seems even those who dont adhere to the Muslim faith will adhere to the call of defense. However, whats worse is that when you have somebody who is a non-muslim and not even an orientalist scholar defending Islam or its sacred writings, you tend to display ignorance or just a sense of social justice warrior hatred. Henry Johnson, a user on YouTube, commented on my video Muhammad Is Not In Isaiah 42 (Refuting EFDawah) and left some interesting critiques. However, he seemed to be interesting in being much more of one who was looking to agitate if anything. So I am going to take the time to respond to his remarks since he claims: You are not a scholar and you have no idea about the Quran nor Islam. I'm personally not a Muslim, I followed my Mother but my Father is a Sheikh and has taught me so don't try tell me I'm wrong about the Quran because I know I'm not wrong. I may not be a scholar, but while your knowledge of Islam seems to come from a Sheikh who is your father (which you never said if he was a Sunni or Shiite), my sources come from Islamic scholars as well. Such as Yasir Qadhi, Ibn Kathir, and many others. Plus, I actually have a Quran software that gives me multiple translations of the Quran in English as well as both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. So my knowledge of the Quran is not just hear say. Also, I have a copy of the Study Quran, a scholarly translation and commentary by four Islamic Scholars of various schools of Islam. The first thing to reply to be the following: You say the Quran is a book of falsehoods and I'd imagine you think Muhammad is a false Prophet. For one, the Quran declares to the Muslims: The Jews and the Christians will never approve of you unless you follow their Religion. [2:120]. You are a living example of this 'timeless prophecy', if you will. Also, according to the Bible, the way to identify a false Prophet is in Deuteronomy 18:21-22: If what a Prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. You can believe whatever you want, be arrogant I'm cool with it but at least we know that by the Bible standards, Muhammad was a Man of Truth. He told many Prophecies of the Day of Judgement. Well, if we are to measure Muhammad by the standard of Deuteronomy 18, then lets do just that. [30:2-4] is a prophecy from Muhammad in his revelation from Allah where he says that the Byzantines would defeat the Persians within three to nine years after the Persians first defeated them. The Byzantines have been defeated. In the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome. Within three to nine years (fi bidi sinina). To Allah belongs the command before and after. And that day the believers will rejoice. It is agreed upon by Islamic Scholars such as Abdullah Yusuf Ali (in his own Quran notes) and Abdul Mannan Omar (in Dictionary of the Holy Quran) that the Arabic phrase here means three to nine years. In fact, Allama Shabir Ahmad Usmani, an Islamic scholar, even notes not just the lexical support for this meaning or range, but that Islamic tradition even gives this as the reading for the Arabic: in lexicon and in the Tradition, the word bid I is applied to a period ranging from three to nine years (1). However, in Irfan Shahids Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, the Orientalist scholar notes that in 614 AD, one of Muhammads claimed prophecies had potential to come true. The Persians conquered Jerusalem and defeated the Byzantines. The Byzantines were led by Emperor Heraclius (2). Of course, these Byzantines would defeat the Persians later, but as historical sources show, especially in The Oxford History of Byzantium, we see this happens thirteen years later in 627 AD (3). I did briefly mention this to Mr. Johnson, but what was his response? Um, he predicted it correctly actually but miscalculated a few years, ooohh what a big deal. Actually it is a pretty big deal. If you as a non-Muslim are going to defend Islam, then the first mistake is when you say he miscalculated. Because either youre saying a prophet of Allah did not receive divine revelation, but instead try to naturally predict an event, or you are saying that Allah made a mistake in the Quran. Which according to Islamic doctrine, this would not be possible especially in reference to the doctrine of Qadar, which is the Arabic word for fate. In fact, Qadar is actually one of the six articles of faith in Islam as mentioned in Book One of Sahih Muslim. What does Qadar teach in the Quran? If you read [3:145], [4:88], [7:188], [9:51] and other verses in the Quran, you will read that it teaches that whatever Allah wills to happen will happen. So if Allah wanted three to nine years, he wouldve wanted and have done just that and not miscalculate at all. In fact, to sum up the doctrine, Islamic scholar Alfred Guillaume notes the following: There are texts which clearly assert that man is responsible for his own actions, though the majority of texts seem to assert that they are definitely decreed. The Mutazila dealt with these passages as best as they could by softening the language of predestination, but still it could not be denied that the orthodox party had the Quran on their side when they asserted that God's predestination was absolute. This view is borne out by the chapter on predestination in the books of canonical tradition which do not contain a single saying of Muhammads which leaves freedom of action to man. Everything is predestined from the first and a mans fate is fixed before he is born (4). So here, Henry Johnson slipped up and made a mistake by admitting that the date was note accurate. Since after all, if whatever Allah decrees in the Quran comes true, it will happen how he wants. And the Quran clearly says within three to nine years. Not thirteen. Therefore, according to Deuteronomy 18, Muhammad was a false prophet. Secondly, Henry Johnson says: The Quran does not give divine attributes ANYTHING else other than God Almighty alone. It holds Jesus in high esteem, he was born of a Virgin by God's command, not because he wanted to **** his own creation and have his own child, he gave Jesus miracles to prove he was the Messiah as the Quran affirms. The Quran says "Far exalted is God to have a Son." While he is not a Muslim, he sure can argue like one. However, again he is in error. The Christians do not believe that YHWH in the bible had sex with anybody. The term Son of God is in reference to the relationship between Jesus and The Father. We as Christians believe Jesus existed eternally with the Father and that he did not have a beginning. For more about an Old Testament understanding of a physical being that beared the same name as YHWH, look up the concept up of The Shekhinah. However, going to what the Quran says, the Study Quran actually makes a statement that Islamic scholars make out to be interesting: His creating live birds out of clay birds, healing the blind and the leper, and raising the dead are likewise recounted in 3:49 (for blind and leper, see 3:49c). These last three miraculous powers attributed to Jesus are extraordinary in that they suggest powers usually reserved for God; God is the one who heals (26:8 [sic]); He is the raiser of the dead throughout the Quran: and the creation of birds from clay and bringing them to life by breathing upon them is exactly parallel to Gods creation of the human being (15:26-29; 32:7-9; 38:71- 72) (5). Interesting indeed that even the Study Quran admits this. A Quran with study notes done by Islamic Scholars. How then does Henry argue with these people he tries to defend here? Thirdly, he claims Paul was the false apostle who created Christianitys doctrines: Paul is the false apostle. He put in his own doctrine based upon the world he lived in. I have already refuted this claim in my article, A Case For Paul, where I even went and left a section showing that early Muslims viewed Paul as a follower of Jesus who taught the same teachings that Peter and the other disciples taught. If one were to actually examine the historical evidence, they would not make the same claims Henry Johnson is making on this issue, which are only claims that are made today and not by early Muslims and skeptics. He also claims that Christianity was a result of paganism influence. To which I ask the same tired question: Where is your evidence for such a claim? I honestly dont care if Henry Johnson responds to this article or not. I only hope that those who read these arguments be prepared for what the future holds in regards to the defending our faith. Shalom.
Sources & Citations
1.) Allama Usmani, Tafseer-E-Usmani,
Vol. 3, [Islamic Book Service, 2004], p. 1768 n. 2).
2.) Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the
Arabs in the Sixth Century, [Dumbarton Oaks, 2002], p. 232 3.) Cyril Mango, The Oxford History of Byzantium, [Oxford University Press, 2002], p. 308
4.) Guillaume, Alfred, Islam, Whitefish,
MT: Literary Licensing, 2011. p. 131
5.) Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, Caner K. Dagli,
Maria Massi Dakake, Joseph E. B. Lumbard, and Mohammed Rustom, eds. The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary, New York, NY: HarperOne, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, 2015. p. 334