Powered By Blogger

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Christ in Islam



Chapter One : Christian Muslim Responses

Debate on TV

At the end of the debate - "Christianity and Islam" - which appeared on the SABC-TV program "Cross Questions" on Sunday 5th June 1983, the Chairman, Mr. Bill Chalmers commented: "I think it can be said from this discussion that there is, at present, somewhat more accommodation on the Islamic side for the founder of Christianity than there is on the Christian side for the founder of Islam. What the significance of that is, we leave it to you, the viewer, to determine, but I do think you will agree that it is a good thing that we are talking together."

"Bill" as he is popularly addressed, without any formalities, on all his programs, by all his panelists, is extremely charming and stupendous in his humility. He is a picture of what the Holy Quran portrays of a good Christian:

"...And nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say: 'We are Christians': because among these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world. And they are not arrogant." (The Holy Quran 5:82)


Jesus - His Status

Were the Muslims on the panel trying to placate the viewers out policy, deceit or diplomacy? Nothing of the kind! They were only articulating what God Almighty had commanded them to say in the Holy Quran. As Muslims, they had no choice. They had said in so many words: "We Muslims believe, that Jesus was one of the mightiest messengers of God that he was the Christ, that he was born miraculously without any male intervention (which many modern-day Christians do not believe today), that he gave life to the dead by God's permission and that he healed those born blind and the lepers by god's permission. In fact, no Muslim is a Muslim if he or she does not believe in Jesus!"


Pleasant Surprise

Over 90% of the people who witnessed this debate must have been pleasantly, but skeptically, surprised. They might have not believed their ears. They must have surmised that the Muslims were playing to the gallery - that they were trying to curry favor with their fellow Christian countrymen; that if the Muslims would say a few good words about Jesus, then in reciprocation the Christians might say a few good words about Muhammed (may the peace and the blessings of God be upon all His righteous servants, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed...etc.); that I scratch your back and you scratch my back - which would be a sham or hypocrisy.


Hate Cultivated

We cannot blame the Christians for their skepticism. They have been so learned for centuries. They were trained to think the worst of the man Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, and his religion. How aptly did Thomas Carlyle say about his Christian brethren over a hundred and fifty years ago: "The lies which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammed) are disgraceful to ourselves only." We Muslims are partly responsible for this. We have not done anything substantial to remove the cobwebs.


Ocean of Christianity

South Africa is an ocean of Christianity. If Libya boasts the highest percentage of Muslims on the continent of Africa, then the Republic of South Africa would also be entitled to boast the highest percentage of Christians. In this ocean of Christianity the R.S.A. - the Muslims are barely 2% of the total population. We are a voteless minority - numerically, we count for nothing; politically, we count for nothing; and economically, one white man, as Oppenheimer, could buy out the whole lot of us, lock, stock and barrel.

So if we had feigned to appease, we might be excused. But no! We must proclaim our Master's Will; we must declare the Truth, whether we liked it or not. In the words of Jesus: "Seek ye the truth, and the truth shall set you free" (John 8:32).

Chapter Two : Jesus in the Quran

Christians Unaware

The Christian does not know that the true spirit of charity which the Muslim displays, always, towards Jesus and his mother Mary spring from the fountainhead of his faith - the Holy Quran. He does not know that the Muslim does not take the holy name of Jesus, in his own language, without saying Eesa, alaihi assalam ("Jesus, peace be upon him")

The Christian does not know that in the Holy Quran Jesus is mentioned twenty five times. For example:

"We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit" (The Holy Quran 2:87)

"O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary..." (3:45)

"...Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of god..." (4:171)

"...And in their foot steps we sent Jesus the son of Mary..." (5:46)

"And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous." (6:85)


Jesus - His Titles

Though Jesus is mentioned by name in twenty-five places in the Holy Quran, he is also addressed with respect as: Ibn Maryam, meaning "The son of Mary"; and as the Maseeh (in Hebrew it is the Messiah), which is translated as "Christ". He is also known as Abdullah, "The servant of Allah"; and as Rasul u Allah, the messenger of Allah.

He is spoken of as "The Word of God", as "The Spirit of God", as a "Sign of God", and numerous other epithets of honor spread over fifteen different chapters. The Holy Quran honors this mighty messenger of God, and the Muslims have not fallen short over the past fourteen hundred years in doing the same. There is not a single disparaging remark in the entire Quran to which even the most jaundiced among the Christians can take exception.


Eesa Latinised to "Jesus"

The Holy Quran refers to Jesus as Eesa, and this name is used more times than any other title, because this was his "Christian" name. Actually, his proper name was Eesa (Arabic), or Esau (Hebrew); classical Yeheshua, which the Christian nations of the West latinised as Jesus. Neither the "J" nor the second "s" in the name Jesus is to be found in the original tongue - they are not found in the Semitic languages.

The word is very simply "E S A U" a very common Jewish name, used more than sixty times in the very first booklet alone of the Bible, in the part called "Genesis". There was at least one "Jesus" sitting on the "bench" at the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin. Josephus the Jewish historian mentions some twenty five Jesus' in his "Book of Antiquities". The New Testament speaks of "Bar-Jesus" a magician and a sorcerer, a false prophet (Acts 13:6); and also "Jesus-Justus" a Christian missionary, a contemporary of Paul (Colossians 4:11). These are distinct from Jesus the son of Mary. Transforming "Esau" to (J)esu(s) - Jesus - makes it unique. This unique (?) name has gone out of currency among the Jews and the Christians from the 2nd century after Christ. Among the Jews, because it came to be a name of ill - repute, the name of one who blasphemed in Jewry; and among the Christians because it came to be the proper name of their God. The Muslim will not hesitate to name his son Eesa because it is an honored name, the name of a righteous servant of the Lord.


Chapter Three : Mother And Son

Mary Honored

The birth of Jesus Christ is described in two places of the Quran - chapter 3 and chapter 19. Reading from the beginning of his birth, we come across the story of Mary, and the esteemed position which she occupies in the House of Islam, before the actual annunciation of the birth of Jesus is given:

"'Behold'! the angels said: 'O Mary! God hath chosen thee and purified thee, and chosen thee above the women of all nations" (3:42)

"Chosen thee above the women of all nations." Such an honor is not to be found given to Mary even in the Christian Bible! The verse continues:

"O Mary! Worship thy Lord devoutly: prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with those who bow down." (3:43)


Divine Revelation

What is the source of this beautiful and sublime recitation which, in its original Arabic, moves men to ecstasy and tears? verse 44 below explains:

"This is part of the tidings, of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O Muhammad!) by inspiration: Thou wast not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mary: nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point)." (3:44)


Mary's Birth

The story is that the maternal grandmother of Jesus, Hannah, had hitherto been barren. She poured out her heart to God: If only God will grant her a child, she would surely dedicate such a child for the service of God in the temple.

God granted her prayer and Mary was born. Hannah was disappointed. She was yearning for a son, but instead she delivered a daughter; and in no way is the female like the male, for what she had in mind. What was she to do? She had made a vow to God. She waited for Mary to be big enough to fend for herself.

When the time came, Hannah took her darling daughter to the temple, to hand over for temple services. Every priest wanted to be the god-father of this child. They cast lots with arrows for her - like the tossing of the coin - head or tail?
eventually she fell to the lot of Zakariya, but not without a dispute.


The Source of His Message

This was the story. But where did Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, get this knowledge from? He was an Ummi, Arabic for "unlettered". He did not low how to read or write. He is made by God Almighty to answer this very question in the verse above, by saying that it was all by divine inspiration. "No!", says the controversialist. "This is Muhammed's own concoction. He copied his revelations from the Jews and Christians. He plagiarized it. He forged it."

Knowing full-well, and believing as we do, that the whole Quran is the veritable Word of God, we will nevertheless agree, for the sake of argument, with the enemies of Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, for a moment, that he wrote it. We can now expect some cooperation from the unbelievers.

Ask him: "Have you any qualms in agreeing that Muhammed was an Arab?" Only an ignorant will hesitate to agree. In that case there is no sense in pursuing any discussion. Cut short the talk. Close the book!

With the man of reason, we proceed. "That this Arab, in the first instance, was addressing other Arabs. He was not talking to Indian Muslims, Chinese Muslims, or Nigerian Muslims. He was addressing his own people, the Arabs. Whether they agreed with him or not, he told them in the most sublime form, words that were seared into the hearts and minds of his listeners that Mary the mother of Jesus, a Jewess, was chosen above the women of all nations. Not his own mother, nor his wife nor his daughter, nor any other Arab woman, but a Jewess! Can one explain this? Because to everyone his own mother or wife, or daughters would come before other women.

Why would the prophet of Islam honor a woman from his opposition! and a Jewess at that! belonging to a race which had been looking down upon his people for three thousand years? Just as they still look down upon their Arab brethren today."


Sarah and Hagar

The Jews learn, from the Bible, that their father, Abraham, had two wives Sarah and Hagar. They say that they are the children of Abraham through Sarah his legitimate wife; that their Arab brethren have descended through Hagar, a "bondwoman", and that as such, the Arabs are an inferior breed.

Will anyone please explain the anomaly as to why Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, if he is the author, chose this Jewess for such high honor? The answer is simple, he had no choice he had no right to speak of his own desire. "It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him." (53:4)


The Chapter of Maryam

There is a Chapter in the Holy Quran, named Surat u Maryam "Chapter Mary", named in honor of Mary the mother of Jesus Christ, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him; again, such an honor is not to be found given to Mary in the Christian Bible. Out of the 66 books of the Protestants and 73 of the Roman Catholics, not one is named after Mary or her son. You will find books named after Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul and two score more obscure names, but not a single one is that of Mary!

If Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, was the author of the Holy Quran, then he would not have failed to include in it with Mary, the mother of Jesus, his own mother Aamina, his dear wife Khadija, or his beloved daughter Fatima. But No! No! This can never be. The Quran is not his handiwork!.


Chapter Four : The Good News
" 'Behold!' the angels said: 'O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him: his name will be Jesus, the son of Mary; held in honor in this world and the hereafter; and (of the company of) those nearest to Allah." (3:45)

"Nearest to God," not physically nor geographically, but spiritually. Compare this with "And (Jesus) sat on the right hand of God." (Mark 16:19). The bulk of Christendom has misunderstood this verse as well as many others in the Bible. They imagine the Father (God) sitting on a throne, a glorified chair, and His Son, Jesus, sitting on His right hand side. Can you conjure up the picture? If you do, you have strayed from the true knowledge of God. He is no old Father Christmas. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. He exists. He is real, but He is not like anything we can think of, or imagine.

In eastern languages "right hand" meant a place of honor, which the Holy Quran more fittingly describes as "In the company of those nearest to Allah." The above verse confirms that Jesus is the Christ. and that he is the Word which God bestowed upon Mary. Again, the Christian reads into these words, a meaning which they do not carry. They equate the word "Christ" with the idea of a god-incarnate; and the "Word" of God to be God.

"Christ" Not a Name

The word "Christ" is derived from the Hebrew word Messiah, Arabic Maseeh. Root word masaha, meaning "to rub", "to massage", "to anoint". Priests and kings were anointed when being consecrated to their offices. But in its translated Grecian form, "Christ" seems unique: befitting Jesus only.

Christians like to translate names into their own language; like Cephas to "Peter" , Messiah to "Christ". How do they do that? Very easily. Messiah in Hebrew means "Anointed". The Greek word for anointed is Christos. Just lop off the 'os' from Christos, and you are left with "Christ"; a unique name!

Christos means "Anointed", and anointed means appointed in its religious connotation. Jesus, peace and blessing be upon him, was appointed (anointed) at his baptism by John the Baptist, as God's Messenger. Every prophet of God is so anointed or appointed. The Holy Bible is replete with the "anointed" ones. In the original Hebrew, he was made a Messiah. Let us keep to the English translation "anointed."

Not only were prophets and priests and kings anointed (Christos-ed), but horns, and cherubs and lamp-posts also.

"I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar ..." (Genesis 31:13)

"If the priest that is anointed do sin ..." (Leviticus 4:3)

"And Moses... anointed the tabernacle and all things that was therein..." (Leviticus 8:100)

"..the Lord shall...exalt the horn of his anointed" (I Samuel 2:10)

"Thus saith the Lord to his anointed to Cyrus..." (Isaiah 45:1)

"Thou art the anointed cherub..." (Ezekiel 28:14)

There are an hundred more such references in the Holy Bible. Every time you come across the word "anointed" in your Bible, you can take it that that word would be christos in the Greek translations, and if you take the same liberty with the word that the Christians have done, you will have Christ Cherub, Christ Cyrus, Christ Priest and Christ Pillar, ...etc.

Some Titles Exclusive

Although, every prophet of God is an anointed one of God, a Messiah, the title Maseeh or Messiah, or its translation "Christ" is exclusively reserved for Jesus, the son of Mary, in both Islam and in Christianity. This is not unusual in religion. There are certain other honorific titles which may be applied to more than one prophet, yet being made exclusive to one by usage: like "Rasulullah", meaning "Messenger of God", which title is applied to both Moses (19:51) and Jesus (61:6) in the Holy Quran. Yet "Rasullullah" has become synonymous only with Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, among Muslims.

Every prophet is indeed a "Friend of God", but its Arabic equivalent "Khalillullah" is exclusively associated with Father Abraham. This does not mean that the others are not God's friends. "Kaleemullah", meaning "One who spoke with Allah" is never used for anyone other than Moses, yet we believe that God spoke with many of His messengers, including Jesus and Muhammed, may the peace and blessings of God be upon all His servants. Associating certain titles with certain personages only, does not make them exclusive or unique in any way. We honor all in varying terms.

Whilst the good news was being announced (verse 45 above) Mary was told that her unborn child will be called Jesus, that he would be the Christ, a "Word" from God, and that...

"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous." (3:46)

"At length she brought the (babe) to her people carrying him. They said: 'O Mary! truly a strange thing has thou brought!'. 'O sister of Aaron!, thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!' " (The Holy Quran 19:27-28)


Jews Amazed

There is no Joseph the carpenter here. The circumstances being peculiar, Mary the mother of Jesus had retired herself to some remote place in the East (19:16). After the birth of the child she returns.

A. Yusuf Ali, comments in his popular English translation of the Quran:

"The amazement of the people knew no bounds. In any case they were prepared to think the worst of her, as she had disappeared from her kin for some time. But now she comes, shamelessly parading a babe in her arms! How she had disgraced house of Aaron, the fountain of priesthood!

"Sister of Aaron": Mary is reminded of her high lineage and the unexceptionable morals of her father and mother. How, they said, she had fallen, and disgraced the name of her progenitors!

What could Mary do? How could she explain? Would they, in their censorious mood accept her explanation? All she could do was to point to the child, who, she knew, was no ordinary child. And the child came to her rescue. By a miracle he spoke, defended his mother, and preached to an unbelieving audience."

Allah azza wa jall says in the Quran:

"But she pointed to the babe. They said: 'How can we talk one who is a child in the cradle?' He (Jesus) said: 'I am indeed a servant of Allah (God) : He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet: 'and He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I live. '(He hath made me) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest; 'So Peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life again)'!" (19:29-33)


His First Miracle(s)

Thus Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, defended his mother from the grave calumny and innuendoes of her enemies. This is the very first miracle attributed to Jesus in the Holy Quran that, he spoke as an infant from his mother's arms. Contrast this with his first miracle in the Christian Bible which occurred when he was over thirty years of age:

"And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, they have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, 'Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.' His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And there were set there six water pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water pots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." (John 2:110)

Since this miracle, wine has flowed like water in Christendom. Many reason that what was good for the Master is good enough for them. Jesus was no "kill-joy" they say. Didn't he make good potent wine, that even those "well drunk", those whose senses had been dulled could make out the difference ? "That the best was kept for the last.". This was no pure grape juice. It was the same wine that, according to the Christian Bible, enabled the daughters of Lot to seduce their father (Genesis 19:32-33).It was the same wine which the Christian is advised to eschew in Ephesians 5:18 - "And be not drunk with wine..."

It is that innocent (?) 1% potency that eventually leads millions down into the gutter. America has 10 million drunkards in the midst of 70 million "born-again" Christians! The Americans call their drunkards "Problem Drinkers". In South Africa, they are called "Alcoholics"; drunkard is too strong a word for people to stomach.

But the Prime Minister of Zambia, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, does not hesitate to call a spade a spade. He says, "I am not prepared to lead nation of drunkards", referring to his own people who drink intoxicants.

Whether the water "blushed" or not "seeing" Jesus, we cannot blame him or his disciples for the drinking habits of his contemporaries. For he had truly opined, "have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now" (John 16:12). Mankind had not reached the stage of receiving the whole Truth of Islam. Did he not also say "You cannot put new wine into old bottles"? (Matthew 9:17).


"Mother" or "Woman"?

According to St. John, in the fourth verse above, describing the marriage feast at Cana, we are told that Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, behaved insolently towards his mother. He calls her "woman," and to rub more salt into the wound he is made to say "what have I to do with thee?" What connection is there between you and me, or what have I got to do with you? Could he have forgotten that this very "woman" had carried him for nine months, and perhaps suckled him for 2 years, and had borne endless insults and injuries on account of him? Is she not his mother? Is there no word in his language for "mother"?

Strange as it may seem, that while the missionaries boast about their master's humility, meekness and long-suffering, they call him the "Prince of Peace" and they sing that "he was led to the slaughter like a lamb, and like a sheep who before his shearer is dumb, he opened not his mouth", yet they proudly record in the same breath, that he was ever ready with invectives for the elders of his race, and was always itching for a showdown i.e. if their records are true:

"Ye hypocrites!"

"Ye wicked and adulterous generation!"

"Ye whited sephulcres!"

"Ye generation of vipers!"

and now to his mother: "Woman..."


Jesus Defended

Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the Messenger of God, is made to absolve Jesus from the false charges and calumnies of his enemies.

"And He (God Almighty) hath made me (Jesus) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest" (19:31).

On receiving the good news of the birth of a righteous son Mary responds:

"She said: 'O My Lord! how shall I have a son, when no man hath touched me?"

The angel says in reply:

"He said: 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a matter He but sayth o it 'Be,' and it is! And Allah (God) will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah (Law) and the Gospel," (3:47-48).


Chapter Five : Quranic and Biblical Versions

Meeting the Reverend

I was visiting the "Bible House" in Johannesburg. Whilst browsing through the stacks of Bibles and religious books, I picked up an Indonesian Bible and had just taken in hand a Greek - English New Testament, a large, expensive volume. I had not realized that I was being observed by the supervisor of the Bible House. Casually, he walked up to me. Perhaps my beard and my Muslim headgear were an attraction and a challenge? He inquired about my interest in that costly volume. I explained that as a student of comparative religion, I had need for such a book. He invited me to have tea with him in his office. It was very kind of him and I accepted.

Over the cup of tea, I explained to him the Muslim belief in Jesus, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. I explained to him the high position that Jesus occupied in the House of Islam. He seemed skeptical about what I said. I was amazed at his seeming ignorance, because only retired Reverend gentlemen can become Supervisors of Bible Houses in South Africa. I began reciting from verse 42 of chapters 3 of the Holy Quran:

"'Behold!' The angels said: 'O Mary, Allah hath chosen thee...'"

I wanted the Reverend to listen, not only to the meaning of the Quran, but also to the music of its cadences when the original Arabic was recited. Rev. Dunkers (for that was his name) sat back and listened with rapt attention to "Allah's Words".

When I reached the end of verse 49, the Reverend commented that the Quranic message was like that of his own Bible. He said, he saw no difference between what he behaved as a Christian, and what I had read to him. I said: "that was true". If he had come across these verses in the English language alone without their Arabic equivalent, side by side, he would not have been able to guess in a hundred years that he was reading the Holy Quran. If he were a Protestant, he would have thought that he was reading the Roman Catholic Version, if he had not seen one, or the Jehovah's Witness Version or the Greek Orthodox Version, or the hundred and one other versions that he might not have seen; but he would never have guessed that he was reading the Quranic version.

The Christian would be reading here, in the Quran, everything he wanted to hear about Jesus, but in a most noble, elevated and sublime language. He could not help being moved by it.

In these eight terse verses from 42 to 49 we are told:
(a) That Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virtuous woman, and honored above the women of all nations.
(b) That all that was being said was God's own Revelation to mankind.
(c) That Jesus was the "Word" of God.
(d) That he was the Christ that the Jews were waiting for.
(e) That God will empower this Jesus to perform miracles even in infancy.
(f) That Jesus was born miraculously, without any male intervention.
(g) That God will vouchsafe him Revelation.
(h) That he will give life to the dead by God's permission, and that he will heal those born blind and the lepers by God's permission, ... etc.

"Chalk and Cheese"

The most fervent Christian cannot take exception to a single statement or word here. But the difference between the Biblical and the Quranic narratives is that between "chalk and cheese". "To me they are identical, what is the difference?" the Reverend asked. I know that in their essentials both the stories agree in their details, but when we scrutinize them closely we will discover that the difference between them is staggering.

Now compare the miraculous conception as announced in verse 47 of the Holy Quran with what the Holy Bible says:

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was in this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, (as husband and wife) she was found with child of the holy ghost."(Matthew 1:18)


Master Dramatizer

The eminent Billy Graham from the United States of America dramatized this verse in front of 40,000 people in King Park, Durban, with his index finger sticking out and swinging his outstretched arm from right to left, he said: "And the Holy Ghost came and impregnated Mary!" On the other hand St. Luke tells us the very same thing but less crudely. He says, that when the annunciation was made, Mary was perturbed. Her natural reaction was :

"How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" (Luke 1:34) meaning sexually.

The Quranic narrative is:

"She said: O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" (3:47) meaning sexually.

In essence there is no difference between these two statements "seeing I know not a man" and "when no man hath touched me". Both the quotations have an identical meaning. It is simply a choice of different words meaning the same thing. But the respective replies to Mary's plea in the two Books (the Quran and the Bible) are revealing.

The Biblical Version

Says the Bible:

"And the angle answered and said into her : 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee" (Luke 1:35)

Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest overshadow her?" We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful. Now contrast this with the language of the Quran:

The Quranic Version

"He said (the angel says in reply): 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!' " (3:47)

This is the Muslim concept of the birth of Jesus. For God to create a Jesus, without a human father, He merely has to will it. If He wants to create a million Jesus' without fathers or mothers, He merely wills them into existence. He does not have to take seeds and transfer them, like men or animals by contact or artificial insemination . He wills everything into being by His word of command "Be" and "It is".

There is nothing new in what I am telling you, I reminded the Reverend. It is in the very first Book of your Holy Bible, Genesis 1:3 "And God said..." What did He say? He said "Be" and "It was". He did not have to articulate the words. This is our way of understanding the word "Be", that He willed everything into being.

Choice for His Daughter

"Between these two versions of the birth of Jesus, the Quranic version and the Biblical version, which would you prefer to give your daughter ?" I asked the supervisor of the Bible House. He bowed his head down in humility and admitted "The Quranic Version."

How can "a forgery" or "an imitation", as it is alleged of the Quran, be better than the genuine, the original, as it is claimed for the Bible? It can never be, unless this Revelation to Muhammed is what it, itself, claims to be viz. The pure and holy Word of God! There are a hundred different tests that the unprejudiced seeker after truth can apply to the Holy Quran and it will qualify with flying colors to being a Message from on High.

Like Adam

Does the miraculous birth of Jesus make him a God or a "begotten" son of God? No! says the Holy Quran:

"The similitude of Jesus before Allah (God) is that of Adam; He created him from dust then said to him: 'Be', and he was." (3:59)

Yusuf Ali, comments in his notes in the Quran translation:

"After a description of the high position which Jesus occupies as a prophet in the preceding verses we have a repudiation of the dogma that he was God, or the son of God, or any thing more than man. If it is said that he was born without a human father, Adam was also so born. Indeed Adam was born without either a human father or mother. As far as our physical bodies are concerned they are mere dust.

In God's sight Jesus was as dust just as Adam was or humanity is. The greatness of Jesus arose from the divine command 'Be': for after that he was more than dust a great spiritual leader and teacher"

The logic of it is that, if being born without a male parent entitles Jesus to being equated with God, then, Adam would have a greater right to such honor, and this no Christian would readily concede. Thus, the Muslim is made to repudiate the Christian blasphemy.

Further, if the Christian splits hairs by arguing that Adam was "created" from the dust of the ground, whereas Jesus was immaculately "begotten" in the womb of Mary, then let us remind him that, even according to his own false standards, there is yet another person greater than Jesus, in his own Bible . Who is this superman?

Paul's Innovation

"For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God... Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life..." (Hebrews 7:1,3)

Here is a candidate for Divinity itself, for only God Almighty could possess these qualities. Adam had a beginning (in the garden), Jesus had a beginning (in the stable); Adam had an end and, claim the Christians, so had Jesus "and he gave up the ghost". But where is Melchisedec? Perhaps he is hibernating somewhere like Rip Van Winkel (a fairy tale character who slept for many ages.)

And what is this "Hebrews"? It is the name of one of the Books of the Holy Bible, authored by the gallant St. Paul, the self appointed thirteenth apostle of Christ. Jesus had twelve apostles, but one of them (Judas) had the Devil in him. So the vacancy had to be filled, because of the "twelve" thrones in heaven which had to be occupied by his disciples to judge the children of Israel (Luke 22:30).

Saul was a renegade Jew, and the Christians changed his name to "Paul", probably because "Saul" sounds Jewish. This St. Paul made such a fine mess of the teachings of Jesus, peace blessings be upon him, that he earned for himself the second most coveted position of "The Most Influential Men of History" in the monumental work of Michael H. Hart: The 100 or The Top Hundred or the Greatest Hundred in History. Paul outclasses even Jesus because, according to Michael Hart, Paul was the real founder of present day Christianity. The honor of creating Christianity had to be shared between Paul and Jesus, and Paul won because he wrote more Books of the Bible than any other single author, whereas Jesus did not write a single word.

Paul needed no inspiration to write his hyperboles here and in the rest of his Epistles. Did not Hitler's Minister of Propaganda Goebbels say: "The bigger the lie the more likely it is to be believed'? But the amazing thing about this exaggeration is that no Christian seems to have read it. Every learned man to whom I have shown this verse to, seemed to be seeing it for the first time. They appear dumbfounded, as described by the fitting words of Jesus:

"...seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." (Matthew 13:13)

The Holy Quran also contains a verse which fittingly describes this well cultivated sickness:

"Deaf, dumb and blind, will they not return (to the path)." (2:18)

The Sons of God

The Muslim takes strong exception to the Christian dogma that "Jesus is the only begotten son, begotten not made". This is what the Christian is made to repeat from childhood in his catechism. I have asked learned Christians, again and again as to what they are really trying to emphasize, when they say: "Begotten not made".

They know that according to their own God given (?) records, God has sons by the tons:

"...Adam, which was the son of God."(Luke 3:38)

"That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair... And when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them..." (Genesis 6: 2,4)

"...Israel is My son, even My firstborn:" (Exodus 4:22)

"...for I (God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn." (Jeremiah 31:9)

"...the Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art My son: this day have I begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7)

"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 18:14)

Can't you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God". It was a metaphorical descriptive term commonly used among the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but Jesus was not like that". Adam was made by God. Every living thing was made by God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer of all. Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the "begotten" son of God, not a created son of God ?

Begotten Means "Sired"!

In my forty years of practical experience in talking to learned Christians, not a single one has opened his mouth to hazard an explanation of the phrase "begotten not made". It had to be an American who dared to explain. He said : "It means, sired by God." "What!?" I exploded : "Sired by God?" "No, no!" he said, "I am only trying to explain the meaning, I do not believe that God really sired a son."

The sensible Christian says that the words do not literally mean what they say. Then why do you say it? Why are you creating unnecessary conflict between the 1,200,000,000 Christians and a thousand million Muslims of the world in making senseless statements?

Reason for Objection

The Muslim takes exception to the word "begotten", because begetting is an animal act, belonging to the lower animal functions of sex. How can we attribute such a lowly capacity to God? Metaphorically we are all the children of God, the good and the bad, and Jesus would be closer to being the son of God than any one of us, because he would be more faithful to God then any one of us can ever be. From that point of view he is preeminently the son of God.

Although this pernicious word "begotten" has now unceremoniously been thrown out of the "Most Accurate" version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V.), its ghost still lingers on in the Christian mind, both black and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the white man is made to feel superior to his black Christian brother of the same Church and Denomination. And in turn, the black man is given a permanent inferiority complex through this dogma.

Brain-washed Inferiority

The human mind can't help reasoning that since the "begotten son" of an African will look like an African, and that of a Chinaman as a Chinese, and that of an Indian like an Indian: so the begotten son of God aught naturally to look like God. Billions of beautiful pictures and replicas of this "only begotten son of God" are put in peoples hands. He looks like a European with blonde hair, blue eyes and handsome features like e one I saw in the "King of Kings" or "The Day of Triumph" or "Jesus of Nazareth". Remember Jeffrey Hunter? The "Savior" of the Christian is more like a German than a Jew with his polly nose. So naturally, if the son is a white man, the father would also be a white man (God?). Hence the darker skinned races of the earth subconsciously have the feeling of inferiory ingrained in their souls as God's "step children". No amount of face creams, skin lighteners and hair straighteners will erase the inferiority.

God is neither black nor white. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. Break the mental shackles of a Caucasian (white) man-god, and you have broken the shackles of a permanent inferiority. But intellectual bondages are harder to shatter: the slave himself fights to retain them.


Chapter Six : Answer to Christian Dilemmas

"Christ in Islam" is really Christ in the Quran: and the Holy Quran has something definite to say about every aberration of Christianity. The Quran absolves Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, from all the false charges of his enemies as well as the misplaced infatuation of his followers. His enemies allege that he blasphemed against God by claiming Divinity. His misguided followers claim that he did avow Divinity, but that was not blasphemy because he was God. What does the Quran say ?

Addressing both the Jews and the Christians, Allah says:

"O People of the Book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah (God) aught but the truth. Christ Jesus son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah (God), and His Word, which he bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah (God) and His messengers..." (4:171)

Going to Extremes

"O People of the Book" is a very respectful title with which the Jews and the Christians are addressed in the Holy Quran. In other words, Allah is saying "O Learned People!", "O People with a Scripture!" According to their own boast, the Jews and the Christians prided themselves over the Arabs, who had no Scripture before the Quran. As a learned people, Allah pulls up both the contending religionists for going to either extremes as regards the personality of Christ.

The Jews made certain insinuations about the legitimacy of Jesus and charged him of blasphemy by twisting his words. The Christians read other meanings into his words; wrench words out of their context to make him God.

The modern day Christian, the hot - gospeller, the Bible thumper, uses harsher words and cruder approaches to win over a convert to his blasphemies.

He says:
(a) "Either Jesus is God or a liar"
(b) "Either Jesus is God or a lunatic"
(c) "Either Jesus is God or an impostor"
These are his words, words culled from Christian literature. Since no man of charity, Muslim or otherwise, can condemn Christ so harshly as the Christian challenges him to do, perforce he must keep non-committal. He thinks he must make a choice between one or the other of these silly extremes. It does not occur to him that there is an alternative to this Christian conundrum.

Sensible Alternative

Is it not possible that Jesus is simply what he claimed to be, a prophet, like so many other prophets that passed away before him? Even that he is one of the greatest of them, a mighty miracle worker, a great spiritual teacher and guide - the Messiah!. Why only God or Lunatic? Is "lunacy" the opposite of "Divinity" in Christianity? What is the antonym of God? Will some clever Christian answer?

The Quran lays bare the true position of Christ in a single verse, followed by a note by Yusuf Ali's:

"That he was the son of a woman, Mary, and therefore a man;"
"But a messenger, a man with a mission from Allah (God), and therefore entitled to honor."
"A Word bestowed on Mary, for he was created by Allah's word 'Be', and he was;"(3:59).
A spirit proceeding from Allah (God), but not Allah: his life and mission were more limited than in the case of some other messengers, though we must pay equal honor to him as a prophet of Allah. The doctrines of Trinity, equality with God, and sons, are repudiated as blasphemies. Allah (God) is independent of all needs and has no need of a son to manage His affairs. The Gospel of John (whoever wrote it) has put a great deal of Alexandrian Gnostic mysticism round the doctrine of the Word (Greek, Logos), but it is simply explained here."

Jesus Questioned

Reproduced below are verses 119 to 121 from the Chapter of Maeda (chapter 5 of the Quran) depicting the scene of Judgment Day, when Allah will question Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, regarding the misdirected zeal of his supposed followers in worshipping him and his mother: and his response,

"And behold! Allah will say: 'O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?' He will say: 'Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.

'Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things.

'If Thou dost punish them, they are Thy servant: If Thou dost forgive them, Thou art the Exalted in power, the Wise.'"
(5:116-118)

Claimed No Divinity

If this is the statement of truth from the All-Knowing, that "Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'", then how do the Christians justify worshipping Jesus?

There is not a single unequivocal statement throughout the Bible, in all its 66 volumes of the Protestant versions, or in the 73 volumes of the Roman Catholic versions, where Jesus claims to be God or where he says "worship me". Nowhere does he say that he and God Almighty "are one" and "the same person."

The last phrase above "one and the same person" tickles many a "hot-gospeller" and "Bible-thumper," not excluding the Doctor of Divinity and the Professor of Theology. Even the new converts to Christianity have memorized these verses. They are programmed to rattle off verses out of context, upon which they can hang their faith. The words "are one" activates the mind by association of memories. "Yes", say the Trinitarians, the worshippers of three gods in one God, and one God in three gods, "Jesus did claim to be God!" Where?

Reverend at the Table

I had taken Rev. Morris D.D. and his wife, to lunch at the "Golden Peacock." While at the table, during the course of our mutual sharing of knowledge, the opportunity arose to ask, "Where?" And without a murmur he quoted, "I and my father are one" to imply that God and Jesus were one and the same person. That Jesus here claims to be God. The verse quoted was well known to me, but it was being quoted out of context. It did not carry the meaning that the Doctor was imagining, so I asked him, "What is the context?"

Choked on "Context"

The Reverend stopped eating and began staring at me. I said, "Why? Don't you know the context?", "You see, what you have quoted is the text, I want to know the context, the text that goes with it, before or after." Here was an Englishman (Canadian), a paid servant of the Presbyterian Church, a Doctor of Divinity, and it appeared that I was trying to teach him English. Of course he knew what "context" meant. But like the rest of his compatriots, he had not studied the sense in which Jesus had uttered the words.

In my forty years of experience, this text had been thrown at me hundreds of times, but not a single learned Christian had ever attempted to hazard a guess as to its real meaning. They always start fumbling for their Bibles. The Doctor did not have one with him. When they do start going for their Bibles, I stop them in their stride: "Surely, you know what you are quoting?", "Surely, you know your Bible?" After reading this, I hope some "born-again" Christians will rectify this deficiency. But I doubt that my Muslim readers will ever come across one in their lifetime who could give them the context.

What is the Context?

It is unfair on the part of the Reverend, having failed to provide the context, then to ask me, "Do you know the context?" "Of course," I said. "Then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. I said, "That which you have quoted is the text of John chapter 10, verse 30. To get at the context, we have to begin from verse 23 which reads:

23. "and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade." (John 10:23).
John, or whoever he was, who wrote this story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus tempting the Devil by walking alone in the lion's den. For we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden opportunity to get even with Jesus. Perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the Jews single-handed in the Temple, and upset the tables of the money changers at the beginning of his ministry (John 2:15).

24. "The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." (John 10:24).
They surrounded him. Brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him and provoking him; saying that he had not put forth his claim plainly enough, clearly enough. That he was talking ambiguously. They were trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. In fact, their real complaint was that they did not like his method of preaching, his invectives, the manner in which he condemned them for their formalism, their ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgetting the spirit. But Jesus could not afford to provoke them any further there were too many and they were itching for a fight.

Discretion is the better part of valor. In a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occasion:

25. "Jesus answered, I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me,"
26. "but you do not believe because you are not my sheep." (John 10:25-26).
Jesus rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous in his claims to being the Messiah that they were waiting for. He says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not listen to him, but:

27. "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me."
28. "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand."
29. "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.." (John 10:29).
How can anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending of the last two verses. But spiritual blinkers are more impervious than physical defects. He is telling the Jews and recording for posterity, the real unity or relationship between the Father and the son. The most crucial verse:

30. "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30).
One in what? In their Omniscience? In their Nature? In their Omnipotence? No! One in purpose! That once a believer has accepted faith, the Messenger sees to it that he remains in faith, and God Almighty also sees to it that he remains in faith. This is the purpose of the "Father" and the "son" and the "Holy Ghost" and of every man and every woman of faith. Let the same John explain his Gnostic mystic verbiage.

"That they all may be one as thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us..."

"I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one..."(John 17:20-22)

If Jesus is "one" with God, and if that "oneness" makes him God, then the traitor Judas, and the doubting Thomas, and the satanic Peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need are God(s), because the same "oneness" which he claimed with God in John 10:30, now he claims for all "who forsook him and fled" (Mark 14:50). All "ye of little faith" (Matthew 8:26). All "O faithless and perverse generation" (Luke 9:41). Where and when will the Christian blasphemy end? The expression "I and my Father are one," was very innocent, meaning nothing more than a common purpose with God. But the Jews were looking for trouble and any excuse will not do, therefore,

31. "Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,"
32. "but Jesus said to them, I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"
33. "The Jews answered him, saying : 'For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God.'" (John 10:31-33).
In verse 24 above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. When that charge was ably refuted, they then accused him of blasphemy which is like treason in the spiritual realm. So they say that Jesus is claiming to be God "I and the Father are one". The Christians agree with the Jews in this that Jesus did make such a claim; but differ in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that he was God and was entitled to own up to his Divinity.

The Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is serious. To one as an excuse for good "redemption", and to the other as an excuse for good "riddance". Between the two, let the poor Jesus die. But Jesus refuses to co-operate in this game, so:

34. "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, `I have said you are gods'?"
35. "If he called them `gods,' to whom the word of God came --and the Scripture cannot be broken--,"
36. "what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, `I am God's Son'?" (John 10:34-36).

Why "Your Law"?

He is a bit sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say: "Your Law"? Is it not also his Law? Didn't he say: "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law of the prophets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill (the Law). For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one Jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:1718).

"You are Gods"

"You are gods:" He is obviously quoting from the 82nd Psalm , verse 6, "I have said, ye are gods: and all of you are the children of the most High."

Jesus, continues: "If he (i.e. God Almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (meaning that the prophets of God were called 'gods') and the scripture cannot be broken..." (John 10:35), in other words he is saying: "you can't contradict me!" Jesus knows his Scripture; he speaks with authority; and he reasons with his enemies that: "If good men, holy men, prophets of God are being addressed as 'gods' in our Books of Authority, with which you find no fault, then why do you take exception to me? When the only claim I make for myself is far inferior in our language, viz. 'A son of God' as against others being called 'gods' by God Himself. Even if I (Jesus) described myself as 'god' in our language, according to Hebrew usage, you could find no fault with me." This is the plain reading of Christian Scripture. I am giving no interpretations of my own or some esoteric meaning to words!


Chapter Seven : "In The Beginning"

"Where does Jesus say: 'I am God,' or 'I am equal to God,' or 'Worship me'?" I asked the Rev. Morris again.

He took a deep breath and took another try. He quoted the most oft-repeated verse of the Christian Bible - John 1:1.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Please note, these are not the words of Jesus. They are the words of John (or whoever wrote them). Acknowledged by every erudite Christian scholar of the Bible as being the words of another Jew, Philo of Alexandria, who had written them even before John and Jesus were born. And Philo claimed no divine inspiration for them. No matter what mystical meaning that Philo had woven around these words (which our John has plagiarized), we will accept them for what they are worth.

Greek not Hebrew

Since the manuscripts of the 27 Books of the New Testament are in Greek, a Christian sect has produced its own version and has even changed the name of this selection of 27 Books to Christian Greek Scriptures ! I asked the Reverend whether he knew Greek? "Yes," he said, He had studied Greek for 5 years before qualification. I asked him what was the Greek word for "God" the first time it occurs in the quotation "and the Word was With God"? He kept staring, but didn't answer. So I said, the word was Hotheos, which literally means "The God".

Since the European (including the North American) has evolved a system of using capital letters to start a proper noun and small letters for common nouns, we would accept his giving a capital "G" for God; in other words Hotheos is rendered "the god" which in turn is rendered "God".

"Now tell me, what is the Greek word for "God" in the second occurrence in your quotation - "and the Word was God"? The Reverend still kept silent. Not that he did not know Greek, or that he had lied, but he knew more than that; the game was up. I said : "the word was Tontheos, which means "a god".

According to your own system of translating you aught to have spelt this word 'God' a second time with a small 'g' i.e. 'god', and not 'God' with a capital 'G'; in other words Tontheos is rendered "a god". Both of these, "god" or "a god" are correct.

I told the Reverend: "But in 2 Corinthians 4:4 you have dishonestly reversed your system by using a small 'g' when spelling 'God' "(and the devil is) the god of this world." The Greek word for "the god" is Hotheos the same as in John 1:1. "Why have you not been consistent in your translations ?" "If Paul was inspired to write hotheos the God for the Devil, why don't you use that capital 'G'?"

And in the Old Testament, the Lord said unto Moses: "See, I have made thee a god to Pharoah" (Exodus 7:1). "Why do you use a small 'g' for 'God' when referring to Moses instead of a capital 'G' as you do for a mere word 'Word' - "and the Word was God."?

"Why do you do this? Why do you play fast and loose with the Word of God?" I asked the reverend. He said, "I didn't do it." I said, "I know, but I am talking about the vested interests of Christianity, who are hell-bent to deify Christ, by using capital letters here and small letters there, to deceive the unwary masses who think that every letter, every comma and full stop and the capital and small letters were dictated by God (Capital 'G' here!)."


Chapter Eight : What is Left

Three Topics

It can hardly be expected in a small publication of this nature that one can deal with all the references about Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, interspersed throughout the fifteen different chapters of the Holy Quran. What we can do is to give a quick glance to the index page reproduced from the Quran earlier in this letter.

Here we find three significant topics, not dealt with yet in our discussion:

Not crucified, (4:157).
Message and miracles,(5:113, 19:30-33).
Prophesied Ahmed, (61:6).
Regarding the first topic, "not crucified", I had written a booklet under the heading "Was Christ Crucified?" some twenty years ago. The book is presently out of print, and further, it needs updating, for much water has passed under the bridge since it first saw the light of day.

As regards the third topic mentioned above, "Prophesied Ahmed", I propose to write a booklet under the title "Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the Natural Successor to Christ" after I have completed "Was Christ Crucified?", I hope to complete both these projects soon, Insha Allah! (Arabic: "By the will of Allah").

The Way to Salvation

We are now left with Topic No. 2, "Message and miracles". The message of Jesus was as simple and straight forward as that of all his predecessors as well as that of his successor Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, namely "Believe in God and keep His Commandments". For the God who inspired His Messengers, is an unvarying God and He is consistent: He is not the "author of confusion" (1 Corinthian14:33).

A law abiding Jew comes to Jesus seeking eternal life or salvation. In the words of Matthew:

"And behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." (Matthew 19:16-17)

You will agree, that if you or I were that Jew, we would infer from these words that, according to Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, salvation was guaranteed, provided we kept the commandments without the shedding of any innocent blood. Unless, of course Jesus was speaking with tongue in cheek; knowing full well that his own "forthcoming redemptive sacrifice", his "vicarious atonement" (?) for the sins of mankind, was not many days hence.

Why would Jesus give him the impossible solution of keeping the Law (as the Christian alleges) when an easier way was in the offing? Or did he not know what was going to happen, that he was to be crucified ? Was there not a contract between Father and Son, before the worlds began, for his redeeming blood to be shed? Had he lost his memory? No! There was no such fairy tale agreement as far as Jesus was concerned. He knew that there is only one way to God, and that is, as Jesus said, "keep the Commandments"!

Miracles, What They Prove

Regarding his miracles: the Holy Quran does not go into any detail about blind Bartimus or about Lazarus or any other miracle, except that he (Jesus) defended his mother as an infant in his mother's arms. The Muslim has no hesitation about accepting the most wondrous of his miracles - even that of reviving the dead. But that does not make Jesus a "God" or the begotten "Son of God" as understood by the Christian.

Miracles do not prove even prophethood, or whether a man is true or false. Jesus himself said:

"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."(Matthew 24:24)

If false prophets and false Christs can perform miraculous feats, then these wonders or miracles do not prove even the geniuses or otherwise, of a prophet.

John the Baptist, according to Jesus, was the greatest of the Israelite prophets. Greater than Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah and all, not excluding himself: in his own words:

"Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist..." (Matthew 11:11)

Not excluding Jesus: because, was he not born of a woman - Mary?
The Baptist, greater than "all", yet he performed not a single miracle! Miracles are no standards of judging truth and falsehood.
But in his childishness, the might Christian insists that Jesus is God because he gave life back to the dead. Will reviving the dead make others God too? This perplexes him, because he has mentally blocked himself from the miracles of others who outshine Jesus in his own Bible. For example, according to his false standard:

Moses is greater than Jesus because he put life back into a dead stick and transmuted it from the plant kingdom to the animal kingdom by making it into a serpent (Exodus 7:10).
Elisha is greater than Jesus because the bones of Elisha brought a man back to life merely by coming into contact with the corpse (2 Kings 13:21).
Need I illustrate to you a catalogue of miracles? But the sickness persists - "it was God working miracles through His prophets but Jesus performed them of his own power." Where did Jesus get all his power from? Ask Jesus, and he will tell us:

Power not His Own

"...All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Matthew 28:18)

"...I cast out devils by the Spirit of God then the kingdom of God is come unto you." (Matthew 12:28)

"I can of mine own self do nothing " (John 5:30)

"I with the finger of God cast out devils" (Luke 1 1:20)

Borrowed Power

The "power" as he says is not his, "it is given unto me". Given by whom? By God, of course! Every action, every word he attributes to God.

Lazarus

But since so much is made of Jesus' mightiest miracle of reviving Lazarus from the dead, we will analyze the episode as recorded in John's Gospel. It is astonishing that none of the other Gospel writers mention Lazarus in any context. However, the story is that Lazarus was very sick, his sisters Mary and Martha had made frantic calls for Jesus to come and cure his sickness but he arrived too late, actually four days after his demise.

He Groaned

Mary wails to Jesus that had he arrived in time, perhaps her brother would not have died; meaning that if he could heal other peoples' sicknesses, why would he not have healed her brother, a dear friend of his. Jesus says that "even now if ye have faith, ye shall see the glory of god." The condition was that they should have faith. Didn't he say that faith could move mountains?

He asks to be taken to the tomb. On the way, "he groaned in the spirit". He was not mumbling; he was pouring out his heart and praying to God. But while he sobbed so bitterly his words were not audible enough for people around him to understand. Hence the words "he groaned". On reaching the grave, Jesus "groaned" again; perhaps, even more earnestly and God heard his groaning (his prayer), and Jesus received the assurance that God will fulfill his request. Now, Jesus could rest assured and command that the stone which was barring the tomb, be removed so that Lazarus could come back from the dead. Without that assurance from God, Jesus would have made a fool of himself.

Avoiding Misunderstanding

Mary thinks of the stink because her brother had been dead for four days! But Jesus was confident and the stone was removed. Then he looked up towards heaven and said:

"Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me." (John 11:41-42)

What is all this, play - acting? Why all the drama? Because he know that these superstitious and credulous people will misunderstand the source of the miracle. They might take him for "God". Giving life to the dead is the prerogative of God alone. To make doubly sure, that his people do not misunderstand, he speaks out loudly that the "groaning" was actually his crying to God Almighty for help. The prayer was incoherent as far as the bystanders could discern, but the Father in heaven had accepted his prayer, viz. "thou hast heard me".

Furthermore, he says, "thou hearest me always"; in other words, every miracle wrought by him was an answer by God Almighty to his prayer. The Jews of his day understood the position well, and they "glorified God", as Matthew tells us of another occasion when the Jews exclaimed "for giving such power unto men" (Matt. 9:8).

In fact, Jesus gives his reason for speaking loudly. He says, "that they may believe that thou has sent me." One who is sent is a messenger, and if he be sent by God, then he is a Messenger of God i.e. Rasulullah. Jesus is referred to in the Quran asRasulullah ("Messenger of Allah").

Alas, this attempt by Jesus to prevent any misunderstanding, as to who really performed the miracle, and that he was in fact only a messenger of God, failed. Christians will not even accept the unambiguous disavowal of Jesus, nor the testimony of Peter, the "Rock" upon which Jesus was supposed to build his Church. Peter truly testified:

"Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, A man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know. " (Acts 2:22)

Case Not Hopeless

This very same message is repeated by God Almighty in the Holy Quran, following the annunciation. In verse 49 of chapter 3, Allah makes it clear that every sign or wonder that Jesus performed was "By Allah's leave," by God's permission. Jesus says so, Peter says so and God says so; but the stubborn controversialist will not listen: prejudice, superstition and credulity die hard. Our duty is simply to deliver the Message, loud and clear, the rest we leave to God. The case is not altogether hopeless for Allah tells us in His Holy Book:

"And among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors." (3:110)

"Among them", meaning among the Jews and the Christians, there are two types of people; the one group described as people of faith to whom this book is addressed, and the other as rebellious transgressors. We must also find ways and means of getting at them. Our literature is eminently suited to cater for all. Pass them on to your non - Muslim friends after reading.

Open the Holy Quran and make your Christian friends and acquaintances to read the verses discussed in this book. Then we can truly conclude:

"Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary:
(it is) a statement of truth, about which
they (vainly) dispute.

"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah
(God) that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him!
when He determines a matter, He only says to it,
'Be', and it is.

"Verily Allah is my Lord and your Lord:
Him therefore serve ye: this is a Way that is straight." (19:34-36)

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

JESUS COMPLEX:



Is Jesus God?

Have you ever met a man who is the center of attention wherever he goes? Some mysterious, indefinable characteristic sets him apart from all other men. Well, that’s the way it was two thousand years ago with Jesus Christ. But it wasn’t merely Jesus’ personality that captivated those who heard him. Those who witnessed his words and life tell us that something about Jesus of Nazareth was different from all other men.

Jesus’ only credentials were himself. He never wrote a book, commanded an army, held a political office, or owned property. He mostly traveled within a hundred miles of his village, attracting crowds who were amazed at his provocative words and stunning deeds.

Yet Jesus’ greatness was obvious to all those who saw and heard him. And while most great people eventually fade into history books, Jesus is still the focus of thousands of books and unparalleled media controversy. And much of that controversy revolves around the radical claims Jesus made about himself---claims that astounded both his followers and his adversaries.

It was primarily Jesus’ unique claims that caused him to be viewed as a threat by both the Roman authorities and the Jewish hierarchy. Although he was an outsider with no credentials or political powerbase, within three years, Jesus changed the world for the next 20 centuries. Other moral and religious leaders have left an impact---but nothing like that unknown carpenter’s son from Nazareth.

What was it about Jesus Christ that made the difference? Was he merely a great man, or something more?

These questions get to the heart of who Jesus really was. Some believe he was merely a great moral teacher; others believe he was simply the leader of the world’s greatest religion. But many believe something far more. Christians believe that God has actually visited us in human form. And they believe the evidence backs that up.

After carefully examining Jesus’ life and words, former Cambridge professor and skeptic, C. S. Lewis, came to a startling conclusion about him that altered the course of his life. So who is the real Jesus? Many will answer that Jesus was a great moral teacher. As we take a deeper look at the world’s most controversial person, we begin by asking: could Jesus have been merely a great moral teacher?


Great Moral Teacher?

Even those from other religions acknowledge that Jesus was a great moral teacher. Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, spoke highly of Jesus’ righteous life and profound words.1 Likewise, Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner wrote, “It is universally admitted … that Christ taught the purest and sublimest ethics … which throws the moral precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity far into the shade.”2

Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount has been called the most superlative teaching of human ethics ever uttered by an individual. In fact, much of what we know today as “equal rights” actually is the result of Jesus’ teaching. Historian Will Durant, a non-Christian, said of Jesus that “he lived and struggled unremittingly for ‘equal rights’; in modern times he would have been sent to Siberia. ‘He that is greatest among you, let him be your servant’—this is the inversion of all political wisdom, of all sanity.”3

Many, like Gandhi, have tried to separate Jesus’ teaching on ethics from his claims about himself, believing that he was simply a great man who taught lofty moral principles. This was the approach of one of America’s Founding Fathers, President Thomas Jefferson, who cut and pasted a copy of the New Testament, removing sections he thought referred to Jesus’ deity, while leaving in other passages regarding Jesus’ ethical and moral teaching4. Jefferson carried around his cut and pasted New Testament with him, revering Jesus as perhaps the greatest moral teacher of all time.

In fact, Jefferson’s memorable words in the Declaration of Independence were rooted in Jesus’ teaching that each person is of immense and equal importance to God, regardless of sex, race, or social status. The famous document sets forth, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …”

But one thing Jefferson didn’t answer: If Jesus falsely claimed to be God he couldn’t have been a good moral teacher. But did Jesus really claim deity? Before we look at what Jesus claimed, we need to examine the possibility that he was simply a great religious leader?


Great Religious Leader?

Surprisingly, Jesus never claimed to be a religious leader. He never got into religious politics or pushed an ambitious agenda, and he ministered almost entirely outside the established religious framework.

When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi Zacharias, who grew up in a Hindu culture, has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction between Jesus Christ and the founders of other major religions.

"In all of these, there emerges an instruction, a way of living. It is not Zoroaster to whom you turn; it is Zoroaster to whom you listen. It is not Buddha who delivers you; it is his Noble Truths that instruct you. It is not Mohammad who transforms you; it is the beauty of the Koran that woos you. By contrast, Jesus did not only teach or expound His message. He was identical with His message."5

The truth of Zacharias’ point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus’ teaching message was simply “Come to me” or “Follow me” or “Obey me.” Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to forgive sins, something only God could do.

In The World’s Great Religions, Huston Smith observed, “Only two people ever astounded their contemporaries so much that the question they evoked was not ‘Who is he?’ but ‘What is he?’ They were Jesus and Buddha. The answers these two gave were exactly the opposite. Buddha said unequivocally that he was a mere man, not a god—almost as if he foresaw later attempts to worship him. Jesus, on the other hand, claimed … to be divine.”6

And that leads us to the question of what Jesus really did claim for himself; specifically, did Jesus claim to be divine?


Did Jesus Claim To Be God?

So what is it that convinces many scholars that Jesus claimed to be God? Author, John Piper explains that Jesus claimed power which uniquely belonged to God.

“…Jesus’ friends and enemies were staggered again and again by what he said and did. He would be walking down the road, seemingly like any other man, then turn and say something like, ‘Before Abraham was, I am.’ Or, ‘If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.’ Or, very calmly, after being accused of blasphemy, he would say, ‘The Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.’ To the dead he might simply say, ‘Come forth,’ or, ‘Rise up.’ And they would obey. To the storms on the sea he would say, ‘Be still.’ And to a loaf of bread he would say, ‘Become a thousand meals.’ And it was done immediately.”7

But what did Jesus really mean by such statements? Is it possible Jesus was merely a prophet like Moses or Elijah, or Daniel? Even a superficial reading of the Gospels reveals that Jesus claimed to be someone more than a prophet. No other prophet had made such claims about himself; in fact, no other prophet ever put himself in God’s place.

Some argue that Jesus never explicitly said, “I am God.” It is true that he never stated the exact words, “I am God.” However, Jesus also never explicitly said, “I am a man,” or “I am a prophet.” Yet Jesus was undoubtedly human, and his followers considered him a prophet like Moses and Elijah. So we cannot rule out Jesus being divine just because he didn’t say those exact words, anymore than we can say he wasn’t a prophet.

In fact, Jesus’ statements about himself contradict the notion that he was simply a great man or a prophet. On more than one occasion, Jesus referred to himself as God’s Son. When asked whether he thought it far-fetched for Jesus to be the Son of God, lead singer of U2, Bono, answered:

“No, it’s not far-fetched to me. Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn’t allow you that. He doesn’t let you off the hook. Christ says, No. I’m not saying I’m a teacher, don’t call me a teacher. I’m not saying I’m a prophet….I’m saying I’m God incarnate.” And people say: No, no, please, just be a prophet. A prophet we can take.” 8

Before we examine Jesus’ claims, it is important to understand that he made them in the context of the Jewish belief in one God (monotheism). No faithful Jew would ever believe in more than one God. And Jesus believed in the one God, praying to his Father as, “the only true God.”9

But in that same prayer, Jesus spoke of having always existed with his Father. And when Philip asked Jesus to show them the Father, Jesus said, “Philip, have I been with you so long and you don’t know me? Whoever has seen me, has seen the Father.”10 So the question is: “Was Jesus claiming to be the Hebrew God who created the universe?”


Jesus continually referred to himself in ways that confounded his listeners. As Piper notes, Jesus made the audacious statement, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”11 He told Martha and others around her, “I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he is dead, yet shall he live.”12 Likewise, Jesus would make statements like, “I AM the light of the world,”13 “I AM the only way to God,”14 or, “I AM the “truth.”15 These and several other of his claims were preceded by the sacred words for God, “I AM” (ego eimi)16. What did Jesus mean by such statements, and what is the significance or the term, “I AM”?

Once again, we must go back to context. In the Hebrew Scriptures, when Moses asked God His name at the burning bush, God answered, “I AM.” He was revealing to Moses that He is the one and only God who is outside of time and has always existed. Incredibly, Jesus was using these holy words to describe himself. The question is, “Why?”


Did Jesus Claim To Be The God Of Abraham & Moses?

Since the time of Moses, no practicing Jew would ever refer to himself or anyone else by “I AM.” As a result, Jesus’ “I AM” claims infuriated the Jewish leaders. One time, for example, some leaders explained to Jesus why they were trying to kill him: “Because you, a mere man, have made yourself God.”17

Jesus’ usage of God’s name greatly angered the religious leaders. The point is that these Old Testament scholars knew exactly what he was saying—he was claiming to be God, the Creator of the universe. It is only this claim that would have brought the accusation of blasphemy. To read into the text that Jesus claimed to be God is clearly warranted, not simply by his words, but also by their reaction to those words.

C. S. Lewis initially considered Jesus a myth. But this literary genius who knew myths well, concluded that Jesus had to have been a real person. Furthermore, as Lewis investigated the evidence for Jesus, he became convinced that not only was Jesus real, but he was unlike any man who had ever lived. Lewis writes,

“Then comes the real shock,’ wrote Lewis: ‘Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time.”18

To Lewis, Jesus’ claims were simply too radical and profound to have been made by an ordinary teacher or religious leader. (For a more in-depth look at Jesus’ claim to deity, see “Did Jesus Claim to be God?” http://www.y-jesus.com/jesus_believe_god_1.php).


What Kind Of God?

Some have argued that Jesus was only claiming to be part of God. But the idea that we are all part of God, and that within us is the seed of divinity, is simply not a possible meaning for Jesus’ words and actions. Such thoughts are revisionist, foreign to his teaching, foreign to his stated beliefs, and foreign to his disciples’ understanding of his teaching.

Jesus taught that he is God in the way the Jews understood God and the way the Hebrew Scriptures portrayed God, not in the way the New Age movement understands God. Neither Jesus nor his audience had been weaned on Star Wars, and so when they spoke of God, they were not speaking of cosmic forces. It’s simply bad history to redefine what Jesus meant by the concept of God.

Lewis explains,

Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God….But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.19

Certainly there are those who accept Jesus as a great teacher, yet are unwilling to call him God. As a Deist, we’ve seen that Thomas Jefferson had no problem accepting Jesus’ teachings on morals and ethics while denying his deity.20 But as we’ve said, and will explore further, if Jesus was not who he claimed to be, then we must examine some other alternatives, none of which would make him a great moral teacher. Lewis, argued, “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say.”21

In his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be—God in the flesh—or his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a great moral teacher. He would either be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex.


Could Jesus Have Been Lying?


Even Jesus’ harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn’t fit with Jesus’ high moral and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn’t who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was intentionally misleading everyone.

One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccolò Machiavelli in 1532. In his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.

Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? In fact, the Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable consistency.

The question we must deal with is: What could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? He taught that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he wouldn’t have been doing it to please his Father. He certainly didn’t lie for his followers’ benefit, since all but one were martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship (see “Did the Apostles believe Jesus is God?” http://www.y-jesus.com/apostles_jesus_god_1.php). And so we are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.


Benefit


Many people have lied for personal gain. In fact, the motivation of most lies is some perceived benefit to oneself. What could Jesus have hoped to gain from lying about his identity? Power would be the most obvious answer. If people believed he was God, he would have tremendous power. (That is why many ancient leaders, such as the Caesars, claimed divine origin.)

The rub with this explanation is that Jesus shunned all attempts to move him in the direction of seated power, instead chastising those who abused such power and lived their lives pursuing it. He also chose to reach out to the outcasts (prostitutes and lepers), those without power, creating a network of people whose influence was less than zero. In a way that could only be described as bizarre, all that Jesus did and said moved diametrically in the other direction from power.

It would seem that if power was Jesus’ motivation, he would have avoided the cross at all costs. Yet, on several occasions, he told his disciples that the cross was his destiny and mission. How would dying on a Roman cross bring one power?

Death, of course, brings all things into proper focus. And while many martyrs have died for a cause they believed in, few have been willing to die for a known lie. Certainly all hopes for Jesus’ own personal gain would have ended on the cross. Yet, to his last breath, he would not relinquish his claim of being the unique Son of God. New Testament scholar, J. I. Packer, points out that this title asserts Jesus’ personal deity.22


A Legacy


So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of most would-be superstars.

Here is another haunting fact. If Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God’s Son, he never would have been condemned. It was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him crucified.

If enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a carpenter’s son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus’ disciples had fled and Peter had denied him. Not exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.

Do historians believe Jesus lied? Scholars have scrutinized Jesus’ words and life to see if there is any evidence of a defect in his moral character. In fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus’ moral and ethical purity.

According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus lied about anything. Schaff argued, “How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful, selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?”23

To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To most scholars, it just doesn’t make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus’ claims, one must come up with some explanation. And if Jesus’ claims are not true, and he wasn’t lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-deceived.


Could Jesus Have Been Self-Deceived?


Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus’ claim to be God. In other words, Jesus was wrong about his claims but didn’t intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually believing he was the Messiah.

Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus’ claims weren’t true, then he must have been insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. “He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”24

Most who have studied Jesus’ life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) acknowledged Jesus’ superior character and presence of mind, stating, “When Plato describes his imaginary righteous man…he describes exactly the character of Christ. …If the life and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.”25

Bono concludes that a “nutcase” was the last thing one could label Jesus.

“So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was---or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson….I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched….”26

So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus “only a good moral teacher” while denying his deity? Interestingly, the audience who heard Jesus—both believers and enemies—never regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration.

The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds about Jesus, stating,

"You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."27

In Mere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce his former atheism and become a committed Christian.

The greatest question in human history is, “Who is the real Jesus Christ?” Bono, Lewis, and countless others have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.


Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?





The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead after his crucifixion. If they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.

But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they discover?

Click here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made---the resurrection of Jesus Christ!

Top 6 Incestuous Relationships In The Bible

Religious scholars say that God suspended the laws of incest in the early days of man in order to ensure that man spread on the earth. In the words of the commentators of the Douay Rheims Bible: “God [dispensed] with such marriages in the beginning of the world, as mankind could not otherwise be propagated.” Despite that, these tales are not all simply matters of procreation – particularly item 1. So, here is a list of 6 of the more questionable relationships in the Bible.


1. Amnon and Thamar





And it came to pass after this, that Amnon the son of David loved the sister of Absalom the son of David, who was very beautiful, and her name was Thamar. And he was exceedingly fond of her, so that he fell sick for the love of her: for as she was a virgin, he thought it hard to do any thing dishonestly with her. [II Kings 13:1-2 ] And Thamar came to the house of Amnon her brother: but he was laid down: and she took meal and tempered it: and dissolving it in his sight she made little messes. And taking what she had boiled, she poured it out, and set it before him, but he would not eat: and Amnon said: Put out all persons from me. And when they had put all persons out, Amnon said to Thamar: Bring the mess into the chamber, that I may eat at thy hand. And when she had presented him the meat, he took hold of her, and said: Come lie with me, my sister. She answered him: Do not so, my brother, do not force me: for no such thing must be done in Israel. Do not thou this folly. [II Kings 13:8-12] But he would not hearken to her prayers, but being stronger overpowered her and lay with her. [II Kings 13:14]

Our final item is not just a case of incest – it is a case of incestuous rape! Amnon fell in love with his sister, Thomar, and was counseled by a crafty man to trick her in to having sex with him. He followed the bad advice and when Thomar tried to defend herself, he raped her. At least justice was ultimately done as Thomar’s other brother, Absalom, killed Amnon two years later in vengeance. Let that be a lesson to us all!


2. Amram and Jochabed




The sons of Merari: Moholi and Musi. These are the kindreds of Levi by their families. 20 And Amram took to wife Jochabed his aunt by the father’s side: and she bore him Aaron and Moses. And the years of Amram’s life were a hundred and thirty-seven. [Exodus 6:19-20]

This is the family history of Moses – the guy who lead the Jews out of Egypt and later was given the ten commandments (which were not actually 10 commandments – more on that here). Jochabed was Moses’ Great-aunty Mom.


3. Lot and his Daughters





And the elder said to the younger Our father is old, and there is no man left on the earth, to come in unto us after the manner of the whole earth. Come, let us make him drunk with wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the elder went in and lay with her father: but he perceived not neither when his daughter lay down, nor when she rose up. And the next day the elder said to the younger: Behold I lay last night with my father, let us make him drink wine also to night, and thou shalt lie with him, that we may save seed of our father. They made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in, and lay with him: and neither then did he perceive when she lay down, nor when she rose up. So the two daughters of Lot were with child by their father. [Genesis 19:31-36]

It doesn’t really get much more blatant than that. The two daughters had sex with their father, Lot, in order to preserve his family line. Incidentally, this all happened shortly after they had fled from Soddom and Gomorrah which was destroyed by God for its immorality – ironic?. After the events described above, Lot had no memory of it (maybe it was the liquor) and nine months later the daughters gave birth to two sons, Moab (father of the Moabites), and Ammon (father of the Ammonites).


4. Nachor and Melcha





And Thare lived seventy years, and begot Abram, and Nachor, and Aran. And these are the generations of Thare: Thare begot Abram, Nachor, and Aran. And Aran begot Lot. And Aran died before Thare his father, in the land of his nativity in Ur of the Chaldees. And Abram and Nachor married wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai: and the name of Nachor’s wife, Melcha, the daughter of Aran, father of Melcha, and father of Jescha. [Genesis 11:26-29]

This is one of those complex “generations” quotes that are found throughout the early stages of the Bible, but if you pay close attention you can see that Nachor (Abraham’s brother) married Melcha (his niece). It is phrases like those above which make it so difficult to read the Bible cover to cover. Frankly, these parts of the Bible make Proust’s “In Remembrance of Things Past” read like a Doctor Seuss book!


5. Abraham and Sara





Howbeit, otherwise also she is truly my sister, the daughter of my father, and not the daughter of my mother, and I took her to wife. And after God brought me out of my father’s house, I said to her: Thou shalt do me this kindness: In every place, to which we shall come, thou shalt say that I am thy brother. [Genesis 20:12-13]

Abraham married his half sister Sara in Ur. The King of Gerara took her from Abraham and God sent him a dream to tell him that he would be destroyed for taking a woman who already had a husband (God approved of the marriage between the brother and sister). The King returned Sara to Abraham and they remained together as a couple until she died at the age of 127. Incidentally, Abraham died 38 years later at the ripe old age of 175.


6. Cain and his Wife





And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, and brought forth Henoch: and he built a city, and called the name thereof by the name of his son Henoch. [Genesis 4:16-17]

Cain was the first born son of Adam and Eve, and Abel was the second. In Genesis 4 we read how Cain kills his brother and is sent east of Eden where he marries a woman and “lays” with her. Because Adam and Eve were the first humans – from whom all people come – Cain’s wife was his sister – and, consequently, all of the early Biblical relationships were incestuous (with the exception of Adam and Eve). Cain, incidentally, was the guy that caused so much trouble for the Mormon’s who believed that the cursed “Mark of Cain” meant black skin, leading them to forbid blacks from entering the Mormon priesthood (God “revealed” that they were allowed to let black skinned people in to the priesthood in 1978). You can read more about that blunder here. In the image above we see Cain killing his brother Abel.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Development of the Old Testament canon and Development of the New Testament canon



Main articles: Development of the Old Testament canon and Development of the New Testament canon

The Bible (from Greek τὰ βιβλία ta biblia "the books"), known as the Holy Bible, are collections of sacred scripture related to Judaism and Christianity. The Bible is the best-selling book in history with more than 6 billion copies published.
There is no single Bible, as the individual books (Biblical canon), their contents and their order vary between denominations. Mainstream Judaism divides the Tanakh into 24 books, while a minority stream of Judaism, the Samaritans, accepts only five. The 24 texts of the Hebrew Bible are divided into 39 books in Christian Old Testaments, and complete Christian Bibles range from the 66 books of the Protestant canon to the 81 books in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.
The Jewish Bible, or Tanakh, is divided into three parts: (1) the five books of the Torah ("teaching" or "law") comprise the origins of the Israelite nation, its laws and its covenant with the God of Israel; (2) the Nevi'im ("prophets") containing the historic account of ancient Israel and Judah plus works of prophecy; and (3) the Ketuvim ("writings"), poetic and philosophical works such as the Psalms and the Book of Job.

When ancient scribes copied earlier books, they wrote notes on the margins of the page (marginal glosses) to correct their text—especially if a scribe accidentally omitted a word or line—and to comment about the text. When later scribes were copying the copy, they were sometimes uncertain if a note was intended to be included as part of the text. See textual criticism. Over time, different regions evolved different versions, each with its own assemblage of omissions and additions.
The autographs, the Greek manuscripts written by the original authors, have not survived. Scholars surmise the original Greek text from the versions that do survive. The three main textual traditions of the Greek New Testament are sometimes called the Alexandrian text-type (generally minimalist), the Byzantine text-type (generally maximalist), and the Western text-type (occasionally wild). Together they comprise most of the ancient manuscripts.

Main articles: Development of the Old Testament canon and Development of the New Testament canon
The Old Testament canon entered into Christian use in the Greek Septuagint translations and original books, and their differing lists of texts. In addition to the Septuagint, Christianity subsequently added various writings that would become the New Testament. Somewhat different lists of accepted works continued to develop in antiquity. In the 4th century a series of synods produced a list of texts equal to the 39-to-46-book canon of the Old Testament and to the 27-book canon of the New Testament that would be subsequently used to today, most notably the Synod of Hippo in AD 393. Also c. 400, Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible (see Vulgate), the canon of which, at the insistence of the Pope, was in accord with the earlier Synods. With the benefit of hindsight it can be said that this process effectively set the New Testament canon, although there are examples of other canonical lists in use after this time. A definitive list did not come from an Ecumenical Council until the Council of Trent (1545–63)

During the Protestant Reformation, certain reformers proposed different canonical lists to those currently in use. Though not without debate, see Antilegomena, the list of New Testament books would come to remain the same; however, the Old Testament texts present in the Septuagint, but not included in the Jewish canon, fell out of favor. In time they would come to be removed from most Protestant canons. Hence, in a Catholic context these texts are referred to as deuterocanonical books, whereas in a Protestant context they are referred to as Apocrypha, the label applied to all texts excluded from the biblical canon which were in the Septuagint. It should also be noted, that Catholics and Protestants both describe certain other books, such as the Acts of Peter, as apocryphal.

Thus, the Protestant Old Testament of today has a 39-book canon—the number varies from that of the books in the Tanakh (though not in content) because of a different method of division—while the Roman Catholic Church recognizes 46 books as part of the canonical Old Testament. The Orthodox Churches, in addition to the Catholic canon, recognise 3 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh and Psalm 151. Some include 2 Esdras. The Anglican Church also recognises a longer canon. The term "Hebrew Scriptures" is often used as being synonymous with the Protestant Old Testament, since the surviving scriptures in Hebrew include only those books, while Catholics and Orthodox include additional texts that have not survived in Hebrew. Both Catholics and Protestants have the same 27-book New Testament Canon.
The New Testament writers assumed the inspiration of the Old Testament, probably earliest stated in 2 Timothy 3:16, "all Scripture is inspired of God."


WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE VERSION AND TRANSLATION

VERSION - an account or description from a particular part of view especially as contrasted with another account.

TRANSLATION - a rendering from one language into another; also a product od such a rendering.

The Christian bible we have today is based on version and is not a translation, coming from one original revelation that is coming from god.

The so called original bible used by christian itself is a version, based on the catholic (325 a.d collections), which was translated into english authorized version as another version by King James (in 1611 a.d) to suit his desires and from it and through other later discoveries comes the other 101 versions of christianity today.

In between 1611 upto the present, the english bible had been edited, revised and corrected over and over again to remove the 20,000 errors in 1841, and from then after only god knows how much more which has not stopped even now. In 1957 some christian still believed there were 50,000 errors in the bible.

But most of all as from the link i gave above, the bible is being shaped to please the masses even now, and that is deceit, the word of god cannot be adjusted, revised, or edited by man, the moment such things are done it is no more the word of god.

And thats it is proved that the bible is based on errors and falsehood as such the truth is hidden and concoctions of a man is being pervaded as the truth. That amounts to deceiving those who have placed their faith in christianity, believing it is the sole truth and nothing but the truth from thier creator.

Thus it very obvious that christianity is a false faith invented by man to suit thier purpose and it can proved by just trying to find out could there be person called ''Jesus'' living in the israel at that time frame? and the answer is no, simply because the letter ''j'' cannot be found in the hebrew or greek language.

So there is no name with the letter ''j'' could have lived in israel that time frame

thus, the truth is hidden in christianity (sorry for to be blunt, but when we deal in sacred matters truth cannot be mixed with untruth just to please one another.
And those who cannot accept the truth will be rejected by god in the hereafter.

The Alexandrian version, or what is known as the Septuagint, translated by seventy learned Jews, assisted by "miraculous power," about two hundred years before Christ, could not have been, it is said, translated from the Hebrew text that we now have. The differences can only be accounted for by supposing that they had a different Hebrew text. The early Christian Churches adopted the Septuagint, and were satisfied for a time. But so many errors were found, and so many were scanning every word in search of something to sustain their peculiar views, that several new versions appeared, all different somewhat from the Hebrew manuscripts, from the Septuagint, and from each other. All these versions were in Greek. The first Latin Bible originated in Africa, but no one has ever found out which Latin manuscript was the original. Many were produced, and all differed from each other. These Latin versions were compared with each other and with the Hebrew, and a new Latin version was made in the fifth century, but the old Latin versions held their own for about four hundred years, and no one yet knows which were right. Besides these there were Egyptian, Ethiopic, Armenian, and several others, all differing from each other as well as from all others in the world.

It was not until the fourteenth century that the Bible was translated into German, and not until the fifteenth that Bibles were printed in the principal languages of Europe. Of these Bibles there were several kinds -- Luther's, the Dort, King James's, Genevan, French, besides the Danish and Swedish. Mort of these differed from each other, and gave rise to infinite disputes and crimes without number. The earliest fragment of the Bible in the "Saxon" language known to exist was written sometime in the seventh century. The first Bible was printed in England in 1538. In 1560 the first English Bible was printed that was divided into verses. Under Henry VIII. the Bible was revised; again under Queen Elizabeth, and once again under King James, This last was published in 1611, and is the one now in general use.

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Imam Mahdi (Descendent of Prophet Muhammad PBUH)

Who Is Imam Mahdi?

Note: Please do not confuse Imam Mahdi with Hadhrat Isa (Jesus) Alayhis Salaam. They are two different persons, and both will come during the last days. According to Hadeeth, Imam Mahdi will appear first, and Hadhrat Isa (A.S.) will appear during Imam Mahdi's lifetime. Furthermore, only Hadhrat Isa (A.S.) will be able to kill Dajjal (the "anti-Christ").

The term "MAHDI" is a title meaning "The Guided one".

Hadhrat Abdullah bin Mas'ood (R.A.) says that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, "This world will not come to an end until one person from my progeny does not rule over the Arabs, and his name will be the same as my name." (Tirmidhi)

Hadhrat Ali (R.A.) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, "Even if only a day remains for Qiyamah to come, yet Allah will surely send a man from my family who will fill this world with such justice and fairness, just as it initally was filled with oppression." (Abu Dawood)

His Features

Hadhrat Abu Saeed Khudri (R.A.) relates that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, "Al Mahdi will be from my progeny. His forehead will be broad and his nose will be high. He will fill the world with justice and fairness at a time when the world will be filled with oppression. He will rule for seven years."

Other ahadeeth inform us that:

* He will be tall
* He will be fair complexioned
* His facial features will be similar to those of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam)
* His character will be exactly like that of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam)
* His father's name will be Abdullah
* His mother's name will be Aamina
* He will speak with a slight stutter and occasionally this stutter will frustrate him causing him to hit his hand upon his thigh.
* His age at the time of his emergence will be forty years
* He will receive Knowledge from Allah.

His Emergence and Rule

Hadhrat Umme Salmah (R.A.) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, " After the death of a Ruler there will be some dispute between the people. At that time a citizen of Madina will flee (from Madinah) and go to Makkah. While in Makkah, certain people will approach him between Hajrul Aswad and Maqaame Ibraheem, and forcefully pledge their allegiance to him.

Thereafter a huge army will proceed from Syria to attack him but when they will be at Baida, which is between Makkah and Madina, they will be swallowed into the ground.

On seeing this, the Abdaals of Shaam as well as large numbers of people from Iraq will come to him and pledge their allegiance to him. Then a person from the Quraish, whose uncle will be from the Bani Kalb tribe will send an army to attack him, only to be overpowered, by the will of Allah. This (defeated) army will be that of the Bani Kalb. Unfortunate indeed is he who does not receive a share from the booty of the Kalb. This person (Imam Mahdi) will distribute the spoils of war after the battle. He will lead the people according to the Sunnat and during his reign Islam will spread throughout the world. He will remain till seven years (since his emergence). He will pass away and the Muslims will perform his Janazah salaat." (Abu Dawood)

According to a Hadeeth, Sayyidena Eesa (A.S.) will lead the Janaazah of Imam Mahdi (A.S.).

While the people will be pledging their allegiance to Imaam Mahdi, a voice from the unseen will call out:

"This is the representative of Allah,
The Mahdi, listen to him and obey him"

This announcement which will be heard by all those present will establish his authenticity. Another sign which will indicate the authenticity of Imaam Mahdi wil be that in the Ramadhaan prior to his emergence an eclipse of the sun and moon will occur.

Hadhrat Abu Umamah (R.A.) says that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "There will be four peace agreements between you and the Romans. The fourth agreement will be mediated through a person who will be from the progeny of Hadhrat Haroon (A.S.) and will be upheld for seven years."

The people asked: "O Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam), who will be the Imaam of the people at the time?"

Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "He will be from my progeny and will be forty years of age. His face will shine like a star and he will have a black spot on his left cheek. He will don two "Qutwaani" cloaks and will appear exactly as a person from the Bani Israeel..." (Tabrani)

According to hadith narrated by Abu Saeed Khudri (R.A.) Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "...(regarding the rule of Imaam Mahdi) the skies will rain down in abundance and the earth will yield forth its crop in abundance, and those alive will desire that those who have already passed away should have been alive to enjoy this prosperity..."

Hadhrat Buraidah (R.A.) says that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "There will be many armies after me. You must join that army which will come from Khurasaan." (Ibn Adi)

Abu Hurairah (R.A.) says that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: "(Armies carrying) black flags will come from Khurasaan. No power will be able to stop them and they will finally reach Eela (Baitul Maqdas) where they will erect their flags."

from: "Signs of Qiyamah"
by Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali

More Hadeeth (with references) (contributed by Bradley Bilal).

1) The Prophet (PBUH and HF) said: "Even if the entire duration of the world's existence has already been exhausted and only one day is left (before the day of judgment), Allah will expand that day to such a length of time, as to accommodate the kingdom of a person from my Ahlul-Bayt who will be called by my name. He will fill out the earth with peace and justice as it will have been full of injustice and tyranny (by then)."

References:

Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p86, v9, pp 74-75
Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p7
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,376; V3, p63

2) The Prophet (PBUH and HF) said: "al-Mahdi is one of us, the members of the household (Ahlul-Bayt)."

Reference: Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4085

3) The Prophet (PBUH and HF) said: The Mahdi will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah (the daughter of the Prophet (PBUH)).

References:

Sunan Abu Dawud, English version, Ch. 36, Tradition #4271 (narrated by Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet)
Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4086

4) The Prophet (PBUH and HF) said: "We (I and my family) are members of a household that Allah (SWT) has chosen for them the life of the Hereafter over the life of this world; and the members of my household (Ahlul-Bayt) shall suffer a great affliction and they shall be forcefully expelled from their homes after my death; then there will come people from the East carrying black flags, and they will ask for some good to be given to them, but they shall be refused service; as such, they will wage war and emerge victorious, and will be offered that which they desired in the first place, but they will refuse to accept it till they pass it to a man from my family (Ahlul-Bayt) appears to fill the Earth with justice as it has been filled with corruption. So whoever reaches that (time) ought to come to them even if crawling on the ice/snow since among them is the Vice-regent of Allah (Khalifatullah) al-Mahdi."

References:

Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4082,
The History Tabari
al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 250-251

5) Abu Nadra reported: We were with the company of Jabir Ibn Abdillah... Jabir Ibn Abdillah kept quite for a while and then reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said: "There would be a Caliph in the last (period) of my Ummah who would freely give handfuls of wealth to the people without counting it." I said to Abu Nadra and Abu al-Ala: Do you mean Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz? They said: NO, (he would be Imam Mahdi).

References:

Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, p1508, Tradition #6961
Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Fitan, v4, p2234, Tradition #67

6) "al-Mahdi is from our Ahlul-Bayt, no doubt Allah will enforce his appearance within a night (i.e., his coming is very unpredictable and is very sudden)."

THE STORY OF IMAM MAHDI

THE STORY OF IMAM MAHDI


Among the major signs of Qiyaamat is the advent of Imam Mahdi (Alayhis salaam). Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) predicted the coming of Imam Mahdi towards the end of this worldly existence, i.e. just before The Day of Judgement.

Hazrat Abu Hurairah (radiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

"If only one day is left for the end of the world, Allah will lengthen that day until a man from my family, whose name will be the same as mine, rules the world." (Tirmizi Shareef)

This indicates the emphasis, which The Holy Messenger of Allah Sallallahu alayhi wasallam laid on the coming of Imam Mahdi.

This article contains all the details about the life and advent of Imam Mahdi, and all these facts are derived from authentic Ahadith on this topic.

There is much speculation nowadays on whether Imam Mahdi has already been born and if so, what would be his present age, and when the impending appearance. Some Ulama have claimed that he is already born.

However, Muslims should realise that mere speculation does not represent concrete evidence upon which any firm and clear-cut ruling could be based. Hence, the best course of action is to believe that Imam Mahdi will appear' before Qiyaamat, but exactly when, only Allah knows. The date and time of his arrival we leave to The Knowledge of Allah. However, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did give certain signs, which will herald the arrival of this great Imam. The Ahadith on this issue leave no room for rejecting or even doubting the coming of Imam Mahdi. Neither do the facts leave us in the dark as to recognising this great Imam when he eventually does arrive.

DETAILS OF IMAM MAHDI

The following are facts taken from the Ahadith of Rasulullah( Sallallahu alayhi wasallam):

NAME AND TITLE

His name will be the same as that of (Rasulullah Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), i.e. Muhammad. In addition, his father's name will be Abdullah. His title is Al-Mahdi, meaning the guided one. The Holy Prophet Sallallahu alayhi wasallam also called him Khaleefatullah, meaning "the Deputy of Allah".

FAMILY LINEAGE

Imam Mahdi will belong to the tribe of Quraish and the family of Hazrat Fatima (radiyallahu anha), the offspring of Hazrat Imam Hasan (radiyallahu anhu).

CHARACTER

He will have the character and morals of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). In one night Allah will grant him unique qualities of faith, piety, leadership and knowledge. Hence the title Mahdi.

BIRTHPLACE

He will be born in Madinah Shareef.

PHYSICAL FEATURES

He will have a broad forehead (with not much hair on the front of his head) and the bridge of his nose will be raised.

SIGNS BEFORE HIS APPEARANCE AS THE MAHDI

The world will be filled with a great amount of injustice and oppression. There will be widespread evil in which all people will be heavily involved.

Muslim countries and their people will have become so weak that even animals would defeat them in battle.

Muslims would be totally disunited, hence their state of weakness. On the other hand, the Kuffaar (Jews, Christians, Hindus etc. Freemasons???) of the whole world would be united under one leader. Their rule would spread over the entire world, and would reach as far as Khaibar, a mere hundred miles from Madinah Shareef. Such would be the dominance of kuffaar during that era.

The Muslims would also be under severe persecution and oppression from the Khaleefah of that time and they will have no place to run.

The Ahle Bait (Family of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) will experience difficulties and persecution.

Throughout the world earthquakes would occur frequently. Innocent people will be put to death. A man by the name of Haarith Harraath (Usama bin Laden???) will emerge from beyond the Euphrates river, and before him will be another by the name of Mansoor (Al-Zawari??? Commander Mansoor of Taliban???). The former (i.e. Haarith) will be preparing the minds of Muslims to-accept Imam Mahdi when he comes. He will perform the same task for Imam Mahdi, what the Quraish performed for Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in Madinah before Hijrat. Mansoor will aid him in this direction.

It is wajib upon every Muslim to help this Haarith, or to respond to his call.

The Abdaals and pious leaders will all be on the lookout for Imam Mahdi, knowing that only he could bring relief to the failing Ummat.

There will be a fight in Makkah between three people, each one being the son of a Khaleefah, over leadership of the Muslims. However, none of them will gain the Khilafat. This fight will take place in the month of Zul-Qa'dah, and even in Mina during Hajj, there will be quarrelling. All this will occur in the same year as Imam Mahdi's election.

An army will come from the East towards Arabia. The East here refers to Khurasan, northeastern Iran, borders of the Soviet Union, Afghanistan, north-western Pakistan. They will pave the way for the establishment of Imam Mahdi's kingdom. This army will carry black banners. Nothing shall stop their onward march, and eventually they will plant their flag on the soils of Jerusalem.

This army will seek the leadership of Arabia. The current leader will refuse to hand over the Khilafat.

A tremendously fierce battle will ensue, the likes of which Muslims had never yet experienced. The army from Khurasan will be victorious and will eventually be granted the leadership.

IMAM MAHDI'S EMERGENCE AS THE NEW KHALEEFA

Having gained the right to appoint the new Khaleefah, they will nominate a member of their army, a man from The Holy Prophet's family, for this position. This man will be The Mahdi, who had also joined the ranks of this army when they entered Arabia.

He will not accept this post and will fleet from Madinah Munawwarah to Makkah Mukarramah. However, his people will be convinced that this is the only man for, the job. And so consequently, a group of people from Makkah will look for him in The Holy City and find him making tawaaf. They will force him to accept the post of Khilafat. Imam Mahdi will reluctantly agree to this offer. They will actually lead him by the hand towards the Hajare Aswad, where people will then formally pledge their allegiance to him as the Khaleefah. This pledge will take place in front of The Holy Ka 'ba, between the Hajare Aswad and the Maqaame Ibraheem, during or just after the days of Hajj.

At the time of this Bay 'at a voice will call out from the heavens: "This is the appointed Khaleefah of Allah, the Mahdi!"

Initially the number of people to take the bay 'at pledge of allegiance at his hands will be 313, which is the number of Sahaba that took part in the battle of Badr. He will be forty years old at the time of his appointment.

PROTECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY ALLAH

Immediately upon his appointment as the new Khaleefah Imam Mahdi will witness the direct Help of Allah. A man from the heart of Damascus, known as Sufyaani (from the family of Abu Sufyaan) will begin a horrendous campaign of bloodshed and killing, during which no tribe or community will be left alone. Even women and children will be mercilessly butchered. His chief supporters and followers will be the tribe of Kalb.

When this Sufyaani hears of Imam Mahdi, he will immediately dispatch an army towards Makkah (where the Mahdi will be). This army will be easily defeated by the Imam and his handful of followers. Then this Sufyaani will himself lead a contingent from Syria towards Makkah to fight against Imam Mahdi.

This army will be destroyed by an enormous earthquake at Baidaa, a place just after Zhul-Hulaifa, on the way to Makkah. First the rear of the army will be devastated, and when those in front go back to see what had happened, they too will meet the same fate. All but one member of this army will perish, and this sole survivor will take back the news of this disaster. There will be many in this army who had been brought along by force, people who did not intend to oppose Imam Mahdi. Such people would also be destroyed along with the others, but on Qiyaamat they will be raised up according to their intentions. When the story of Divine Help being granted to Imam Mahdi spreads through the Muslim world, the Abdaals of Syria and the pious people of Iraq will come to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi and join his ranks.

Similarly, other Muslim armies from Madinah and elsewhere will also come to Makkah and offer their support and allegiance to Imam Mahdi.

A man from the Quraish tribe will then emerge and oppose the Imam. This man also will have the backing of the tribe of Kalb. He too will send an army against Imam Mahdi, who will yet again, through The Grace of Allah, inflict heavy defeat on his enemies.

The Prophet of Allah actually castigated those who do not participate in this battle against the Kalb. The inhabitants of the heavens and the inhabitants of the earth will be pleased with him.

It will be Wajib upon all Muslims who hear of Imam Mahdi to pledge their allegiance and full support to him.

HIS LEADERSHIP, BATTLES AND ACHIEVEMENTS

With his army now bolstered by saintly and pious people Imam Mahdi will defeat his enemies, as we have seen in the initial battles mentioned above.

He will become the supreme leader and reformer of the Muslim Ummat.

There will be a great Islamic revival, and this Deen will reign supreme. He will fill the world with justice after it had been plagued with oppression.

He will practice and lead people according to the Sunnat of Nabi Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

He will rule for seven to nine years, with complete justice and righteousness, and all this time Islam will be the predominant religion of the world. .

During his rule, the Muslims will experience great economic enrichment. There will be no droughts and lands will be exceptionally fertile. The earth will yield crops in abundance and of the best quality. This rich agricultural state will ensure a glut of money and food. In fact, so much that people who come to the Baitul-Maal for assistance will be given as much as they can take away.

In short the Muslims will live a most luxurious and comfortable life, something they will never ever experience again in this world.

Imam Mahdi will distribute lands equally among people. Muslims will live in great harmony with each other. Gone will be the days of in fighting, strife and disunity.

The hearts of people will become so independent of wealth and so dependent on Allah that when an announcement is made for the needy to come forward, only one person will stand up. When this person will be given wealth in such abundance, he will feel ashamed and would want to return the wealth, but the answer will be: "We do not take back what has been given. It's all yours to keep."

Jerusalem will also be captured by Muslims (as stated earlier under "signs before his appearance").

Imam Mahdi will conquer the city of Constantinople (presently known as Istanbul). The story behind this conquest is as follows:

After the earthquakes, which destroyed his enemies, and the subsequent amassing of Muslim armies under his leadership, the Imam will leave Makkah for Madinah, where he will offer salaam at the Rowzha Mubarak (The Grave of Rasulullah Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Having done this his next step would be to proceed on to Damascus, where the bulk of the Nasaara (Christian) forces would be deployed.

In Damascus, the Imam will set up his headquarters. From here, he will conduct military operations against the enemies of Islam, and from here, he will rule.

At a place known as either A 'maaq or Daabiq, somewhere near Allepo Syria, 960,000 Christian forces would be assembled under 80 banners, quite clearly to annihilate the Muslims.

Imam Mahdi will send a battalion of Muslim fighters, from among the best people on earth, to engage them. When the two groups encounter each other face to face, the Romans will request that the Muslims hand over to them those who had fought and captured their Roman brethren. The Muslims will refuse, saying: "We will never hand over our Muslim brothers" thus triggering off a fierce battle. A third of the Muslim army will flee, and Allah will never ever grant them towba (repentance). A third will be slain, and they will be the noblest martyrs in The Sight of Allah. The surviving third will be victorious, never to suffer defeat thereafter.

This battle will last four days. Each day the Muslim troops will resolve on oath that they will not return but as victors. For three days, they will fail to crush the enemy, with many men becoming martyrs. On the fourth day, the Christians will falter and succumb to a tremendous onslaught from the remaining Muslim troops. The ensuing slaughter will be unprecedented in history. This decimation will utterly shatter the morale of the Christians.

Thus, Imam Mahdi will smash the might of the non-Muslims forces in that period, forces which had come together from all parts of the world.

Pressing forward, the next destination will be Turkey. From the Syrian coast, Imam Mahdi will dispatch seventy thousand soldiers of the Banu Ishaq tribe to conquer Constantinople. They will cross the Mediterranean Sea, bound for Turkey and will conquer Istanbul without the use of a single weapon. Parts of the city will collapse upon the Takbeer and Tahleel of these warriors. They will recite
'Laa ilaha ilial-laahu wallahu Akbar' and simply walk over the city. The Muazhzhins of the Muslims will then establish the five times daily azhaan throughout the city.

This will occur about six years after Imam Mahdi had come to power.

Imam Mahdi will also arrive at Constantinople and set up the structure for his rule, appoint people to govern there and most importantly, make arrangements for the implementation of Islamic law.

This conquest will deliver untold fortunes into the hands of the Muslims. As he and his men busy, themselves capturing and rounding up these vast riches a rumour will spread that "the Dajjaal has broken loose in Syria and is wreaking havoc among your families." This news will be very disturbing to the Imam, and so consequently, he will hurriedly leave for Syria. In the meantime, ten men will be sent ahead to ascertain the truth. About these ten The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: " I know their names and the names of their fathers they will be among the best warriors in that era." Nabi e Kareem (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) even knew the colour of their horses.

One of them will report that the whole story is false. Dajjaal has not yet emerged. This was a lie fabricated by Shaitaan to try and disrupt the progress of the Muslims. Imam Mahdi will resume his return journey to Syria with greater ease and comfort once he learns that Dajjaal is not yet loose.

He will stop over in all the towns and cities along the route to survey the situation and make necessary arrangements for government.
Meanwhile the conquerors of Istanbul will march on and invade parts of Western Europe (Greece, Italy, etc.) in the same manner, with the Takbeer and Kalimah. All this area will fall under the rule of Imam Mahdi.

A few weeks after Imam Mahdi reaches Damascus the great imposter, Dajjaal will now truly emerge and begin his campaign of mischief and corruption.

Since the Dajjaal will have a large following of mainly Jews and illegitimate people (those born out of marriage), the Muslims under Imam Mahdi will resume preparations for war. They will be busy arranging the formation of their troops during the time of Fajr. The jamaat salaah will be almost about to start when suddenly Sayyidina Eesa (Alayhis salaam) will descend from the heavens and join the ranks of Muslims for salaah. He will lead the Fajr salaah.

After the slaying of Dajjaal by Nabi Eesa, Imam Mahdi will not live for very long. A few months will elapse and this great Imam, a man who provided the perfect sequel to Allah's Supreme Religion -ISLAM, will pass on to the realms of the hereafter. The Muslims will perform his Janaaza salaah and bury him. The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned that there would be no better in life after Imam Mahdi.

__________

All the above happenings are taken from the authentic Ahadith of Rasulullah( Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Therefore, the fulfillment of these prophecies will leave absolutely no doubt in the, minds of even the most ardent critics or sceptics, as to the veracity and truthfulness of Our Noble Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).