Distortion of Isaiah 21:7 (A Proof Text for the Prophesy of Muhammad ﷺ)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

مِنَ الَّذِیۡنَ ہَادُوۡا یُحَرِّفُوۡنَ الۡکَلِمَ عَنۡ مَّوَاضِعِہٖ

Among the Jews are those who pervert words from their proper places

(Surah 4, Ayah 46)

I previously quoted Isaiah chapter 21, verse 7 a prophecy about the holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم who is described as the rider of the camel راكب الجمل

The Jewish scribes, known as the Masoretes, however, distorted the word “rider” in the singular and pluralized it to chariotry. The scholar John C. Reeves says: “evidence supplied by the extant Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Aramaic versions of this passage in Isaiah—textual recensions that predate the linguistic labors of the Masoretes upon biblical manuscripts—clearly demonstrates that those who were reading Isaiah in the pre-Masoretic age were pronouncing the consonantal skeleton רכב as rôkhev, “rider; one riding” (i.e., as if it were written רוכב), in the latter two of the three occurrences. That this participial reading was in fact the more primitive one for the Hebrew text of Isa 21:7 is confirmed by the graphic evidence supplied by the Qumran Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa^a), which has רוכב for רכב in both instances. These considerations suggest that the Muslim reading of the grammar of Isa 21:7 is not unusual at all; rather, it is in line with a normative understanding of the linguistic forms registered there in the centuries prior to the activity of the Masoretes.”

John C. Reeves goes on to say: “It is therefore of signal interest to note that there is at least one instance where it appears that this potentially compelling Muslim reading of a biblical text was adopted by a Jewish exegete, reformulated, and semantically subverted in order to generate a new insight into the imminence of the messianic age. A popular post-Muslim Jewish apocalypse introduced as the Nistarot or Secrets of R. Šim’ôn ben Yohai, a work whose contents span the rise and fall of the Umayyad caliphate, contains in what is arguably its most primitive redaction a suprisingly positive endorsement of the prophetic mission of Muhammad and an intriguing affirmation of the divinely mandated role of Islam in the deliverance of Israel from Byzantine rule...Finally, it is clear that the ‘judaized’ interpretation of Isa 21:7 advanced in the Nistarot, a work compiled from smaller complexes of apocalyptic traditions emanating from the mid-seventh to mid-eighth centuries CE, presumes, as do all the extant pre-Masoretic versions of this oracle, a ‘singular’ understanding of the animal riders; namely, one figure riding an ass and another figure riding a camel. Given the Islamicate cultural context for the bulk of Masoretic textual activity, it is tempting to argue that the inscribed vocalization of the key word רכב in its final two occurrences in Isa 21:7 as rekhev in place of the demonstrably older traditional reading rôkhev signals a conscious yet subtle polemical move on the part of the Masoretic enterprise. Even less subtle is the roughly Arabic ‘translation’ (tafsîr) of Isa 21:7 by R. Saadya Gaon, where the single ‘ass-rider’ and lone ‘camel-rider’ of the pre-Masoretic versions become ‘peoples (!) who are riders of asses and camels,’ a pluralizing rendition that effectively sabotages its prophetological import. Since Isa 21:6-7 had enjoyed some scholarly recognition even within some Jewish circles as a viable proof text for Islam’s divine mandate, it is not difficult to imagine later generations of textual critics seizing this opportunity to counter and subvert a culturally influential yet doctrinally ‘flawed’ textual reading.”

Reeves, J. C. (2005). Trajectories in near eastern apocalyptic: A postrabbinic jewish apocalypse reader. Society of Biblical Literature. (pages 9,10,12)

Sunni vs. Shi'ite Narrative on Early History of Islam

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

A crucial difference in the narratives of the Sunni Muslims and the heretical Shi’ites concerning the early Muslims and the early history of Islam is that the Sunni narrative is positive, viewing the early triumphs of the Muslims and the successful spread of Islam under the Prophet’s immediate Successors as a sign of the Muslims being divinely favored, whereas the Shi’ite narrative implies that the forces of hypocrisy and apostasy prevailed immediately following the passing away of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم

We Muslims recognize the following passage in the Torah to be a glad-tiding of the advent of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

נָבִ֨יא אָקִ֥ים לָהֶ֛ם מִקֶּ֥רֶב אֲחֵיהֶ֖ם כָּמֹ֑וךָ וְנָתַתִּ֤י דְבָרַי֙ בְּפִ֔יו וְדִבֶּ֣ר אֲלֵיהֶ֔ם אֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲצַוֶּֽנּוּ

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him

(Deuteronomy 18:18)

The Holy Quran confirms that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is the promised Prophet who is the likeness of Moses:

اِنَّاۤ اَرۡسَلۡنَاۤ اِلَیۡکُمۡ رَسُوۡلًا ۬ۙ شَاہِدًا عَلَیۡکُمۡ کَمَاۤ اَرۡسَلۡنَاۤ اِلٰی فِرۡعَوۡنَ رَسُوۡلًا

Verily, We have sent you a Messenger, who is a witness over you, even as we sent a Messenger to Pharaoh

(Surah 73, Ayah 15)

It therefore follows that the blessed leadership which the Israelites were under subsequent to the passing away of Moses عليه السلام and the triumphs they were granted during the Conquest of Canaan would be mirrored in this Ummah in the immediate days subsequent to the departure of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم from this world. After Moses passed away he was immediately succeeded by Joshua son of Nun, who was appointed a Prophet by God. Subsequent to Joshua عليه السلام some righteous figures were raised up by God to lead the Israelites, known as the Judges, namely, Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah and Samson. Then a monarchy was established in Israel, beginning with Saul, then Kings David and Solomon. After Solomon عليه السلام the Kingdom of Israel was divided and was given over to a succession of mainly corrupt and evil rulers. But in general, the period from Joshua to Solomon was a blessed period when the Israelites were under a succession of righteous leaders and experienced worldly triumphs and success, a sign of being divinely favored.

In the history of this Ummah, after the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم departure, he was succeeded by four rightly guided Successors, namely, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali رضى الله عنهم and then the monarchy was established for Mu’awiyah رضى الله عنه who ruled for approximately twenty years. Thus the first fifty years of this Ummah’s history was a blessed period that mirrors the history of the Israelites subsequent to Moses, the period of Joshua, the Judges, and the united monarchy under Kings David and Solomon.

Another proof for the Sunni Islamic narrative is the Ayat al-Istikhlaf:

وَعَدَ اللّٰہُ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا مِنۡکُمۡ وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ لَیَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّہُمۡ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ کَمَا اسۡتَخۡلَفَ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِمۡ

Allah has promised to those among you who believe and do good works that He will surely make them Successors in the land, as He made Successors from among those who were before them

(Surah 24, Ayah 55)

The Ayah clearly states that the Succession which this Ummah is promised, on condition of faith and good works, shall mirror the Succession of those who came before, meaning the Israelites and their history of triumph and success in the period that begins with Prophet Joshua and ends with King Solomon as has already been discussed. Now if the early Believers of this Ummah, meaning the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم were not truly pious Believers and were not, in general, doers of good works (as per the false Shi’ite narrative) then how does one explain the establishment of the Religion for them and the success of the Khilafat ar-Rashidah in those early days? The Shi’ite narrative is that subsequent to the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم departure, all of the Sahabah committed apostasy (God forbid!) with the exception of a handful of individuals, and that the forces of hypocrisy and apostasy usurped the leadership of the Ummah. But how could the alleged usurpers then be granted such incredible success and triumphs through which Islam expanded and was established throughout the land? Such a notion of the corrupt forces of hypocrisy and apostasy being granted succession in the land directly opposes Ayat al-Istikhlaf.

Now the so-called Imamiyah, the dominant branch of Shi’ism today, argue that it is impossible and irrational that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم would leave this world without naming his Successor under divine instruction. Ayat al-Istikhlaf is a clear answer to their flimsy argument. Allah عز وجل revealed through this Ayah that He Himself shall bear the responsibility of establishing the Prophet’s succession and bringing about the establishment of this Religion, on condition of the Community’s continued faith and good works. Therefore, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was never meant to name his Successor, Allah Himself would bring it about through means. The Community could trust this would happen as part of their Faith and indeed it did. Through means Allah established for Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه the Khilafah, and during his blessed Khilafah Islam was re-established in the land of Arabia after a brief apostasy from the Bedouin tribes which rebelled but whose rebellion was crushed. Again, the Shi’ite narrative fails to explain that if the Sahabah and Shaikhain رضى الله عنهما were hypocrites and apostates معاذ الله how they came to clash with other factions of apostates during the Ridda Wars. Jesus Christ عليه السلام famously said, when he was accused of exorcising demons with the help of other demons: “And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?” (Matthew 24:26) “And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.” (Mark 3:25)

Woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands (2:79)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

فَوَیۡلٌ لِّلَّذِیۡنَ یَکۡتُبُوۡنَ الۡکِتٰبَ بِاَیۡدِیۡہِمۡ ٭ ثُمَّ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ ہٰذَا مِنۡ عِنۡدِ اللّٰہِ لِیَشۡتَرُوۡا بِہٖ ثَمَنًا قَلِیۡلًا

Woe, therefore, to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: This is from Allah; to gain therewith a paltry sum

(Surah 2, Ayah 79)

Many Muslims cite this Ayah as evidence that the Bible in its present form as printed and distributed by the various Christian Churches is a corrupted text, manufactured by the hands of lying scribes. However, I dissent from such an extreme position. I believe that, insofar as the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible is concerned, it is for the most part an accurate record of the original Revelation that was received by the Israelite Prophets, and explains why much of its content is in perfect accord with the Quran, the Sunnah and the Hadith. When it comes to the so-called New Testament, the four Gospels likewise appear to be, for the most part, an accurate representation of the original Gospel of Jesus, and also an accurate account of his life and teachings. But we Muslims consider Paul of Tarsus a false teacher and one of the antichrists that Jesus himself warned would appear within his community, therefore, I would certainly agree that Surah 2:79 applies to the Epistles of Paul and that of his followers who wrote in his name which the Christians claim is divinely inspired Scripture from God. Concerning the last book in the Bible, the Book of Revelation, I tend to the view that it is, for the most part, an accurate account of a true Vision that one of the followers of Jesus, John of Patmos, beheld. Its contents do, for the most part, accord with the Quran and Hadith.

However, in my humble view, Surah 2:79 is more relevant to some of the much later texts that were written by shameless scribes to attributed their writings to Prophets of the past and claimed these writings were therefore inspired and from God. Here I am referring to the many Gnostic texts, especially the false “Gospels” and “Apocalypses” of the heretical Gnostic and Docetist sects. It is more generally a reference to the pseudepigraphic works composed by the Jews, for example, Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer. It is ironic, therefore, that Surah 2:79 is actually primarily referring to pseudepigraphic works of the Jews and Christians that were composed subsequent to the advent of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

Indeed, it would make more sense for the Quran to condemn such false scriptures and the scribes who manufactured them if it is a phenomenon that is to occur subsequent to the revelation of the Quran, the final divine Scripture. Consequently, Surah 2:79 would also apply to the false scripture known as the Book of Mormon, fabricated by the false prophet Joseph Smith.

Christian Argument "Lords Beside Allah and the Messiah" (9:31) Answered

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Among the foolish attempts by the Christians to prove the divinity of Jesus عليه السلام is arguing from the following Ayah of the Quran:

اِتَّخَذُوۡۤا اَحۡبَارَہُمۡ وَرُہۡبَانَہُمۡ اَرۡبَابًا مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَالۡمَسِیۡحَ ابۡنَ مَرۡیَمَ

They have taken their learned men and their monks for lords beside Allah and the Messiah Son of Mary

(Surah 9, Ayah 31)

Lacking any sense of Arabic grammar and ignoring deliberately the rest of the Quran including the remainder of this very Ayah that emphasizes the Oneness of Allah and manifestly rejects the divinity of Christ عليه السلام the Christians argue that in this Ayah (9:31) it is stated that Allah and the Messiah are both Lord (Rabb).

In Arabic grammar, a noun in the accusative case has a fat-ha on its final alphabet whereas in the genitive case it has a kasra on its final alphabet. So in this Ayah the noun Allahi is in the genitive case, its final alphabet being maksur, the noun al-Masiha Ibna Maryama is clearly in the accusative case, with the words al-Masiha, Ibna and Maryama all ending with maftuh alphabets. So for those who understand basic Arabic grammar, in this Ayah the name Allahi is majrur whereas the name al-Masiha is mansub.

In summary, the Christian argument is easily demolished when it is realized that it is an attempt to deceive by appealing to the rules of English grammar in a translation of the Ayah 9:31 that doesn’t take into account basic Arabic grammar. A more faithful English rendering of Ayah 9:31 in accordance with basic rules of Arabic grammar is:

They have taken their learned men, their monks and the Messiah Son of Mary for lords beside Allah

The Ayah continues:

وَمَاۤ اُمِرُوۡۤا اِلَّا لِیَعۡبُدُوۡۤا اِلٰـہًا وَّاحِدًا ۚ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ ؕ سُبۡحٰنَہٗ عَمَّا یُشۡرِکُوۡنَ

And they were not commanded but to worship One God. There is no god but He. Holy is He from that which they associate with Him!

Angels will Protect the Messiah (Psalm 91:11-12)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

According to the Christian Gospels, the Devil took Jesus to the pinnacle of the Temple and said to him: “If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone” (Matthew 4:6)

Apparently, this is a reference to Psalm 91, recognized by the Christians as Messianic, meaning it is concerning the Messiah Jesus: “For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone” (Psalm 91:11-12)

The Psalm not only speaks of the Angels protecting the Messiah but also bearing him up, an allusion to his ascension into Heaven.

If indeed this Psalm is a prophecy concerning the Messiah, that God shall order the Angels to grant him complete protection such that even his foot should not be injured by a stone, then the Christian belief that Jesus was murdered on the cross becomes extremely problematic. As a matter of fact, Psalm 91 is full of statements that indicate the Messiah is to be saved from his enemies: “Surely he will deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence” (Psalm 91:3), “A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee” (Psalm 91:7), “There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling” (Psalm 91:10), “Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name. He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him. With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation” (Psalm 91:14-16)

It is indeed incredible that every Psalm cited or alluded to in the Christian Gospels, emphatically affirms that God shall protect him and deliver him from the hand of his enemy!

See my previous article quoting many Messianic Psalms on this subject.

I Restrained the Children of Israel From You (5:110)

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Blessing and peace be upon you, my master, Apostle of God!

And upon your family and your companions, my master, Apostle of God!

May my father and mother be ransomed for your sake, Apostle of God!

Allah جلّ جلاله says:

وَاِذۡ کَفَفۡتُ بَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ عَنۡکَ

And when I restrained the Children of Israel from you (Jesus)

(Surah 5, Ayah 110)

This is interpreted to mean that the hostile Jews who disbelieved in the Messiah عليه السلام were prevented from killing him, as Allah says:

وَمَا قَتَلُوۡہُ وَمَا صَلَبُوۡہُ وَلٰکِنۡ شُبِّہَ لَہُمۡ

And they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, rather it was made to appear as such to them

(Surah 4, Ayah 157)

The people historically and presently differ greatly concerning the matter of Jesus’s death and crucifixion. The Jews boast that they murdered him, as Allah says:

وَّقَوۡلِہِمۡ اِنَّا قَتَلۡنَا الۡمَسِیۡحَ عِیۡسَی ابۡنَ مَرۡیَمَ رَسُوۡلَ اللّٰہِ

And their saying, “Verily, we killed the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”

(ibid)

And this arrogant boast of the Jews about having killed Jesus Christ is mentioned in their Talmud too: “Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, ‘He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whosoever has anything to say in his defense, let him come and declare it.’ As nothing was brought forward in his defense, he was hanged on Passover Eve.” (Sanhedrin 43a)

Some people object that why would the Jews, when claiming responsibility for having murdered Jesus عليه السلام refer to him as the Messiah and the Messenger of God? One possibility is that this is Allah’s own description of Jesus and not how the Jews referred to him. Another possibility is that the Jews said this sarcastically, in an apparent jest. The Gospels also state that the enemies of Jesus would call him “King of the Jews” out of mockery (Matthew 27:29) and that a sign reading INRI, a Latin acronym meaning Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews, was placed on the cross upon which Jesus was apparently crucified.

Many secular historians likewise tend to believe that Jesus was killed by means of crucifixion, though his execution was not carried out directly by the Jews but by the Romans under the authority of Pilate.

The Christians believe that Jesus was crucified and died on the cross but that he was subsequently resurrected and then ascended to Heaven, to sit at the right hand of God “the Father”. Their belief about Jesus’s resurrection and ascension are naturally rejected by the Jews and secular historians who affirm the historical existence of Jesus (as opposed to the Mythicists who say Jesus was not a historical person and never existed).

Among Muslims too there are a variety of views. Most Muslims believe Jesus was never put on the cross, that he ascended to Heaven before his enemies could capture him and that someone else was crucified in his place. This is known as the Substitution Theory. Others, especially the Qadianis who are a heretical sect that are in fact not Muslim, teach the Swoon Theory, which is that Jesus was placed on the cross but did not die, rather he merely swooned, and regained consciousness a few days after having been taken down from the cross presumed dead while in reality he was alive the whole time. The Qadianis deny that Jesus ascended to Heaven and teach that instead he migrated eastward eventually settling in present-day Kashmir where he is supposedly buried. Some others, especially the Isma’ili sect, believe Jesus really was crucified and died on the cross. According to them, when the Quran denies that the Jews killed or crucified him it means they were unable to kill his soul, but his physical body or apparent being was indeed killed.

But Allah عز وجل says about all this confusion and differing over this matter:

وَاِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ اخۡتَلَفُوۡا فِیۡہِ لَفِیۡ شَکٍّ مِّنۡہُ ؕ مَا لَہُمۡ بِہٖ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍ اِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ

And, verily, those who differ therein are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge about it except the following of conjecture

(Surah 4, Ayah 157)

Ultimately it has to be admitted that nothing may be said about this matter, the alleged crucifixion of Jesus and his apparent dying on the cross, with any degree of certainty unless there is decisive Revelation on the matter. Everything else, including the various theories, must be termed nothing more than speculation. Based on the Revelation of the Quran we can know for certainty only a few matters, that Allah restrained the Jews from Jesus and ultimately saved him, that it seemed as though Jesus was killed or crucified, but in reality the Jews did not kill him, and that Allah did raise Jesus to Himself. This is all that is required for a Muslim to believe. There is no definitive basis to believe that Jesus was actually placed on the cross and either was killed or simply swooned as a result of that crucifixion, or to believe that someone else was made to look like Jesus and that person was crucified in his place, or to believe that Jesus was resurrected as the Christians say, or to believe that Jesus died already.

As a Sunni Muslim I affirm my belief that Jesus is the promised Messiah, that he is a Messenger of God and a Prophet that Allah sent to the Children of Israel, that he was born with a virgin birth to Mary without any father or male agency, that he performed many miracles like restoring sight to the blind, healing lepers from their leprosy and raising the dead back to life, that Allah raised him to the Heavens up to Himself, and that he will descend back into this world during the End Times. As a Muslim I also believe he is a mortal human and not God incarnated in the flesh as the Christians believe.