Bismika Allahuma Muslim Responses to Anti-Islam Polemics

The Qur’an Can­not Be A Text of Divine Origin

Hesham Azmy

The Bible | Bismika Allahuma Team | November 26, 2006
The Qur’an Can­not Be A Text of Divine Origin

The Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ar­ies tend to make the gen­er­al con­clu­sion that the Qur’an can­not be a text of divine ori­gin because of the unac­cept­able mean­ings includ­ed in it. Per­haps they are cor­rect in this con­clu­sion and we may be inclined to agree with them due to the fol­low­ing rea­sons, which are :

    1. The Qur’an does not say a prophet slept with his daugh­ters.Gen­e­sis 19:30 – 38

    2. The Qur’an does not say a prophet slept with his neigh­bour’s wife and plot­ted to kill him2 Samuel 11:1 – 27

    3. The Qur’an does not say a prophet wor­shipped the Gold­en Calf.Exo­dus 32:1 – 6

    4. The Qur’an does not say a prophet changed his reli­gion, wor­shipped idols and built for them tem­ples.1 Kings 11:1 – 13

    5. The Qur’an does not say a prophet told lies and that God deceived and destroyed anoth­er prophet.1 Kings 13:1 – 30

    6. The Qur’an does not say David, Solomon and Jesus were orig­i­nal­ly bas­tards from the seed of Pharez, son of Judah.Gen­e­sis 38:12:30

    7. The Qur’an does not say the first­born of the Great Prophet who was the first­born of God slept with his step­moth­er.Gen­e­sis 35:22 and 49:3 – 4

    8. The Qur’an does not say the sec­ond son of the same Great Prophet (first­born of God) slept with his daugh­ter-in-law.Gen­e­sis 38:12:30

    9. The Qur’an does not con­tain lurid details and explic­it pornog­ra­phy involv­ing men of Assyr­ia and whores from Egypt.Ezekiel 23

    10. The Qur’an does not say John the Bap­tist, who was the great­est Israelite Prophet ever accord­ing to Jesus — though the least in the king­dom of God was greater than him ! — failed to rec­og­nize his sec­ond lord on earth, although this lord fol­lowed him and got bap­tized by him. At least not until he saw the third god descend­ing on this sec­ond god as a pigeon.Matthew 3:13 – 17, Mark 1:9 – 11 and Luke 3:21 – 22

    11. The Qur’an does not say the apos­tle of this god, Judas Iscar­i­ot, who per­formed many mir­a­cles in his name and was among the dis­ci­ples who were greater than Moses and oth­er Israelite Prophets accord­ing to Jesus, deliv­ered his god to the hands of his ene­mies for 30 pieces.Matthew 26:14 – 16, 27:3 – 9, Mark 14:10 – 11, Luke 22:3 – 6 and John 18:1 – 5

    12. The Qur’an does not say Caiaphas, the high priest — who was a prophet accord­ing to John the Bap­tist — reject­ed, insult­ed and made a ver­dict to kill his god.Matthew 26:57:68, Mark 14:53 – 65, Luke 22:54 – 71 and John 18:12 – 24

For all the above rea­sons, we con­clude that the Qur’an, unlike the Bible, can­not be a text of divine origin. The Qur'an Cannot Be A Text of Divine Origin 1


52 comments on “The Qur’an Can­not Be A Text of Divine Origin

  1. islamispeace

    Jazak Allah Khair broth­er Abdul­lah for the kind words, but I do not deserve such praise. All praise is due to Allah. By the way, I am a brother :-)

  2. Abdullah

    Assalam­mu’alaikum Wr. Wb.,

    Thank’s God there is per­son like islamis­peace. I hope there are more peo­ple like him or her.

    ALHAMDULILLAH, ALLAHU AKBAR, LAA ILLAHA ILALLAH MUHAMMADAR RASULULLAH.

  3. abdul

    salaam

    lol:intresting i did­nt know some of the points and the divine cred­itabil­i­ty” of bible.yap,if these are the things present in the bible and its still con­sid­ered to be the word of God[in its present form]than its right that glo­ri­ous Quran does not full these this requier­ment” lol.

    jaza­kallah

  4. islamispeace

    No response from Mariyyah ? Oh well.

  5. shadowofears

    GOD pro­hibit­ing broth­ers from mar­ry­ing their bio­log­i­cal sis­ters after He ini­tial­ly allowed it for Abra­ham and Sarah :

    And yet indeed she is my sis­ter ; she is the daugh­ter of my father, but not the daugh­ter of my moth­er ; and she became my wife. (Gen­e­sis 20:12)”

    Cursed be he that lieth with his sis­ter, the daugh­ter of his father, or the daugh­ter of his moth­er. And all the peo­ple shall say, Amen. (Deuteron­o­my 27:22)”

    It is impor­tant to know that in the same book of Gen­e­sis, GOD Almighty did Speak direct­ly with Abra­ham. For instance :

    Gen­e­sis 12:1 – 3
    1 The LORD had said to Abram, Leave your coun­try, your peo­ple and your father’s house­hold and go to the land I will show you.
    2 I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you ; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.
    3 I will bless those who bless you, and who­ev­er curs­es you I will curse ; and all peo­ples on earth will be blessed through you.”

    Yet, GOD nev­er pro­hib­it­ed Abra­ham from mar­ry­ing his own bio­log­i­cal sis­ter, Sarah !

    So, Deuteron­o­my 27:22 is indeed an abro­ga­tion to the pre­vi­ous Law !

  6. islamispeace

    Hi Mariyyah,

    Any response ?

  7. islamispeace

    Hel­lo Marriyah,

    I have read through your response and have pre­pared a counter-response and here it is.

    You said the following :

    First­ly I was a bit dis­ap­point­ed with your answer con­cern­ing peace in the Qur’an I didn’t expect you to list all but at least a few… I also don’t under­stand the pas­sage you have giv­en the gen­er­al mes­sage is as I said pre­vi­ous its to oth­er muslim’s and only if asked for for­give­ness… is this real­ly peace at all … please explain further.”

    To be hon­est, I am not at all sur­prised that you found my response to be dis­ap­point­ing.” You already have a pre­dis­posed under­stand­ing” of Islam and the Quran, even though you admit that your knowl­edge of the Quran is still young.” This can only mean that you read alot of anti-Islam­ic mate­r­i­al, instead of doing your own research. Any­way, you clear­ly mis­un­der­stood the vers­es I men­tioned. They do not speak of oth­er Mus­lims, but the unbe­liev­ers who waged war against the Mus­lims. Read the vers­es again please :

    If thou fear­est treach­ery from ANY group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms : for Allah loveth not the treacherous.
    Let not the UNBELIEVERS think that they can get the bet­ter (of the god­ly): they will nev­er frus­trate (them).
    Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your pow­er, includ­ing steeds of war, to strike ter­ror into (the hearts of) the ene­mies, of Allah and your ene­mies, and oth­ers besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. What­ev­er ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treat­ed unjustly.
    But if the ENEMY INCLINE TOWARDS PEACE, DO THOU (ALSO) INCLINE TOWARDS PEACE, and trust in Allah : for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).
    Should they intend to deceive thee,- ver­i­ly Allah suf­ficeth thee : He it is That hath strength­ened thee with His aid and with (the com­pa­ny of) the Believ­ers;” 5:58 – 62

    It does not speak of oth­er Mus­lims, but the unbe­liev­ers who are geared towards using vio­lence against Mus­lims. It is in this con­text that the Quran urges the believ­ers to fight back. How­ev­er, it also says that if the ene­my sues for peace, then it is the oblig­a­tion of the Mus­lims to also accept peace.

    You said :

    Choose not friends from them [unbe­liev­ers]. … Take them and kill them wher­ev­er ye find them. – 4:89

    This act of vio­lence issued by the qur’an fails to include the words if pro­voked’ but states that because they are of a dif­fer­ing faith they should be killed thus giv­ing the job of god to man. Not very peaceful”

    You have mis­quot­ed this verse and also out of con­text, which is dis­heart­en­ing since you have been going on about how broth­er Hes­ham Azmy has some­how mis­quot­ed the Bible when he wrote the arti­cle, even though you have failed to demon­strate how he has done so. You have not fol­lowed what you preach. First of all, the verse is not talk­ing about the unbe­liev­ers but the hyp­ocrites. You would have known that if you had read the verse in its con­text. Let me give you the con­tex­tu­al evi­dence from Surah 4:88 – 90 :

    Why should ye be divid­ed into two par­ties about the Hyp­ocrites ? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way ? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, nev­er shalt thou find the Way.
    They (the hyp­ocrites) but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same foot­ing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is for­bid­den). But if they turn rene­gades, seize them and slay them wher­ev­er ye find them ; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
    Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restrain­ing them from fight­ing you as well as fight­ing their own peo­ple. If Allah had pleased, He could have giv­en them pow­er over you, and they would have fought you : There­fore if they with­draw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guar­an­tees of) peace, then Allah Hath opened no way for you (to war against them).”

    The warn­ing is to avoid the hyp­ocrites because of the dan­ger they posed to the Mus­lims. But again, the Quran affirmed the com­mit­ment to peace when peace was pos­si­ble. Notice that verse 90 says that if the hyp­ocrites are from a group which has a treaty of peace with the Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty, then it is incum­bent upon the Mus­lims to hon­or the truce. Is this not peace ?

    You said :

    The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His mes­sen­ger and strive after cor­rup­tion in the land will be that they will be killed or cru­ci­fied, or have their hands and feet on alter­nate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degra­da­tion in the world, and in the Here­after theirs will be an awful doom. – 5:33

    Mak­ing war I guess is not agree­ing with Allah and his Mes­sen­ger as well as those who as you say per­se­cute mus­lims, is this fair, does this sound like a book of peace ? ”

    The verse can­not be any clear­er. It clear­ly says mak­ing war.” That does not mean not believ­ing in Islam but using phys­i­cal vio­lence. If they per­se­cute Mus­lims, the Quran gives the Mus­lims their God-giv­en right to defend them­selves. I can­not under­stand why Chris­tians feel that these vers­es are some­how evil” or unmer­ci­ful.” It seems to me that there is an inher­ent bias against Islam, and no amount of intel­lec­tu­al rea­son­ing will change that. I hope I am wrong.

    You said :

    I am ful­ly aware that the Bible and the Torah both talk about pun­ish­ments such as these for adul­ter­ers and the such but if we look into the new tes­ta­ment the sto­ry of the ston­ing of the woman takes place (John 8 1 – 11) where Jesus states that he who has com­mit­ted no sin may cast the first stone, there­fore say­ing that these kind of pun­ish­ments are hyp­o­crit­i­cal and that no man is able to make that deci­sion. Which is why Chris­tians believe that sin­ner will be dealt with by God which is why we don’t stone peo­ple 4 those sorts of crimes any more…”

    I have two prob­lems with your argu­ment. First, the New Tes­ta­ment did not apply here because it did not exist in the time of David. There­fore, your argu­ment is point­less. What they had at the time was the Law of Moses, and that law called for the ston­ing of the adul­ter­er or adul­tress as I showed in my pre­vi­ous response. It is irrel­e­vant what the New Tes­ta­ment says in this case. David, as king, was not tasked with uphold­ing the New Tes­ta­ment, but the Old Tes­ta­ment. The New Tes­ta­ment did not come about until much lat­er. He should have been put to death as the law required. Why was he not ? I ask again. Are peo­ple of pow­er above the law ?

    Sec­ond, you evoke John 8:1 – 11 in your argu­ment that the Law of Moses no longer applies to Chris­tians, even though this is irrel­e­vant to the mat­ter at hand. The prob­lem with your argu­ment is archae­o­log­i­cal. You see, accord­ing to your own Bible (The New Inter­na­tion­al Version):

    ((The ear­li­est and most reli­able man­u­scripts and oth­er ancient wit­ness­es do not have John 7:53 – 8:11.))”

    This is what the NIV says regard­ing the Peri­cope de Adul­tera.” You can see for your­self here :
    http://​www​.bible​gate​way​.com/​p​a​s​s​a​g​e​/​?​b​o​o​k​_​i​d​=​50&​c​h​a​p​t​e​r​=​7&​v​e​r​s​i​o​n​=31

    Archae­o­log­i­cal evi­dence shows that these vers­es were not added to the Bible until hun­dreds of years of Jesus (pbuh). One of the most famous New Tes­ta­ment man­u­scripts attests to the absence of the Peri­cope from the ear­li­est Chris­t­ian sources and that man­u­script is P66 or Papyrus 66, which has been dat­ed to about 200 CE, mak­ing it one of the ear­li­est. You can see pic­tures of it here :

    http://www1.uni-bremen.de/~wie/ww_tc.html

    Scroll down a bit and you will see it below The Sinaiti­cus Finds of 1975.” Clear­ly, there is a prob­lem with John 8:1 – 11 and it is there­fore not suit­ed for your argu­ment. I have done my research. It seems that you have not done yours.

    You said :

    This relates to your ques­tion about David and why he wasn’t giv­en the tra­di­tion­al pun­ish­ment. I am not a the­olo­gian so I can only answer you accord­ing to my own knowl­edge and under­stand­ing… David was wrong in what he did and his son was killed as a result I think that is worse then any pun­ish­ment includ­ing the orig­i­nal. How­ev­er your belief that its not true because he did some­thing wrong I don’t under­stand David was a man not a God and he made mis­takes like any one of us, yes he is a prophet and in his mis­take and pun­ish­ment he still gave the mes­sage of God as his pun­ish­ment rein­forced moses’ law , thou shalt not com­mit adultery’.”

    Why is David’s son killed for the sins of his father ? Is this your idea of Bib­li­cal jus­tice ? In order to pun­ish David, God kills his son ? From your words, it seems as if you are not dis­turbed by this. I cer­tain­ly am. Why is an inno­cent child killed for some­thing he did not do and the real sin­ner gets off the hook ? Is the Bible real­ly pro-life. I see all these Chris­tians oppos­ing abor­tion and yet their own scrip­ture talks of infan­ti­cide ! It sends shiv­ers down my spine. I mean no offense but this sto­ry dis­turbs me to the core.

    You said :

    In response to the ques­tion about Lot I apol­o­gise for not being clear I believe that Lot and Sodom and Gom­morah show the same kind of sin but I don’t under­stand why you wouldn’t accept the sto­ry lot in Chris­tian­i­ty is not a Prophet he is a nor­mal man who along with his daugh­ters com­mit­ed sin. That is the top­ic here diss­cussing the above about the prophet sleep­ing with his daugh­ters, he isn’t a prophet. As I said before I don’t have all the answers, but I don’t c why this sto­ry stands out any more we have shown the above is wrong and lot isn’t a key fig­ure in the bible so I cant say I have been taught about him enough to answer these questions.”

    First of all, Lot is not a nor­mal” man. He was vis­it­ed by angels for God’s sake ! How many peo­ple do you know that have been vis­it­ed by angels who deliv­ered God’s word to them. Lot was the recip­i­ent of God’s word. God, in his mer­cy, sent Lot to reform the peo­ple of Sodom and Gamor­rah, because He nev­er pun­ish­es any­one with­out send­ing guid­ance to them first. The peo­ple of Sodom and Gamor­rah reject­ed God’s word and were there­fore destroyed. They were giv­en a chance and they blew it. So even if Lot did not make prophe­cies, he still received God’s word. There­fore, he was not a nor­mal per­son. God was com­mu­ni­cat­ing with him through His angels. He was not a nor­mal man. I am sor­ry to say that your answers are not sufficient.

    You said :

    I have a ques­tion though why do you not accept the sto­ries of David being an adul­ter­er because he is a Prophet and there­fore would­nt have com­mit­ed such a vile’ crime, then why do you believe in Mohammed ? He com­mit­ted worse crimes then David ever did- he killed inno­cent peo­ple and instruct­ed the killing of the inno­cent, raped women and instruct­ed the rape of women- tak­ing what the right hand pos­sess’ mar­ried a child which today con­sti­tutes and pae­dophil­ia. Is it not ? And reject­ed god becoz Gods word was mak­ing him unpop­u­lar and instead said it was ok to believe in al uzzat and minat If I am wrong plz cor­rect me as I say my knowl­edge of the qur’an is still young.”

    Please give me exam­ples of where the blessed Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh) killed inno­cent peo­ple and raped women. This is slan­der of the worst type, and it is unfor­tu­nate­ly quite typ­i­cal among many Chris­tians, although not all. I can say with full hon­esty that I have many Chris­t­ian friends who do not believe that the Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh) was a mur­der­er and rapist. They know that his­to­ry says oth­er­wise ; that he was wise, a great leader and a cham­pi­on of the poor and of women. The Al-Uzza and Al-Man­at argu­ment is also false. The so-called Satan­ic Vers­es” myth has been proven to be false. You can read a detailed refu­ta­tion of this myth here :

    http://​www​.islam​ic​-aware​ness​.org/​P​o​l​e​m​i​c​s​/​s​v​e​r​s​e​s​.​h​tml

    You said :

    Anoth­er ques­tion is by stat­ing the the sto­ries of lot and David are wrong are you not going against the teach­ing of the qur’an.

    Sura 5:68 — Say : O Peo­ple of the Book ! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law (Torah), the Gospel (Injeel), and all the rev­e­la­tion that has come to you from your Lord.””

    Verse 41 of the same surah states the following :

    O Mes­sen­ger ! let not those grieve thee, who race each oth­er into unbe­lief : (whether it be) among those who say We believe” with their lips but whose hearts have no faith (the hyp­ocrites); or it be among the Jews,- men who will lis­ten to any lie,- will lis­ten even to oth­ers who have nev­er so much as come to thee. THEY CHANGE THE WORDS from their (right) times and places : they say, If ye are giv­en this, take it, but if not, beware!” If any one’s tri­al is intend­ed by Allah, thou hast no author­i­ty in the least for him against Allah. For such — it is not Allah’s will to puri­fy their hearts. For them there is dis­grace in this world, and in the Here­after a heavy punishment. ”

    Also, the Quran crit­i­cizes the Jews and Chris­tians from divert­ing from the truth. Surah 5:65 – 66 states :

    If only the Peo­ple of the Book had believed and been right­eous, We should indeed have blot­ted out their iniq­ui­ties and admit­ted them to gar­dens of bliss.
    If only they had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the rev­e­la­tion that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed hap­pi­ness from every side. There is from among them a par­ty on the right course : but many of them fol­low a course that is evil. ”

    The mean­ing here is that they did not hold fast to the Torah and the Gospel which were God’s words, but instead altered the Word. So, yes the Quran does hon­or the Torah and the Gospel but it crit­i­cizes the Jews and the Chris­tians for chang­ing God’s words and putting in their own. A per­fect exam­ple is John 8:1 – 11. Clear­ly, these vers­es did not exist in the 2nd cen­tu­ry but some­how start­ing pop­ping up in 3rd and 4th cen­tu­ry Bibles.

    You said :

    Sura 29:46 Mus­lims are told by Allah, not to ques­tion the author­i­ty of the scrip­tures of the Chris­tians, say­ing, And dis­pute ye not with the Peo­ple of the Book, but say, We believe in the rev­e­la­tion which has come down to us and in that which came down to you ; Our Allah and your Allah is one;”

    You don’t do a good job of quot­ing scrip­ture. The verse, in its entire­ty states the following :

    And dis­pute ye not with the Peo­ple of the Book, except with means bet­ter (than mere dis­pu­ta­tion), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, We believe in the rev­e­la­tion which has come down to us and in that which came down to you ; Our Allah and your Allah is one ; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam).”

    So you see, it does not for­bid Mus­lims from argu­ing with Chris­tians. Ibn Kathir wrote that the mean­ing of this verse is that :

    any­one who wants to find out about reli­gion from them should argue with them in a man­ner that is bet­ter, as this will be more effec­tive. Allah says : (Invite to the way of your Lord with wis­dom and fair preach­ing…) (16:125) And Allah said to Musa and Harun when he sent them to Fir‘awn : (And speak to him mild­ly, per­haps he may accept admo­ni­tion or fear.) (20:44)”

    There is no pro­hi­bi­tion from debat­ing and dis­cussing, as long as it is pro­duc­tive. Whether our con­ver­sa­tion is pro­duc­tive or not remains to be seen. I am try­ing to show you the truth, so it is worth it.

    You said :

    the scrolls of the ot and nt have been found and autho­rised as the same now as they were then, they are now in a muse­um in Jerusalem.”

    As I showed above, this is not the case. John 8:1 – 11 are not present in scrolls of the…NT” along with oth­er vers­es. If you study the Bib­li­cal man­u­scripts, you will find many dis­crep­an­cies. I don’t think that you have stud­ied the man­u­scripts and have not done the appro­pri­ate research. You sim­ply accept what you have been told.

    Once again, thank you for offer­ing your views. I look for­ward to your response !

  8. Marriyah

    Hi there Islamis­peace’
    Thank-you for your reply as i am always inter­est­ed in your opin­ions and ques­tions. And I will try my best to answer them to high standard…
    First­ly I was a bit dis­ap­point­ed with your answer con­cern­ing peace in the Qur’an I didn’t expect you to list all but at least a few… I also don’t under­stand the pas­sage you have giv­en the gen­er­al mes­sage is as I said pre­vi­ous its to oth­er muslim’s and only if asked for for­give­ness… is this real­ly peace at all … please explain further.

    In my study/​interest of the quran I have come across many pas­sages that speak of violence…

    Choose not friends from them [unbe­liev­ers]. … Take them and kill them wher­ev­er ye find them. – 4:89

    This act of vio­lence issued by the qur’an fails to include the words if pro­voked’ but states that because they are of a dif­fer­ing faith they should be killed thus giv­ing the job of god to man. Not very peaceful

    The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His mes­sen­ger and strive after cor­rup­tion in the land will be that they will be killed or cru­ci­fied, or have their hands and feet on alter­nate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degra­da­tion in the world, and in the Here­after theirs will be an awful doom. – 5:33

    Mak­ing war I guess is not agree­ing with Allah and his Mes­sen­ger as well as those who as you say per­se­cute mus­lims, is this fair, does this sound like a book of peace ?

    I am ful­ly aware that the Bible and the Torah both talk about pun­ish­ments such as these for adul­ter­ers and the such but if we look into the new tes­ta­ment the sto­ry of the ston­ing of the woman takes place (John 8 1 – 11) where Jesus states that he who has com­mit­ted no sin may cast the first stone, there­fore say­ing that these kind of pun­ish­ments are hyp­o­crit­i­cal and that no man is able to make that deci­sion. Which is why Chris­tians believe that sin­ner will be dealt with by God which is why we don’t stone peo­ple 4 those sorts of crimes any more…
    This relates to your ques­tion about David and why he wasn’t giv­en the tra­di­tion­al pun­ish­ment. I am not a the­olo­gian so I can only answer you accord­ing to my own knowl­edge and under­stand­ing… David was wrong in what he did and his son was killed as a result I think that is worse then any pun­ish­ment includ­ing the orig­i­nal. How­ev­er your belief that its not true because he did some­thing wrong I don’t under­stand David was a man not a God and he made mis­takes like any one of us, yes he is a prophet and in his mis­take and pun­ish­ment he still gave the mes­sage of God as his pun­ish­ment rein­forced moses’ law , thou shalt not com­mit adultery’.

    In response to the ques­tion about Lot I apol­o­gise for not being clear I believe that Lot and Sodom and Gom­morah show the same kind of sin but I don’t under­stand why you wouldn’t accept the sto­ry lot in Chris­tian­i­ty is not a Prophet he is a nor­mal man who along with his daugh­ters com­mit­ed sin. That is the top­ic here diss­cussing the above about the prophet sleep­ing with his daugh­ters, he isn’t a prophet. As I said before I don’t have all the answers, but I don’t c why this sto­ry stands out any more we have shown the above is wrong and lot isn’t a key fig­ure in the bible so I cant say I have been taught about him enough to answer these questions.

    I have a ques­tion though why do you not accept the sto­ries of David being an adul­ter­er because he is a Prophet and there­fore would­nt have com­mit­ed such a vile’ crime, then why do you believe in Mohammed ? He com­mit­ted worse crimes then David ever did- he killed inno­cent peo­ple and instruct­ed the killing of the inno­cent, raped women and instruct­ed the rape of women- tak­ing what the right hand pos­sess’ mar­ried a child which today con­sti­tutes and pae­dophil­ia. Is it not ? And reject­ed god becoz Gods word was mak­ing him unpop­u­lar and instead said it was ok to believe in al uzzat and minat If I am wrong plz cor­rect me as I say my knowl­edge of the qur’an is still young.

    Anoth­er ques­tion is by stat­ing the the sto­ries of lot and David are wrong are you not going against the teach­ing of the qur’an.

    Sura 5:68 — Say : O Peo­ple of the Book ! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law (Torah), the Gospel (Injeel), and all the rev­e­la­tion that has come to you from your Lord.”

    Sura 29:46 Mus­lims are told by Allah, not to ques­tion the author­i­ty of the scrip­tures of the Chris­tians, say­ing, And dis­pute ye not with the Peo­ple of the Book, but say, We believe in the rev­e­la­tion which has come down to us and in that which came down to you ; Our Allah and your Allah is one ;

    If these are accu­rate sita­tions then that would also mean that the divin­i­ty of the quran is in ques­tion because byu say­ing the these events didn’t hap­pen includ­ing the sta­tus of Jesus as son of God is against your own qur’an and your qur’an is against itself, because inb one place it says he wasn’t son of God and in the oth­er he says that u shud lis­ten to the bible which say he is and that these sto­ries doid occur ? And plz don’t say that its just about the real bible and torah’ and not the one we look at because I am aware of that myth, the scrolls of the ot and nt have been found and autho­rised as the same now as they were then, they are now in a muse­um in Jerusalem.

    I look for­ward to your response.

Comments are closed.