathers did. But as a nation, they are all responsible. They are following in their forefathers footsteps. What is Jesus (pbuh) telling the Jews? He is telling them that they, as a nation, have abused their position, and therefore, God Almighty will take His kingdom from the Jews and give it to a different "NATION."  How will we know which nation God's prophethood will be transferred to? The verse states that it will be given to the nation of the "rejected stone." Jesus (pbuh) was indeed rejected by the Jews, but he is not the one intended. Why? Because Jesus was a Jew. His disciples were also Jews. Jesus (pbuh) himself even said quite clearly: "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" Matthew 15:24 We also read  "Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou (Jesus), being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria?" John 4:9  He even told his own twelve apostles: "Go not into the way of the Gentiles (non-Jews), and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand" Matthew 10:5-7 To further emphasize this Jesus (pbuh) is quoted as saying:  "But he (Jesus) answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's (Jews) bread, and to cast [it] to dogs (Gentiles)." Matthew 15:26 Is the kingdom of God going to be taken from the Jews and given to the Jews? It is important to notice that the verses wherein Jesus (pbuh) is alleged to have commanded his followers to preach to the whole world (such as Mark 16:15) are either now considered later "insertions" because they are nowhere to be found in the most ancient manuscripts available today (those of the fourth century) such as the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican #1209, and the Armenian version, or refer only to preaching to "all nations" (such as Luke 24:47) which, in order to not conflict with the above verses must be understood to refer to the twelve nations of Israel. This is exactly what the Qur'an says. An example of a reference to the tribes of Isaac as "nations" can be seen in Genesis 17:16. There are other examples, such as the referral to the twelve tribes of Ishmael as twelve "nations" in Genesis 25:16, the referral to the tribes of Ham in Genesis 10:20, the tribes of Shem in Genesis 10:31, the tribes of Noah in Genesis 10:32, and the tribes of Abraham in Genesis 17:5 ......etc. Well, what do Christian scholars have to say about the word "all" in "all nations"? If we go back to one of their foremost references, Strong's concordance, and look up this word and it's meaning we will find that the original Greek word is "pas" {pas}. The following description is given for this word:  ".....'The whole world has gone after him' Did the whole world go after Christ? 'Then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in the Jordan'. Was all Judea or all Jerusalem baptized in the Jordan? 'ye are of God little children', 'and the whole world lieth in the wicked one', Does the whole world there mean everybody? The words 'world' and 'all' are used in some seven or eight senses in the Scripture, and it is very rarely the 'all' means all persons, taken individually...." Strong's Concordance, C.H. Spurgeon from a sermon on Particular Redemption.  Mr. Tom Harpur, says: "Most of Jesus' ministry took place in the Northern district of Israel, the Galilee, and it is clear he thought of his mission as directed to the Jews, not to the world at large" For Christ's Sake, Tom Harpur, p. 35. In the tenth year1 of Muhammad's (pbuh) prophethood, Allah Almighty sent Gabriel with a beast called Al-Buraq in order to take prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from the "Inviolable Mosque" in Makkah to the "Furthest Mosque" in Palestine (currently known as Israel). He was then taken up into the heavens where he saw many of the signs of the Almighty and then he returned to Makkah. All of this happened in one night which was later named the night of "Israa and Miraj" (Travel by night and ascension)*. After this deed was accomplished, Allah revealed to Muhammad (pbuh) the first verses of the chapter of Al-Israa(17). Scholars of the Qur'an from long ago noticed that while the first verse speaks about this occurrence explicitly, the following verses suddenly begin to speak about the children of Israel, the scripture that was sent to them by Allah, and how they shall bring corruption into the earth. These scholars concluded that the verses were revealed in order to confirm the transfer of Allah's covenant from the children of Israel to the Islamic nation and to reveal the reason for this decree. Please read in this regard the parting words of prophet Moses in the Old Testament when he spoke to the children of Israel on his deathbed: "And it came to pass, when moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, That Moses commanded the Levites(Jews), which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt [yourselves], and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands." Deuteronomy 31:25-29 On pages 24-25 of "The five Gospels," written over six years by 24 Christian scholars from a number of Western universities, we read  "Christian conviction eventually overwhelms Jesus: He is made to confess what Christians had come to believe...The charge to announce the good news to the whole world (Mark 13:10 and Matthew 28:18-20) was developed by Paul, Mark and others in the early days of the new movement."  This book has already demonstrated in chapter one how "Saint Paul" was the one primarily responsible for the corruption of the message of Jesus (pbuh). Logic too verifies the Christian recognition that "the great commission" of the above verses was a later insertion of the church and not the words of Jesus (pbuh). This claim can be demonstrated to be supported by logic by observing that had Jesus (pbuh) indeed commissioned his apostles to preach to the whole world, as claimed in the above verses, then obviously they would not differ on this matter later on. However, the Bible tells us that long after this alleged commission, "St. Paul" decided to preach to the Gentiles (non-Jews). We are told in Galatians 2:13-15 that this resulted in a fierce debate and a great difference of opinion between the apostles and Paul (the apostles Peter the Rock, James the son of thunder, and Barnabas on one side, and Paul on the other). This would not have been the case if Jesus (pbuh) had explicitly commanded his apostles to preach to the gentiles and this verse was not a later insertion.  We also notice that Paul only refers to his own philosophy and opinion in his charge of "hypocrisy" against the apostles, never does he quote the alleged command of Jesus (pbuh) wherein he is claimed to have publicly commanded the twelve disciples to preach to the Gentiles. If this verse was not a later insertion, then St. Paul could have very simply defended his point of view by simply quoting Jesus (pbuh). There would be no need for him to say anything more. Thus, these verses are recognized by Christian theologians as later insertions of the Church and not the words of Jesus (pbuh). Since this topic would take up too much time and space to get into here I will suffice with this sampling for now (see section 1.2.2.1 for more on this topic). However, there is another problem which prevents Jesus (pbuh) from being the one intended. If Jesus (pbuh) was indeed the one intended by this verse then we must apply the rest of it to him also. We read.... "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes?.. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder" Matthew 21:42 This rejected stone of the Jews, the nation of Ishmael, would indeed come to be victorious against all comers. The Islamic nation, through the guidance of Allah, and which fought in His name, grew till it stretched from China to Spain and was victorious against all pagan superpowers (including the Persians and the Romans) of it's time. It then went on to raise science to new heights. There was not a single nation that was able to stand in the way of the Muslims who fought in the name of God and died in His cause. Both the Jews and the Christians were either subjugated by the Roman pagans or took them as allies. Jesus (pbuh), could not be this "rejected stone" because he did not fall on the Jews or the Romans and "grind them to powder," nor did they fall on him and become "broken." Quite the contrary, the Bible alleges that Jesus (pbuh) was arrested, beaten, spat on, whipped, kicked, mocked, cut, laughed at, crucified, and then sent to hell for three days. In the mean time, the Romans and Jews went back to business as usual. There is a distinct difference between saying that Jesus (pbuh) died for someone's sin and between saying he fell on nations and ground them to powder, and nations fell on him and were broken. This is the profile of a military leader and not a meek sacrificial lamb of God who tells his followers:  "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have [thy] cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain" Matthew 5:38-41 and also "Then saith he (Jesus) unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." Matthew 22:21 Whilem on the other hand, the Qur'an taught Muhammad (pbuh) and his followers:  "And fight against them until persecution is no more and religion is for God alone. But if they desist then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers" Al-Bakarah(2):194. Many Christians will object "No, Jesus (pbuh) was the one intended." They will explain that the verse is not meant to be taken literally but in an abstract sense. Jesus was prophesying himself. Thus, Jesus did indeed fall on the sinners and grind them to powder and they did fall on him and become broken. In other words, matters of FAITH and not WAR are intended. This is a valid theory, so let us test it:  Those who make these claims will themselves readily acknowledge that the "son of the householder" is Jesus (pbuh) but then they go on to tell you that "the rejected stone" is also Jesus (pbuh). So: If Jesus (pbuh) is both the "son of the householder" and also "the rejected stone," then one would expect there to be some sort of hint in the text associating one with the other. For example, the text could have combined the two terms into "the rejected son." We notice that this is not the case. If the "rejected stone" is an alias for a character previously mentioned in the text, and not a completely new character, then what arguments from the Biblical text can we present that can not just as easily be applied to the other servants (prophets) who were chased away or killed, or even the "householder" (God) himself? In other words, any arguments which are presented from the text will be equally valid for any of the many other prophets who were beaten, stoned, and killed by this nation. In this parable, the first servant (prophet) was beaten and was taken out of the picture. The second was killed and was also taken out of the picture. The third was then stoned and taken out of the picture. Then the son was killed and taken out of the picture. Where does the text indicate that the "son of the householder" has come back to life while the other "servants" remain dead or chased away? Where does the text state the "son" shall come back to life but the other dead servants shall not? The goal of a parable is always to describe a matter in "real-life" terms which can be seen in our every day lives so that we can better understand the point being made. IN REAL LIFE, would we expect a dead son of a householder to come back to life and "miserably destroy" all the husbandmen who killed him, or would we expect the householder to send an army to wipe out the husbandmen who killed his son and servants? The "Householder" in this parable refers to a non-abstract God. The "servants" refer to physical prophets. The "Son of the Householder" refers to a physical Jesus (pbuh), the beating, killing, and stoning of the servants refer to a physical beating, killing, and stoning of the prophets, even the vineyard refers to a physical kingdom of God. But now, in order to make this rejected stone refer to Jesus (pbuh) we must claim that the "grinding and breaking" refer to an ABSTRACT grinding and breaking, thus Jesus (pbuh) is the one intended. Notice how the verse is made to conform to our preconceived concepts and not the other way around? If the "grinding and breaking" referred only to an other-worldly reward for all who do not believe and not an earthly defeat (followed by one in the hereafter), then why did Jesus (pbuh) use the words: "whosoever shall FALL on this stone" and not "whosoever shall REJECT this stone." This would more accurately describe acts of BELIEF and not WAR. Also, if acts of BELIEF were meant and not acts of WAR then there would be no need for "on whomever it shall FALL" otherwise it would be implied that Jesus was forcing people to disbelieve. For example, if a Jew did not believe in Moses (pbuh), would it be more accurate to say: "He REJECTED Moses" or to say "He FELL upon Moses"? If Pharaoh sent an army to kill Moses (pbuh) and the Jews, would it be more accurate to say "Pharaoh FELL upon Moses" or "Pharaoh REJECTED Moses"? These verbs were carefully chosen for a reason. Indeed, if we were to go back to the Bible itself, we would find that the term "fall on" is in fact used to convey the general meaning of "fight", or "to wage war". For example, in Judges we read: "And they said unto him, We are come down to bind thee, that we may deliver thee into the hand of the Philistines. And Samson said unto them, Swear unto me, that ye will not fall upon me yourselves." Judges 15:12 And "And the men were afraid, because they were brought into Joseph's house; and they said, Because of the money that was returned in our sacks at the first time are we brought in; that he may seek occasion against us, and fall upon us, and take us for bondmen, and our asses." Genesis 43:18 And "And they said, The God of the Hebrews hath met with us: let us go, we pray thee, three days' journey into the desert, and sacrifice unto the LORD our God; lest he fall upon us with pestilence, or with the sword." Exodus 5:3 And "Then Zebah and Zalmunna said, Rise thou, and fall upon us: for as the man is, so is his strength. And Gideon arose, and slew Zebah and Zalmunna, and took away the ornaments that were on their camels' necks." Judges 8:21 There are countless other examples, however, these should suffice. Thus, we see that the prophesy is for one who will wage war against those who killed and persecuted the prophets of God. This war against the "killers of the prophets" by this messenger of God would result in "miserably destroying" these transgressors. This prophesy was fulfilled by Muhammad (pbuh) who began by signing pacts and treaties with the Jews. However, after they reneged on their pacts and broke their promises, he fought against them, utterly destroyed them, and finally expelled them from Arabia for all time (see chapter 10).

التعليقات | | Read More...

Tweet

Glorifies Jesus(pbuh)

6.12: Glorifies Jesus(pbuh)

"Beloved, believe not every spirit (prophet), but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." 1 John 4:1-3 This one is very easy to understand: Every prophet who does not confess that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was not sent by God. He is a false prophet. But any prophet that confesses that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was sent by God. What does the Qur'an and Muhammad (pbuh) say about Jesus (pbuh)? They say that a Muslim is not a Muslim if he does not believe in Jesus (pbuh), in his miraculous birth, in his giving life to the dead by God's permission, in his healing of the lepers and the blind by God's permission, in his piety and chastity, in his truthfulness, and in the fact that he was the Messiah (the Christ). The Qur'an contains many verses to this effect. For example, in A'al-Umran(3):40 we read:  "And the angles said 'O Mary, Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name is Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, High honored in this world and the next, of those near stationed to Allah." So now we must ask: Has Muhammad (pbuh) fulfilled this criteria or not? This is all the more remarkable when it is contrasted with the popular opinion of the time such as the claims of the Jews regarding Jesus (pbuh) and his mother Mary (pbuh) as seen in part nine of section 6.3. As a matter of fact, Jesus is referred to by name in the Qur'an fully sixteen times, as compared to only four places in the whole Qur'an where Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name. No other religion in the whole world outside Christianity makes it an article of faith for its adherents to believe in, love and honor Jesus except Islam. Reading the Qur'an bears testimony to that (see for example (19):16-36, A'al-Umran(3):33-68, Al-Nissa(5): 72-77). Here we have thetestimony of Jesus himself in the Bible that Muhammad was a prophet of God. If Jesus' words carry any weight at all with us then we must concede that Muhammad was a prophet of God and therefore spoke in the name of God. Further, Jesus gives a second criteria to judge the truthfulness of a prophet. He says:  "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." Matthew 7:15-20 So, according to the testimony of Jesus, if we wish to know whether prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a true prophet or not we need to see what sort of "fruit" his message produced. A moderately detailed description of these fruits can be found in chapters 9 and 10, however, let us listen to the words of the Hindu Professor K. S. Ramakrishna Rao. He says: "Historical records show that all contemporaries of Muhammad, both friend and foes, acknowledged the sterling qualities, the spotless honesty, the noble virtues, the absolute sincerity, and the absolute trustworthiness of the apostle of Islam in all walks of life and in every sphere of human activity. Even the Jews and those who did not believe in his message accepted him as arbitrator in their personal disputes on account of his scrupulous impartiality" Muhammad the Prophet of Islam, K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, p. 13 (Please read chapter nine for more on the fruit of the message of Muhammad, pbuh)

التعليقات | | Read More...

Tweet

God did not kill Muhammad (pbuh) for speaking in His name

6.11: God did not kill Muhammad (pbuh) for speaking in His name

In Deuteronomy 18:20 we read "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die." Muhammad (pbuh) spoke not just a single word, but dictated a whole book in God's name. For twenty three years he spoke exclusively in the name of God Almighty. He was given one hundred and fourteen chapters, all of which were, and are to this day, recited day after day in God's name. Chapters in the Qur'an begin with the words "In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful." Yet he did not die, but lived to fulfill his message completely. He himself even narrated in the name of God a similar verse in the Qur'an: "And if he (Muhammad) had invented false sayings in Our (God's) name, We would have taken him by the right, then We would have severed from him his aorta, and there is none among you who could have held Us off from him" The noble Qur'an, al-Haaqah(69):46 (Remember that the plural form of this verse is the Arabic plural of respect, not the Christian plural of "Trinity," as seen in chapter 14). If the claims of some are true: That Muhammad (pbuh) was an impostor, then did God go to sleep for twenty three years? Of course not! He knew full well what Muhammad (pbuh) was claiming. If he was not telling the truth, why did God not kill him? Why did he allow him to perpetrate a lie that would span fourteen centuries, and eventually come to cover the globe?

التعليقات | | Read More...

Tweet

Reference to moses, Jesus, and Muhammad (pbut) in that order

6.10: Reference to moses, Jesus, and Muhammad (pbut) in that order

"And this [is] the blessing, wherewith moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a fiery law for them." Deuteronomy 33:1 Fig. 8 The succession of the prophets of God, like the rising sun. This is a chronological succession of prophets which is narrated through reference to location (see Fig. 8). This prophesy is reported at the end of Deuteronomy in association with the story of the death of prophet Moses (pbuh). It was a blessing and glad tidings bestowed by prophet Moses upon his followers just prior to his death. It was designed to give his followers hope upon the occasion of the passing of their prophet that God is not abandoning them, rather, the best is yet to come, and He shall continue to bless mankind with His guidance and His light. Sinai is a reference to Moses (pbuh). It is an obvious reference to mount Sinai where Moses (pbuh) received his revelation (Exodus 19:20).  Seir is a reference to Jesus (pbuh). It is usually associated with the chain of mountains West and South of the Dead Sea extending through Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus (pbuh). It was later extended to include the mountains on the East side as well (Dictionary of the Bible, John L. McKenzie, S.J., p. 783). However, Seir is also identified with the Northern border of the tribal territory of Judah and usually with Saris near Kesla (Chesalon), barely nine miles West of these two cities (The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary, by Allen C. Myers, pp. 921-922, and The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, V4, p. 262) Prophet Moses (pbuh) never in his lifetime entered Palestine, and thus, this could not be a reference to him. As we have already seen in section 6.4, Paran is a reference to the city of Makkah in the Arabian Peninsula. The wilderness of Paran is where Abraham's wife Hagar and his eldest son Ishmael settled (Genesis 21:21) in the Arabian desert, specifically, Makkah. Makkah is, of course, the capital of Islam in Arabia and the birthplace of Mohammed (pbuh). Mount Paran is the chain of mountains in that same region which the Arabs call the "Sarawat mountains". Muhammad (pbuh) received his first revelation in the cave of "Hira'a" located in these mountains (see Fig. 9). Jesus never in his life traveled to Paran. Mohammed, however, was born there. He became the prophet of Islam there. And it was the capital of the Islamic religion in that day and this. No prophet of the Bible ever came from the Arabian city of Paran (Makkah). Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the only prophet of God who has ever fulfilled this prophesy.  We also read in verse 33:2 that a fiery law shall issue forth from the right hand of the prophet from Paran. Muhammad (pbuh) did indeed come with a new law called the Shari'ah. The reference to "right" hand is a reference to strength, justice, and guidance. In Islam, all clean and desirable actions are performed with the "right" hand (eating, shaking hands, etc.), while all other actions are done with the left hand (washing one's private parts, picking up garbage, etc.). In the Qur'an, the good are described on the Day of Judgment as receiving their book of deeds in their "right" hands, while the wicked receive theirs in their "left" hand. This can be seen for example in Al-Haqah(69):13-37. This general attitude is also conveyed in the Bible. We read: "Biblical phrases referring to the right hand reflect a widespread human cultural attitude, namely the recognition that for most people the right hand is both stronger and more adept than the left, and is the hand with which many tasks are instinctively undertaken ... Eccl. 10:2 links 'a wise man's heart' with his right hand, and 'a fool's heart' with his left. When the Son of Man separates the sheep from the goats at the Last Judgment, it is to the damned 'on the left hand' that he says, 'Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire' (Matt. 25:41) ...The right hand is often mentioned as a symbol of strength, both for human beings and anthropomophically for God (e.g. Job 40:14; Isa. 48:13)" A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition In English Literature, David Lyle Jeffrey, p. 442. This fiery law that shall issue from the right hand of the prophet from Paran will be a new law for the children of Israel and not the same one they had been practicing in the time of Moses (pbuh) and later. This is held out by simple logic; if I already own something, then I can not say that my neighbor shall bring "for me" this same "something" which I already own. In such a case, he would have "brought" nothing and it would have been more logical to say he would "confirm" the preexistent law. No prophet of the Bible ever in his lifetime either came from Paran or preached the replacement of the law of Moses (pbuh). Even Jesus (pbuh) came to confirm and reinforce the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17-19), as explained in detail in chapter one. Muhammad (pbuh) is the only prophet of God who fulfilled both of these requirements. However, if we look closely, we will find that the prophesy contains one more requirement. It tells us that this prophet from Paran who will bring a fiery new law shall come with 10,000 saints. Once again, two years before the death of prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in the year 630 AD, he lead 10,000 of his followers to their final and decisive victory against the pagans of Makkah (see chapter 10). This was one of the most bloodless victories of all history. The Muslims took control of Makkah, the capital of paganistic Arabia, virtually without a single casualty. Upon entering Makkah victorious, Muhammad did not take it's inhabitants as prisoners. Even though these people had been torturing himself and his companions, and killing many of them over many years, still, Muhammad commanded that they not be tortured, nor should retribution be sought against them. Rather, he pardoned them all and set them free. Most of them entered into Islam. Once again, we find that prophet Moses (pbuh) was appointed seventy very close and devout followers (Exodus 24:1-9, Numbers 11:16-25). Jesus (pbuh) was appointed eleven very close and devout followers (if we were to exclude Judas), as seen in Matthew 10:1-5, Mark 3:14-19, etc. Prophet Muhammad, once again, was the only one to fulfill this requirement. Mr. Kais Al-Kalbi asks the question:  "When this verse Deut 33:2 was translated from Hebrew to English, the phrase '10,000 saints10,000 saints' was kept the same. But when this verse was translated from Hebrew to Arabic, the phrase '10,000 saints' was intentionally changed to 'holy valley', why?" Prophet Muhammad the last messenger in the Bible, third edition, Kais Al-Kalbi, pp. 231-232. The wording also bears out this chronological succession of prophets. Came: daybreak and the arrival of the sun in the morning. Rose up: like the light of dawn. Shined forth: Mid-day sun which lights up the Earth from East to West. Islam has indeed come to shine all over the earth as the mid-day sun. It is estimated to have 1.2 billion adherents throughout the globe, and according to Western sources, it is said to be the fastest growing religion in the world today.  "This day have I (God) perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):3

التعليقات | | Read More...

Tweet

A rod out of the stem of Jesse

6.9: A rod out of the stem of Jesse

"And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;" Isaiah 11:1-2 Once again, we have here a verse which has been popularly interpreted to apply to Jesus, and once again it must be stated that although all Muslims believe in Jesus and in the prophesies of him in the OT, still, this specific prophesy does not apply to him, why? To understand this prophesy we need to study the verses carefully. These verses tell us that the rod (branch) which shall grow out of the stem (trunk) of "Jesse" shall be filled by God with wisdom, understanding, council, might, knowledge, and the fear of God. In other words, he shall be a statesman, a prophet and a judge. The obvious question that springs to mind is: Who was "Jesse"? In the Encyclopedia Biblica we read that Jesse is a contraction of Ishmael, or:  "Jesse, for Ishmael… The changes which proper names undergo in the mouths of small children account for a large number of these particular abbreviations - who could guess, to take modern examples, that Bob and Dick arose out of Robert and Richard? … such forms as in ai were particularly common in later times … and many more in the Talmud, which also exhibits various other kinds of abbreviation" Encyclopaedia Biblica, Rev. T. K. Cheyne D.Litt D.D., J. Sutherland Black M.A. LL.D., Vol. 3, under "Names," p. 3292, item 52 Now, the reason why these biblical scholars have said this may not be readily apparent to us simply by reading the English rendition of these two words, however, when these Christian scholars went back and looked at the original Hebrew words, that is when they realized it's true meaning. Although a complete understanding of why this is true would require a knowledge of the Hebrew language, still, it is possible at least phonetically to see this even in the English language. Let us have a look.  In Hebrew, the word Ishmael is written as Yishma`e'l. It is pronounced {yish-maw-ale'}. Similarly, in Hebrew, the word Jesse is written as Yishay. It is pronounced {yee-shah'-ee}, or in Aramaic it is 'Iyshay and pronounced {ee-shah'-ee}. Thus, we begin to see, even in our phonetic Hebrew rendition, how these Christian Biblical scholars came to recognize that just as "Dick" is a contraction of "Richard," and "Bob" is a contraction of "Robert," similarly, by studying the Hebrew words themselves, they found that {yee-shah'-ee} is indeed a contraction of {yish-maw-ale'}. Isn't it amazing that we have been told this not by Muslims, but by Christian scholars? Which Muslim "Moor" stood over these Christian scholars with a drawn sword and forced them to come to this realization? Out of the thousands upon thousands of Hebrew names in the Bible, what drove these Christians to recognize that Jesse is derived from Ishmael and not, for example, from Judah, or Isaac, or Shem, or any of these other thousands upon thousands of Hebrew names? The odds against it are astronomical if what the Qur'an said was false. Yet here we have it in black and white. Isn't it amazing how with every passing day the most learned among Christians scholars are drawing closer and closer to Islam? It is further interesting to note the following words of the authors of this same "Encyclopaedia Biblica": They say: "In many cases the contraction is such as to render the discovery of the original form impossible." … hmm. The only "branch" from the stem of Ishmael who was a statesman, a prophet and a judge was prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The reason many people interpret this verse to apply to Jesus (pbuh) is because he is claimed to be of the lineage of king David, and Jesse was the name of the father of king David. However, why would this prophesy tie the coming prophet to the father of David who was for all practical purposes a completely unknown figure in the Bible? It would be much more logical to follow the much more popular trend found elsewhere in the Bible of associating Jesus with king David himself who was both a king and a prophet and a much more popular figure in the Bible and much better known to anyone who reads it. In other words, what is so direly special about king David's father that this prophesy had to completely bypass the legendary prophet king David himself in order to apply itself to his unknown father? The answer is that it was not meant to apply to the father of king David but to a descendant of Ishmael the son of prophet Abraham.  It is further important to remember that insisting on tying prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) to a human lineage descendant from king David shall ultimately result in a complete nullification of the religion known today as "Christianity." This is because if Jesus is the descendant of king David then he has a human father and his father is not God. Some attempts have been made to insist that Jesus was the physical Son of God and at the same time apply spiritual contradictory human lineages to him such as Matthew 1 and Luke 3 so that he can be the physical son of both David and God. This, even though the Bible is quite explicit that the lineage must be a "physical" and not a "spiritual" lineage. We find this stipulation spelled out quite clearly in the Bible in: Acts 2:30 "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;" and Romans 1:3 "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;" Therefore, the only way that Jesus (pbuh) could be the physical Son of God and also be the physical son of king David "according to the flesh" is if his lineage from kind David passes through his (human) mother Mary (pbuh). However, if we were to read the two contradictory lineages found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 we would find that both attempt to make his lineage pass through a human father. In one it is "Joseph the son of Jacob" and in the other is "Joseph the son of Heli." Such practices can only hurt the message of Jesus (pbuh) rather than helping it.

التعليقات | | Read More...

Tweet