Rebuttal to Sam Shamoun’s article
A Series of Answers to Common Questions
By
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/god.htm
Shamoun has come up with an article
in which he tries to show whether the God of Islam is indeed the God of the Bible. As a
Christian Shamoun definitely believes that the God of Islam is a totally and different God
than the one he worships and believes in. That is fair enough, so one would expect to find
some reasonable points by Shamoun in this article to show why he as a Christian does not
believe that Allah is the God of the Bible. However so Shamoun's real
intention is quite clear. His main goal in this article is to attack Islam, Allah,
and the Quran. As we go through the article you will see it for yourself, and realize that
Shamoun simply wanted to attack Islam in this article. One would ask Shamoun why put such
a deceptive title name for an article, when the main purpose is the exact opposite? Sure
Shamoun can say he was not trying to attack Islam or Allah but show the differences
between his God and my God. However so, once again, as we go through the article you will
see for yourself that Shamoun's article is nothing but an attack on Islam. However so that
is not a problem. I will be more than happy to refute his arguments and objections. I will
be basically posting his arguments against Islam one by one, what he has to say concerning
the Bible will be disregarded and not posted. To read his entire article click on the link
I posted under the title. The aim of this rebuttal is to basically present his arguments
and refute them.
ARGUMENT: 1
AUTHOR OF EVIL
The Holy Bible
teaches that God cannot be tempted by evil and neither tempts anyone with evil; evil being
understood as referring to immorality and sin. James
Yet, the Quran
teaches that Allah is the author of evil:
And (the
unbelievers) schemed and planned, and Allah schemed also, and the best of schemers is Allah. S.
3:54
Remember how the
unbelievers schemed against thee, to keep thee in bonds, or to slay
thee, or get thee out (of thy home). They scheme and plot, but the best of schemers is Allah. S. 8:30
The term for
scheme in Arabic is makara which denotes one who
is a deceiver, one who is conniving, a schemer. It is always used in a negative sense.
Allah is thus seen as the best of deceivers, the premiere schemer and conniving one.
This is not
simply a Christian perspective but one thoroughly endorsed by Muslim theologians as well.
For example Dr.
Mahmoud M. Ayoub in his book, The Quran and Its Interpreters, Vol. II The House of
Imran, brings up the question of "how the word makr (scheming or plotting), which implies
deceitfulness or dishonesty, could be attributed to God." (Ibid. [1992 State
University of New York Press, Albany], p. 165)
After listing
several Muslim sources he quotes ar-Razi as arguing that "scheming (makr) is
actually an act of deception aiming at causing evil. It is not possible to
attribute deception to God. Thus the word is one of the muttashabihat [multivalent words of the
Quran]." (Ibid., p. 166)
In fact the Quran
furnishes plenty of examples on some of the methods Allah adopts in devising evil:
Remember in thy
dream Allah showed them as a few: if he had showed them to thee as many, ye would surely
have been discouraged, and ye would surely have disputed in your decision: but
Allah saved you: for He knoweth well the (secrets) of (all) hearts. S. 8:43
Allah is said to
have shown the opposing fighting forces as few to Muhammad since if he had shown them as
they actually were, the Muslims would have been afraid to fight. Hence, Allah had to use
deception in order to encourage the Muslims to fight in his cause.
And when We desire to destroy a city, We command its men who live at ease, and they commit
ungodliness therein, then the Word is realized against it, and We destroy it
utterly. S. 17:16
Allah commands
men to sin in order to destroy them completely.
They (Jinns- demon spirits) worked for him (Solomon) as
he desired ... then when We decreed death upon him, nothing
showed them his death except a little creeping creature of the earth, which gnawed away at
his staff. And when he fell the Jinns saw clearly how, if they had
known the unseen, they would not have continued in the humiliating penalty (of work).
S. 34:13-14
Allah deceived
the Jinns into working for Solomon by preventing the latter's death from being disclosed
to them, otherwise they would have stopped their work.
Allah also
deceived both Christians and Jews into thinking that Jesus was crucified when in fact
"it was so made to appear unto them", seeing that he never was
crucified or killed. S. 4:157
According
to S. 9:51, nothing befalls Muslims except what Allah has ordained. And in S. 14:4,
we are told,
"Allah leads
astray whomsoever He will and guides whomsoever he will."
And,
"Whomsoever
Allah guides, he is the one who follows the right way; and whomsoever He causes to err,
these are the losers. And certainly We have
created for hell many of the jinn and the men; ... Whomsoever Allah causes to err,
there is no guide for him; and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering
on." S. 7:178-
179, 186
"If thy Lord
had so willed, He could have made mankind one People: but they will not cease to differ.
Except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy: and for this did He create them:
and the Word of thy Lord shall be fulfilled: ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all
together.’" S. 11:118-119
Not only does
Allah guide people astray, but also has created men specifically for hell. To make matters
worse, he even ordains the evil one commits as we have already seen in S.
Abu Huraira
reported Allah's Apostle as saying:
Verily Allah has
fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he of necessity
must commit (or there would be no escape from it)." Sahih Muslim #6421, 6422
To even imagine
that Allah causes adultery is not only horrendous but disqualifies him from being the God
of Moses.
My response:
Shamoun's main argument is that Allah
deceives or schemes on his enemies. I for one see no evil in that, there is difference
when you deceive some one good who has done no harm to you, or when you deceive some one
to cause them harm, such as Satan. However when you read the verses Shamoun posted, in
which Allah deceived his ENEMIES, and the ENEMIES of the prophets. It was to derail their
plans, their evil plans. I see no evil in that, Allah is helping out his prophets, the
good people by getting one over the bad guys who are trying to do something bad. Allah
does not deceive good people to harm them as Satan does. Allah just plots and plans on his
enemies when they plan and plot against him, such as to kill his prophet or harm the
Muslims.
Now let us quote the verses Shamoun
posted on which Allah supposedly deceived Muslims:
Remember in thy
dream Allah showed them as a few: if he had showed them to thee as many, ye would surely
have been discouraged, and ye would surely have disputed in your decision: but
Allah saved you: for He knoweth well the (secrets) of (all) hearts. S. 8:43
I
find it funny that Shamoun is going for whatever he can get. To start off, Shamoun claims
that Allah is deceiving Muslims and so on. However so, Shamoun is making up an argument as
if to say that Allah deceived the Muslims so harm could come to them, when in fact you
read the verse and you get no sense of that at all. The verse is clear, the enemies were
much more than the Muslims, so if the Muslims saw that, they would have been discouraged,
many would flee, and many with argue with one another on what to do. This would cause a
lot of deaths to the Muslim side, however so, Allah comforted them, and made it appear to
the Muslims that they were not that many, and that the Muslims were indeed the stronger
side.
Allah
was simply helping the Muslims out. Allah simply wanted his believers to triumph over his
enemies. So he comforted them and as a result the Muslims were victorious. Had Allah not
comforted them something terrible would have happened, and the Muslims would have lost,
and the enemies of God would have prevailed, is that what Shamoun wants? The fact is, the
only true deceiver here is Shamoun, he makes arguments out of
nothing and tries to make a situation seem very bad. He tries to show that Allah deceived
the Muslims and misguided them as if to cause them harm and evil. However Shamoun forgets, Shamoun tries to show that this thing is evil, when in fact you
look at it and you see no evil in it. Allah did not make the enemies number seem less to
CAUSE HARM AND DEATH AMONG MUSLIMS, Shamoun is trying to liken Allah to Satan, which he
completely fails to do. Satan deceives to cause harm and send people to hell, I would like
Shamoun to show me the evil that Allah caused when he actually comforted the Muslims and
lead them to victory, I want Shamoun to show me the evil Allah
intended to do on the Muslims. Shamoun has yet to show the evil, the verse shows anything
but evil, it shows God helping the Muslims. The same goes with his previous verses in
which Allah deceived HIS ENEMIES. I want to know the evil in that, God deceived his
enemies who were plotting to kill his believers and prophets, where is the evil in that? I
would like Shamoun to show it to me. Shamoun forgets, Satan deceives to cause harm and
sin, Allah does not.
The next verse he posts:
And when We desire to destroy a city, We command its men who live at ease, and they commit
ungodliness therein, then the Word is realized against it, and We destroy it
utterly. S. 17:16
The
verse has no evil in it, in fact you are a true deceiver in
abusing the text. No where in the verse does Allah command the men to do evil and then
destroy it.
17.016
YUSUFALI: When We
decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who
are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true
against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly.
PICKTHAL: And when We
would destroy a township We send commandment to its folk who live at ease, and afterward
they commit abomination therein, and so the Word (of doom) hath effect for it, and we
annihilate it with complete annihilation.
SHAKIR: And when We
wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives,
but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with
utter destruction.
As
you can see the main three translations say nothing of what Shamoun is talking about!
The
verses DONT SAY that Allah commands the men to live at ease and
transgress
so he destroys them, the verses say that when he destroys a town, or plans on destroying a
town, he sends a command to the people who are living at ease and committing sins. HE
SENDS A COMMAND TO THEM, meaning a prophet or a messenger or something to warn them,
however they continue to commit sins, so then the command of destruction against them is
allowed for they listened not and continued to sin.
The
next verse Shamoun posts:
They (Jinns- demon spirits) worked for him (Solomon) as
he desired ... then when We decreed death upon him, nothing
showed them his death except a little creeping creature of the earth, which gnawed away at
his staff. And when he fell the Jinns saw clearly how, if they had
known the unseen, they would not have continued in the humiliating penalty (of work).
S. 34:13-14
Shamoun
once again tries to build a case which he does not have. Allah was simply showing the
arrogant jinn that they are nothing, and that it took a small worm to let them find out
that Solomon had been dead. The jinn thought themselves to be powerful, and were arrogant,
and deceived a lot of men into taking them as Gods, so Allah was simply teaching the jinn
of Solomon a lesson that they are like everyone else and are not smarter than God. Jinn
are not demon spirits, there are devils among jinn, but not all jinn are devils.
Shamoun
then states: Allah also deceived both
Christians and Jews into thinking that Jesus was crucified when in fact "it was so
made to appear unto them", seeing that he never was crucified or killed. S. 4:157
Allah
deceived his enemies into thinking they killed Jesus. Allah once again showed that he is
all powerful and is always one step ahead of them. The true deception is that of
Christians and Paul who later went and made up stories that Jesus rose from the dead, and
died for our sins. That is the true deception. There would have been no sin on Christians
at the time who mourned for Jesus and believed he had died. The
sin is when they started making things up. So in fact Shamoun is still being deceived by
his own book in which it states that Jesus died and rose, when in fact he did neither.
According
to S. 9:51, nothing befalls Muslims except what Allah has ordained. And in S. 14:4,
we are told,
"Allah leads
astray whomsoever He will and guides whomsoever he will."
There
is nothing wrong in that. It is Allah's will if we convert or not. Every one knows this.
Allah is the one in command of all things. By the end of argument one I will show that
even Shamoun admits that his God guides whom he will and misguides whom he wills, and is
indeed the author of evil, in Shamoun's own words. Shamoun then posts:
Whomsoever Allah
guides, he is the one who follows the right way; and whomsoever He causes to err, these
are the losers. And certainly We have
created for hell many of the jinn and the men; ... Whomsoever Allah causes to err,
there is no guide for him; and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering
on." S. 7:178-179, 186
"If thy Lord
had so willed, He could have made mankind one People: but they will not cease to differ.
Except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy: and for this did He create them:
and the Word of thy Lord shall be fulfilled: ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all
together.’" S. 11:118-119
There
is no deception in that, whatever God wills is done, if he wills it not then that is how
it is. Do you disagree with that Shamoun? If you have a problem with those verses then
this means several things happening in this world are not controlled by your God but
outside his control and will, hence your God is not all powerful. That is the consequence
of disagreeing with those verses he posted. Everything is indeed God's will. If he chooses
mercy for us, then it will happen, if not, then it will not.
God is in control of everything which Shamoun obviously does not believe!
Abu Huraira
reported Allah's Apostle as saying:
Verily Allah has
fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he of necessity
must commit (or there would be no escape from it)." Sahih Muslim #6421, 6422
In
other words the verses are claiming Allah is in control of all things. I will expose
Shamoun that he even believes that. You will see for yourself that he believes that his
God causes adultery and all evil. Quoting what Shamoun himself said in a previous article:
There is no
difficulty at all with these passages, since God allowed Satan to incite David to number
The reason why
this angered the Lord is that rather than trusting God, David was evidently placing his
trust in the number of his people. Even David's commander-in-chief, Joab, was not totally
pleased with the king's decision:
"But
Joab said to the king, `May the LORD your God increase the number of the people a hundred
fold, while the eyes of my lord king can still see it! But why does my lord the king want to do this? But
the king's word prevailed against Joab and the commanders of the army..." 2 Sam. 24:3-4a NRSV
Evidently, David
had purposed within his heart to number
Hence, although
Satan was the direct cause, God was
also indirectly responsible since the Devil can only do that which God allows
him to do.
Hilarious
indeed! So Shamoun attacks something which he himself believes in,
which is God is in control of all things! Note Shamoun admits that the devil cannot do
anything that God does not allow him to do, meaning it is God who is indirectly involved
when the devil convinces you into having illegal sex which means God is the one doing it.
So every evil thing the devil does, it is in fact God doing it, as Shamoun admitted. This
also means that everything we do is only if God wills it or allows it, meaning he is in
charge and whatever we do it is in fact by his grace or his allowance, so hence why does
Shamoun have a problem with God guiding some and not guiding some others? It his own will,
something you perfectly agree with! This shows how ignorant
Shamoun truly is, and how inconsistent he is and how he lies and deceives. So hence as you
can see for yourself, Shamoun believes God is in-directly or directly in control of
EVERYTHING, meaning Shamoun admits God is the author of evil and all bad things because he
allows it to be and happen, so hence Shamoun's argument falls flat on his face, and
Shamoun must now abandon Christianity because the argument he uses against Islam to
discredit it can be applied to his own religion, as he himself showed, so hence he must
leave Christianity! If he does not then every one is a witness to what a hypocrite he is. Thank you Shamoun for exposing yourself yet AGAIN.
That
is the end of argument one, as you saw Shamoun's arguments were made of nothing. He tried
to make something seem bad when it wasn’t. You all also saw how inconsistent Sam is,
and what a liar he is, as the arguments he uses against Islam are in fact also against
Christianity as he himself admitted it in a previous article. So much
for Allah being evil and deceiving. It is just another argument followed up by
another rebuttal.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT: 2
AUTHOR OF ABROGATION
According to the
Quran Allah reveals a verse only to have it canceled out a short time later:
None of Our
revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We
substitute something better or similar- Knowest thou not that Allah has power over all
things? S. 2:106
When We substitute
one revelation for another- and Allah knowest best what He reveals (in stages)- They say, "Thou art but a forger"; But most of them
understand not. S. 16:101
This leaves us
with the difficulty of having a God who does not remain consistent and often changes his
revealed purpose. This being the case, how is one to know that the promises of such a Being in regards to eternal security can be trusted? Just as he
changes his mind in relation to the revelation, he can also decide to change his mind in
regards to the believer's ultimate destiny without anything stopping him from doing so.
My Response:
Shamoun
has once again lied, and he has even gone as far as lie to his Christians and his own
book. The Bible does indeed contain abrogation, or God changing his mind. Here is the
proof, from a previous rebuttal of mine to Shamoun:
This
will be the easiest argument to respond to. Let me quote something very interesting from
Shamoun: It must be stated that the
scriptures clearly teach that God's decree of judgement is not always final since God
often allows time for repentance to occur since his desire is for none to perish.
He also stated: In relation to God reversing a
decision he has made due to man's actions we read in Jeremiah
18:7-10:
Not
only is that a lie that is a contradiction within the very Bible. As we can see Shamoun is
claiming that God can reverse his decision and his decision is not always final, meaning
he changes his mind. Shamoun also post some verses to show this:
Ezekiel
33:11
Jeremiah
18:7-10:
However
so that is simply not true, and it also leaves us with a contradiction in the Bible, let
us look at the contradicting verses:
KJB 1 Sam
Num
So
as we see God does not repent, he does not change his mind, however so Shamoun claims God
does change his mind and reverse his decision leaving us with a plain contradiction, let
us quote the contradicting verses:
Jer 18:8
If
that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
Jer
Jer 26:3 If so be they will
hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto
them because of the evil of their doings.
To
repent or not to repent that is the question. (End of rebuttal)
So
as you can see, I have already dealt with the issue of God changing his mind in the Bible,
and you can all see it for yourself that God in fact did change his mind. For further
proof that the Bible contains abrogation let us post Bible verses which have abrogated the
other:
Genesis 20:11-12:
11 And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and
they will slay me for my wife's sake. 12 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.
This
verse was an allowance of marrying your sister which is the daughter of your father but no
mother was abrogated by:
Deuteronamy
27:22: 22 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
So
as you can see for yourself, there is indeed abrogation in the Bible. So Shamoun's
argument falls flat on his face and can be used against him. Now since he believes
abrogation cannot be from God, and we have seen abrogation in his book then he must leave
Christianity. If he does not then we all bear witness that he is a hypocrite. There is
more to write on abrogation in the Bible but that is enough for now. However for more
detailed information on abrogation in the Bible please visit these links:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/abrogation_in_bible.htm
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/Bible/abrogate.htm
Now as for
abrogation in the Quran. Shamoun
obviously does not understand what it means, and goes on to start inventing lies by
claiming God is inconsistent yet it is Shamoun who is the inconsistent one all along.
Abrogation
in Arabic means Naskh, which means obliteration. The cases of abrogation occur only in
laws, and not beliefs or change of beliefs. For example God will not abrogate the belief
of worshiping one God by coming up with something new such as to worship two Gods.
Christians have always used abrogation against the Quran, an obvious misunderstanding by
them and lack of understanding on the Islamic view point of abrogation. The Quran was
revealed in a period of 23 years, it was revealed in stages as the
Quran
says:
017.106
YUSUFALI: (It is) a Qur'an which We have divided (into parts from time to time), in order that thou
mightest recite it to men at intervals: We have revealed it by stages.
025.032
YUSUFALI: Those who reject Faith say: "Why
is not the Qur'an revealed to him all at once? Thus (is it revealed), that We may strengthen thy heart thereby, and We have rehearsed it to thee
in slow, well-arranged stages, gradually.
076.023
YUSUFALI: It is We
Who have sent down the Qur'an to thee by stages.
So as you can
see, the Quran was revealed in stages, and not sent at once, which even the unbelievers
got mad at because they wanted to know why the Quran was not sent at once. However so the Quran was not sent at once because it would have been too
much to take in at once. It would have been to hard to
follow and just leave your ways and the way you lived and change in an instance. That is
human nature and God knows best. Such as the case of alcohol.
The Quran says that in alcohol there is a benefit and a harm,
and the harm is greater:
002.219
YUSUFALI: They ask thee concerning wine and
gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is
greater than the profit." They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What
is beyond your needs." Thus doth Allah Make clear to you His Signs: In order that ye
may consider-
That would
gradually make the Muslims at the time that were drinking stop and think, and start
drinking less and maybe even stop. The Quran then forbid Muslims to come to their prayers
while in a drunken state:
PICKTHAL: O ye who
believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye
know that which ye utter, nor when ye are polluted, save when journeying upon the road,
till ye have bathed. And if ye be ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the
closet, or ye have touched women, and ye find not water, then go to high clean soil and
rub your faces and your hands (therewith). Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving.
So now it has
become clear to Muslims not to approach their prayers while they were drunk, and their are 5 prayers, in the early morning, in the early afternoon, in
mid afternoon, and in the evening, and one at night. So basically that in itself would
have made it very difficult for the Muslims to drink, and if they did it would have to be
very minimum as to prevent drunkenness, so this would eventually lead to several Muslims
stop drinking as to the inconvenience and difficulty it presented. Then finally the Quran
revealed that alcohol is completely forbidden to drink once the Muslims had gotten used to
drinking little of it or completely abstaining from it:
005.090
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Intoxicants and
gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may
prosper.
005.091
YUSUFALI: Satan's plan is (but) to excite
enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the
remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will ye not then abstain?
So that is a
basic way of how abrogation works. It is not that God did not know, or the first rule
failed. The fact is Allah revealed things in stages. It would have been to hard for the people to give up their alcohol ways at once unless
you weren’t that into it, and the people back then were very into drinking alcohol.
So hence a failing rule would be if God would reveal that alcohol is forbidden at once
rather than in stages. You cannot abandon something you like or addicted to at once, it
takes time. So that just shows how simple abrogation is, nothing like what Shamoun makes
it to be.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT:
3
AUTHOR OF HISTORICAL ERRORS
The Quran
contains historical errors which implies that Allah is not an
Omniscient Being, since an all-knowing Being would be able to accurately recall historical
events. Below is a list of just some of the many problems we find in the Quran.
·
·
In
S. 17:1 we are told that Muhammad was taken to the farthest Mosque, Masjid al-Aqsa. The problem with this is that the
Aqsa Mosque had not been erected since Abd al-Malik only built it in AD 691. It cannot be
referring to the Temple in Jerusalem since that was destroyed by the armies of the Roman
general Titus in AD 70.
S. 18:9-26 alludes
to several men and their dog who slept for approximately 309
years only to be awakened in perfect condition.
According to S.
18:83-98, Alexander the Great called Zhul Qarnain,
"the Two Horned One," was a Muslim who traveled till he found the Sun
literally setting in a muddy spring. When we keep in mind that the
title "the Two Horned One" was a title
given to Alexander in pre-Islamic times, the Muslim attempts of trying to deny this fact
utterly fails.
According to S.
4:157 the unbelieving Jews boasted by saying, "We killed the Messiah Jesus the son of
Mary, the apostle of Allah." The only problem with this is that the unbelieving Jews
never admitted that Jesus was Messiah and would not have killed him if they had believed
that he was their long-awaited Messianic Deliverer. The unbelieving Jews had Jesus killed
because they believed he was a false Messiah:
'And they began to
accuse him, saying, ‘We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment
of taxes to Caesar and CLAIMS to be Christ a king.’"
Luke 23:2 NIV
Christians are
accused of worshiping Mary and Jesus as two gods apart from the true God:
And behold! Allah
will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, Worship me and my mother ... " S.
5:116
Christ the son of
Mary was no more than an apostle- many were the apostles that passed away before him. His
mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat
their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His Signs clear to them ... S. 5:75
In blasphemy indeed
are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the
least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all - every one that is on the
earth..." S. 5:17
This presumes
that since Mary ate food and could be destroyed by Allah she could not possibly be divine.
This gives the misleading impression that Christians believe that she is more than simply
human.
In fact
the
Quran proceeds to accuse Christians of worshiping three gods:
"They do
blaspheme who say: Allah is the third of three
(inallaaha thaalithu thalaatha)" S. 5:73
"... so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not three (thalaatha): desist: It will be better for
you: for Allah is one Allah ..." S. 4:171
Mary the Mother
of Jesus is confused with Mary the sister of Aaron and Moses, the daughter of Amram:
Behold! The wife of Imran (i.e. Amram) said, "O my
Lord! I do dedicate unto thee what is in my womb"... When she was delivered, she
said: "O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child ... I have named her Mary... "
S. 3:35, 36
"And Mary the daughter of
Imran, who guarded her chastity.." S. 66:12.
"... They
said: O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of
evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste." S. 19:27-28
"Then Mary (Heb. Mariam), the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the timbrel in her hand
..." Exodus
"The name of
Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of
Levi, who was born to Levi in
My Response:
Shamoun
has to come up with what he believes are several historical errors in the Quran, so let us
see if this is indeed the case starting with his first post:
·
·
In
S. 17:1 we are told that Muhammad was taken to the farthest Mosque, Masjid al-Aqsa. The problem with this is that the
Aqsa Mosque had not been erected since Abd al-Malik only built it in AD 691. It cannot be
referring to the Temple in Jerusalem since that was destroyed by the armies of the Roman
general Titus in AD 70.
Shamoun's
mistake is seen right from the start when he claims that the Mosque had not been erected
until AD 691. Shamoun believes that if something is a Mosque, it must have look like all
the modern day Mosques or something similar, however so, a Mosque or masjid can be any
place, as Muhammad said, the whole earth has been made a Mosque for him. So hence that
argument falls short. He then says it cannot be the temple in Jerusalem since it was
destroyed. He says this without bringing any references, in a debate or discussion, when
you make a claim you must put forth your proof, Shamoun claims the Mosque Muhammad visited
and prayed in is a temple which was destroyed. He does not show any of his references of
this claim he makes, therefore it is disregarded until he brings forth the reference and
source he is using. Once he does so I will gladly refute him again. Until then we shall
wait, I do not deal with claims being made without providing any references at all.
·
·
S.
18:9-26 alludes to several men and their dog who slept for approximately 309 years only to
be awakened in perfect condition.
I
would like to see the historical problem with that. Is your objection that men cannot be
asleep for 309 years and then be awakened in perfect condition? Are you denying what God
can do?
According to S.
18:83-98, Alexander the Great called Zhul Qarnain,
"the Two Horned One," was a Muslim who traveled till he found the Sun
literally setting in a muddy spring. When we keep in mind that the
title "the Two Horned One" was a title
given to Alexander in pre-Islamic times, the Muslim attempts of trying to deny this fact
utterly fails.
According to
Surah 18:83-98 there is nothing to indicate that Zhul-Qarnain is Alexander the great.
Shamoun makes another claim that the two horned one was a title given to Alexander the
great pre-Islamic times without showing any proof or references. He does not show his
source yet again. Secondly for argument's sake, let us assume that the two horned one was
a title given to Alexander the great, this does not mean if the Quran calls some one else
the two horned one that he has to be Alexander. It could still be someone else. Let us see
what tafsir Ibn kathir said:
The Story of Dhul-Qarnayn
Allah says to His Prophet ,
[æóíóÓúÜóáõæäóßó]
(And they ask
you) O Muhammad ,
[Úóä
Ðöì ÇáúÞóÑúäóíúäö]
(about Dhul-Qarnayn.) i.e., about his story.
We have already mentioned how the disbelievers of Makkah sent word to the People of the
Book and asked them for some information with which they could test the Prophet . They (the People of the Book) said, `Ask him about a man
who traveled extensively throughout the earth, and about some young men who nobody knows
what they did, and about the Ruh (the soul),' then Surat Al-Kahf was revealed.
Dhul-Qarnayn had great Power
[ÅöäøóÇ
ãóßøóäøóÇ áóåõ Ýöì ÇáÇøñÑúÖö]
(Verily, We
established him in the earth,) means, `We have given him great power, so that he had all
that kings could have of might, armies, war equipment and siege machinery.' So he had
dominion over the east and the west, all countries and their kings submitted to him, and
all the nations, Arab and non-Arab, served him. Some of them said he was called
Dhul-Qarnayn (the one with two horns) because he reached the two "Horns" of the
sun, east and west, where it rises and where it sets.
[æóÂÊóíúäóÜåõ ãöä ßõáøö ÔóìúÁò
ÓóÈóÈÇð]
(and We gave him the means of everything.) Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, Sa`id
bin Jubayr, `Ikrimah, As-Suddi, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak and others said, "This means
knowledge.'' Qatadah also said,
[æóÂÊóíúäóÜåõ ãöä ßõáøö ÔóìúÁò
ÓóÈóÈÇð]
(and We gave him the means of everything.) "The
different parts and features of the earth.'' Concerning Bilqis, Allah said,
[æóÃõæÊöíóÊú ãöä ßõáøö ÔóìúÁò]
(she has been given all things) [27:23], meaning all things that
monarchs like her are given. Thus too was Dhul-Qarnayn: Allah gave him the means of all
things, meaning the means and power to conquer all areas, regions and countries, to defeat
enemies, suppress the kings of the earth and humiliate the people of Shirk. He was given
all that a man like him would need. And Allah knows best.
[ÝóÃóÊúÈóÚó
ÓóÈóÈÇð - ÍóÊøóì ÅöÐóÇ ÈóáóÛó ãóÛúÑöÈó ÇáÔøóãúÓö
æóÌóÏóåóÇ ÊóÛúÑõÈõ Ýöì Úóíúäò ÍóãöÆóÉò æóæóÌóÏó
ÚöäÏóåóÇ ÞóæúãÇð ÞõáúäóÇ íÐóÇ ÇáúÞóÑúäóíúäö
ÅöãøóÂ Ãóä ÊõÚóÐøöÈó æóÅöãøóÂ Ãóä ÊóÊøóÎöÐó
Ýöíåöãú ÍõÓúäÇð - ÞóÇáó ÃóãøóÇ ãóä Ùóáóãó
ÝóÓóæúÝó äõÚóÐøöÈõåõ Ëõãøó íõÑóÏøõ Åöáóì
ÑóÈøöåö ÝóíõÚóÐøöÈõåõ ÚóÐóÇÈÇð äøõßúÑÇð -
æóÃóãøóÇ ãóäú Âãóäó æóÚóãöáó ÕóÜáöÍÇð Ýóáóåõ
ÌóÒóÂÁð ÇáúÍõÓúäóì æóÓóäóÞõæáõ áóåõ ãöäú
ÃóãúÑöäóÇ íõÓúÑÇð ]
(85. So he
followed a way.) (86. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it
setting in a spring of Hami'ah. And he found near it a people. We said: "O
Dhul-Qarnayn! Either you punish them or treat them with kindness.'') (87. He said:
"As for him who does wrong, we shall punish him, and then he will be brought back
unto his Lord, Who will punish him with a terrible torment (Hell).'') (88. "But as
for him who believes and works righteousness, he shall have the best reward, and we shall
speak unto him mild words.'')
We
don’t see anything about any Alexander. Visit this interesting link:
http://debate.domini.org/newton/alex.r.html
·
·
According
to S. 4:157 the unbelieving Jews boasted by saying, "We killed the Messiah Jesus the
son of Mary, the apostle of Allah." The only problem with this is that the
unbelieving Jews never admitted that Jesus was Messiah and would not have killed him if
they had believed that he was their long-awaited Messianic Deliverer. The unbelieving Jews
had Jesus killed because they believed he was a false Messiah:
That
is very easy to respond to. Shamoun's objection is that the Jews said they killed the
messiah. Shamoun says that they would say no such thing had they believed he was indeed
the messiah. Shamoun once again is going for anything. The Jews were simply mocking him.
The Jews were simply making fun and playing around when they were calling him the messiah.
Shamoun knows this yet tries to make an argument out of it. As the verse says: the unbelieving
Jews boasted
They
boasted, meaning showed off and started going around showing off as if they did something
great. When you boast and so on you tend to mock and make fun of some one at the same
time, as these Jews did, going around saying we killed the messiah in an act to make fun
of Jesus for claiming to be the messiah. This happens everyday, when people mock each
other or make fun of some one when he claims to be something, such as if some one claimed
to be a king in the middle of the street, people would laugh around and say ‘ohhh
kinggg pleasee clean the streets for us etc.’ Just because they call him king
doesn’t mean they believe he is a king, but it is just play and making fun.
·
·
Christians
are accused of worshiping Mary and Jesus as two gods apart from the true God:
And behold! Allah
will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, Worship me and my mother ... " S.
5:116
Christ the son of
Mary was no more than an apostle- many were the apostles that passed away before him. His
mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat
their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His Signs clear to them ... S. 5:75
In blasphemy indeed
are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the
least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all - every one that is on the
earth..." S. 5:17
The
verses don’t imply ALL Christians worship Mary. The fact of the matter is that many
Christians have made Mary into God status and something more than she really is. Such as
the Catholics do. Here are some links that do show that many Christians have in fact
worshiped Mary and put her into a God status position:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/worship_mary.htm
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/marytrin.html
"They do
blaspheme who say: Allah is the third of three
(inallaaha thaalithu thalaatha)" S. 5:73
"... so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not three (thalaatha): desist: It will be better for
you: for Allah is one Allah ..." S. 4:171
You could also refer to a
book by Neil Robinson entitled “Christ in Islam and Christianity” where he
discusses this verse and says that there indeed was a sect known as the Marimites that
used to worship Mary.
These
verses describe your trinity and what you say, that God is the third of three, there is no
problem with that, the third of three is the same thing of what you claim. You claim the
Holy Spirit is God, hence the Holy Spirit is the third of three; hence you do indeed say
God is the third of three. As for the next verse, indeed say not THREE, for Allah is one,
not three. Allah is not a trinity; I wonder how Shamoun missed that? The verse is making
it clear Allah is ONE, not made up of three persons, and God is one, not three different
persons who you call God hence ending up with three Gods!
Mary the Mother
of Jesus is confused with Mary the sister of Aaron and Moses, the daughter of Amram:
Behold! The wife of Imran (i.e. Amram) said, "O my
Lord! I do dedicate unto thee what is in my womb"... When she was delivered, she
said: "O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child ... I have named her Mary... "
S. 3:35, 36
"And Mary the daughter of
Imran, who guarded her chastity.." S. 66:12.
"... They
said: O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of
evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste." S. 19:27-28
"Then Mary (Heb. Mariam), the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the timbrel in her hand
..." Exodus
"The name of
Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of
Levi, who was born to Levi in
This
is an old argument that has been refuted countless of times; it is just you who cannot
stand to accept the answer so you keep ranting over an old argument. Here are links that
have already dealt with this supposed mistake of the Quran:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/mary.html
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/qbhc06.htm
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/qbhc06_1.htm
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Contra/External/sister_of_aaron.htm
http://www.drzakirnaik.com/pages/qanda/40.php
Of
course Shamoun will claim that he has already refuted the arguments and responses by
Muslims and that the responses by Muslims just don’t cut it. I would expect nothing
more from him, but however so the Muslims have refuted his argument made up by Christians
and it is in fact Christians who can’t provide a good response to the Muslim response
but respond by giving their initial argument which the Muslims have already refuted!
The
verse is clear, when it says sister of Aaron it did not mean literally as the prophet
himself cleared it up, visit the links and you will see it for yourself. The Christians
will no doubt keep bringing it up, but let them be.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT: 4
AUTHOR OF CARNAL PLEASURES
The Quranic
paradise is totally different from the biblical portrait of heaven. In Allah's paradise,
we find sexual and carnal pleasures for believers to engage in throughout eternity:
But give glad
tidings to those who believe and work righteousness, that their portions is Gardens,
beneath which rivers flow, every time they are fed with fruits therefrom, they say:
"Why, this is what we were fed with before," for they are giving things in
similitude; And they have therein damsels (Arabic - Houris )
pure (and holy); and they abide therein (forever)." S. 2:25
But to those who
believe and do deeds of righteousness, We shall soon admit to
Gardens, with rivers flowing beneath, their eternal home. Therein they have damsels
pure and holy; We shall admit them to shades, cool and ever
deepening. S. 4:57
Of a rare creation
have We created the Houris, and We have made them ever virgins,
dear to their spouses, of equal age with them for the people of the right hand. S.
56:35-38
But for those who
fear Allah is a blissful abode, enclosed gardens and vineyards, and damsels with
swelling breasts (Arabic - Kawa'eb), their peers in age, and a full cup. S.
78:31-34 (Arberry and Rodwell translate this part correctly, see also this overview page <../Quran/Versions/078.033.html>)
My Response:
Well
as we already saw with the links I provided. The God of the Bible does indeed change his
mind, so maybe he changed his mind on how he would want to make heaven. ;)
Now
I believe Shamoun wants to make an argument that to have sex in heaven is something evil
and perverted as many Christians like to say. However so this can be
easily refuted.
1-
It is heaven, heaven is the supreme success and pleasure, so this would be totally
something different, it is not like Muslims are told to go and have sex and all the
pleasure of the world in this life. It is the after life which is heaven which is again
the supreme success.
2-
The Christians make it seem to have beautiful women in heaven to have sex with is a crime
and something evil and perverted. If so, then why would their God create sex in the first
place? Why would their God create beautiful women in the first place? Why do you
Christians have sex? Why do you Christians enjoy looking at beautiful women? Why do you
beautiful Christian women enjoy being beautiful and make sure you look beautiful?
Christians complain and make an argument about something in which they have no trouble in
taking part in. So hence it seems Christians believe sex is evil and perverted, then this makes their God a pervert for making sex. It makes their
God a pervert for making beautiful women and makes every Christian who has sex and who is
beautiful or likes or wants to be beautiful a sick perverted human! So the fact is, their
God allowed sex on earth. They complain about sex in heaven as if sex is evil, hence what
makes sex on earth more pure than sex in heaven? The fact is nothing. The Christians
argument is not that having sex in heaven is bad because its heaven, their argument is
because sex is bad! Their argument is that being rewarded with the option of having sex is
something evil! Hence their God is a pervert and so is every Christian who has sex, and
every Christian must now leave Christianity since they too have sex which they believe is
evil! Hilarious indeed! It amazes me to see such ridiculous arguments.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT: 4
AUTHOR OF FOREIGN WORDS
The Quran claims
to be in pure Arabic speech:
We have sent it
down as an Arabic
Quran, in order that ye may learn wisdom. S. 12:2
"An Arabic
Quran, wherein there is no crookedness..." S. 9:28
And We know very well that they say, "Only a mortal is teaching
him." The speech of him at whom they hint is barbarous- and this is Arabic, pure and
clear. S. 16:103
But according to
Arabic scholars the Quran is not in pure Arabic, containing dozens of foreign
words:
Abariq, S. 56:18,
Persian
Adam, S. 2:34,
Akkadian
Araik, S. 18:31,
Persian
Firdaus, S.
18:107, Pahlavi
Fir'awn, S.
73:15, Syriac
Habr, S. 9:31,
Hebrew (Haver)
Istabraq, S.
18:31, Persian (Istabar)
Sakina, S. 2:248,
Hebrew
Sijjil (baked
clay), S. 105:4, Persian
Taghut (idols),
S. 2:257, Syriac (Teghutha)
Zakat, S. 2:110,
Syriac (Zkhutha)
Zanjabil
(ginger), S. 76:17, Pahlavi
My Response:
RESPONSE
This
shows that Shamoun's main goal of this article was to attack the Quran and Islam.
To
begin with, let us post the verses he posted:
We have sent it
down as an Arabic
Quran, in order that ye may learn wisdom. S. 12:2
"An Arabic
Quran, wherein there is no crookedness..." S. 9:28
And We know very well that they say, "Only a mortal is teaching
him." The speech of him at whom they hint is barbarous- and this is Arabic, pure and
clear. S. 16:103
Something PURE means without any corruption. When the Quran says PURE
Arabic it means Arabic containing no falsehood or lies. Pure meaning
clean and truthful. An Arabic without any crookedness
meaning no corruption or lies like the Bible. The fact is words are taken from cultures
and adapted and eventually become part of that language. Such as alcohol and sugar is now
recognized as English words when in fact their origin is Arabic, but no one goes and says
that they are not English words. Shamoun's main response to this is that this answer
cannot stand because the Quran is the eternal speech of God and existed before any human
language was here. However so, this is also easy to respond to. The fact is that Allah
simply chose to take and use such words. This in fact shows Allah’s knowledge. That
he knew all languages before time and how some words would adapt to other languages.
Shamoun once again plays the game of why would God do this? Rather than keep questioning
why God would do this or that just stick to what he did rather than keep making rubbish
arguments.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT:
5
AUTHOR OF GRAMMATICAL ERRORS
Not only does the
Quran contain foreign words, but according to Arabic grammarians it also contains
grammatical mistakes:
The Qor'an contains
sentences which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries;
foreign words, unfamiliar Arabic words, and words used with other than the normal meaning,
adjectives and verbs inflected without observance of the concords of gender and number-
illogically and ungrammatically applied pronouns which sometimes have no referent- and
predicates which in rhymed passages are often remote from the subjects ... To sum up, more than one
hundred Qor'anic aberrations from the normal rules and structures have been noted...
( Ali Dashti, 23 Years: A
Study of the Prophetic Career of Muhammad [Costa Mesa, Ca. 1994; Mazda Publishers],
pp. 48, 50)
few
examples include the following passages:
·
·
S.
7:56 - "The mercy of Allah is near"
Arabic -
"inna rahmata Allahi qaribun min al-mohseneen."
The word qaribun is the predicate of rahmata Allahi, and as such should match in gender.
Since rahmata is feminine the word qaribun (which is masculine )
should be qaribah, its feminine form.
·
·
·
S.
7:160 - "We divided them in twelve tribes"
Arabic - "wa
qata'nahom 'ethnata 'ashrata asbatan."
In Arabic, any
noun which is counted by a number above ten should be singular, as is the case in S.
7:142; 2:60; 5:12; 9:36; 12:4. As such the Arabic asbatan
should be sebtan.
·
·
·
S.
5:69 - "Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabians, and the Christians, whosoever believes
in Allah and the Last Day, and works righteousness- no fear shall be on them, neither
shall they sorrow."
Arabic-
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna
wan-Nasaara man'amaana bilaahi wal-Yawmil Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
According to
scholars, the Arabic Saabi'uuna has been wrongly
declined. Compare the same grammatical structure found in the following suras:
S. 2:62-
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaara was-Saabi'iina..."
S. 22:17-
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina
wan-Nasaara..."
In the last two
suras the term was declined correctly, Saabi'iina,
as opposed to Saabi'uuna. This is due to the
word inna found in the beginning of the sentence
causing a form of declension called "nasb" (as in the cases of accusative or
subjunctive) with the "yeh" being the
"sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna
is given the case of 'uu, a sign of
"rafa" ( as in cases of nominative and indicative ).
Accordingly, the verse in 5:69 is wrong.
·
·
·
S.
91:5 - "By the heaven and that which
built it."
Arabic-
"was-samaaa-i wa maa ba-naahaa."
The word ma is impersonal in Arabic. Yet, the subject of the
verse is Allah, heaven's Creator. As such the word man,
meaning "him who", should have been
used instead of the impersonal ma.
The Muslim
scholar Ibn al-Khatib in his book al Furqan
quotes Muhammad's wife Aisha as saying:
"There are
three grammatical errors in the Book of Allah, they are the fault of the scribe: In 20:63
... And in 5:69 ... And in 4:162." (Muhammad M. abd al-Latif Ibn al-Khatib, Al-Furqan [Dar al-Kutub al-Elmiyah, Beirut], p. 91)
After seeing the
first standard copy of the Quran, Islam's third Caliph Uthman proclaimed, "I see grammatical errors in it, and the Arabs
will read it correctly with their tongues." (Ibid., p.90)
My Response:
RESPONSE
As
for Aisha saying there are grammatical errors in the Quran, and the same with Uthman,
Shamoun always seems to get more desperate! The grammatical errors mentioned by both Aisha
and Uthman were that of SCRIBES. They miswrote a few words and so on, nothing bad, this
happens when you copy or write a lot. Shamoun very well knows the same criteria can be
used against his own book with the mistakes of scribes and so on, so why use an argument
that can be used against him? As for the rest of what Shamoun said on
mistakes in grammar and wrong sentences and so on. I for one am not an Arabic
scholar and I’m not very good in Arabic, neither is Shamoun. However so I am sure
that any good Arabic speaking Muslim will easily correct you and refute you on what you
have said as many Arabic speaking Muslims have done to many
Christians who claim that there are grammatical mistakes in the Quran. Here are some links
to show Muslim's refuting arguments of grammatical errors in the Quran:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/gramrefut.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/iltifaat.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/robinson.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/poetry.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Miracle/ijaz1.html#2
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Scribal/scribal.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Scribal/haleem.html
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/luxreview1.html
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Q_Studies/ahruf.htm
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Q_Studies/qiraat.htm
http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/khalid.html
http://www.understanding-islam.org/related/text.asp?type=article&aid=18
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/grammar2.htm
He wrote:
ARGUMENT:
6
ALLAH AND OATHS
My Response:
RESPONSE
Shamoun
has written a more detailed article on Allah and his oaths, therefore I shall be writing
my response to this argument in a rebuttal against his long article Allah and oaths.
He wrote:
ARGUMENT:
7
ALLAH IS NOT TRIUNE
The final proof
that Allah is not Yahweh Elohim of the Holy Bible is that Allah is not a trinity.
According to the Holy Bible, there is only One true God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Galatians
Yet, at the same
time Scripture affirms that this One God eternally exists in three Persons:
The Father
"...elect
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father..." 1 Peter 1:2
The Son
"... looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of our Great God and
Savior Jesus Christ..." Titus 2:13
The Holy Spirit
"But Peter
said, 'Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit...
you have
not lied to men but to God." Acts 5:3-4
Three in One
"... baptizing them in the
My Response:
RESPONSE
Indeed
Allah is not triune, not a belief shared by Muslims only but by many Christians as well:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/early_christians.htm
Jehovah's
witnesses don’t believe in the trinity.
And Unitarian
Christians.
So
that ends this rebuttal to Shamoun’s article. As you can see for yourself, all his
arguments were baseless and did not discredit Islam at all.
Secondly
many of the arguments he uses can be based against him and are applied to him, hence he
should leave Christianity. You all saw for yourself that Shamoun believes his God is the
author of evil and EVERYTHING. Shamoun used such an argument against Allah forgetting that
he himself believed in it; hence he must leave Christianity since he believes this is
something evil. Another article another rebuttal!
My Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.
Rebuttals to Sam Shamoun's Articles section.
Sami Zaatari's Rebuttals section.