Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 77





Gerhard Nehls

Published 1980 by "Life Challenge",
PO. Box 273, Claremont, 7735,
South Africa
All rights reserved.
Quotations out of the wider context are forbidden.

ISBN 0 620 04 702 x

Printed by Evangelical Mission Press, Box 72,
Bellville 7530
Does the Qur'an allege that the Bible is corrupt?..........................................1
Do Christian Scholars allege that the Bible is corrupt?............................... 2
Do Muslim Theologians allege that the Bible is corrupt?.............................3
Did the Bible Come Down From Heaven?.......................................................4
How Did The Bible Come To Us?.....................................................................5
Are there forgeries, interpolations and contradictions in the Bible?...........8
Are there changes to and interpolations in the Bible?..................................9
Are there Contradictions in the Bible?..........................................................11
What Can we Say to these Objections brought forth against the Bible?...17
Is the Bible a Filthy Book Marred with Obscenities and Atrocities?..........19
Some Prophecies and Fulfilment regarding Jesus..21
The Evidence of Eye-Witnesses....27
Some prophecies regarding the Jews.....28
Summary of Jewish history showing the Fulfillment of these
Islamic objections to the doctrine of atonement..........................................34
Islamic objections to the divinity of Jesus and his sonship.42
Islamic objections to the doctrine of trinity...46
Islamic objections to the crucifixion49
Secular history confirms the crucifixion.50
Islamic objections to the claim of the Universality of Jesus.54
6: THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS....................................................................60
The Content......................................................................................................60
The Islamic Challenge.....................................................................................60
The Christian Answer......................................................................................61
Do Christians believe in inherited sin?.........................................................68
8: WHAT THEN IS THE GOSPEL?..................................................................69


How Can People Claim That The Bible Is
Does the Qur'an allege that the Bible is corrupt?
The Qur'an declares the Bible acceptable and advocates that it be studied and obeyed.
"It was We who revealed the Law to Moses, therein was guidance
and light ... and in their footsteps, We sent Jesus the son of
Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him
the Gospel, therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of
the Law that had come before him, a guidance and admonition to
those who fear Allah. To thee (Muhammad) We sent the Scripture
that came before it, and guarding it in safety." Surah 5:47-51
"'O, People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless
ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation
that has come to you from your Lord.' It is the revelation that
cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them
their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy ... those who believe
(in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures), and
the Sabaeans and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and
the Last Day, and work righteousness, - on them shall be no
fear, nor shall they grieve." Surah 5:71-72
"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." Surah 5:69. See also Surah 5:16,
"Dispute not with the People of the Book, save in the fairer
manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say: 'We
believe in what has been sent down to us, and what has been
sent down to you; Our God and your God is One and to Him we
have surrendered.'" Surah 29:45
"This Qur'an could not have been forged apart from God; but it
is a confirmation of what is before it ..." Surah 10:37
"Before it was the Book of Moses for a model and a mercy; and
this is a book confirming in Arabic tongue to warn the evil-
doers and good tidings to the good-doers." Surah 46:11
"Who sent down the Book that Moses brought as a light and
guidance to men? You put it onto parchments, revealing some,
and hiding much; and by which you were taught that you knew
not, you and your fathers. Say, 'God'". Surah 6:91
"And what We have revealed to thee of the Book, is the truth,
confirming what is before it." Surah 35:31
"Children of Israel ... believe in that I have sent down,
confirming the revelation that is with you and be not the first
to disbelieve in it ... and do not confound the truth with
vanity and do not conceal the truth wittingly (i.e. concealing
the truth against better knowledge)". Surah 2:40-42
The above texts presuppose the availability ot knowlede ot that which has been contirmed, presupposin that
the Torah was available in an unadulterated torm durin the time ot Muhammad.
"We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession
of Apostles. We gave Jesus, son of Mary, clear signs and
strengthened (or confirmed) him with the Holy Spirit." Surah
"And when there comes to them (the Jews) a Book from Allah,
confirming what is with them (the Taurat) ... they refused to
believe in it." Surah 2:89
"He has sent down upon thee the Book with the truth, confirming
what was before it and He sent down Torah and the Gospel afore
time, as guidance to the People and He sent down salvation."
Surah 3:3
There is no doubt that at least as early as AD 350 well betore the time ot Muhammad there was a unitorm
canon ot the Bible and nothin has been chaned, adulterated, polluted or perverted since.
"Before thee (i.e. Muhammad), also, the Apostles we sent were
but men ... If you realise this not, ask of those who possess
the message." Surah 21:7
"Believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Scripture which He
hath revealed unto his Messenger, and the scripture which He
revealed aforetime. Whoso disbelieveth in Allah and His Angles
and the Last Day, He verily hath wandered far astray." Surah
"Each one believeth in Allah and His Angels and His Scriptures
and His Messengers - We make no distinction between any of his
messengers." Surah 2:285
"Say: 'Bring you the Torah now and recite (or read) it, if you
are men of truth'" (Again the existence of the Torah is
presupposed). Surah 3:93
"You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent
down, confirming that which is with you." Surah 4:47
How could they compare the two, it one were lost. ($ee also Surois 5.+3, +6, +8, 6568, 66.12, 2.++, 53, 3.70,
78, 5.13, 15, +.+++6 and 2.78,79)
We see quite clearly that the accusations aainst ]ews and Christians are not that they have corrupted $cripture,
but they have misinterpreted, concealed or disobeyed it.
"There is none that can change the Words of Allah. Already hast
thou received some account of those Apostles (or: the other
Apostles also say so)." Surah 6:34
"No change can there be in the Words of Allah." Surah 10:64
Do Christian Scholars allege that the Bible is corrupt?
$ome do. To clarity this, some explanation is needed. A Muslim is a Muslim because he is born into Islam. This
view is enerally held. No man can be a Christian tor that same reason. The Bible denies this most
Christ asked some followers:
"Why do you call me, Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?" Luke 6:46
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be
condemned"! Mark 16:16
Without taith no one can be a Christian. Faith in whom. In the Ood ot the Bible
This is not merely beliet in the existence ot Ood. That is obvious.
"Even the demons believe and tremble", we read in the Bible. James 2:19
It is an obedient entrustin ot oneselt into His Hands and His will. Our knowlede about Ood, His will tor us,
and our standin betore Him is derived trom His Word, the Bible. The conscious turnin to Ood and the
determination to obey Him, as well as the acceptance ot His order, uidance and also a lite based on His
promises, is essentially an act ot will by each individual person.
The decision to become a Christian is as necessary tor one's spiritual lite as the birth ot a child is to its physical
lite. For Jesus said.
"I tell you the truth, no-one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born againno-one can
enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit." John 3:3,5
When the church was institutionalised (trom the time ot Constantine. AD 27+337) spiritual decline set in. It
became accepted (aainst the teachin ot the New Testament or Ir,:i) that a person became a 'Christian'
throuh birth and by the receivin ot '$acraments'. The 'ordinary' Christians, even the priests in those days,
knew little about the Bible. Tradition and ritual replaced the Word ot Ood. This resulted in a christianised
world which came to be called the 'Christian Occident' or the 'Christian Western World'. In tact it never was
based on Biblical truth and consequently it is not 'Christian'.
To the person who bases his or her taith on the Bible, the above concept is thus pure heresy. There has never
been a 'Christian' West or, tor that matter, a 'Christian' nation. The nation miht have been christianised,
miht have accepted in principle a new set ot beliets collectively and miht have celebrated Christian testivals,
but taith as such has in essence always been a personal matter restin on an individual decision and the
determination to live by it.
Within the 'churchitied' massChristianity that emered lived believers whose taith was orientated by the
Word ot Ood, the Bible, and who constantly tried to be a corrective to massChristianity. This situation has
remained unchaned to this day.
What the 'outsider' believes to be 'Christianity' is in tact Western culture with traces ot reliious concepts
and torms a culture capable ot launchin Crusades, ot blessin wars, ot outraeously abusin alcohol, and ot
acceptin and promotin a torm ot morality that cannot be called moral by any standard. In short, such
Christianity is totally devoid ot any obedience to Ood's Word or even knowlede thereot.
But within this decadent massChristianity, as we have seen, there is still a oodly number ot those who love
Ood, obey His will, and live consecrated and devoted lives. They are Bibleorientated. It is not surprisin
theretore that two mainstreams ot Christian theoloy have evolved. The one is man orientated (humanistic,
liberal, existentialistic, or whatever one may call it), where church membership does not presuppose Biblical
taith and standards, but rather is considered to be 'automatic' it one submits to the '$acraments', i.e. baptism
and the like.
This is the tvpe of Christianitv of which Jesus, in the Book of Revelation savs:
"I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other !
So, because you are lukewarm neither hot nor cold I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
You say, I am rich ; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing. But you do not realize that
you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked." Revelation 3:11-17
It you have ever considered that to be Christianity, I have ood news tor you. It is not And has never been
Liberal theoloy has denied the revelation ot Ood and 'interpreted' it to suit itselt and its own litestyle and
purpose. These 'theoloians' or 'Christian $cholars' have discovered all the 'contradictions' and 'corruptions'
that are so eaerly accepted by nonChristians as welcome aruments aainst the Bible.
There are, however, other Christian $cholars in the majority, I am lad to state who base their taith on the
Bible. That does not make them blind In tact, tor the last 100 years they have worked devotedly to clear the
Bible ot any copyin errors that crept in over the 3,000 years durin which the Bible was copied by hand.
Anyone who has written a book is paintully aware ot the tact, that despite conscientious care and several proot
readins, the tinished product always contains errata.
Due to the abundance ot very ood and old manuscripts many discovered by archaeoloists only within the
last 100 years our latest translations are just about beyond reproach. When in 19+8 a number ot well
preserved scrolls datin trom the $econd Century BC were tound near the Dead $ea, a complete copy ot the
Prophet Isaiah was tound. It coincides with the text ot our Bible in every detail.
To answer the question posed at the beinnin ot this chapter, we can say then that only liberal or 'modern'
theoloians seem to have been determined to tind corruption in the Bible. Their claims will be put to the test
later in this book.
Do Muslim Theologians allege that the Bible is corrupt?
Deviatin trom the teachin ot the Qur'an, which they protess to accept as revelation, Muslim theoloians have
exploited the opinions and statements ot liberal 'Christian' critics. This is only natural, tor they are interested
in showin the superiority ot the Qur'an over the Bible in quality and reliability. To be tair, we have to ask,
however, where Muslim textual critics ot the Qur'an may be tound and what their tindins are. A critical
assessment ot the Qur'an has never been acceptable to Muslims.
To Muslims it is ro;:i (- came trom heaven) and is considered to be beyond human criticism. We tind it in
poor taste tor them to apply a double standard when determinin the revelations character ot the Bible. We
either accept all scriptures as $cripture without subjectin them to criticism, or we apply the same kind ot test
to all scriptures to determine their trustworthiness.
This serious chare ot deliberately alterin the text ot the $cripture, which many Muslims make, without any
proot, is called toir:,:io,;:. Do you know that some learned Muslim writers, who have studied this matter, have
detinitely acknowleded that it cannot be proved aainst the ]ews or Christians. $ir $ayyid Ahmad Khan,
tounder ot the Aliarh Collee, has written. 'In the opinion ot us Muhammadans it is not proved that
corruption (toir:,:io,;:) ... was practised.' $ir $ayyid quotes Imam Bukhari and Fakhruddin Razi as areein
with him. Fakhruddin Razi states on the authority ot Ibn Abbas, a nephew ot Muhammad, that 'The ]ews and
early Christians were suspected ot alterin the text ot the Taurat and Injil, but in the opinion ot eminent
doctors and theoloians it was not practicable thus to corrupt the text, because those $criptures were eneral
known and widely circulated, havin been handed down trom eneration to eneration.' This witness is true,
and in this book we shall provide all the convincin tacts needed. We ask only that the reader will ive time to
thouhttully consider them, tor as a hen that quickly leaves the es will certainly never hatch any chicks, so a
mind that retuses to consider tacts will certainly never obtain the truth.
How important it is tor us to have a real desire tor the truth However, just as spectacles cannot help the
blind to see, no more can a statement ot tacts help a prejudiced mind know spiritual truth.
$o love tor Ood, openness toward Him and all His ways and revelation, as well as willinness to obey Him at
all cost, which is the summary ot our taith, are all needed in addition to tacts alone.
Did the Bible Come Down From Heaven?
Betore we look turther into our subject, we do well to detine the word 'Revelation', since it is clothed in
ditterent meanins by Christians on the one hand and Muslims on the other.
Islam reasons. Book (Qur'an) trom Ood (nazil - come down) - Revelation from Ood.
Christianitv maintains. Christ trom Ood - Revelation of Ood.
Thus the ultimate question is. Is Christ, the Word (Loos) ot Ood - Revelation. (Suroi 3:45, 4:!7!) (oir
!:!,!4) or Is the Qur'an the Word ot Ood - Revelation. Or perhaps both.
We must realize that Ood cannot reveal himself in words alone There He reveals intormation about
Himselt, His character and will. $eltrevelation is an 'open appearin', an 'uncoverin' ot Himselt. This
happened when a body was prepared tor Him. (Hebrews 10:5) Hence ]esus could say. "Anyone who has seen
me has seen the Father." John 14:9
Further the Apostle ]ohn recorded tor us. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We
have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,

who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.' (John
What we know about Yahweh, Ood's revealed Name in $cripture, and ]esus we tind in the paes ot the Bible.
This is the inspired revelation trom Ood. Every Christian accepts the total authority thereot.
The whole Bible likewise moves proressively towards the culmination ot revelation, when Ood revealed
himself. This revelation is not 'ro;:i' the way Islamic theoloy understands this concept today. Neither is the
Qur'an it measured alonside the same concept (see 'Christians ask Muslims'). The Bible does show the
imprint ot human hand (individual use ot lanuae, varyin keenness ot intellect or temperament, apparent
presupposition ot contemporary concepts ot scientitic knowlede without which the $criptures would have
been beyond understandin at that time) and style ot writin.
The Muslim reader will tind it ditticult to accept this concept ot revelation tor it is ditterent to his own. We
should like to point out, however, that it is wron ot Muslims to measure the Bible aainst the 'ro;:i' concept.
The revelation evidences that the Bible very stronly produces, as will be seen a little later, are absent in the
Qur'an, namely. Fultilled prophecy, historic documentation and the acceptable eyewitness report ot
accompanyin sins and wonders. Besides that we also tind a similar imprint ot human hand in the Qur'an. We
observe varving modes of inspiration in the Bible:
"I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted." Isaiah 6:1 (S.. 2526)
"This is what the Lord says" Jeremiah 13:8 and very many other places
" This is what the Lord said to me" Jeremiah 13:1 and many other passages
"An oracle: (or burden) the word of the Lord to Israel through Malachi." Malachi 1:1
"And I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire" Revelation 15:2
"When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and
said: "Do not be afraid." Revelation 1 :17; or even:
"To the married I (Paul) give this command (not I, but the Lord) I say this as a concession,
not as a command This is the rule I (Paul) lay down in all the churches I have no command
from the Lord, but I give a judgment" 1 Corinthians 7:10,6,17,25
We must learn to discern between these modes The Muslim must also learn to understand that in the Bible we
tind combined what we would term the 'Qur'an', the 'Hadith' and even the 'Tatsir'.
In contrast the essential biblical messae is unitorm, despite the variety ot 'recorders' and the vast expanse ot
time between them. Ood untolds the messae ot His desired relationship with man, His love, His concern and
riet, His compassion, mercy and wrath and His plan ot reconciliation.
Christ appears in the very tirst verse ot the Old Testament and throuhout all the Revelation ot Ood in Him
(pp. +3tt, 92tt). Everythin was, however, proressively untolded, as man was able to comprehend.
In the recorded, inspired Word we tind Ood in ]esus. Even today we can experience the New Birth as
recorded in the Bible it we put our taith in Him, which comes by hearin Ood's Word. We still receive the
Holy $pirit to transtorm us and to live in us
It we claimed the Bible to be 'ro;:i', we would have to try to explain the imprint ot the human hand, as we
are waitin on the Muslim to do in the case ot the Qur'an. In the case ot the Bible the evidence ot its divine
authorship is clear and needs no turther proots (pp. +3tt, 105, 135). The messae ot the Bible is inspired
(ti.or.ustos - Oodbreathed), thouh by the countless copyin ot the handwritten texts on primitive materials
under adverse conditions resulted in some 'mistakes'. $tudyin the vast amounts ot recently discovered
documents, scholars have detected and claritied just about all ot these.
How Did The Bible Come To Us?
Muslims acceptin unquestioninly the 'ro;:i' concept ot revelation, look at the way the Bible and particularly
the New Testament were iven and conclude. 'This cannot be revelation.'
They look at the number ot writers, and the tact that their writins were circulated amon churches, collected
toether and then considered by the various Church Councils which decided which were $cripture and which
In the chapter 'Revelation' (pp. 10tt.), we became aware that the Apostles had an intimate knowlede ot
Christ, His sayins, actions, way ot lite and character. They had been ordained by Christ to proclaim the ood
news ot tree salvation to all, commandin them to put their trust in the tinished work ot Christ. It were these,
as well as two or three other men who were prompted by the Holy $pirit to write down independently the
accounts that, collected toether, make up the New Testament.
Atter these writins were collected, many more, some under the names ot the Apostles, so as to appear more
trustworthy, come into circulation, containin marks ot wellmeanin, but leendary stories. These writers
intended to lority ]esus by attributin actions and sayins to Him, which they thouht possible or which was
amplitied hearsay. It was the task ot the early Church to discern between $cripture and leend. Fortunately,
even trom today's viewpoint, it was not at all ditticult to discern between the two. A person, wellread in the
Bible, who reads the Apocrypha (the collection ot all these writins), will immediately detect the ditterence in
character between these writins and the New Testament.
The Church, when contronted with any writins claimin to be Apostolic, always compared them with the
oriinal, trusted and accepted Apostolic witness. Whenever a teachin or historical narrative had to be tested,
the Christians tested it aainst the Apostolic accounts, which were eyewitness accounts based on intimate
knowlede and backed by the prophets. $o we can, with the reatest deree ot contidence claim that the New
Testament was not just accepted by a roup ot bishops at a certain church council at random. The selection was
not only universal and unanimous, it was actually a decision, which had already been made earlier by all the
local churches over the years independently and at their own discretion. The only worry that we miht have, is
that too little ot the material was accepted as Canon ot the New Testament, rather than too much. We are in
the tortunate position ot bein in possession ot probably all the documents ot old, includin those that were
rejected by the early Church. This excludes much later writins claimin to be Apostolic ($ee below. 'The
Oospel ot Barnabas')
We are even now in the position to approve or disapprove ot their decision. Believers and scholars ot all
aes have disareed very little in this reard. In addition to this a subjective, but very weihty proot must be
mentioned. He who builds his lite on and trusts the Bible will tind out that it works In ]ohn 7.17 ]esus
Himselt otters us this test. A transtormed lite is the result. Many Muslims seem to be ot the opinion that a
Book trom Ood must be iven as such trom heaven. The Qur'an is said to be such. We recommend to the
openminded and honest reader a look into the chapter 'The Collection and Compilin ot the Qur'an' in the
book 'Christians ask Muslims'

Do Christians Have Answers To The Islamic Allegations?
n many it not most Islamic books dealin with reliious matters, the Bible is depicted as bein totally
untrustworthy. We do not want to investiate the obvious reasons tor this approach, but do have to point
out, that by tar the majority ot statements are either based on inorance, or are made aainst better
knowlede or at best depend on intormation selected in a very biased way. Althouh we would have preterred
to eneralise, we shall have to mention a couple ot authors, since we must quote in order to substantiate what
we say.
In the book 'The Liht' by alHaj $ultan Hatiz Abdul (revised by Maulana $yed ZiaudDin Ahmad Oilani) we
are told that the synoptic writers (i.e. the three recorders ot the Oospel that are more historically orientated and
as such are rather similar in comparison to the tourth recorder, ]ohn, who looks at the events trom a more
elevated position) ot the Oospel are Paul, Luke, Matthew and ]ohn. Actually there are only three, ]ohn's part ot
the Oospel is the exception, and Paul did not write an account ot the Oospel at all The 'synoptics' are
Matthew, Mark and Luke, as every Christian ot even rudimentary learnin knows.
Christians rihttully look at 'learned men' like this with suspicion, tor they cannot make an acceptable
contribution. We tind it, however, extremely traic that millions ot Muslims et their sole intormation about
the Bible trom such unintormed or dishonest men, who build their aruments entirely on onesided, sitted and
selected knowlede, or who arue aainst better knowlede.
We must, however, hasten to add that by no means all Muslims arue in this rather base spirit. We shall
contine our analysis primarily to one book, which is typical in its antiChristian stance, is relevant to our
situation, and is reasonably comprehensive.
The tollowin aruments, queries and also quotations are taken trom 'The Bible Word ot Ood or Word ot
Man.' by $heikh A.$.K. ]oommal, tormerly ot Pretoria and now ot ]ohannesbur.
In the toreword Mr ]oommal is introduced as 'a detender ot Islam aainst malicious slanders and as an
exponent ot Islamic teachins', and also as 'one ot $outh Atrica's handtul ot oriinal, creative thinkers.'
The malicious slander aainst Islam, we take to be the Bible a book that is preIslamic
In his criticism, he tollows the line ot socalled 'modern theoloy', which no doubt, supplied him with the
required data. In addition he wronly supposes that the character ot the Bible must essentially be based on the
same concept ot revelation ('ro;:i') that Muslims believe in. This is indicated in the following sentence:
"A collection of every single word, commandment, permission,
prohibition, censure and other teachings of the Master (Jesus)
faithfully reproduced in it's pristine purity in the original
Aramaic language which he spoke, would no doubt comprise the
true word of God or the Bible. The great question is, is this
Bible in existence? The answer is clearly no, as every Bible
scholar knows."
This is not quite consistent with earlv Islamic concepts:
"Among the things which have reached me about Jesus the Son of
Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the
followers of the Gospel ... It is extracted from what John the
Apostle set down for them when he wrote the Gospel for them
from the Testament of Jesus ..." Siratu'l Rasool vs.149
It we jude this quotation rihtly the Oood News (or 'Oospel') was iven to ]esus. It does not say in writin. It
also does not mention the lanuae. These were 'set down' in writin by the Apostle ]ohn. Part ot this record is
then used (rather talsely, however) to show a prediction concernin Muhammad in the Oospel. Nowhere is the
authenticity and purity ot ]ohn's record questioned by Ibn Ishaq (AH 85151). The only real problem is that the
quotation is not trom oriinal documents but trom a rejected, corrupt text, the so called 'Palestinian $yriac
Lectionary', as stated in the translator's tootnote.
In the quotations ot Mr ]oommal the emphasis is on the oriinal lanuae, which in the case ot Islam is, ot
course, Arabic. To the Muslim the Qur'an is in tact a collection ot every sinle word, commandment, etc. that
Allah ave to Muhammad. To many the Hadith is also seen as inspired in its words and actions. It adds
knowlede to and interprets the Qur'an, makin it possible tor practisin Muslims to read the most detailed
intormation about their prophet and his words and actions, which they then may tollow. Whether every word
that Muhammad said was recorded, is another matter, however. Muslims look at the Bible as they would look
at the Qur'an. This is misleadin, tor such an approach does not allow tor statements such as the reetins or
advice on questions about lite and taith in the Biblical 'Epistles'. In the opinion ot Muslims such statements
belon rather to the Hadith. We must make our Muslim triends aware ot this. All that Ood wanted to convey
to man in His Word, has been conveyed. It is in the hands ot every Christian today. There is no room tor
additions or improvements. Even in the Qur'an we tail to see any improvements to the Bible.
We are told, however, that:
"What used to be the word of God, has been so adulterated by
human hands, that the word of God is hardly distinguishable
from the word of man. In some places we do still find a glimmer
of the truth that Jesus taught - the gems of divine wisdom that
he uttered for the good of his people - but these are few and
far between in the jungles of interpolations and contradictions
with which the Bible is dense ... Christianity, as we all know,
is founded on blind belief, where rational thinking plays no
part whatever ... It is admitted by the most learned men in the
Hebrew language, that the present English version of the Old
Testament contains at least 100 000 errors (this would amount
to approximately three errors in every verse. G.N.) ... It is
not known for certain who in fact wrote any of the books of the
Old Testament ... Christians them selves are in disagreement as
to what books are inspired."
It is alleed that practically all versions ot the Bible have dittered trom one another and noone knows yet which
is riht.
Aain and aain Christians are asked why there are so many versions. Muslims are surprised to hear that
these versions are nothin other than ditterent translations ot the same oriinal documents. The 'Authorised' or
'Kin ]ames Version' dates back to the year AD 1611. With the chanin ot a livin lanuae a revision became
necessary. In addition to that, many more manuscripts had since been tound. $ome verses were contained in
some ot these manuscripts, but not in others (see pp. 17tt.). These texts appear in italics in the 'Revised
Versions'. To rasp the extent ot these passaes in relation to the whole text it ouht to be said that besides two
portions ot 12 verses each (Nos. 5. and 6. on pp. 1920) and two verses which are omitted tor bein repetitions
(Mark 9.++ and +6 are repeated by vs.+8) eiht sentences or portions thereot (+) without any bearin on the
messae or meanin ot the text are in question. This makes out 0.1% ot the 7959 verses ot the New Testament
$ome translations are aimed at reat accuracy tor the scholar, others are in a popular style avoidin less
common words or phrases, caterin tor the youn or less educated reader who is interested in the biblical story
and its teachin rather than in theoloical concepts. The messae and content ot all is much more identical
than the ditterent translations ot the Qur'an (i.e. Yusut Ali, Dawood, Marmaduke Pickthall, Oeore $ale,
Rodwell, Arberry etc.).
"Although an extravagant claim is put forward by Bible
Societies and other fanatics, that the Bible is the most read
book in the world, the contrary is true."
The intimate knowlede claimed by Muslims concernin these thins perplexes us. We note, however, that
there is little or no substantiation tor these claims. The 'best known' Bible scholars and commentators reterred
to are men who are totally obscure personalities.
The tact that Islam has never tolerated textual criticism ot the Qur'an, makes it easy tor Muslims to assume
that all theoloians that practice the 'hiher (or tormal) criticism', (not to be contused with textual criticism)
must surely ive a true retlection ot the Bible. That this is not so, is common knowlede, tor 'hiher criticism'
is based on philosophical speculations and makes tor arbitrary statements, very otten with no Biblical
toundation. $peculative theoloy in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries has created vast numbers ot claims
and speculations, which were neither Biblical nor ever substantiated and were never taken seriously by
Christians. To draw material trom such theoloy puts the Bible in a totally talse liht.
Muslims, however, have concluded that:
"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God" and that "the
present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called
the inspired word of God" and that "faith demands total
allegiance to the Bible with its faults, absurdities,
everything. Reason, on the other hand, is loath to accept
matters that constitute an insult to the human intelligence."
Muslims also ask, referring to the Authorised Version, Revised Version and others:
"What need has the Word of God to go through so many versions?
Our reason says, that the true Word of God should have remained
unaltered, uncorrupted, unrevised, exactly as it was revealed
to Christ."
We have to stop for a moment to consider these allegations:
First of all, the Word ot Ood was not revealed to ]esus. He I$ the revelation ot Ood and He I$ the Word ot
Ood. That is even supported by the Qur'an (Suroi 4:!7! orc 3:45,59)
Then we would have to ask the cateorical question. when, where and by whom was the Bible chaned.
Even the Qur'an bears witness that the Torah and the Oospel were detinitely in existence durin Muhammad's
time (pp. 56). It oes aainst the tacts to claim that the Bible was chaned thereatter.
The Qur'an claims to be sent to uard the tormer revelations (Suroi 5:475!) and states explicitly that the
Torah and Oospel are revelation. That means they came trom Ood and are consequently His Word. The
Qur'an also states stronly that no one can chane the Words ot Ood (Suroi 6:34 orc !u:64)
The writins ot the New Testament were composed in a certain context ot history and time, more than 500
years earlier than the Qur'anic writins, and up to 1,500 years atter those ot the Old Testament. Lnlike
Hebrew, Aramaic and Oreek, Arabic has remained a spoken lanuae reatly intluenced by the Qur'an to the
present time. Hebrew experienced an interruption as a livin lanuae tor about 1,500 years, durin the time ot
the Diaspora, and Aramaic is no loner a livin lanuae at all. Research work, in this century particularly, has
reatly expanded our knowlede ot Hebrew and has helped solve the lanuae ditticulty. This, as well as the
inevitable chane ot every lanuae (just try to read a book written 200 years ao) has made it necessary to revise
existin translations ot the Bible periodically to make the text true to the livin lanuae aain.
To a Christian the need to read or recite $cripture or prayers in their oriinal (lanuae) makes no sense.
Basically we are interested in the content ot the messae and not in the mechanics ot the oriinal. We deem it
hihly unlikely that the averae Christian will manae to ain a knowlede ot the oriinal lanuae(s) ot the
Bible equal to that ot the hihly qualitied teams ot linuists that do our translations. Besides that, we tirmly
believe that Ood understands us in our lanuae when we worship, praise Him or speak to Him in prayer.
We also cannot subscribe to the Muslim view that the inspired character ot a prophetic utterance is suspect
when one cannot precisely determine the author. Lltimately the prophet or writer ot an inspired messae is just
a tool in Ood's hand. It we seek to establish the authenticity ot a letter, we do not make this dependent on our
knowlede ot the make and locality ot the pen as lon as we are sure that the messae is enuine.
The chare that there are 100 000 errors in the Old Testament is too absurd even to need an answer, and the
statement, that the Christian taith is essentially blind beliet, throws poor liht on the intormation at the
disposal ot the writer.
Within the tramework ot a book like this, it is obviously impossible to deal with all claims made aainst the
Bible. There are, however some that are more prominent than others and we shall have to consider these tirst.
Are there forgeries, interpolations and contradictions in the Bible?
I quote aain some passaes trom 'The Liht' by alHaj $ultan Hatiz Abdul, revised by Maulana $yed ZiaudDin
Ahmad Oilani. We read in the foreword (o. XI):
"We hope to cull relevant non-Muslim material in support and
denunciation of the Christian theories of the origin of sin, of
Jesus' alleged sonship of God, the thesis of crucifixion of the
Messiah, the doctrine of man's redemption through Jesus Christ
and many other pressing and questionable matters. In this
humble way I request above all things that this book would be
an ambassador of goodwill and understanding between the East
and the West, the forces of good and that of evil. Moreover, I
am more than confident that a profound religious knowledge in
the world scriptures and their diverse philosophies would
incarnate the truest spirit of goodness in any nation, any
people or any creed."
We tully aree withthe last sentence ot this pararaph which, however, is in total contrast to the tirst part.
There he tries to undermine the very toundation ot the Bible by denouncing the four fundamental Biblical
teachings, namelv:
Atonement or salvation by race
The crucitixion
The sonship and deity ot ]esus and
The Trinity
All other challenes aainst the Bible are subordinate to these, but will need claritication too. In the interests ot
unitormity, the attacks are taken trom the previously mentioned book by A.$.K. ]oommal. We have to be
concise in our evaluation, however.
Are there changes to and interpolations in the Bible?
1. 'But this kind never comes out, except by prayer and tastin.' (Matthew17.21) accordin to the
'Authorised Version', is missin in the 'Revised Version.'
As mentioned earlier, the 'Authorised Version', also called the 'Kin ]ames Version', is a translation
datin trom 1611. In the meantime, particularly in this and the Nineteenth Centuries, a reat number ot
other manuscripts, many more comprehensive and older than those available to the translators ot the
'Authorised Version' have been tound and have put us in a tar better position to locate copyin mistakes
and interpolations.
We answer. Interpolations are insertions in the text. Perhaps some scholar wrote a lossary, a remark or a
parallel passae in the marin ot the text. The next copyist copied this lossary and it then appeared in the
new M$ (manuscript) as a $criptural text, which was then copied over and over aain.
With the availability ot many more ancient M$$, some containin the lossary and others not, scholars
have the necessary leads to tind out whether a text is an interpolation or whether it has been omitted by
mistake. Hence the corrections in the newer translations. We must be aware that the Old Testament was
copied by hand tor 3,000 years and the New Testament tor 1,+00 years in isolated communities in
ditterent lands even continents
The revision ot the Qur'an had already been completed shortly atter the death ot Muhammad, by Khalit
Lthman who was aware ot the problems that Christians and ]ews had underone. Atter all the variant
readins had been destroyed, there remained only one oriinal, which was copied straiht away and
multiplied, thereby virtually eliminatin the risk ot mistakes creepin in (see 'Christians Ask Muslims').
Besides all this, the risk ot mistakes enterin any text increases reatly the turther back one oes in history.
The verse in question here is tound in manuscripts 'C' and 'D' ot the Koine, but not in the others. An
interpolation is not impossible, theretore this verse is iven only as a tootnote in the 'Revised $tandard
Version'. We may add a word ot personal experience. The iven text deals with the castin out ot demons.
The divine authority tor this text can be put to the test and has been tound to be 'in tull workin order' by
myselt and many other Christians. We reter to ]ohn 7.17. 'It any mans will is to do His will, he shall know
whether the teachin is trom Ood ...'
2. In Isaiah 7.1+, the 'Authorised Version' states. 'Behold a virin shall conceive ...'
The 'New International version' reads. "The virgin shall be with child" The Hebrew word used is 'alma',
and means an unmarried youn woman. We can sately presuppose that an unmarried temale can rihttully
be called a virin in the liht ot Deuteronomy 22.28.
3. Otten the opinions ot that 'reat commentator ot the Bible', Reverend D ummelow, are quoted.
Accordin to him verses 2+25 ot ]ohn 21 may have been added by the Ephesian elders who tirst put the
Oospel in circulation atter the death ot the Apostle, and who wished to testity to its authenticity and
trustworthiness. Dummelow is a liberal commentator who appears to be known only to Muslim critics ot
the Bible.
4. We answer. This is not a case ot interpolation, nor is it a revision ot the oriinal We answer. Christians
are not really interested in the opinion ot a man who speculates on unveritied presumptions.
+. Few ot the points made by Mr ]oommal are ot serious consequence. The phrase 'and was carried up into
heaven' in Luke 2+.51 no loner appears in modern versions ot the Bible. The reason is that in some ot
the manuscripts available today (Codex $inaiticus and Codex Cambride), this portion is not mentioned.
But it is tound in Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus.
We answer. This is another objection by Reverend Dummelow who thinks it possible that Christ did not
ascend, but miraculously disappeared at the end ot the 'interview' with his disciples. The tact remains, that
the same writer ot $cripture in Acts 1.9 made an almost identical statement. We conclude theretore that
no chane in historical detail, or in doctrine has been brouht about by the omission ot the phrase.
Besides. the Qur'an contirms this event. (Suroi 4:!58)
5. The passae trom ]ohn 7.53 to ]ohn 8.11, the story ot the woman taken in adultery, does not appear in
contemporary translations, except in italics.
We answer. Internal and external evidence indicates that this passae may not be the writin ot ]ohn. This
passae could be an interpolation, possibly by Papias, Elder ot the Church ot Hierapolis and companion ot
Polycarp ot $myrna (born 69 AD), who aain was a disciple ot ]ohn the Evanelist. Althouh none ot his
writins have been preserved, quotations trom him appear in the works ot Eusebius. Thus we can sately
assume that, despite the possibility ot this passae bein an interpolation, it is an authentic Apostolic
tradition and was canonized tor that reason. We hold that the tact that Christians seek to be scrupulously
honest and true in the presentation ot the oriinal manuscripts, should not be used as an arument to
undermine the interity ot $cripture. One can only wish that Muslim scholars would apply the same
scrutiny to their own scriptures.
6. The tinal words ot the Oospel accordin to Mark trom verses 1520 includin the 'Oreat Commission',
are inserted in italics in the 'New International version'.
Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is
baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

And these signs will
accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new

they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will
not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well. After the
Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of
Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them
and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it."
We answer. Aain we have a case ot some manuscripts havin recorded this passae and others not. The
Codices Ephraemi Rescriptus and Bezae Cantabriiensis, which are enerally considered copies ot the
oriinals, both include the end ot the Oospel accordin to Mark.
Remarkable is the evidence ot the most ancient traments. The Curetonian manuscript lost all the Oospel
accordin to Mark, except the last tour versesthose in dispute. The disputed text is also tound in the $yriac
and Peshito ($econd Century) texts, and the Memphitic, $ahidic and Thebaic texts ot upper and lower
Eypt contain it as well. Lntortunately, durin the early period ot Christianity, in which the tirst
manuscripts were written, the writin material was papyrus, which was easily destroyed by moisture and
insects, hence we have only traments available, but these still testity to the reliability and accuracy ot the
later manuscripts, tor it these pieces totally correspond with those ot a hundred years later, one may sately
assume that the tull text is indeed acceptable. Also ]erome copied the end ot this Oospel narrative in his
Vulate version (translated between AD382390).
']erome certainly would not have admitted this portion ... had he not tound it in undisturbed possession.'
(Commentary by F.C. Cook, Volume I ot the New Testament, paes 302303).
The manuscripts, that omit the disputed verses, belon to a particular period and were probably edited by
one critic.
]ustin Martyr made repeated mention ot the said passae in AD 150 and so did his youner contemporary,
Irenaeus. Irenaeus was a pupil ot Polycarp's and was, so to speak, a spiritual randson ot ]ohn the
In order to verity the enuineness ot this passae one should perhaps not rely only on the ancient
manuscripts, and the testimony ot the early Apostolic Fathers alone. There is other evidence, and parallel
passaes in other Oospel accounts. We tind the heart piece ot this messae repeated in the Oospel account
ot Matthew 28.1920, which is contained in all manuscripts, and so we dare not doubt its authenticity. But
what about the sins mentioned that should tollow those who believe. Were these sins apparent and
reconised and known, or not. We can onlv conclude: Yes, indeed.
Demons have been cast out by Christian disciples throuhout the aes. It is still done today.
'They will speak in new tonues'. This happened on the day ot Pentecost and we have adequately
documented accounts ot similar happenins elsewhere and at other times.
We have accounts, thouh isolated, ot attempts to murder Christian missionaries by poison, but
which did not have any ettect. Indeed, we read ot the Apostle Paul, atter his shipwreck, Acts 28.36,
bein bitten by a poisonous viper, which had no ettect on him. The writer ot this book was himselt
bitten by a snake at a Christian youth camp, without ettect. While dressin at another, he discovered
inside his Tshirt a lare black scorpion, which was cauht by the shirt on his bare shoulder but
nothin happened. Coincidence. Perhaps. But surely Ood had His purpose too.
It is also common knowlede that Christians here and there are endowed with the itt ot healin
practiced even today with absolutely astoundin results. All this evidence supports the tact, that this is
authentic $cripture and consequently can be lived by and trusted.
The otten repeated alleation that 'reardless ot how pure a text may have been oriinally, it has no more
claim to purity when extraneous matter creeps in' is not acceptable. No ancient lanuae had, tor instance,
punctuation marks, divisions into chapters or verses, sentences or even separate words. The translator who
determines were a tull stop, comma, quotation mark or question mark is placed, is already torced to
interpret $cripture and without this no old manuscripts can be understood by contemporary man, except
by those who have specialized in the study ot the ancient lanuae concerned. There can be no ancient
writin, includin the Arabic ot the Qur'an, ot which it can be said that no extraneous matter has crept in.
We need only consider the diacritical marks and vowellin in the Arabic lanuae, which were introduced
atter the compilation ot the Qur'an.
Every Christian believer can testity to the chanin power ot Ood in man atter conversion and taith in
the messae ot the Bible. Yet this book, in the opinion ot Muslims, consists only ot some traces ot divine
messae enulted in a mass ot human thouht.
Muslim critics of Christianitv stress that
"The difference between man and animal is that a man has a
capacity of reason to think. An animal cannot reason, it
behaves by instinct. Reason it what distinguishes man from
What is implied thereby is that Christians simply do not reason or think.
We answer. The uninitiated reader is encouraed to compare a ood and popular commentary on the
Bible with a commentary on the Qur'an betore, reachin his own conclusion on this matter.
Are there Contradictions in the Bible?
Many challenes by Muslims deal with ditterences in numbers or names pertainin to identical events. They are
copyists' mistakes, but are ot no siniticance whatever as reards the messae ot the text.
In 2 Chronicles 36.9, ]ehoiachim was eiht years when he bean to rein, and in 2 Kins 2+.8 he was eihteen.
In 2 Chronicles 22.2 Ahazia was +2 years old when he bean to rein, and in 2 Kins 8.26 twentytwo years.
Similar cases mav be found in:
2 Chronicles +.5 when compared with 1 Kins 7.26,
2 Chronicles 1+.3,17.6 when compared with 1 Kins 15.1+, 22.+3,
2 Chronicles 9.25 when compared with 1 Kins +.26,
1 Timothy 6.16 when compared to 1 Kins 8.12, Psalm 18.11,
]ohn 1.18 when compared with Exodus 33.11,
2 $amuel 2+.2+ when compared with 1 Chronicles 21.25,
2 $amuel 8.+ when compared with 1 Chronicles 18.+,
2 $amuel 10.18 when compared with 1 Chronicles 19.18,
2 $amuel 2+.1,9,13,2+ when compared with 1 Chronicles 21.1,5,11,12,22,10, and
Oenesis 38.7 when compared with Matthew 1.3.
In no way would any reputable historian conclude that merely because ot this type ot discrepancy, manuscripts
have been rendered unreliable or even polluted. Besides this, none ot these errors are ot any consequence or
attects vital matters.
Here now are some more detailed allegations:
1. The Creation and Flood accounts to 'modern theoloians' are based on two narratives 'whose ditterences
ot matter and style betray two authors' and that these accounts have been blended by an editor, who has
slihtly vetted them'. We are told that in Oenesis 6.19 Ood commanded Noah to brin into his ark 'ot
every livin thin ... tuo ot every sort ... male and temale.' The second author, the critic says, tells us that
Noah was commanded to preserve trom the tlood 'ot every clean beast ... s.:.r male and temale. and ot the
beasts that are not clean two.' (G.r.s:s 7:23)
Muslims lookin tor a contradiction here have overlooked the tact, that in Chapter 8.20 these extra
animals were used as tollows.
"Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind
of unclean animal, a male and its mate."
That statement should explain the 'rievous contradiction'.
2. In another 'contradiction', we aain tind a ross nelect ot the context.
"He who seeks finds." Matthew 7:8
The alleed contradiction to this statement is tound in Proverbs 1.28.
Then they will call to me but I will not answer; they will look for me but will not find me.
The reason (conveniently lett our by the critic) is.
"Because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord, would have none of
my counsel, and despised all my reproof, therefore they shall eat the fruit of their way and be
sated with their own devices."
Isaiah 1:15: "When you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide my eyes from you; even if
you offer many prayers, I will not listen. The omitted reason is: Your hands are full of blood."
The omitted reason is: "your hands are full of blood." and Psalm 18:4: "They cried for help, but
there was no-one to save them- to the Lord, but he did not answer."
The omitted reason for this "contradiction" follows: "Thou didst deliver me from strife with the
Here is the case ot David's enemies who did wron in tryin to kill him tor no reason but jealousy. They
were not heard by Ood, but rihteous David was. The reader will immediately detect that those who shall
not tind Ood are those, who reject Ood's ways and commandments. The immediate remedy iven (in
Isaiah.1.1620) is to.
"Wash and make yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight! Stop doing wrong,
learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed Come now, let us reason together,
says the Lord. Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow If you are
willing and obedient, you will eat the best from the land; but if you resist and rebel, you will be
devoured by the sword for the mouth of the Lord has spoken." The same principle applies to the
occupation ot Canaan. Our critic chooses to call Ood 'cruel, merciless, destructive and
We are tempted to quote the proverb about lass houses, but shall rather look at the subject matter. The
abovementioned passaes (.r.:oi !3:!4, D.ut.roro, 7:!6,! Sou.i !5:3, .tc.) all have somethin in
common. the destruction ot the Canaanites. The reason tor this order by Ood was to preserve His people.
The enemies ot Ood's people were out to exterminate Israel, ultimately with the spiritual purpose ot
preventin the outworkin ot Ood's Word and the comin ot the Messiah who had to come trom amon
the Israelites. In Deuteronomy 20:1618 we read.
"Do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them as the Lord your God has
commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in
worshipping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God."
I think it is necessary to be reminded ot the toreknowlede ot Ood, which is an aspect ot His omniscience,
and thus to remind all who inorantly or maliciously use these aruments that it is rather a presumptuous
undertakin to prescribe to Ood what He may do or command and what He may not. Ood needs no
advisers. Our job is not to criticize Ood, but to establish the reliability ot His Word, live by it and to
establish what we can learn trom its admonitions.
3. $ometimes it is explained to us that in certain $criptures Ood delihts in burnt otterins and sacritices.
Indeed, we may add, that Ood even demands them.
"For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for
yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for ones life Leviticus 17:11
The critic, however, then discovers that in other passaes Ood has no pleasure in burnt otterins and claims
that the two standpoints are mutually contradictory. The context aain, will reveal the truth. A sacritice
ottered by unrepentant and disobedient people is an abomination to the Lord.
"Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths
and convocations I cannot bear your evil assemblies. Your New Moon festivals and your
appointed feasts my soul hates. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing
them." Isaiah 1:13-14
"When you bring blind animals for sacrifice, is that not wrong? When you sacrifice crippled or
diseased animals, is that not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased
with you? Would he accept you?" says the Lord Almighty "Now implore God to be gracious to
us. With such offerings from your hands, will he accept you?" says the Lord Almighty "Oh,
that one of you would shut the temple doors, so that you would not light useless fires on my
altar! I am not pleased with you," says the Lord Almighty, "and I will accept no offering from
your hands When you bring injured, crippled or diseased animals and offer them as
sacrifices, should I accept them from your hands?" says the Lord. "Cursed is the cheat who has
an acceptable male in his flock and vows to give it, but then sacrifices a blemished animal to
the Lord. For I am a great king," says the Lord Almighty, "and my name is to be feared among
the nations." Malachi 1:8-10,13-14
"Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the
Lord? To obey is better than sacrifice For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance
like the evil of idolatry I Samuel 15:22-23
+. $ome objections reter to Ood and His dealins with man. Ood is heard and seen by some.
"The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend." Exodus 33:11
"But the Lord God called to the man, where are you?" He answered, "I heard you in the
garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid." Genesis 3:9-10
"So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, it is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life
was spared." Genesis 32:30
"I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple."
Isaiah 6:1; and yet we read: "No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only," John 1:18,
" never heard his voice nor seen his form" John 5:37 and
"You cannot see my face, for no-one may see me and live." Exodus 33:20. Other scriptures
could be added.
We deem that these statements about Moses, Adam and Isaiah were ot a metaphorical nature. Ood is
$pirit and obviously He cannot be seen physically, unless He manitests Himselt as in Oenesis 18.12, 32.2+
28 and 1+.1820. In such a case man does not see Ood as such either, but rather a manitestation ot Him.
Reardin 'seein' Ood, do we not sometimes hear people say, 'We saw Ood's hand in this', or 'We
noticed Ood workin in that'. We see a like principle outlined in the Qur'an:
"In it are verses basic of fundamental (of established
meaning). They are the foundation of the Book; others are
allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the
part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and
searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden
meaning except Allah and those who are firmly grounded." Surah
To interpret the above texts literally suests that the writer ot Oenesis and Exodus was stupid enouh to
introduce such obviously contradictory statements in what he wrote even within one chapter (Eocus 33).
This man was Moses. Apart trom this, the whole context ot the Bible contradicts the idea that Ood as such
can actually be seen.
5. The critic scorns the text in which the Almihty Ood is said to be unable 'to drive out the inhabitants ot
the valley, because they had chariots ot iron.' ]udes 1.19
He has "overlooked", however, that in the earlier part of the verse it says: "To drive the people
from the plains, because they had iron chariots." "He" is not the Lord, but Judah. Therefore
Judah could not drive out the inhabitants because of the chariots. The fact that God is with a
person does not necessarily mean that all things run smoothly in life (e.g. Joseph was sold,
enslaved and imprisoned and God used this event to save his brothers. The death of Christ
certainly looked like a defeat, yet was the greatest victory). Indeed, we read in Romans 8 that:
"Neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any
powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us
from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
And in Romans 8:28 "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love
And that incorporated what Paul, proclaiming the message of God to the heathen of his time,
had to state: " we are dishonoured we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are
brutally treated, we are homeless cursed persecuted slandered." 1 Corinthians 4:10-13
"We are hard pressed on every side perplexed struck down" 2 Corinthians 4:8-9
The explanation ot this (verse 7) is. 'But we have this treasure in jars ot clay to show that this allsurpassin
power is trom Ood and not trom us.'
We may add here that Ood has limited Himselt in His power by bindin Himselt to His law and His
promises. Ood cannot lie or breach a promise and consequently renders part ot His power to man, who by
obedience to His Word can expect Ood to stand by His promises.
6. Other objections deal with the $criptures that appear to contradict themselves by statin sometimes that
Ood is, and at other times is not, the author ot evil. The problem touched on here is rather philosophical
and cannot be solved by reasonin. It Ood is the Creator ot all, then He must have created the devil and is
consequently also the author ot evil. Lltimately, Ood would then be responsible tor these actions ot man
that are evil and would act unjustly it He were to hold man responsible tor his actions, but this is not so.
Ood did not create $atan. $atan was created as Luciter, the Anel ot Liht who, in turn decided to become
a rebel, plottin to overthrow Ood, and sit on His throne (the name $atan means adversary or accuser). All
this is beyond human comprehension, but one thin is clear. that the Anel ot Liht and man, have both
been created with a tree will a necessity tor decidin tor or aainst Ood, tor no love can sprin torth trom
compulsion. Theretore, we must examine the $criptures reterred to, which appear to contradict each other
in the light of 2 Thessalonians 2:911:
"The coming of the lawless one (Antichrist) will be in accordance with the work of Satan
displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that
deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so
be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie
and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in
Ood is instrumental in lettin man believe the lie that man desires to tollow.
The following set of passages is alleged to contradict the set below:
A. "The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul. The statutes of the Lord are trustworthy,
making wise the simple. The precepts of the Lord are right, giving joy to the heart. The
commands of the Lord are radiant, giving light to the eyes." Psalm 19:7-8,
"For God is not a God of disorder but of peace." I Corinthians 14:33,
"He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does
no wrong, upright and just is he." Deuteronomy 32:4, and
"When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by
evil, nor does he tempt anyone." James 1:13
B. "I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by."
Ezekiel 20:25,
"Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?"
Lamentations 3:38,
"This is what the Lord says; Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan
against you." Jeremiah 18:11, and
"When disaster comes to a city, has not the Lord caused it?" Amos 3:6
We have to reter to the context ot these verses, which has been somewhat nelected by Mr ]oommal.
"Out of the mouth of the Most High proceeds not evil and good"
- is how Mr Joommal quotes Lamentations 3:38.
The full text, however, reads:
"Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it? Is it not from the mouth of
the Most High that both calamities and good things come? Why should any living man complain
when punished for his sins?
Let us examine our ways and test them, and let us return to the Lord. Let us lift up our hearts
and our hands to God in heaven, and say: We have sinned and rebelled and you have not
forgiven. You have covered yourself with anger and pursued us; you have slain without pity.
You have covered yourself with a cloud so that no prayer can get through. You have made us
scum and refuse among the nations." Lamentations 3:37-45
$o the evil that comes trom the Lord, is the punishment tor sin, which is the just reward tor a man's
The same applies to the other texts:
" So I said I would pour out my wrath on them and spend my anger against them in the
desert, But I withheld my hand, and for the sake of my name I did what would keep it from
being profaned in the eyes of the nations in whose sight I had brought them out. Also with
uplifted hand I swore to them in the desert that I would disperse them among the nations and
scatter them through the countries, Because they had not obeyed my laws but had rejected my
decrees and desecrated my Sabbaths, and their eyes lusted after their fathers idols. I let them
become defiled through their gifts the sacrifice of every firstborn that I might fill them with
horror so that they would know that I am the Lord. Therefore, son of man, speak to the people
of Israel and say to them, This is what the Sovereign Lord says: In this also your fathers
blasphemed me by forsaking me. Therefore say to the house of Israel: This is what the
sovereign Lord says: Will you defile yourselves the way your fathers did and lust after their vile
images?" Ezekiel 20:21,22-24,26,27,30
"Then the word of the Lord came to me: O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter
does? Declares the Lord. Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of
Israel. If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and
destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the
disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built
up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the
good I had intended to do for it. Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in
Jerusalem, This is what the Lord says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a
plan against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your
actions. But they will reply, Its no use. We will continue with our own plans; each of us will
follow the stubbornness of his evil heart." Jeremiah 18:5-12, and
"Hear this word the Lord has spoken against you, O people of Israel against the whole family
I brought up out of Egypt: You only have I chosen of all the families of the earth; therefore I will
punish you for all your sins. Do two walk together unless they have agreed to do so? Does a
lion roar in the thicket when he has no prey? Does he growl in his den when he has caught
nothing? Does a bird fall into a trap on the ground where no snare has been set? Does a trap
spring up from the earth when there is nothing to catch? When a trumpet sounds in a city, do
not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the Lord caused it? Surely the
Sovereign Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets." Amos 3:1-
1. 'Let your liht so shine betore men, that they may see your ood works.' (Motti.u 5:!6) is placed in
opposition to.
"Take heed that you do not your alms before man to be seen by them." Matthew 6:1
The critic expediently sees a contradiction in these two statements in ]esus' '$ermon on the Mount'. As
usual, he has 'overlooked' the context, tor this sentence tollows the tirst statement immediately.
"And glorify your Father, who is in heaven."
Christ deals with two different aspects here:
That our actions may lority Ood,
That we should not pertorm them so that we et the praise.
This is theretore no contradiction.
2. Jesus, we are told, preached:
"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body." Luke 12:4, but in practice was afraid Himself, for
we read:
"After this, Jesus went around in Galilee, purposely staying away from Judea because the Jews
there were waiting to take his life." John 7:1
His time had not yet come. He had forecast His death a number of times:
"From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and
suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he
must be killed and on the third day be raised to life." Matthew 16:21
"I lay down my life-only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own
accord." John 10:15,17,18
"As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for
Jerusalem." Luke 9:51 (He knew what was waiting for Him there!)
When Christ announced that He would o to ]erusalem (oir !!:!5!6), one ot His disciples exclaimed.
'Let us also o, that we may die with him.' Aain a contradiction is seen where there is none. The disputed
text does not state that He was atraid to o to ]erusalem, but that at that particular stae, His time had not
come. Critics also forget to mention Gethsemane where Scripture records that Christ said:
My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death My Father, if it is possible, may this
cup be taken from me."
But then He continues:
'Yet not as I will, but as you will.'
Obviously Christ was in aony at the thouht ot His crucitixion, which is natural, because He telt pain like
anyone else.
3. Circumcision is enjoined in Oenesis 17.10.
"The covenant you are to keep: every male among you shall be circumcised." and in Oalatians 5.2 this is
apparently contradicted by Paul's sayin that.
'It you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be ot no value to you at all.'
Aain a remarkable inorance ot Biblical theoloy is apparent. The Covenant that included circumcision as
a covenantsin, was with Abraham and his ottsprin. At no time was this covenant extended to the
Oentiles. But already in the Old Testament we read repeatedly that the circumcision ot the tlesh made by
hands is not sutticient in Ood's siht.
Aain and aain Ood challenes people to have their hearts circumcised meanin that the covenant is not
an outward thin, but somethin that should attect the soul and heart ot man. The New Covenant or New
Testament threw the doors open to all who were interested in receivin Ood's itt ot toriveness throuh
]esus Christ. Consequently, the New Testament superseded the Old Testament, since the Old Testament
was only 'a shadow ot thins to come.'
Lnder the New Covenant people were baptized, a ritual with a ditterent siniticance, but in itselt, ot
course, as meaninless as circumcision in the tlesh. Only when this act is tilled with meanin, is the New
Covenant ettected in a man or woman. ]ews at the time ot Paul, demanded that Oentile believers also be
circumcised, in tact they demanded strict adherence to the Law ot Moses in addition to taith in Christ. Now
the context ot the disputed verse must be appreciated, for it continues:
"Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the
whole law. You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have
fallen away from grace For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any
value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love Brothers, if I am still
preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offence of the cross
has been abolished." Galatians 5:3-4,6,11
We are made aware in this text that there are two ways ot comin to Ood. the old way, by keepin Ood's
laws, oii ot them oii the time (o.s 2:!u) to be saved which is impossible, OR to rely on the race ot Ood,
acceptin the New Covenant, and not relyin on one's own works. However, throuh pride, man otten
rejects the mercy and race ot Ood. It can clearly be seen that the 'stumblin block' is the cross. Ood
declares us untit to save ourselves by ood deeds, and that is a deathblow to all seltsutticiency. (Please
consider pp. 7879).
Islam, has chosen the way ot works and tor that reason cannot otter race, but can only await the
rihteous judement ot Ood, Who will jude the livin and the dead on the Last Day. A pardon retused, is
a pardon torteited.
+. Critics hold that Leviticus 20:21:
"If a man marries his brothers wife, it is an act of impurity."(and Deuteronomy 25:5:
"If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry
outside the family. Her husbands brother shall take her and marry her and fulfil the duty of a
brother-in-law." contradict each other. In the first passage a man is allowed to marry his
brother's widow, and in the other it is forbidden. We find it incomprehensible that the critic has
overlooked the fact, that the commandment in Leviticus 20:21 not to take a brother's wife in no
way contradicts Deuteronomy 25:5, where the widow of a brother is spoken of.
5. It is trequently pointed out that the enealoies ot ]esus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 respectively, are
ditterent. Christians are aware ot this. A possible answer is that in Matthew we have the enealoy ot
]oseph and in Luke the enealoy ot Mary (In that case Heli was the tatherinlaw ot ]oseph.)
6. The death ot ]udas in two ditterin Biblical accounts is sometimes challened. In Matthew 27.5, ]udas
haned himselt, and in Acts 1.18, he "there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines
spilled out."
The word 'tell headlon' is a little obscure in the Oreek and probably means 'swell up'. We suest that
the latter verse reters to what happened later, i.e. that the body, probably halt putretied, tell trom the rope.
7. A trequently quoted 'contradiction', is that, on the one hand. 'By the deeds ot the law there shall no tlesh
be justitied (Romans 3:20), and "Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the
law." (Galatians 2:16)
Yet both seem to be contradicted by ]ames 2.2122, 2+ and Romans 2.1213 on the other hand.
Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he didYou see that his faith
and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did You
see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. " those who obey the
law who will be declared righteous."
In the case ot the latter verse, we must reter aain to the context. This reters to the people livin under the
Old Covenant.
all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who
are righteous in Gods sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.
$tudyin the Bible superticially will inevitably lead to such misconceptions. It we do not consider a text
within its context and dispensation, we are bound to et hihly distorted tacts. In the case ot the other
$criptures mentioned. We need also point to the context. The critics should have continued by quotin
about Abraham's justitication by works.
"Abraham was justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar. You see that
faith was active along with his works and faith was completed by works."
This answers the 'problem'. The complete text brins home the obvious messae that theoretical taith (i.e.
beliet in the existence ot Ood and certain ot His attributes) is 'dead'. 'Livin' taith is thus action in
response to Ood's Word ('Lord, we have tished all niht and cauht nothin. But ot ,our uorc, I u:ii let
down the nets.' Luke 5.5)
8. Another common challenge concerns Matthew 27:910:
"Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins" This
passae is not tound in ]eremiah, but in Zechariah 11.1213.
This could be a very serious problem were we to insist that the Bible is 'ro;:i'. As mentioned earlier,
Christians do not see the Biblical writers as typewriters ot Ood, but rather hold that Ood ives the messae,
which, however, is otten clothed in the words ot the writer, retlectin his character, style and temperament,
and occasionally, his knowlede and wisdom. Ood addresses Himselt to man on his level ot understandin,
allowin tor the concepts ot the time and environment in which he lives. (We reter to paes 1011).
In the disputed passae, Matthew 27, we have a historical narrative, which Matthew records. This narrative,
i.e. its messae, is inspired. (I P.t.r !:2!) Matthew's reterence to ]eremiah bein the author ot a text trom
Zechariah is wron. This, however, does not alter the messae. The problem may be detected in earlier
manuscripts. $ome read. 'then was tultilled that which was spoken by the prophet', omittin the name
]eremiah. In that case the word ']eremiah' would be an interpolation. However, there is quite a stron
possibility that Zechariah is actually quotin an unrecorded utterance ot ]eremiah's. (Torrey. 'Ditticulties in
the Bible').
9. There is also a 'contradiction' between Matthew 2.11 (where ]esus was born in a house), and Luke 2.7
(where He was born in a stable). Perhaps the critic is not quite used to observin passaes caretully enouh,
tor there is no mention ot the birth ot Christ in Matthew 2.11.
A considerable time had elapsed between the birth and the comin ot the 'wise men' trom the East. The
tact that Herod ordered all children two years and youner to be slain, atter he had diliently inquired ot
the Wise Men when they saw the star tirst, is very suestive, tor who would mistake a baby a week old tor
a child ot two years playin in the arden. We must also consider that the journey trom the East, probably
trom Babylonia to Palestine, had taken a considerable time. At that stae, Mary and ]oseph had lon since
moved trom the stable into a house.
10. Another 'contradiction' is that, accordin to Luke 3.23, ]esus was about thirty years old and in ]ohn 8.57
the Pharisees say to ]esus. 'You are not yet titty years old.'
When someone is thirty he is obviously not yet titty years old
What Can we Say to these Objections brought forth against the Bible?
1. Why should Ood care whether a man rounded the corners ot his beard or not, asks the critic, reterrin to
Leviticus 19.27 'You shall not round ott the hair on your temples or mar the edes ot your beard.'
This is a relevant question but we would return it by askin the Muslim critic why he should keep his
beard 'equal on all sides'. It is in tact 'sunnat tor a Muslim to keep beard.'
We would also ask why 'beards should be oiled, combed, and washed, and worms be removed with
dusters.' (M:siiot Voiu. !, o. 6u2) Why not with, say a tork or toothpick. (M:siiot Voiu. !, o. 6u5)
2. 'Do you really believe that men who lap water like a do make the best soldiers.' we are asked with
reterence to ]udes 7.5. We tind this story repeated, incorrectly, thouh, in the Qur'an. In the Biblical story
it were the men ot Oideon who were selected in that way, in the Qur'an (Suroi 2:249) we tind them to be
$aul's soldiers, who were tested in a similar tashion. We presume that this is a rhetorical question like most
3. We are sometimes asked with reard to Oideon's victory. 'Do you think that a man could hold a lamp in
his lett hand, a trumpet in his riht, blow his trumpet, shout 'The sword tor the Lord and ot Oideon', and
break the pitchers at the same time.'
Nowhere in the iven verse (uc.s 7:2u) does it say that all this was done simultaneously.
+. 'Can you believe that Pekah slew 120 000 men in one day.' (2 Ciror:ci.s 28:6)
We believe it as surely as Hitler killed 6 million ]ews.
5. It is observed with contempt that 'Ood tells someone that 'thou shalt betroth a wite and another shall lie
with her' (D.ut.roro, 28:3u)
The context ot this chapter is a prophecy concernin the nation ot Israel. In the text (verses 11+ ot
Deuteronomy 28) it shows what would have happened it the Israelites had obeyed Ood and trom verse 15
on wards we read ot the curses that would betall Israel it they were to be disobedient, and within the lon
list ot happenins toretold, this verse also appears. The irony ot tate was that Muhammad himselt actively
helped to make this prophecy come true. One ot Muhammad's concubines was Rihanah, a ]ewish woman,
whom he chose as booty atter the deteat ot the ]ewish tribe ot the Quraiza and the slauhter ot their men.
(Ior Isio: S:rotu'i Rosui, :s. 693, . 466)
6. In 2 Peter 3.310 we are made aware that the return ot ]esus need not be an event to be expected soon, as
'the Lord is ... not wishin that any soul perish, but that all should reach repentance.'
This is explained in the sentence. 'With the Lord one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day',
demonstratin Ood's detachment trom time.
The critic, Mr ]oommal, calls this a 'quibble ... too ridiculous to be discussed'. He must have been inorant
ot the tact that the tollowin texts. 'Ood will not tail His promise. Verily a day in the siht ot thy Lord is like a
thousand years ot our reckonin', and 'The anels and the $pirit ascend unto Him in a day the measure
whereot is (as) titty thousand years' are tound in the Qur'an. (Suroi 22:47 orc 7u:4)
May these aruments be representative ot many others that have been omitted, tor they are repetitive and
larely irrelevant.
We can see that in almost all cases the 'contradictions' are the creations ot an overcritical mind, ot someone
who rejects the Biblical messae, because it contlicts with his own and who is either too inorant or too
presumptuous or too tainthearted to look at the evidence betore reachin a conclusion and decidin matters in
the liht ot the tacts.
By now the Muslim reader will have acknowleded the invalidity ot many an accusation, but will still
seriously wonder how any mistake can come into Ood's Word.
We do not tind it illeitimate to ask our critics tor a list ot the 100 000 errors in the Old Testament (Mr
]oommal's quotation) or at least ot the 50 000 errors in the Bible (accordin to Mr Deedat's booklet 'Is the
Bible Ood's Word.'). Without substantiation we cannot accept such ridiculous claims, even it they come trom
one or other unknown and unacceptable 'Christian'.
The most rievous 'errors' ot the critics' publications have been looked at and evaluated. We tound out,
however, that just about all ot these 'errors' and 'pollutions' turned out to be malicious accusations without
base. As we saw earlier (pp. 1+tt.) eiht ot a possible 7959 verses otter the possibility ot havin been
interpolated, besides ]ohn 7.538.11 none ot any consequence, however. The contradictions and objections
pointed out are on teebler round still. Besides 10 copyist's errors involvin ditterin numbers or names ot
purely historical records (p. 22) we can only pick out two ot the listed ones (and aain these are just about all
those ot any consequence) that have an explanation that could be queried (points 12 and 15 ot pp. 3233).
Visualizin the above in the context ot a lare book like the Bible, written between 35002000 years ao and
copied ever so many times by hand until the printin press was invented some +00 years ao, makes the text
more than trustworthy.
Muslims have been reared to accept that there is no contradiction in the Qur'an and not a trace ot a human
hand in it. We should like to challene any one to read on in 'Christians ask Muslims' where we shall look
critically into the Qur'an and the Hadith. This is not meant to be a justitication ot possible errors, copyin
mistakes or the like within the Bible. They do creep in when copyin is done over extended periods ot time.
We have to point at problems ot a much deeper nature with which the above problems cannot even be
compared. We speak about the establishment ot tacts and evidence reardin divine inspiration. Aain we
should like sincerely to assure the reader that we are not out to retaliate or win an arument. But we should
like you to become aware ot tacts that must have escaped your attention and ot which you are unaware, but
which you ouht to consider, tor they are ot vital importance in your quest to establish where you tind divine
Is the Bible a Filthy Book Marred with Obscenities and Atrocities?
Many Muslims are ot the opinion that 'the moral tone ot the Old Testament is coarse and barbaric.'
This is said with reterence to 'obscenities' that make the Bible a book that ouht to be scrutinised by censors.
Without enterin into the controversy, we should like to mention two points.
The tact, that these 'obscenities' are still in the Bible can prove one of two things:
1. That the author and readers ot all times deemed this a welcome piece ot pornoraphy to indule in, or
2. That they had such respect tor the revealed Word, that they dared not chane it, althouh it exposed the
most humiliatin and disustin tacts ot their own toretathers, such as Lot's relationship with his
dauhters, or the wicked sin ot Kin David, or the events concernin Tamara and the revoltin story ot
rape and cowardice, recorded in the book ot ]udes (19).
The Bible constitutes the written history ot the ]ews. Historians ot any country endeavour to record history in
such a way, that the country and its people are loritied. Historical records ot identical events may vary vastly
trom country to country accordin to their bias. In the trank recordin ot the shametul sins ot Israel we
particularly see an obvious sin that nobody tried to 'improve' the imae ot the ]ews. This weihs heavily in
tavour ot the interity and truthtullness ot the Biblical record.
We are told that the Hebrew word tor a 'woman' 'simply reters to the sexual interest that a man has in her'.
This statement is untrue. The Hebrew word 'Isha' is the teminine torm ot Ish, which means man. Without
wishin to retaliate, we are tempted to reter to a Hadith in the 'Mishkat' (Voiu. 2, o. 426), where
Muhammad intendin to o to war, exempted 'a man who made lawtul the private part ot a woman intendin
to cohabit with her.'
This is what today would be called lealised prostitution.
Christians could make similar claims concernin atrocities within Islam. There is no way ot denyin (althouh
this is sometimes done) that at least the early conquest ot Islam was tull ot atrocities. Be that as it may, we see in
the recordin ot atrocities a sin ot the trustworthiness ot the Bible. The Bible does not condone the act ot sin,
nor does it otter any praise tor dirty actions, but proclaims rather the impendin judement ot Ood. (S.. 2
Sou.i !!:2627 !2:!!9):
"When Uriahs wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. After the time of
mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him
a son. But the thing David had done displeased the Lord."
The Lord sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, "There were two men in a
certain town, one rich and the other poor. The rich man had a very large number of sheep and
cattle, but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb that he had bought. He raised
it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even
slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him. Now a traveller came to the rich man, but the
rich man refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle to prepare a meal for the traveller
who had come to him. Instead, he took the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and
prepared it for the one who had come to him." David burned with anger against the man and
said to Nathan, "As surely as the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die! He must pay
for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity."
Then Nathan said to David, "You are the man! This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: I
anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. I gave your masters
house to you, and your masters wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and
Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. Why did you
despise the word of the Lord by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite
with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the
Ammonites. Now, therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you
despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." "This is what the Lord says:
Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity upon you. Before your very eyes I will
take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will lie with your wives in
broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel,"
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord," Nathan replied, "The Lord has
taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have made the
enemies of the Lord show utter contempt, the son born to you will die."
After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriahs wife had borne to David,
and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and went into his house and
spent the nights lying on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him
up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them. On the seventh
day the child died. Davids servants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they
thought, "While the child was still living, we spoke to David but he would not listen to us. How
can we tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate." David noticed that his
servants were whispering among themselves and he realised that the child was dead. "Is the
child dead?" he asked. "Yes," they replied, "he is dead." 2 Samuel 11:26-12. A somewhat similar
situation is reported in Judges 19-21.

Biblical Prophecies Fulfilled
here are two extensive prophetic themes in the Old Testament. the inspired record ot Ood's covenant
with Israel, and His uidance in it. Both ot these themes were iven to the various prophets trom Moses
(BC 1500) to Malachi (BC +00). One concerns Ood's people ot old, the ]ews and their history to come,
the other the Lord's Messiah. Messiah (Hebrew) or Christos (Oreek) means 'the anointed one' or, in modern
terminoloy, the ruler priest. No other subject receives such important attention in Ood's siht as these themes.
Let us bein with the prophecies concernin ]esus. For the sake ot brevity only some have been selected.
Some Prophecies and Fulfilment regarding Jesus
OT 700 BC ot ]esus' birthplace and preexistence.
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will
come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins
are from of old, from ancient times." Micah 5:2
NT - Luke 2.+7
"So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town
of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. He went there to register with
Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. While they were there,
the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped
him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn." Luke
OT 700 BC ot the virin birth, divinity and unique sonship.
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to
a son, and will call him Immanuel." (= God with us) Isaiah 7:14
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulder. And
he will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." "
Isaiah 9:6
NT - Matthew 1823
"This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married
to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy
Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to
public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. But after he had considered this, an
angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid
to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She
will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his
people from their sins." All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had said through the prophet:
"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" -which
means, "God with us." (which means, God with us). Matthew 1:18-23
OT 520 BC concernin the time ot his comin .
"Seventy weeks (of years, i.e 70 x 7 years = 490 years) are determined upon thy people
(Daniel's people = Jews) and upon thy holy city (Jerusalem), to finish the transgression, and to
make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting
righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy (i.e. no more prophetic revelation added
to the Bible after that), and to anoint the Most Holy (anoint = exalt, crown, dedicate). Know
therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build
Jerusalem (which at that time was destroyed and its inhabitants were captives in Babylon) unto
the Messiah, the Prince, shall be seven weeks (49 years) and sixty-two weeks (434 years): The
streets shall be built again, and the wall, even in troubled times."

+9 years were actually needed to rebuild ]erusalem atter Nehemiah ot the royal order by Artaxerxes (BC +65
+25), which he ave in the 20th year ot his rein (Nehemiah 2.1,8b), i.e. ++5 BC The book ot Nehemiah states
that ]erusalem was indeed rebuilt in troubled times, since many enemies were tryin to hinder this. The
remainin +3+ years brin us to the year AD 38. Althouh this is some years atter the triumphant entry ot
Christ into ]erusalem we must consider the tact that.
1. Historical dates ot this time are not quite as accurate as they are in more recent history, due to the tact that
there was no proper calendar and ditterent lenths ot a year (Israel had a lunar year ot 35+ days) and
2. This described event does not tit any other happenin in history and we must consequently conclude that
the error is more likely to be tound in history than in the Bible.
"After the sixty-two sevens, the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people
of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood:
War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."
(The "prince that shall come" is no doubt Titus, the Roman conqueror and son of Emperor
Hadrian who, after the death of the Messiah, came and destroyed Jerusalem and, against his
will, the temple, in AD 70. After that "desolations are determined" and lasted until this century!)
Daniel 9:24-26
OT 700 BC toretellin that he came to save and to heal.
" your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to
save you. Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped." Isaiah
NT - Mathew 1.21, Luke 19.10, ]ohn 3.1321, Romans 3.2126, 5.12, 8.1, Luke 18.+0+3, Mathew +.23
2+, 11.26, 8.1617
"She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his
people from their sins." Matthew 1:21
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost." Luke 19:10
"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven-the Son of Man.

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that
everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

"For God so loved the world that he gave
his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For
God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through
him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands
condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because
their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for
fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that
it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God." John 3:13-21
"But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law
and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all
who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and
are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God
presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,

through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate
his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-
he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who
justifies those who have faith in Jesus.". Romans 3:21-26
" Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we

have peace with God through our
Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we
now stand. And we

rejoice in the hope of the glory of God Romans 5:1-2
" Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through
Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. Romans 8:1
" Jesus stopped and ordered the man to be brought to him. When he came near, Jesus asked
him, "What do you want me to do for you?" "Lord, I want to see," he replied. Jesus said to him,
"Receive your sight; your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed
Jesus, praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God. Luke 18:40-43
" Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the
kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people. News about him spread
all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering
severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralysed, and he healed
them." Matthew 4:23-24
When John heard in prison what Christ was doing, he sent his disciples to ask him, "Are you
the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?" Jesus replied, "Go back and
report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have

are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the
poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me." Matthew 11:2-6
" When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove
out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to fulfil what was spoken through
the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases." Matthew 8:16-17
OT 700 BC predictin the name ot ]esus..
"Listen to me, you islands; hear this, you distant nations: Before I was born the Lord called me;
from my birth he has made mention of my name. He made my mouth like a sharpened sword
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation (Hebrew = Yeshua,
the actual name of Jesus, when he lived in Israel) to the ends of the earth. This is what the
Lord says the Redeemer and Holy One of Israel to whom was despised and abhorred by
the nation " Isaiah 49: 1-8 and many other passages
NT - Mathew 1.21 The Anel told ]oseph.
"She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,
because he will save his
people from their sins."(Matthew 1:21
Lp to now Muslims and Christians can reasonably aree, althouh Muslims will dispute the passae in Isaiah
that toretells or determines ]esus' deity and sonship. But we have to consider the substantial weiht ot this
claim ot Ood in prophecy and Fultillment. Consider.
Ot no other man can it be said that he.
Was born in such a miraculous way
Could heal all manner ot diseases
Cast out all evil spirits
Was sinless and holy (Surah 19:19, Hebrews 4:15, I John 3:5, II Corinthians 5:21, I Peter 2:22, Isaiah 53:9, etc.)
Is the Word ot Ood (Surah 4:171, John 1:1-2,14)
Is a $pirit trom Ood (Surah 4:171)
Is toretold in any such detail hundreds ot years ahead ot its Fultillment.
But this is by no means all. Let us consider the end ot the lite ot ]esus as predicted in the Old Testament and its
OT +80 BC ot ]esus' humble entry to ]erusalem on a donkey.
"Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to
you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a
donkey." Zechariah 9:9
NT - Mathew 21,19
" As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent
two disciples, saying to them, "Go to the village ahead of you, and at once you will find a
donkey tied there, with her colt by her. Untie them and bring them to me. If anyone says
anything to you, tell him that the Lord needs them, and he will send them right away." This took
place to fulfil what was spoken through the prophet: "Say to the Daughter of Zion, `See, your
king comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.' "

disciples went and did as Jesus had instructed them. They brought the donkey and the colt,
placed their cloaks on them, and Jesus sat on them. A very large crowd spread their cloaks on
the road, while others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. The crowds
that went ahead of him and those that followed shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of David!"
"Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" "Hosanna

in the highest!" Matthew 21:1-9
OT +80 BC ot the betrayal ot ]esus .
"Even my close friend, whom I trusted has lifted up his heel against me." Psalm 41:9
I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty
pieces of silver. And the Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter" the handsome price at which
they priced me! (=the price of a slave). So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into
the house of the Lord to the potter." Zechariah 11:12-13
NT - Mark 1+.1011, 1721, +3+6, Mathew 27.38
" Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them.
They were delighted to hear this and promised to give him money. So he watched for an
opportunity to hand him over." When evening came, Jesus arrived with the Twelve. While they
were reclining at the table eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me-one
who is eating with me." They were saddened, and one by one they said to him, "Surely not I?"
"It is one of the Twelve," he replied, "one who dips bread into the bowl with me. The Son of
Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It
would be better for him if he had not been born." Judas, one of the Twelve, appeared. With
him was a crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests, the teachers of the
law, and the elders. Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the
man; arrest him and lead him away under guard." Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Rabbi!"
and kissed him. The men seized Jesus and arrested him. Mark 14:10-11, 17-21, 43-46
" When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with
remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned,"
he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your
responsibility." So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and
hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this
into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's
field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this
day. Matthew 27:3-8
OT 700 BC ot ]esus' mishandlin at His 'trial'.
"I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did
not hide my face from mocking and spitting." Isaiah 60:6
NT - ]ohn 18.22
"What do you think?" "He is worthy of death," they answered. Then they spit in his face and
struck him with their fists. Others slapped him and said, "Prophesy to us, Christ. Who hit you?"
Matthew 26:66-67 " one of the officials nearby struck him in the face." John 18:22
OT 700 BC ot the sutterin and death by crucitixion ot ]esus:
" he had no beauty majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should
desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with
suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him
not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken
by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was
crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his
wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own
way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he
did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her
shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken
away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for
the transgression of my people he was stricken. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and
with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. Yet
it was the Lords will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a
guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper
in his hand. After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied, by his
knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. Therefore I
will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because
he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the
sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Isaiah 53
And even earlier this prophecy was iven about the circumstances ot his death BC 1,000.
"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from
the words of my groaning? all who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
He trusts in the Lord; let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him. Yet
you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you even at my mothers breast open
their mouths wide against me. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My
heart has turned to wax; it has melted away within me. My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death. Dogs have
surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.
I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among
them and cast lots for my clothing." Psalm 22:1, 7-9, 13-18
NT - ]ohn 18.3619.37
" Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my
arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place." "You are a king, then!" said
Pilate. Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born,
and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to
me." "What is truth?" Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, "I find no
basis for a charge against him. But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at
the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release `the king of the Jews'?" They shouted
back, "No, not him! Give us Barabbas!" Now Barabbas had taken part in a rebellion.
Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns
and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe and went up to him again and again,
saying, "Hail, king of the Jews!" And they struck him in the face.
Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, "Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you
know that I find no basis for a charge against him." When Jesus came out wearing the crown of
thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, "Here is the man!"
As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, "Crucify! Crucify!" But
Pilate answered, "You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against
him." The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he
claimed to be the Son of God." When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, and he went
back inside the palace. "Where do you come from?" he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no
answer. "Do you refuse to speak to me?" Pilate said. "Don't you realize I have power either to
free you or to crucify you?" Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not
given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater
From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, "If you let this man go,
you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar." When Pilate
heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge's seat at a place known as the
Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). It was the day of Preparation of Passover
Week, about the sixth hour. "Here is your king," Pilate said to the Jews. But they shouted,
"Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!" "Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked. "We
have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered. Finally Pilate handed him over to them
to be crucified.
So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the
Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). Here they crucified him, and with him two others-
one on each side and Jesus in the middle. Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the
cross. It read: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this
sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in
Aramaic, Latin and Greek. The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, "Do not write `The
King of the Jews,' but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews." Pilate answered, "What I
have written, I have written."
When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for
each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one
piece from top to bottom. "Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who
will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said, "They divided my
garments among them and cast lots for my clothing." So this is what the soldiers did.
Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and
Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing
nearby, he said to his mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," and to the disciple, "Here is
your mother." From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.
Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus
said, "I am thirsty." A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the
sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. When he had received the
drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.
Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the
Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have
the legs broken and the bodies taken down. The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of
the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they
came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of
the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The
man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth,
and he testifies so that you also may believe. These things happened so that the scripture
would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken," and, as another scripture says, "They
will look on the one they have pierced." John 18:36 - 19:37
OT 1,000 BC ot the resurrection ot ]esus.
" I have set the Lord always before me. Because he is at my right hand, I shall not be shaken.
Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will rest secure, because you
will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay." Psalm 16:8-10
NT - Luke 2+.111
" On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had
prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they
entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were wondering about this,
suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the
women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look
for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while
he was still with you in Galilee: `The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men,
be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' " Then they remembered his words. When
they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. It
was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told
this to the apostles. But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them
like nonsense."Luke 24:1-11
OT 1,000 BC ot the Ascension.
The Lord says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your
feet." Psalm 110:1
NT - Acts 1.611
" So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the
kingdom to Israel?" He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has
set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and
you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the
earth." After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their
sight. They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men
dressed in white stood beside them. "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here
looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come
back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven." Acts 1:6-11
$till OT +80 BC ot the repentance ot Israel and their turnin to ]esus.
"And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and
supplication., They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as
one mourns for an only child and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son."
Zechariah 12:10
OT 1,000 BC ot our situation now where people like to separate ]esus the $on trom Ood the Father.
"The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the Lord and
against his Anointed One. Let us break their chains, they say, and throw off their fetters I will
proclaim the decree of the Lord: He said to me, You are my Son; today I have become your
Father. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your
possession Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath
can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him." Psalm 2:2-3,7-8,12
No critic in the world can explain away the evidence ot these tultilled prophecies. It is unique in all history and
to all reliious books. It is Ood's seal that is interwoven with His messae to mankind so that any earnest and
honest seeker can be totally reassured that he is not readin a book by some reliious men tryin to impose
their views on others. No man dare claim on the evidence iven above, that the Bible has been corrupted
The Evidence of Eye-Witnesses
However, the question may be raised. Was the Old Testament perhaps, at least partly, written atter the New
Testament in order to 'supply' such 'prophecy'. This is unthinkable tor several reasons. The ]ews uarded the
$criptures with the utmost viilance and care. They themselves were, in tact, not interested in havin these
prophecies in their Holy Book, tor they contradict their own taith and practice. It is siniticant that tew it any
ot the abovementioned passaes are ever read on the reular $abbath readins in any synaoue. But besides
that, the Old Testament was already very widely circulated betore Christ and had been translated already into
Oreek between BC 250100. To then 'revise' a text that is widely distributed is quite impossible. Besides, we
have preChristian copies ot Old Testament books in our possession containin these prophecies.
But what about composin the New Testament to suit the prophecies. Could not Christ have known these
and lived to tultill them on purpose. Could not the disciples have composed this.
These happenins did not occur in a hidden corner, away trom any witnesses. They took place in public and
all Israel was aware ot them. When the Oospel was written down by the tour recorders and the teachin ot the
Oospel detined in the Epistles, the whole ot Israel would have stood up in protest aainst these it they were
toreries. On the contrary, the Apostles otten challened the people to question the many eyewitnesses. Paul in
his detense betore Kin Arippa said.
" The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none
of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner." Acts 26:26
Also Peter on the Day ot Pentecost and shortly atter the crucitixion, said to a reat multitude ot ]ews.
" Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by
miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.
This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the
help of wicked men,

put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the
dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold
on him." Acts 2:22-24
We note that the ]ews never denied the execution ot ]esus by crucitixion. They only denied His Messiahship.
A little later Peter and the other Apostles were put into prison tor their teachin. While bein interroated by
the council ot the ]ews, they replied.
" We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead-
whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince
and Saviour that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel. We are witnesses
of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him." Acts
Paul likewise reterred to the double security. it is 'in accordance with the $criptures' (reterence to prophecy ot
the Old Testament) and evidenced by many witnesses ot whom at that time most were alive to be questioned.
This was mentioned to the people in Oreece, tor in Israel there would have been little need to mention it.
" For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to
the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter,

and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared
to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though
some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles." 1 Corinthians
This aain is supported by the Apostle Peter at a slihtly later stae, emphasizin the eyewitness report but
pointin at the tultilled prophecy as 'more sure'. A witness may lie. Even many witnesses may. But in prophecy
and its Fultillment can be no tlaw
" We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honour and
glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is
my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came
from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. And we have the word of the
prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a
dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must
understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For
prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried
along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:16-21
The only academic amon the Oospel narrators, Luke, beins his account thus.
"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled

us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and
servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the
beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you." Luke 1:1-3
Besides all this how could ]esus have chosen the predicted time ot His comin, the mode ot his birth (by a
virin), or the mode ot His death (crucitixion) which was itselt unknown to the prophet who announced it, tor
it was not practised in his day and ae Furthermore, how could He have pertormed His miracles.
On the basis ot what precedes we must reject statements by Muslims, similar to these words ot Mr ]oommal (u.
r.,.r to o. !4):
"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God: ... the
present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called
the inspired word of God ... faith demands total allegiance to
the Bible with its faults, absurdities, everything. Reason, on
the other hand, is loath to accept matters that constitute an
insult to the human intelligence." (Please consider also the
historic evidences on pp. 98ff.).
We challene every true Muslim to reconsider his views on the 'corruption and unreliability ot the Bible'
throuh seekin and providin any evidence in support ot the inspiration ot the Qur'an that is as stron and
convincin as the abovementioned cases in the Bible.
We tind the Qur'an without any acceptable prophecy that was tultilled, neither do we tind acceptable
evidence ot witnesses to any sins to support the ottice ot prophethood in Islam. Lltimately the claim ot the
divine oriin ot the Qur'an is evidenced by one man only. That he manaed to convince his tollowers is
another matter, but is in itselt unacceptable evidence, tor thousands ot oriinators ot reliious roups have
done the same. We are aware that statements like this are likely to arouse indination, or suspicion and may
result in rejection. In such a case, however, the basis ot rejection is neither spiritual nor intellient, but to be
tound in emotions or tear. We are indeed sorry to hurt the teelins ot our Muslim triends by such statements.
May you be aware ot our deep concern tor the truth ot Ood and tor your spiritual standin betore the livin
Some prophecies regarding the Jews
Anyone who is reasonably acquainted with history, particularly ]ewish history, will actually tind it easy to
associate the torecast made by prophets lon years betore with the event itselt.
In BC 1500 Moses was inspired to write this torecast.
"If you fully obey the Lord your God and carefully follow all his commands that I give you today,
the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations on earth. All these blessings will come
upon you and accompany you if you obey the Lord your God: You will be blessed in the city
and blessed in the country. The fruit of your womb will be blessed, and the crops of your land
and the young of your livestock the calves of your herds and the lambs of your flocks. Your
basket and your kneading trough will be blessed. You will be blessed when you come in and
blessed when you go out."
"However, if you do not obey the Lord your God and do not carefully follow all his commands
and decrees I am giving you today, all these curses will come upon you and overtake you: You
will be cursed in the city and cursed in the country. Your basket and your kneading trough will
be cursed. The fruit of your womb will be cursed, and the crops of your land, and the calves of
your herds and the lambs of your flocks. You will be cursed when you come in and cursed
when you go out. The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put
your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have
done in forsaking him."
"The Lord will drive you and the king you set over you to a nation unknown to you or your
fathers. There you will worship other gods, gods of wood and stone. You will become a thing of
horror and an object of scorn and ridicule to all the nations where the Lord will drive you. You
will sow much seed in the field but you will harvest little, because locusts will devour it. You will
plant vineyards and cultivate them but you will not drink the wine or gather the grapes, because
worms will eat them. You will have olive trees throughout your country but you will not use the
oil, because the olives will drop off. You will have sons and daughters but you will not keep
them, because they will go into captivity. Swarms of locusts will take over all your trees and the
crops of your land. The alien who lives among you will rise above you higher and higher, but
you will sink lower and lower. He will lend to you, but you will not lend to him. He will be the
head, but you will be the tail!
All these curses will come upon you. They will pursue you and overtake you until you are
destroyed, because you did not obey the Lord your God and observe the commands and
decrees he gave you. They will be a sign and a wonder to you and your descendants for ever.
Because you did not serve the Lord your God joyfully and gladly in the time of prosperity,
therefore in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and dire poverty, you will serve the enemies the
Lord sends against you. He will put an iron yoke on your neck until he has destroyed you.
The Lord will bring a nation against you from far away, from the ends of the earth, like an eagle
swooping down, a nation whose language you will not understand, a fierce looking nation
without respect for the old or pity for the young. They will devour the young of your livestock
and the crops of your land until you are destroyed. They will leave you no grain, new wine or
oil, nor any calves of your herds or lambs of your flocks until you are ruined. They will lay siege
to all the cities throughout your land until the high fortified walls in which you trust fall down.
They will besiege all the cities throughout the land the Lord your God is giving you. Because of
the suffering that your enemy will inflict on you during the siege, you will eat the fruit of the
womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the Lord your God has given you. Even the most
gentle and sensitive man among you will have no compassion on his own brother or the wife he
loves or his surviving children, and he will not give to one of them any of the flesh of his
children that he is eating. It will be all he has left because of the suffering that your enemy will
inflict on you during the siege of all your cities.
The Lord will also bring on you every kind of sickness and disaster not recorded in this Book of
the Law, until you are destroyed. You who were as numerous as the stars in the sky will be left
but few in number, because you did not obey the Lord your God. Just as it pleased the Lord to
make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You
will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess. Then the Lord will scatter you
among all nations, from one end of the earth to the other. There you will worship other gods
gods of wood and stone, which neither you nor your fathers have known. Among those nations
you will find no response, no resting place for the sole of your foot. There the Lord will give you
an anxious mind, eyes weary with longing, and a despairing heart. You will live in constant
suspense, filled with dread both night and day, never sure of your life. In the morning you will
say, If only it were evening? and in the evening If only it were morning! because of the
terror that will fill your hearts and the sights that your eyes will see." Deuteronomy 28:1-6, 15-21,,
36-55, 61-67
We do see the ]ews in this world bein envied tor their success. All Antisemitism stems trom this. ]ews are
successtul in business, the arts and science. They have provided the larest number (pro rata) ot Nobel Prize
winners. Why. A look at their history will enlihten us.
Summary of Jewish history showing the Fulfillment of these prophecies
Let us as brietly as possible trace the history ot these people. In the mornin time ot history, in BC 1936, +12
years atter the tlood, Ood called Abraham a $hemite, trom Lr ot the Chaldees, to be the tather ot a new
The Lord had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your fathers household and
go to the land I will show you. 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.

I will bless those who bless you, and whoever
curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you." Genesis 12:1-3
Notice that this is not a conditional promise, and there is not a passae anywhere in the Bible that revokes it.
The unconditional promise was contirmed to his son Isaac and to his randson ]acob. When the descendants
ot Abraham had increased to about 70 they mirated to Eypt and were settled in the land ot Ooshen, where
they had to work in slavery tor +00 years as was prophesied in Oenesis 15.131+.
The next reat event in ]ewish history was the Exodus. When the time ot their deliverance trom Eypt came,
Ood prepared them by increasin the hardness ot their lot, and when they cried to Ood he sent Moses to
deliver them. Within a year atter their escape trom Eypt the law was iven, the Tabernacle built, a sacriticial
system ot worship inauurated, and the ']ewish Commonwealth' set up. But when at the end ot the year they
had reached Kadesh Barnea and retused to o up and take possession ot the land, Ood punished them by
compellin them to wander tor +0 years in the wilderness, where they were miraculously ted and clothed, and
divinely uided by the 'Pillar ot Cloud and Fire'.
At the end ot the +0 years, under the leadership ot ]oshua, they crossed the ]ordan and entered the Promised
Land and took possession ot it. Then bean the third period ot their history, the time ot the ]udes, which
lasted about +50 years. The overnment was a Theocracy administered at tirst throuh elders and then by
]udes. The people, however, were not satistied with bein ruled by an invisible Kin. They wanted a kin like
the other nations around them, so they went to $amuel, the Prophet, and asked him tor a kin. $amuel was
displeased, teelin it was aimed at his administration but when he took the matter to Ood, He said.
Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have
rejected me 1 Samuel 8:7
$amuel then warned the people ot what the chosen kin would do to them but the warnin was ot no avail and
$aul was chosen. This was the beinnin ot the tourth period ot the history. $aul reined tor +0 years and was
succeeded by David, a man ot Ood's choice, who also reined +0 years and was succeeded by his son $olomon,
who in turn reined +0 years. Durin the rein ot $olomon the tirst temple was built. His rein was most
lorious, but its weak teature was that he married so many heathen wives, and permitted them to introduce
idolatrous worship in ]erusalem. This was the beinnin ot the downtall ot the ]ewish nation. Atter the death
ot $olomon BC 975, the kindom was divided, his son Rehoboam retainin the rule over two tribes, ]udah and
Benjamin, and with them ]erusalem and the Temple. ]eroboam, an usurper, as ruler over the remainin tribes,
set up his capital at $amaria. This division ot the kindom, known as Israel, rapidly declined and in BC 721 the
ten tribes were carried captive to Assyria. The two tribes known as ]udah, survived over a hundred years loner,
but in BC 606 they were carried into captivity to Babylon, and ]erusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in
BC 587. Thus ended a period ot deadly tribal wars which was made illustrious by the ministry ot a noble
succession ot reat prophets.
With the captivity ot ]udah and the destruction ot ]erusalem, bean that lon period which is outlined and
described in the Book ot Daniel. This period has not yet expired.
The titth period bean with the termination ot the 70 years' Babylonian captivity, the ]ews returnin to
]erusalem to rebuild the Temple and the walls ot the city. But while the ]ews were permitted to return to their
own land, they never aain secured supremacy. They remained subject to ditterent conquerors ot their land
thouh tor the most part overned by rulers ot their own race, in Fultillment ot the prophecy that the sceptre
should not depart trom ]udah until $hiloh came (G.r.s:s 49:!u)
The tollowin prophecy preceded the national captivity ot ]udah in Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar ( BC
605538) prophesied by ]eremiah.
For this is what the Lord says: "I will make you a terror to yourself and to all your friends; with
your own eyes you will see them fall by the sword of their enemies. I will hand all Judah over to
the king of Babylon, who will carry them away to Babylon or put them to the sword.

I will hand
over to their enemies all the wealth of this city - all its products, all its valuables and all the
treasures of the kings of Judah. They will take it away as plunder and carry it off to Babylon."
Jeremiah 20:4-5
"This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of
Babylon seventy years." Jeremiah 25:11
A people that you do not know will eat what your land and labor produce, and you will have
nothing but cruel oppression all your days. The sights you see will drive you mad.

will afflict your knees and legs with painful boils that cannot be cured, spreading from the soles
of your feet to the top of your head. The LORD will drive you and the king you set over you to a
nation unknown to you or your fathers. There you will worship other gods, gods of wood and
stone." Deuteronomy 28:33-36
In BC 168 Antiochus Epiphanes, Kin ot $yria conquered Palestine trom Eypt, twice took and sacked
]erusalem, desecrated and closed the Temple and cruelly persecuted the ]ews until they became so incensed as
to rise in rebellion under the leadership ot the Maccabbees. This rebellion lasted trom BC 160+0.
In BC 63 ]udea became subject to Rome and durin the next sixty years the Roman Empire tihtened its rip
on the Holy Land. About this time, BC 5, many ot the students ot prophecy, knowin by Daniel, the Prophet,
that the time set tor the comin ot 'Messiah the Prince' was not tar distant (Daniel 9.2+27), trequented the
temple waitin tor the consolation ot Israel.
]esus was born at Bethlehem, was visited by the shepherds. and acknowleded a tew weeks later in the
Temple by $imeon and Anna, the wise men trom the East did him homae and he was taken to Eypt and
returned to Nazareth where he spent his youth and youn manhood. At thirty years ot ae, He appeared at the
]ordan, was baptized by ]ohn, and entered upon his public ministry. But His claim to be the Messiah was
rejected by the ]ews. They handed Him to the Oentiles to be crucitied, cryin.
Let his blood be on us and on our children! Matthew 27:25
How literally this was tultilled we read in the history books. In AD 70 the Roman armies came, ]erusalem and
the Temple were destroyed by Titus and the ]ews were scattered amon the nations ot the earth, as had been
prophesied in the ninth chapter ot Daniel.
With the rejection and crucitixion ot the Messiah, the sorrows ot the ]ewish race really bean.
In AD 50 some 30 000 were killed in ]erusalem in a tumult with the Romans but their worst sutterins bean
in AD 66 under Oessius Florus, the Roman overnor ot ]udea. His oppressions led to a widespread revolt.
Nero sent Vespasian, accompanied by his son Titus, with an army ot 60 000 men. He was met in Lpper Oalilee
by ]osephus, a tamous eneral ot the Hasmonean race, and a noted historian, who entrenched himselt at
]otapata, but was tinally overpowered, atter a siee ot +7 days, with a loss ot over +0 000 men. The subjuation
ot Oalilee tollowed. Thousands perished in that war. ]udea and ]erusalem were spared because Vespasian was
called back to Rome throuh the death ot Nero. When Vespasian was made emperor he sent his son Titus to
complete the subjuation ot the Holy Land and capture ]erusalem.
It was in April AD 70 that the Roman army, numberin 100 000 men, marched aainst ]erusalem, a city but
poorly prepared to withstand a siee. Rival tactions disputed amon themselves tor control. The city was
surrounded by a triple wall, detended by 90 towers. The siee lasted tour months. Oreat enines ot elastic
timbers aided by the twistin ot reat cables, hurled stones aainst the walls. Within the city tamine reined,
wives snatched tood trom their husbands, children trom their parents, mothers trom their babies, and some
mothers, havin lost all sense ot motherhood, killed, cooked, and ate their own children. Many tled trom the
city to meet a worse tate tor, on bein captured by Titus, they were crucitied as a warnin outside the city walls.
$o horrible became the condition ot the besieed that Titus called Ood to witness that he was not responsible.
At last, on Auust 5th, AD 70, the tower Antonia was taken, the Romans swarmed into the Temple
enclosure and althouh Titus commanded his soldiers to spare the beautitul temple buildin, tor it was looked
upon, even by Rome, as one ot the wonders ot the world, a soldier threw a blazin torch throuh a doorway
and in the contlaration that tollowed the temple ot Herod was destroyed, leavin nothin but the rock upon
which it stood.
]osephus says that over 1,000 000 perished in the siee, while 97 000 survived as captives ot whom the
handsomest youn men were taken to Rome to race the triumph ot the conqueror, and thus the prophecy ot
Daniel was tultilled that 'the people ot the Prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.'
(Dor:.i 9:26)
While the destruction ot ]erusalem by Titus scattered the ]ews tar and wide, it was by no means the tinal
blow. $ixtytive years later, by AD 136, the ]ews had sutticiently recovered trom that crushin blow to rise atresh
in revolt aainst Roman authority. Hadrian then completed the work ot dispersion. In a war lastin three and a
halt years he devastated Palestine, destroyed 580 000 persons, ran a plouhshare over Zion (thus tultillin the
prophecy ot Micah 3.12, uttered 885 years betore) and torbade the ]ews, on pain ot death, even to approach
Aelia Capitolina, the new Roman city which he erected on the site ot ]erusalem. From that time on there were
tew ]ews in Palestine.
In AD 362 the Emperor, ]ulian the Apostate, made an attempt to rebuild the walls ot ]erusalem, which
would have run contrary to the prediction ot the Lord but his workmen were driven ott by tire that burst trom
the ruins.
The interval trom Hadrian AD 1+0 to Constantine saw the ]ewish people prosperous and tlourishin to
some extent in the lands ot their exile throuhout the Roman world. They even took part in paan persecutions
ot the early church. But the conversion ot Constantine to Christianity AD 312, chaned all this, the ]ews then
became a condemned and persecuted sect. This opened a sad period in which, the Roman Church usin its
intluence and political power as well as the inorance ot its members, persecuted the ]ewish people in the
Name ot Ood
The loom deepened until AD 1096, the time ot the tirst crusade, known in history as the 'Holy War' when
the pall ot midniht blackness tell upon them and did not litt until lon atter the retormation.
In A.D 1020 Canute banished all ]ews trom Enland. A little later the only burial place in all Enland
allowed to ]ews was Crickleate in London. Then the Holy War bean with the attempt to murder all ]ews in
Europe who would not submit to baptism. Henry II ordered the ]ews to pay 60 000 towards detrayin his
expenses durin one ot the crusades. At the accession ot Richard I, in AD 1189, murderous riots were
instiated aainst the ]ews and not a ]ewish household escaped robbery and murder.
The tollowin year saw the traedy ot York Castle in which the Chiet Rabbi ot York and 500 tollowers, were
besieed in York Castle and when escape became hopeless, they slew one another. The Chiet Rabbi, the last to
die, started a contlaration, then took his own lite and when the besieers broke in they tound the besieed in
one reat pile like a sacritice upon an altar.
Lp to the time ot Edward I in 1272, the Crown claimed to own the ]ew and all he possessed and trom time
to time would allow him to ather riches that they miht be squeezed trom him like water trom a spone.
Edward I drove all the ]ews, 16,500 in number, trom Enland and tor nearly tour centuries there was no
evidence that British soil was trodden by a ]ewish toot.
In 1306, on the mornin ot the tast, commemoratin the destruction ot ]erusalem, all ]ews in France, men,
women and children numberin 100 000, were stripped ot their possessions tor the benetit ot the Royal
Treasury and cast out ot the land. In ten years they were allowed to return but soon the 'Pastoureaux', bands ot
tanatical shepherds and maletactors, swept them away by the thousands. In 1683 the ]ews were ordered to quit
all French Colonies and it was not until 1723, when Louis XV ave the ]ews permission to hold real estate in
France, that the tide bean to turn
The 'Black Death', the plaue which swept over Europe (13+850) and carried ott onetourth ot the
population, attlicted the ]ews but lihtly, owin to their simple lite and observance ot the hyienic requirements
ot the Levitical Law. Their comparative exemption caused them to be suspected as the source ot the plaue and
they were chared with poisonin the wells and sprins. In Oermany, the composition ot the alleed poison,
the colour ot the packaes in which it was transported and the persons who conveyed them, were all declared to
be known, the result was that they suttered the torture, the cauldron and the devourin tlame at the hands ot
the 'Flaellants', an order ot tanatics who swarmed throuh Oermany preachin extermination ot all
unbelievers. The entire community at $trassbur, 2 000 souls, was draed to an immense scattold which was
set on tire.
They were also chared with stealin the children ot Christians and crucityin them as Passover Lambs, also
stealin the consecrated 'Host' and piercin it with knives. In 1560, they were banished trom Praue and later
in Constantinople, 3 000 houses in the ]ewish quarters were burnt and property to the value ot 50 000 000
crowns contiscated.
In $pain, the machinery ot the Inquisition held tull sway. It was established to territy into taithtullness
apostate ]ews, men and women disappeared by the hundreds as it the round had opened and swallowed them
up. $ome never returned, others reappeared atter years as human wrecks, pale and emaciated and semiinsane
throuh lon incarceration in dark and chilly subterranean duneons. Now and then processions wound
throuh the streets to the place ot burnin, the victims bein tortured in the hope that they would recant
betore bein thrown into the tlames.
Many tound themselves led trom the Hall ot ]udement alon subterranean passaeways to the Chamber ot
the 'Iron Maiden', a rude hollow tiure ot a woman, made ot iron which, at the touch ot a sprin, tlew open to
disclose its inner surtace studded with iron nails, rusted by its numerous victims. When the condemned
stepped inside, the tiure bean to close, huin the victim in its iron rasp until the nails enterin the body
amid human shrieks, pierced some vital part and when all was over the iron tiure aain opened to allow the
body to tall into the yawnin pit below. But this was not all. Ferdinand and Isabella, in 1+92 issued an edict ot
banishment aainst all ]ews in $pain. A ]ew ottered 600 000 crowns tor a revocation ot the edict. The kin and
queen hesitated and were inclined to accept, when the $panish Inquisitor, Torquemada, stalked into the
presence ot the abashed rulers and, holdin up a crucitix betore them, cried
"Behold Him Whom Judas sold for 30 pieces of silver, sell ye
Him now for a higher price and render an account of your
bargain before God!"
The sovereins trembled betore the stern Dominican and the ]ews had to o. They were iven tour months in
which to prepare, whither they o they knew not, tor there was no hospitable shore to which to tlee. $ome
embarked tor Atrica and were sold in slavery. A number reached Italy. Their sutterins were indescribable. Two
hundred years later, in 1680, the spirit ot $pain towards the ]ews was unchaned.
And so, like a horrible nihtmare, tor centuries history records the terrible punishments and persecutions
that betell the seed ot Abraham and even today, in an ae ot humanism and civilization, it is tresh in our minds
how Hitler and his tanatical lunatics systematically destroyed 6,000 000 ]ews in camps and as chambers. The
miracle ot the preservation ot the ]ews durin the lon niht ot their persecutions cannot be accounted tor,
except on the supposition that they have been preserved tor a purpose . (This historical account was copied by
me some 20 years ao trom a script which name and author I cannot recall anymore).
The ]ews were by no means the only persecuted people but certainly the most persecuted ones. They are the
only nation in the world to sutter and survive the 'diaspora' (i.e. dispersion amon the other nations ot the
world) tor close on 2 000 years The Bible toretold this.
"Then the LORD will scatter you among all nations, from one end of the earth to the other.
There you will worship other godsgods of wood and stone, which neither you nor your fathers
have known. Among those nations you will find no repose, no resting place for the sole of your
foot. There the Lord will give you an anxious mind, eyes weary with longing, and a despairing

You will live in constant suspense, filled with dread both night and day, never sure of
your life." Deuteronomy 28:64-66
"The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will bring my people Israel and Judah back
from captivity and restore them to the land I gave their forefathers to possess, says the LORD."
"Hear the word of the LORD, O nations; proclaim it in distant coastlands: He who scattered
Israel will gather them and will watch over his flock like a shepherd. For the Lord will ransom
Jacob and redeem them from the hand of those stronger than they." Jeremiah 31:10-11
"Do not be afraid, for I am with you; I will bring your children from the east and gather you from
the west. I will say to the north, Give them up! and to the south, Do not hold them back. Bring
my sons from afar and my daughters from the ends of the earth - everyone who is called by my
name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made. Lead out those who have eyes
but are blind, who have ears but are deaf." (although they see and hear!) Isaiah 43:5-8
To me the most inexplicable event of all is the return ot the ]ews to Israel, which bean at the end ot the last
century but became a reat movement atter the last World War and with the toundin ot the $tate ot Israel in
19+8. Lnpredictable and yet it was predicted and is bein tultilled.

Islam Disagrees With And Denies
Fundamental Biblical Teaching
s we have observed already (pae 17) Islam's hopes are.
'To cull relevant nonMuslim material in support and denunciation ot the Christian theories ot ...
]esus' alleed sonship ot Ood, the thesis ot the crucitixion ot the Messiah and the doctrine ot
man's redemption throuh ]esus Christ ...'
We are sad to contess that Islam has been most successtul in doin so, at least amon Muslims. We are sad,
because this is an ettort to cull revealed truth revealed truth backed by evidence that is divine.
Contrary to Islamic accusations, the Bible has never been tampered with any time and as reards the New
Testament has certainly not underone any chanes since it was canonized. This can be proved a thousand
times. and has been investiated already (p. 36). We have also looked at the prophetic aspect to prove the
Divine Hand in the messae ot the Bible (pp. +0tt.). We have established the tact, that althouh Ood chose to
inspire men with the idea ot the messae rather than with a mechanical dictation, this messae has detinitely
been veritied. Other evidence will still be added later. In the study ot the revelation ot Ood's plan in the Bible
which is rejected by Islam we see a totally harmonious line ot development riht throuh the Bible althouh it
consists ot two Covenants (the Old and New Testaments, one a national contract with the ]ews, the other with
all who are willin to submit to Ood's otter ot pardon), written in 66 'books' or portions by about +0 ditterent
writers over 1 600 years. May this consistency be illustrated with reard to the subjects under dispute, namely.
1. Atonement
2. ]esus and His divinity, throuh bein part ot the 'Trinity' and His sonship ot Ood
3. The crucitixion
Aain the critical quotes are taken trom the book by Mr ]oommal.
Islamic objections to the doctrine of atonement
What is atonement. It is simply reconciliation with Ood atter havin rebelled aainst Him by breakin the
Covenant or Contract that He made with man. We call that sinnin. For that matter, anythin done in
thouht, word or deed that is contrary to His Word, Law and purpose tor man, is sin. Every sinner, havin
committed treason or rebellion in Ood's siht, has been rejected by Ood. The result ot that is death spiritual
death which must result in eternal separation trom Ood as well.
For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light
have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer
have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and
idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As god has said: I will live with them and walk
among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.
2 Corinthians 6:14-16
Ood ordained in the Old Testament that atter sins (not willtul Leviticus +.2) were committed the ottender
should seek to atone tor them in order to be reconciled with Ood. The way this should be done was
commanded in reat detail (Leviticus chapters 17, 16, etc.). It was by means ot a sacritice. In the New
Testament the place ot an animal sacritice was taken by ]esus who then suttered in the place ot the ottender.
It appears that the basic problem a Muslim sees in atonement, is that in the atonin act ot Ood a substitute is
to be sacriticed tor the repentin sinner. This is accepted by Ood instead ot the ottender, and the just
punishment is executed on the substitute. Muslims reason that it would be unjust ot Ood to punish the
innocent tor the ottence ot the uilty. The just should be rewarded with oodness just as surely as the unjust
should be rewarded with tribulation. ]esus, the just, theretore can not really sutter, but it would certainly be
impossible tor Ood to allow Him to sutter tor the unjust, tor this would be ottensive to Ood's concept ot
rihteousness and justice. This arument, however, is contrary even to the Qur'an, tor there it is mentioned
that the prophets ot old did indeed sutter and were killed. (Suroi 3:!83)
$ince Muhammad himselt also suttered by bein poisoned, almost dyin on one occasion (the Hadith says
that he suttered trom the consequences ot this until the end ot his lite), and since he suttered deteat at the
Battle ot Lhud, (where he himselt was wounded in the tace and lost two tront teeth), it is not tartetched to
assume that aain we are tacin a rhetorical arument by Muslim clery.
Furthermore we should like to reter to the 'Bismillah', where Allah is called alRahman and alRahim
(racious and mercitul). Orace is an undeserved itt in leal terms it means pardon. Mercy is an act ot
compassion that does not consider whether or not a person deserves help, but is in tact spontaneous aid.
Pardon or the act ot atonement is, in the strictest sense ot the word, unjust. The ottender does not deserve it.
But Ood's love provided a way by which the act ot sin would be punished (to satisty His rihteousness), but the
ottender could be restored. This is what atonement is all about. Besides all this we must accept that
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my
thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8-9
When Ood makes a plan to rescue those whom He loves and that love Him, we can either accept His Way or
reject it. We cannot question Ood and His revealed Way by aruin.
"How can God do it this way and not that?"
Who are we, atter all, to question or advise Almihty Ood. All we have to do is to check the scriptures that
oppose one another while claimin to be revelation tor their evidence and live accordin to the established
We are torced to assume that the Islamic concept ot the rihteous Ood who does not allow the rihteous to
sutter, is merely an arument ot expediency to invalidate the atonement ot ]esus on the cross.
Muslims always incorrectly assume that.
"This doctrine gives mankind licence for the free and unbridled
commission of sins. All one has to do is to have implicit faith
in Jesus having given his blood with which the past and future
sins of mankind have been washed clean. This is a most
comfortable, convenient and easy doctrine to follow. It does
not require any hard rigorous or practical form of worship from
the believer. He must merely believe and have faith and his
salvation is assured." A.S.K. Joommal
We see in these words an attempt to promote seltredemption. Ti:s :s ti. :.r, s:r tiot cor r.:.r o. ,or::.r,
because it is the sin aainst the Holy $pirit. Man sees himselt tit to deal with his sin. Takin this theme to its
loical conclusion would mean that man does not need Ood, as he is capable ot dealin with his sins by
compensatin theretor with 'ood deeds' or a 'riorous, practical torm ot worship' and we assume this to be the
purpose ot the 'tive pillars ot Islam'. But doin ood deeds is our duty.
There is no merit at all in doin them. It we try to compensate tor sin by doin ood deeds we are selt
rihteous, and the Bible distinctly says that.
All our righteous acts are like filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6
Have you ever heard that an ottender in court is acquitted on the rounds that he promises never to do it aain
or to 'be ood' in the tuture.
The underlyin problem is that Muslims have a view ot what the Bible terms 'sin' which is quite ditterent to
the Biblical concept. $in is seen in the Bible as the principle that enslaves all mankind and compels each man
to commit sins. It is man's attitude ot independence, ot open rebellion aainst Ood whether it be a 'bi sin'
like murder or a 'small sin' like tellin a lie in business or stealin somethin trom the tirm. Both presuppose
the absence ot Ood in the centre ot the will and conscience ot man. There may be a lot ot reliious exercise and
devotion, but the sincerity ot the worshiper is otten disproved by deeds. We cannot reard these sins as similar
to receivin a ticket tor speedin. $ins separate us trom Ood
"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you
followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at
work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the
cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by
nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy,

us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions - it is by grace you have been
saved.. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this not from yourselves, it
is the gift of God -

not by works, so that no one can boast.
or we are Gods workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.".
Ephesians 2:1-5,8-10
Critics assume that every church member is in tact a Christian and they also assume that repentance (- turnin
away trom sin) is either not necessary or is otherwise part ot a church ritual. No love tor Ood, tor His
redemptive deed, theretore results, and consequently the believer does not lead a devout live. This is not so
The Christian is devout in ratitude tor the tact that his sins have been toriven, and that he can have
tellowship with Ood aain and enjoy the truit ot salvation, which, no doubt, is " without holiness no one will
see the Lord." Hebrews 12:14)
Without ivin his source, Mr. ]oommal suests that Dr. Martin Luther claims that as a result ot atonement,
a believer 'miht sin to his tull. tor he was sure to be saved.'
(This statement does not coincide with the rest ot Luther's teachin, nor with his actions and theretore we do
not accept it. It, however, these words can be attributed to Luther, they must have been stated in a ditterent
context, tor this statement is inconsistent with Biblical teachin). The consequences ot this teachin, accordin
to Mr. ]oommal, is seen to be responsible tor the 'ross immorality and moral deradation in which the
Christian continents ot Europe and America are wallowin.'
We know ot no Christian continent or Christian nation. Lntortunately, the talse impression may be ained
that all church members are Christians and the superticial onlooker may reach such a conclusion. The Bible
itselt, however, retutes this most stronly.
"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who
practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning
sulfur. This is the second death." Revelation 21:8
"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry
and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions

envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this
will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience,
kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no

Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and
desires." Galatians 5:19-24
To overlook this would indeed be a talse presentation ot atonement, tor we are always saved ,ro somethin
and ,or somethin. It is theretore, wron to conclude. 'that they have no more need to tollow the law'.
That Christians are no loner under the law is true.
"For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on

Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to
establish their own, they did not submit to Gods righteousness.

Christ is the end of the law so
that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. Moses describes in this way the
righteousness that is by the law: The man who does these things will live by them." Romans
"Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too,
have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by
observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified." Galatians 2:16
No law in the world makes a man rihteous. The law determines what is riht and wron, but it cannot oi. a
person riht. It is simply the standard by which judement shall be passed.
"Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too,
have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by
observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified." Galatians 5:4-6
Consider Abraham: He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.

Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham.

The Scripture foresaw that
God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: All
nations will be blessed through you.

So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham,
the man of faith.
All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who
does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.

Clearly no one is justified
before God by the law, because, The righteous will live by faith.

The law is not based on faith;
on the contrary, The man who does these things will live by them.

Christ redeemed us from
the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who is
hung on a tree.

He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to
the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.
Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a
human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case.

The promises were
spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say and to seeds, meaning many
people, but and to your seed, meaning one person, who is Christ.

What I mean is this: The
law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God
and thus do away with the promise.

For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer
depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.
What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed
to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a

A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one. Is the law,
therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that
could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.

But the Scripture
declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given
through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be

So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.

Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. You are all sons of
God through faith in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:6-26
This, however, does not mean the believers may act lawlessly in any way
"You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in
both the Lords table and the table of demons.

Are we trying to arouse the Lords jealousy? Are
we stronger than he? Everything is permissible - but not everything is beneficial. Everything
is permissible - but not everything is constructive.

Nobody should seek his own good, but the
good of others." 1 Corinthians 10:21-24
Christ distinctly tauht His disciples to love Ood and to love one another.
"If you love me, you will obey what I command." John 14:15
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one
another." John 13:34
"If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him
and make our home with him." John 14:23
In this all the commandments ot the Old Testament are tultilled.
"Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together.

One of them, an
expert in the law, tested him with this question: Teacher, which is the greatest commandment
in the Law? Jesus replied: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul
and with all your mind.

This is the first and greatest commandment.

And the second is like it:
Love your neighbor as yourself.

All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
commandments." Matthew 22:34-40
Concernin atonement, our critics poses the tollowin question.
"How can we believe that the heavenly God sacrificed himself
for the sake of insignificant, sinning, puny men, who are of no
importance whatsoever, compared to him? Such an idea is totally
opposed to common sense and is against the laws of nature."
We do not quite see how the law ot nature tits in here, (think, tor example, ot the sacriticial love ot mothers),
but some ot us are able to tathom what love is, however incomplete our concept ot it may be. Ood is love, (1
]ohn +.8), and because He revealed Himselt as such and committed Himselt in His Word to it, we can believe
that the heavenly Ood sacriticed Himselt accordin to His Word, not tor the insiniticant, but tor those that
He loved.
For when love is present, insiniticance disappears. ]ust consider the tact that even on a human level when
some 'insiniticant' person becomes the object ot love and returns that love, he becomes hihly siniticant. Ot
course, this idea is totally opposed to 'common sense', but the believers are encouraed.
"And to know this love that surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measure of all
the fullness of God." Ephesians 3:19
We can believe our heavenly Father, because in His Word He committed Himselt and we can trust Him
"Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of
what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath.

God did this so that, by two unchangeable
things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered
to us may be greatly encouraged." Hebrews 6:17-18
Another alleation by our critics is that believers in Christ die as all other mortals do and consequently
atonement has no value. Nowhere in the Bible are we told that a person who has been reconciled to Ood
becomes throuh that tact immortal on earth, but we are told.
"But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of

And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who
raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives
in you." Romans 8:10-11 (This applies spiritually now and also implies the resurrection ot the
In another passage we read.
"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins,
in which you used to live when
you followed the ways of this world." Ephesians 2:1-2
The value ot atonement is not physical, but spiritual, and althouh we die physically, we will be raised aain at
the Last Day as all other mankind, but will not tace judement and condemnation which was passed to ]esus
Muslims have suested that Christ did not ive His lite as a ransom willinly.
" he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be
taken from me." Matthew 26:39
The critics aain overlook the context. $hortly betore His arrest ]esus was in the Oarden ot Oethsemane
prayin. The above words were part ot His prayer. He also said.
My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death."
He closed His prayer, however, with.
"Yet not as I will, but as you will.
Another record ot the Oospel reports that Christ
"And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling
to the ground." Luke 22:44
What appears to have happened, takin medical tactors into account, is that Christ was severely tempted by
$atan and that He was about to die in Oethsemane ('sorrowtul unto death'), which is demonstrated by the
sweatin ot blood, a very rare phenomenon which accordin to medical evidence, leads to death throuh
extreme anxiety or terror. We must bear in mind, that what lay betore Him was not 'a little chastisement'
(A.$.K. ]oommal), but was physically the most ruesome torture imainable. In the case ot Christ, however, the
spiritual sutterin was reater still, in that He, the undetiled and Holy One, was polluted with all the sin ot all
the world.
It is revealin to read some explanation ottered in Hebrews 5.7.
"During the days of Jesus life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and
tears (Gethsemane) to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of
his reverent submission."
It this incident reters to the cross, he was not heard, tor he died there. $o we must conclude, that the 'passin
ot the cup' was not a prayer tor deliverance trom the cross, but rather tor a deliverance trom a death that would
have prevented Him trom oin to the cross.
The act ot atonement otters the solution which Islam cannot tind to the reat problem.
How can a righteous and holy God be forgiving and merciful?
By punishin sin He expresses His rihteousness and by takin the punishment on Himselt, He expresses His
mercy. Apart trom this method, there is no way tor a rihteous Ood to be a mercitul one as well A happenin
trom history may illustrate this point.
$hamuel was a Caucasian prince livin a couple ot hundred years ao. His people were at constant war with
the Turks. Once he besieed a Turkish city with his army. As usual his mother was with him in his camp. One
niht he planned a surprise assault. But the enemy was lyin in wait. The secret plans had been betrayed. The
battle was lost. In aner $hamuel announced that the traitor would be punished with 100 lashes ot a whip, it
tound out. Aain in reat secrecy another surprise attack was planned. With the same result. But the traitor was
discovered It was $hamuel's mother.
For three days and nihts he withdrew to his tent. What should he do. It he were to spare his mother, all
would rihtly say that he was unjust. Were he to punish her, however, all would say 'Look at $hamuel He does
not even have pity tor his own mother' At lon last he appeared. His army athered expectantly. $erenely he
addressed his people. 'We lost two battles because ot treason. Our men have been killed. There were no
extenuatin circumstances. The crime was committed, and theretore the uilty person shall be punished
accordin to my law. with 100 lashes Rihteousness and judement must be maintained.'
His mother was led to the circle. $he was pale and shiverin with tear. The executioner litted his whip but
betore the tirst lash came down, $hamuel cried. 'Wait This is my mother. I am ot her tlesh and blood. I shall
take the punishment tor her' He went into the circle, took ott his arment and commanded. 'Executioner,
dare not hit more lihtly than you did with your last victim. Do your duty. Hit on' Lash atter lash tound its
mark, until he broke down, unconscious. He survived thouh, aainst expectation.
This event, perhaps more than any other in history, tits the picture ot ]esus. He was Ood in a body. He had
and has to execute rihteous judement. But in His pertect love He took on Himselt our (my own, your own)
sin and suttered the cruel, but just consequences on the cross. But we are aware, that it was not only the
physical sutterin, bad thouh it was, that was so cruel, but that the very pure and holy Ood Himselt took upon
Himselt all the uly tilth ot our sin.
Rihteousness and love met at the cross ot Christ.
"That God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting mens sins against them.
And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation." 2 Corinthians 5:19
This happened once and tor all. This sacritice tor sin is ood enouh tor all men at all times. It is Ood's race,
Ood's itt to us, which we did not deserve. A itt is, however, only mine, when I accept it. And keep it.
When a sculptor creates a statue and he then draws the same statue on a piece ot paper, he will have to
chane a three dimensional object into a twodimensional one. Let us liken man to a bein who in his natural
capacity, can tathom only two dimensions, and tor whom the depth dimension can be added only by revelation.
We always start trom a talse premise when we try to explain Ood and His ways to man, trom man's point ot
view. Exactly that happens when critics speak ot the punishment ot a sinner as a means ot correction and
retorm. They have apparently not understood what sin is trom a divine point ot view. It we inore this, we must
inevitably come to the conclusion that reliious observances will compensate tor our 'little mistakes'. S:r is,
however, s.i,u:ii in all aspects ot practical lite and is only supposedly compensated by reliious duties and rites.
S:r bein ti. r:rc:i. o, corsc:ous orc urcorsc:ous r.:oit oo:rst Goc, separates the sinner completely and eternally
trom Ood. No correction that can deal with the sins ot the past is possible except it comes trom Ood. The need
ot man is much deeper than a need tor retorm. There must be a transtormation ot the whole nature ot man.
"Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of Gods mercy, to offer your bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God - this is your spiritual act of worship.

Do not conform any
longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you
will be able to test and approve what Gods will is - his good, pleasing and perfect will." Romans
We cannot ettect this transtormation ourselves, neither is it ettected by mechanical reliious deeds. It is the
result ot Ood's salvation by race.
There is one last point that we shall have to consider on this matter. It Ood's punishment aims at bein
corrective, how can it be ot any use on the Day ot ]udement when sinners shall receive this punishment. It we
reject Ood's eternal plan and substitute reliion tor it, we deceive ourselves and choose the way ot separation
trom Ood. Hell in this case is not punishment it is our own choice. Atonement is the only alternative ottered
by Ood to restore lost communion with Him. This attects every sphere ot our lives and results in our lives bein
chaned or converted. The imained taculty ot man bein able to please Ood in his own rihteousness, which
we have already discovered to be the only untorivable sin, is reconised and repented ot and a new lite beins.
Many indeed retuse ]esus and His atonement, because they are so bewildered, that they are not even able to
think the concept throuh to the end.
The surprised Christian is intormed by Mr. ]oommal that it was Paul 'whose inenuity ave birth to this idea
ot atonement.' He relates that ]esus was not really dead on the cross, but only appeared to be so, tor he was
taken as dead and placed in a sepulchre. This is in direct contrast not only to the Bible, but also to the Qur'an,
which says in Suroi 4:!55!56:
"They did not slay him, neither crucified him."
Mr. ]oommal's statement is the Ahmedian beliet introduced by Mirza Ohulam Ahmad. His views are rejected
by $unni Muslims, and yet are very otten propaated tor expediency. His account then oes on to say that ]esus.
"Recovered from his wounds after they had been treated, left
the sepulchre and met his disciples secretly. It would have
been highly dangerous to reveal that he was still alive, since
he was formally tried and sentenced to death by the Roman
Government. If his identity had been discovered, he would have
been rearrested and sentenced for a second time. How could his
disciples even expose the fact that Christ was not dead, but
very much alive?
The Jews on the other hand, exultantly declared that Jesus
died, because he was an accursed man and an imposter 'for he
that is hanged is accursed of God', says Deuteronomy 21:23."
This assumption is totally torein to the New Testament eyewitness record the only detailed oneot the death
ot Christ.
"The aim of the Jews in having Jesus crucified, was to show
that he was an imposter and thus prove the truth of the Word of
God. The disciples of Jesus did not know what to do or say;
they were in a dilemma. An admission of his death on the cross
involved a belief in his having become the 'accursed of God',
but a declaration that he was alive, was most hazardous ... it
was at this junction, that Paul's ingenuity came into operation
and he devised a clever plan to which the disciples did not
object, because it seemed the only way out of the predicament
under the circumstances. Paul advanced the theory, that Jesus
had undoubtedly been subjected to an accursed death, but since
he himself was completely innocent, having taken on his own
shoulders the burden of the curse for the sins of men, this did
not constitute infamy, but was on the contrary, a very
meritorious act. Thus the Christians now at least had something
to say in reply to the Jews. This theory, however, originally
formulated as an answer to the Jews, gradually developed into
the doctrine of atonement as now preached by the Christian
We would like to know more about the sources ot Mr. ]oommal's unique type ot intormation. In addition he
reters to a book by a Protessor Dr. Arnold Meyer entitled ']esus or Paul'. We are told that.
"The Professor proves conclusively that the divinity of Jesus
and the atonement are dogmas which owe their origin to Paul.
'Jesus and his Apostles,' the Professor says, 'knew nothing
whatsoever of these doctrines.'"
"Meander in his 'History of the Christian Religion and the
Church' says, 'that the doctrine of Atonement as it is now
believed by the Christian Church, was not definitely and
distinctly formulated until the twelfth century.' "
"We also do not find any mention of atonement being made in
either the Talmud or the Torah."
We should like to refute these alleations.
No i:stor:coi .:.rt o, oic :s os u.iicocu.rt.c os ti. i:,. o, Cir:st. H:stor:ors io:. ro r.osorooi. couot os to ti. r.i:oo:i:t,
o, ti. cocu.rtot:or o, ti. N.u T.sto.rt. (S.. . 98,,.).
B.s:c.s ti. :rt.rroi .::c.rc., ti.r. :s oiso .t.rroi .::c.rc. ,or ti. cruc:,::or to o. ,ourc :r oti.r cort.oror, ur:t:rs.
V. or. ,orc.c to couot ti. :rt.r:t, o, ti. ur:t.r o, ti. ooo:. stot..rts, ,or u. irou tiot i. :s o or o, i.orr:r. Ir r.i,
to i:s oii.ot:or tiot Poui iott.c u:ti ti. c:sc:i.s to oi. ti.s. stot..rts, u. oos.r:. tiot Poui uos .rs.cut:r ti.
Cir:st:or Ciurci urt:i i:s cor:.rs:or, ui:ci o, o. cot.c orourc AD 36 or ooout 6 ,.ors o,t.r Cir:st's c.oti. Ti.r.o,t.r
i. sto,.c oior. :r Aroo:o ,or oroti.r tir.. ,.ors. So ooout t.r ,.ors ioc .ios.c o.tu..r ti. r.surr.ct:or orc osc.rs:or orc
ti. o.:rr:r o, Poui's t.oci:r :r:str, :r ti. ciurci o, Art:oci (to ui:ci i. uos coii.c o, Borrooos). 'Ti. ci.:.r ior' :s,
ti.r.,or., i:stor:coii, urocc.tooi..
Cir:st ui.r ior:r or ti. cross, uos :rc..c 'occurs.c o, Goc' orc o.co. o curs. ,or us 'Cir:st r.c...c us ,ro ti.
curs. o, ti. iou o, o.co:r o curs. ,or us, ,or :t :s ur:tt.r: Curs.c :s .:.r,or. uio :s iur or o tr... (Oalatians 3.13)
Or H: uos io:c ti. ur:si.rt orc curs. o, ti. s:r o, ti. uoric.
Corc.rr:r i:s s.i.ct:or o, ro,.ssors orc co.rtotors, Mr. oooi i.ors .cius::.i, or i:o.rois, uio .r,o, ro cr.c:o:i:t,
oor Cir:st:ors ot oii, r.:ti.r co ti., oos. ti.:r t.oci:rs or Scr:tur.. Ti. 'corcius::. roo, tiot ti. c:::r:t, o, .sus orc
ti. otor..rt or. coos ui:ci ou. ti.:r or::r to Poui' :s utt.r rors.rs.. Vors. rors.rs. st:ii, :s ti. oii.ot:or tiot .sus
orc H:s Aosti.s ir.u roti:r ooout :t. Ti. uorc 'otor..rt' o.ors 79 t:.s :r ti. Oic T.sto.rt, ui:ci ioc oir.oc,
o..r trorsiot.c :rto oroti.r ioruo. ior o.,or. ti. t:. o, Cir:st. Ti. uorc 'otor..rt' :rc:c.rtoii,, :s ,ourc ori, orc.
:r ti. N.u T.sto.rt:
But wealso rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now
received reconciliation. (or atonement)
The entire 16th chapter ot the Book ot Leviticus (BC 1500) is devoted to the 'Dav of Atonement' and in
chapter 17.11, it is expressly stated.
For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for
yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for ones life.
Islamic tradition relates that the custom ot slayin the uroor oriinates trom this Day ot Atonement,
which Muhammad toether with the ]ews ot Medina observed in his tirst year atter the Hijjra.
The books ot Exodus and Leviticus in particular, abound with reports about and instructions tor
atonement and all are based on the need tor a sacritice that may become the substitute tor the believer who
had become an ottender aainst Ood's Law. The ottender had to brin the sacritice or sinotterin to the
altar, and contess his sins restin his hand on the head ot the sacritice the sacritice was then slauhtered,
which showed the ottender the seriousness in the siht ot Ood ot his misdeeds tor which only the death
penalty could be the verdict. Ot course, 'the blood ot oats or bulls can never wash away sins,' (H.or.us
!u:4, 9:9o!9), but these sacritices toreshadowed the sacritice, which was ratitied in ]esus.
The claim that the doctrine ot atonement was never preached by Christ at any time is equally untrue. We
are not quite sure whether we should blame this on the critic's inorance or deceit. We reter to Matthew
"Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many."
"This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."
Matthew 26:28
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 (See also notes on "Son of God" pp. 93ff.)
"I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live
forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." John 6:51
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep and I lay down
my life for the sheep... No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. " John
10:11,15 and 18
And turnin back to the Old Testament, we have the classic prophecy ot Isaiah 53 where it distinctly says.
"Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows But he was pierced for our transgressions, he
was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we
are healed the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all for the transgression of my people he was
strickenYet it was the Lords will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a
guilt offering For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." In closin, we
should like to answer two ot the rhetorical questions on atonement as posed by the critic. 'What exactly has
]esus' sacritice done tor Christians.'
The Bible replies.
"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written:
Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree. He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to
Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the
promise of the Spirit." Galatians 3:13-14
"But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the
blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the
barrier, the dividing wall of hostility,

by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments
and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making

and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he
put to death their hostility." Ephesians 2:13-16 (i.e. hostility between man and God).
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.

It teaches us to say No
to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this
present age, while we wait for the blessed hope - the glorious appearing of our great God and
Savior, Jesus Christ,

who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify
for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good." Titus 2:11-14
The other question has been tormulated thus.
"Has the sacrifice created a loathing for sin, or killed the tendency to commit evil in those who
believe in Christ and partake of his flesh and blood?"
Our emphatic answer would be yes, indeed No Christian can live in the mire ot sin atter he has been
redeemed every true Christian, I mean. (pp. 130tt.). The very paes ot the Bible label all in whom this has not
been ettected, as hypocrites.
The Bible, and particularly the New Testament, has manv admonitions on this subject.
"You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness count
yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus We died to sin; how can we live in it
any longer?" from Romans 6
"Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. You, however, are controlled not by
the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have
the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." Romans 8:8-9
"You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful
nature; rather, serve one another in love." Galatians 5:13
"Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others."
Philippians 2:4
" whatever is true noble right pure lovely admirable excellent or praiseworthy
think about such things." Philippians 4:8-9
" clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

Bear with
each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another put on love,
which binds them all together in perfect unity." Colossians 3:12-15
Many other texts could be quoted.
This does not mean that Christians attain a state ot sinlessness. But they hate sin, even minor ones and do not
live in a state ot sin it has no dominion over them thouh they may ive way to it sometimes.
"If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our
lives." 1 John 1:10
How then can we account tor the ross immorality and moral depravity prevalent in Western countries
protessin the Christian taith. The vast majority ot the people have no better protession than a mere
membership card ot their church or at least believe in the existence ot a Ood somewhere. This is not Christian
taith It would be totally out ot keepin with the New Testament meanin ot the word to call them Christians.
A Christian is committed to Ood and lives by His Word
In conclusion, we can sum up by sayin that atonement, i.e. reconciliation between man and Ood, has been
the call ot Ood to man and has been practised trom the very tirst paes ot the Bible till the consummation ot
the sacritice on the cross. $ince then all Christian believers have beun their Christian lives by availin
themselves ot the atonement already provided by Christ whom they then proceeded to serve.
"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All
this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of

that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting mens sins
against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

We are therefore
Christs ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on
Christs behalf: Be reconciled to God.

God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in
him we might become the righteousness of God." 2 Corinthians 5:17-21
Islamic objections to the divinity of Jesus and his sonship
A Reverend H.D.A. Major, principal ot Repon Hall, Oxtord, is reported to have said at a reliious conterence
at Oxtord in 1921.
"It should be clearly realised that Jesus did not claim in the
Gospels to be the Son of God in a physical sense, such as the
narrative of virgin birth suggests, nor did He claim to be the
Son of God in a metaphysical sense, such as was required by the
Nicaean theology. He claimed to be God's son in a normal sense,
in the sense in which all human beings are sons of God, as
standing in a filial and moral relationship to God and capable
of acting on these moral principles on which God acts."
"Dr. Rashdall, Dean of Carlisle, who presided at this
conference, further threw a bombshell on the Christian world
when he said that his reading of the Bible did not allow him to
accept Jesus as God. Jesus, said the learned Dean, was man in
every sense of the word and not God." ("The Bible: Word of God
or Word of Man?" by A.S.K. Joommal).
Aain 'liberals' are called upon to express their views. How do their statements match up with the Bible.
The divinity ot Christ is not the opinion ot popes, deans, bishops or priests, tor their opinions are by no
means always Biblical, and those ot the Reverend H. Major and Dr. Rashdall are detinitely not so. Christians
draw their intormation and instructions trom the Bible and do not accept tancitul, private and personal
interpretations. I consider it necessary to mention also, that there may be a distinct ditterence between a
Biblical doctrine and a church doma.
It is sad, that Muslims, when hearin the words 'Trinity', '$on ot Ood' or 'Divinity ot Christ', retlect
exclusively on such statements in the Qur'an, as.
"God neither begets nor is begotten." Surah 112:3
The Trinity here is understood to consist ot Ood, Mary and ]esus, (Suroi 5.119) which suests physical union
in order to beet. This is utterly contrary to Biblical $cripture and Muhammad was correct to reject physical
union. This type ot 'Trinity', however, was never tauht by $cripture or the church, except, perhaps, where
Mary was talsely called 'Mother ot Ood' by the instituted church ot the Middle Aes. Inorance ot Biblical
$cripture very otten causes the Muslim to reach an illconsidered conclusion.
Even the Qur'an makes allowance tor the sonship ot Christ in an unique sense. The anel spoke to Mary,
"I am a messenger of thy Lord (to announce) to thee the gift of
a HOLY SON (our emphasis).' She (i.e. Mary) said: 'How shall I
have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not
unchaste?' He said: 'So (it will be): Thy Lord saith, 'that is
easy for me. And (we wish) to appoint him as a sign unto men
and a mercy to Us!'" Surah 19:19-21
"His name will be Jesus Christ, the son of Mary, held in honour
(or illustrious) in this world and the Hereafter." Surah 3:45
In $urah 19 we are introduced to the mother ot ]esus and Ood is the Father tiure ot the holy son, as
indicated by the phrase 'that is easy tor me'. We cannot, but aree that this could not possibly have been by
physical union, but by His Holy $pirit. $ince one cannot separate the spirit ot a person trom the person himselt
the miracle ot the immaculate conception happened and the 'holy son' ]esus was born.
The Qur'an by no means belittles the tact that ]esus was unique and incomparable to any other person who
ever lived.
He was born ot a virin ($urah 19.1635)
He was the Messiah. ($urah +.171) The Qur'an does not describe what the Messiah is. $o we must assume
that the Biblical meanin is accepted. The predicted and accepted tunction ot the Messiah was that ot the
redeemer and saviour.
He was a $pirit trom Ood ($urah +.171)
He was the Word ot Ood ($urah +.171) This aain is in pertect keepin with the Bible (]ohn 1.11+)
He was taultless (Transl. by Marmaduke Pickthall) or holy (Transl. by Yusut Ali) (Suroi !9:!9) This was said
in contrast to any other man or prophet.
Adam sinned ($urah 2.36, 7.2223)
Abraham sinned ($urah 26.82)
Moses sinned ($urah 28.1516)
]onah sinned ($urah 37.1+2)
David sinned ($urah 38.2+25)
Muhammad sinned ($urah +7.19, +8.12, 33.3638)
He is illustrious in the world and the hereatter ($urah 3.+5)
He was taken up to heaven by Ood ($urah +.158)
He will come back to earth tor judement ($urah +3.61 transl. Yusut Ali and Mishkat IV, pp. 7880)
Another consideration may be taken trom the Qur'an, where it is rihtly stated.
"O men! Here is a parable set forth! Listen to it! Those in
whom, besides Allah ye call, cannot create (even) a fly, if
they met together for the purpose!" Surah 22:73
We all aree that only Ood can create lite. Let us then look in the liht ot this at ]esus.
"I have come to you. with a sign from your Lord, in that I make
for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and
breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave
(permission): And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and
I quicken (make alive) the dead, by Allah's leave ... Therein
is a sign for you IF ye did believe." Surah 3:49
We are caretul to note that it was ]esus who created lite (in the dead people and the birds) and health. From the
text it is clear that he was not used by Ood as an instrument to create, but that He created Himselt.
Another interestin thouht reardin the oneness ot Ood in His plurality is iven by Dr. A. Haqq.
If God is absolute unity even within His own nature, then a
question arises as to the nature of His attributes. Are these
part and parcel of the essence of God, or are they outside of
Him? If they belong to His essence, then we have One essence
subsisting in ninety-nine qualities (in the case of Allah's
attributes). The absolute eternal oneness of God must give way
to manyness within Him. If, on the other hand, the qualities be
regarded external to the nature of God then they will be non-
divine. In that case attributing the beautiful names to Allah
would amount to associating creatures with the Creator. It is
the worst kind of blasphemy that is possible against God
according to Muslim belief. Hence, the first alternative must
prevail, i.e. one nature subsisting in many qualities within
God ...
Another problem about the Muslim concept ot the absolute unity ot Ood arises in the context ot revelation.
The Qur'an speaks ot revelation as a record in heaven whence anel Oabriel brouht it to the prophets. This
record or oriinal in heaven is called 'the Mother ot the Book.' (!3:39) This heavenly book contains all
revelation and a record ot all thins and happenins. (57:22, !7:37, 6:38) Muslim theoloy itselt has raised the
thorny question, 'Is this Book in heaven eternal or created.' The Qur'an itselt turnishes no intormation at this
point. However, a later orthodox theoloy settled tor the eternity ot the Mother ot the Book. AlOhazali
rearded it as a part ot the essence ot Ood. It the Mother ot the Book is eternal, then it could exist either in
Ood or alonside Him. It the Book exists with Ood, there will be two eternals which amounts to beliet in two
ods. AlOhazali saw this ditticulty, theretore, he chose the other alternative the Book subsistin in the essence
ot Ood. At this juncture, a Christian can encourae a Muslim to jude tor himselt whether the Christian beliet
in the eternal Word or $on ot Ood (Suroi 4:!7!), who is with the Father in one Oodhead, is less meanintul
than a recorded Book subsistin in Ood. Ood does not need to record His decrees like humans who are liable
to torettullness. But all thins are upheld by His Word. (H.or.us!:!3) The same Word or $on ot Ood is the
$ource ot both creation, revelation and salvation, who at a iven point in human history was made tlesh, and
lived amon us, (and we beheld His lory, the lory as ot the onlyborn ot the Father), tull ot race and truth.'
(oir !:!4)
Can anyone, in the liht ot these statements, claim, that ]esus was an ordinary man or prophet. Where is a
prophet with like qualities and attributes.
Muslims seem to contuse the $onship ot Christ with the 'sonship' ot believers or spirits also mentioned in
the Bible. The Oospel accordin to ]ohn in chapter 3.1618 speaks ot Ood's only beotten, or only son.
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life. For god did not send his Son into the world to condemn
the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but
whoever does not believe stans condemned already because he has not believed in the name
of Gods one and only Son.
The word 'beotten' is trom the translation ot 1611 and expressed somethin that is phrased ditterently today.
A livin lanuae chanes. In the oriinal Oreek manuscripts the word is 'oro.r.s' ('oro' - a sinle one, '.r.s'
- born). There is no suestion ot a beettin act
In addition to this, we are intormed in the Bible that all judement is iven to the $on.
" or as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.

he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. Do not be amazed at this,
for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice

and come out - those
who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned."
John 5:26-29 (The title "Son of Man" had been introduced by the prophet Daniel (BC 500)
Chapters 7:13, 10:16. No doubt is left as to who this can be!)
The reason tor the persecution ot Christ by the ]ews was this very tact.
"For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." John 5:18
There are various tactors that have repeatedly motivated Muslims, as well as humanists, to deny the deity ot
Christ. They point out trom the Bible that when Christ was tempted to worship $atan, He replied.
" it is written: Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only." Matthew 4:10
This statement is supposed to prove that Christ is not divine. We tail to see the point, tor Christ steadtastly
retused to worship $atan
Then there is the passae in Luke 18.19, where ]esus said to the enquirin ruler.
"Why do you call me good? Jesus answered. No one is good - except God alone."
At tirst siht the quoted passaes seem to imply that ]esus rejects the honour and the title because they are not
His. But was that really so.
but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human
likeness. Philippians 2:7. But we must view the situation in its context: The inquirer addressed
Jesus as good rabbi' (teacher, sheikh). By implication Jesus said: "A rabbi is not good, but God
alone! It is well that you call me good, but I am more than a teacher!"
There is a limitation placed on ]esus, too.
"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to
please myself but him who sent me." John 5:30
Christ's apparent lack ot omniscience has also led many critics to reach the same conclusion. They are tond ot
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the
Father. Matthew 24:36
"For he has put everything under his feet. Now when it says that everything has been put
under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything
under him, so that God may be all in all." 1 Corinthians 15:27-28
It these statements are seen in the wider context ot $cripture, everythin will take its proper place, namely that
Christ, while in human torm, suttered many ot the limitations ot man. For instance.
He could be at only one place at a time. He was subject to human emotions and also to a somewhat limited
knowlede, despite the tact that He pertormed miracles that are totally beyond human capability, atter all He
was also tully man.
It is quite clear then that in the case ot Christ the attribute '$on ot Ood' ditters widely trom the other two
concepts that sound so similar, namely.
1. The spirit beins (Job 1:6 and 2:1 and Genesis 6:2) and
2. The 'children ot Ood' or 'sons ot Ood', i.e. those who have accepted the otter ot pardon trom Ood. (John
1:12, 3:8, Ephesians 1:5, Romans 8:14, etc.)
It is necessary to underline the tact that Christ's deity is well documented in both Testaments. We shall
consider the Old Testament evidence reardin the Trinity in the tollowin chapter. We shall now look at the
New Testament evidence.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was
with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made
that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the
darkness, but the darkness has not understood it. The Word became flesh and made his
dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the
Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:1-5
"He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize

He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.

Yet to all who
received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."
John 1:10-12
Then Jesus said to her, Your sins are forgiven. The other guests began to say among
themselves, Who is this who even forgives sins? " Luke 7:48-49
"For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him for by him all things were created:
things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible all things were created by him and for
He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. " Colossians 1:19 and 16-17

but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things,
and through whom he made the universe.

The Son is the radiance of Gods glory and the exact
representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." Hebrews 1:2-3
"Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness."
Philippians 2:6-7
To the ]ews 'belon the covenant, the ivin ot the Law, the worship, and the promises, to them belon the
patriarchs, and ot their race, accordin to the tlesh, is the Christ (Messiah). Ood who is over all be blessed
torever.' or 'Christ, (who is) Ood over all, be blessed torever.' (Roors 9:4,5) (The meanin here depends on
punctuation, which is not present in the oriinal documents).
" Christ, who is the image of God." 2 Corinthians 4:4

Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you
overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood." Acts 20:28
"We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may
know him who is true. And we are in him who is true - even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the
true God and eternal life." 1 John 5:20
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.

It teaches us to say No
to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this
present age,

while we wait for the blessed hope - the glorious appearing of our great God and
Savior, Jesus Christ,

who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness " Titus 2:11-
It may be objected that all these quotations are not direct records ot the words ot Christ Himselt. This may be
so, and yet we have the words ot Christ to contirm this.
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to
drink without cost from the spring of the water of life.

He who overcomes will inherit all this, and
I will be his God and he will be my son." Revelation 21:6-7
Then he said to Thomas, (after the resurrection) Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach
out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe. Thomas said to him, My
Lord and my God! Then Jesus told him, Because you have seen me, you have believed;
blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." John 20:27-29
What did Thomas believe. He believed that his Lord ]esus was Ood. Christ did not deny this tact, but
commended his beliet. He certainly did not intend to deceive Thomas or us

I and the Father are one. Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,

but Jesus said to
them, I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone
me? We are not stoning you for any of these, replied the Jews, but for blasphemy, because
you, a mere man, claim to be God." John 10:30-33
Christ did not try to avoid stonin by explainin that He was just a man, which He surely would have done it
He had been. In tact, He said just the opposite.
I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you
really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have
seen him.

Philip said, Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us. Jesus
answered: Dont you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time?
Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, Show us the Father? Dont
you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?" John 14:6-10
Whereas all prophets are seen as normal men who were also sinners (see p. 87) it is remarkable that the Bible
explicitly states that ]esus was sinless.
Jesus "who had no sin." 2 Corinthians 5:21
Jesus "He committed no sin." 1 Peter 2:22
"was without sin." Hebrews 4:15
In Jesus "is no sin."(1 John 3:5
This is actually contirmed by the Qur'an ($urah 19.19) when it speaks ot 'the taultless son' ot Mary. No
'explanation' can undermine the meanin ot all these statements. How can such thins be. The tollowin
chapter will provide the answer.
Islamic objections to the doctrine of trinity
Little has been more misunderstood than this mystery. Riht at the start we acknowlede that the word Trinity
is a theoloical term and not a Biblical phrase, is implied more than stated as a doctrine, and is beyond human
comprehension. We must trankly admit that all attempts by man, even by way ot analoy, to understand the
Trinity are tutile, simply, because we cannot comprehend the personality ot Ood. What a man can comprehend
and what is necessary tor salvation, is laid down in the $criptures. All we can know about Ood is revealed, but
we cannot throuh revelation, experience the knowlede ot oii that Ood is. It that were so, Ood would be
smaller than our minds. Accordinly, we reject such silly aruments by Muslim 'scholars' as the tollowin.
"By all rules of Mathematics, three times one equals three. But
in Christian arithmetic three times one equals one ... We are
told by the priests not to use our reason and trying to
understand the dogmas of the church. So that is the crux of the
matter. We are not supposed to use our god-given power of
reasoning in order to understand that which we are asked to
believe. Our belief in these doctrines must be blind,
unquestioning, absolute! Whoever questions these beliefs, be it
in all sincerity in order to understand them, is doomed to
eternal damnation."
It the tirst part ot this quotation is silly, the latter part is a malinant lie. Everyone who knows even a little bit
about the Bible is aware that understandin is the aim ot all its teachin.
"That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom
and revelation, so that you may know him better. I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be
enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you." (Ephesians 1:17-
"I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in
your inner being,

so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you,
being rooted and established in love,

may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp
how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ,

and to know this love that
surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God."
Ephesians 3:16-19
Many more passaes in like vein could be quoted. We are encouraed to reason, but there are thins past our
comprehension. Critics may teel challened to detine in a plausible way concepts like intinity, not to mention
eternity, heaven, Ood, etc.
It one were to write a reliious book claimin it to be inspired by Ood, one would no doubt leave out
everythin that the hearers or readers would tail to comprehend, tirstly to make it understandable, but secondly
because the author himselt could not conceive the incomprehensible The very accusation that the reason tor
not understandin the Trinity is that it is 'merely a manmade theory', is theretore nonsense.
We otten hear the question. 'It ]esus is Ood, who was runnin the universe when he was in the womb ot
Mary, in the cradle or in the rave.' Let an analoy ive the answer. I o down to the ocean with a bucket and
till it up with seawater. What will happen to all the tish in the ocean. You may loically say. 'Why, what has
that to do with the tish.' I reply. 'Fish cannot live without water and the water is now in the bucket'
When Ood was in Christ, bein omnipresent, He was still everywhere else, ot course.
We must et one point quite clear. It is not Christ that became Ood. No, Ood became Christ, not to the
point, however, that Ood was nowhere else at that time. That would be a total limitation ot Ood. 'Ood in
Christ reconciled the world to Himselt' (2 Cor:rti:ors 5:!9)
Careless statements are otten made.
"The only reference to the Trinity in the Bible is to be found in 1 John 5:7-8: "For there are three
that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."
Critics suest that this verse, which in the more modern translations is printed in italics, was not part ot the
Church's teachin until it was incorporated in the Bible at the Council ot Nicaea (AD 325). This suests wiltul
interpolation ot this text by Christians. The critc (A.$.K. ]oommal in his book 'The Bible. Word ot Ood or
Word ot Man.') claims that all the New Testament $criptures were actually incorporated into Christianity at the
Council ot Nicaea'. It is true that at that time Eusebius AD 326 and Athanasius 367 with other Christian
scholars were, very successtully, researchin which ot the then circulatin Christian writins were ot apostolic
oriin, and by that token '$cripture', and which were later leendary additions. It is, however, not true, that the
Council ot Nicaea canonised the New Testament. It must be stated here, that already in the second Century
almost all ot the later canonised New Testament books were in eneral circulation and unanimously accepted
by the Churches.
This is evidenced by a reat number ot writins by the scholars ot the tirst Church in Asia, Atrica and Europe.
Is the criticism that only one reterence in the Bible implies the Trinity valid or not.
I open the tirst pae ot the Bible and I read there.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." The word 'Ood' and, ot course, the whole text, was
written in Hebrew and since 'Ood' is an Enlish word, we tind 'Elohim' in the oriinal 'Ood' would actually
be El or Elah. What then does 'Elohim' mean exactly. It means 'Oods'. A little turther in verse 26 we read.
"Then Elohim said, 'Let us make man ..."
and in Chapter 11 we aain read.
"Come, let us go down and confuse their language"
Who is 'u.'.
Answer: Elohim. How can we understand this. Is this the use ot the royal plural. No, tor such usae is
unknown in Hebrew. $ince Ood reveals Himselt in $cripture proressively, more and more liht is cast on the
subject later. Ood says (in Deuteronomy 6:4ff.):
"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart
and with all your soul and with all your strength."
or. 'You shall love Yahweh your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your miht.'
Throwin most liht on the subject is, however, the short sentence. "The Lord our God is one Lord."
In Hebrew it would read like this. "Yahweh Eluhenu Yahweh echad."
Literally translated it would, mean. "The Lord our Gods, the Lord is one", or "a unity".
The same word 'echad' was also used where Ood says ot Adam and Eve atter their creation.
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will
become one (echad) flesh." Genesis 2:24
We all realize, ot course, that married people are not one person, but they are one couple. In Isaiah still more
liht is shed on the subject. The tull understandin ot this mystery, as tar as man may comprehend it, is
revealed here.
"This is what the LORD says - Israels King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first
and I am the last; apart from me there is no God." Isaiah 44:6
Further we read:
" I will tell of the kindnesses of the LORD, the deeds for which he is to be praised, according to
all the LORD has done for us - yes, the many good things he has done for the house of Israel,
according to his compassion and many kindnesses. He said, Surely they are my people, sons
who will not be false to me; and so he became their Savior. In all their distress he too was
distressed, and the angel of his presence saved them. In his love and mercy he redeemed
them Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy."
Isaiah 63:7-10
Quite unmistakably the prophet says to Kin Ahaz, who tor motives ot expediency retuses to choose a sin trom

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth
to a son, and will call him Immanuel." (i.e. God with us) (i.e. 'God with us'). Isaiah 7:14
" For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
Isaiah 9:6
We are sometimes told that it actually should read 'Wondertul counsellor of the mihty Ood'. This is untrue
There is no 'shel' or 'ot' in the Hebrew oriinal
]esus, accordin to the Oospel ot ]ohn (8:5859) made an apparently queer statement.
" I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, before Abraham was born, I am! At this, they picked up
stones to stone him."
Why. Because the 'I am' means 'Yahweh' and the rammar (Betore Abraham was I am) indicated Christ's
eternal nature.
This is in pertect keepin with the Old Testament and as such we accept it. Only in the liht ot the Old
Testament revelation, are we able to understand and rihtly evaluate the statements made by and about Christ
in these and other texts.
" I and the Father are one." John 10:30
" You, a mere man, claim to be God." John 10:33
" Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." John 14:9
"The church has not a scrap of authority for claiming that Jesus is
part of God." says Mr. Joommal.
The Bible replies:
" Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their
stand and the rulers gather together against the Lord and against his Anointed One." Let us
break their chains, they say, and throw off their fetters. The One enthroned in heaven
laughs; the Lord scoffs at them.

Then he rebukes them in his anger and terrifies them in his
wrath, saying,

I have installed my King on Zion, my holy hill. I will proclaim the decree of the
LORD: He said to me, You are my Son; today I have become your Father. Ask of me, and I will
make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will rule them
with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery." Psalm 2:1-9
Althouh any type or analoy is only a very inadequate picture, the tollowin is a simple illustration to make us
aware ot one way ot lookin at the Trinity.
Take a drop ot water to a chemist and ask him tor an analysis. He will tell you that it is H
O. Take the same
drop to a physical scientist. He will say it is a liquid. Take a little ice and do the same. The chemist will
maintain that it is H
O, the physicist will say it is a solid. Then we take a test tube tull ot steam and et the
same result trom the chemist, but a ditterent result trom the physicist, who says, 'This is a as.'
In a very reverent way I wish to point out the similarity between this and the Trinity. As water, ice or steam
are consistently H
O, notwithstandin all their physical ditterences, so Ood in His diverse 'appearances', is
always Ood. Perhaps we can liken the water, the oriinator and maintainer ot lite, to the CreatorFather, the
ice, that which can be handled, to the $on ot Ood who became the $aviour and the steam, otten unseen and
unmanaeable, representin power, to the Holy $pirit, who reveals Ood to all who seek Him and ives the
power tor the believer to live rihteously. Yet all three tacets ot Ood are Ood.
There are other analoies. Man consists ot body, soul and spirit. $unshine contains liht, heat and chemical
action. Fire, liht and heat are three, yet one. In the same way, mind, thouht and speech belon toether and
yet are distinct trom one another.
Islamic objections to the crucifixion
The crucitixion is another most vital issue in the ChristianIslamic controversy, which is otten hotly debated.
For the Christian any possibility ot compromise on this issue is impossible. Neither is compromise possible tor
the Muslim tor one ot the basic Qur'anic statements is that.
"They killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to
appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of
doubts, with no knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for
of a surety they killed him not; nay, Allah raised him up unto
Himself." Surah 4:157-158
What prompted a statement like this to be written down in total contrast to the Oospel, and not 'contirmin' it
at all. (see pp. 56). It is not easy to reconstruct the situation, but it appears that relationships between
Muhammad and his ]ewish contemporaries in Medina had become increasinly strained, and consequently
their attitude towards each other rew more hostile. $ince he esteemed ]esus as the hihest ot all prophets he
no doubt had a very hih opinion ot Him.
Muhammad is reported to have stated.
"I am most akin to the son of Mary among the whole of mankind",
and "I am most close to Jesus, son of Mary, among the whole of
mankind in this worldly life and the next life." Sahih Muslim,
vol. 4, pp. 1260-1261. What prompted a statement like this to be
written down?
This opinion could not tolerate that His enemies, the ]ews, could have had sutticient power over such a
Messener ot Ood to have destroyed Him.
Accordin to chronoloers, $urah + was written about the middle ot Muhammad's stay in Medina, i.e. in
approximately 5 AH This period saw much antaonism between the ]ews and the Muslims, judin trom the
many occurrences and remarks recorded in the Hadith.
$ince a prophet is ot intinitely hiher status than an ordinary man, sutterin or even deteat (which was what
the cross seemed to Muhammad) were out ot the question. To Muhammad, ]esus was a very reat person. This
is supported by the tact that ot all the prophets, ]esus, accordin to Muhammad's teachin, was the only one
that was born ot a virin raised to heaven alive, is to come back, was sinless, is called 'the word ot Ood' and a
'$pirit trom Ood', and 'is illustrious in the world and the hereatter' (see p. 87). Muhammad had not been
made aware ot the atonin work that Christ came to do, without which His death on the cross cannot be
understood. Muhammad, as we shall see, appears never to have been introduced to the Oospel in its oriinal
torm. All knowlede ot ]esus in the Qur'an can be traced to the Apocrypha or leends that were current amon
Coptic Christians in Arabia.
Besides all this, we still need a convincin exeesis and interpretation ot the texts in $urahs 3.55 and 19.33.
'O ]esus, I will cause thee to die' as many ot the old traditionists like Ali ibn Abbas, Abdullah ibn $alih,
Muaweheh, Ibn Ishaq, $alma and Wahab ibn Munabbih understood it, and 'so peace is on me the day I was
born, the day I die and the day that I shall be raised up to lite (aain).' We cannot overlook the sequence. born
die raised up
It ]esus did not die on the cross, as the Bible clearly teaches, then WHEN did He die. He had to die
accordin to the Qur'an (Surois 4:59, !9:33, 3:55) (Dr. A. Ho)
Christians have boundless contirmation in the Bible (and elsewhere) tor the crucitixion. ]ust under one third
ot the Oospel narrative is all about the last week in the lite ot ]esus and His death. It is in total harmony with
the doctrine ot atonement and the practice ot otterin sacritices, which we can trace throuhout the entire Old
Testament period.
But besides this, 'we have the more sure word ot prophecy', tor the sacriticial death ot the Messiah was toretold
in the Old Testament.
" Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by
smitten by him, and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for
our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he
was stricken For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."
Isaiah 53:4-6,8,12
" you lay me in the dust of death they have pierced my hands and my feet people stare
and gloat over me they divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing." Psalm
Secular history confirms the crucifixion
The New Testament documents enjoy an extremely hih deree ot acceptance by historians. The more than
5,000 documents available to us to date are ot such hih reliability that the tact ot the crucitixion cannot be
denied, even thouh the manuscripts, except perhaps tor a tew traments, do not date trom the tirst century,
which was when the oriinal documents were written.
Nevertheless, considerin the remoteness ot time, there are no other historical events ot that era that are
remotely as well documented as those described in the New Testament.
History is otten said to provide no evidence concernin Biblical events. Durin the time ot the philosophical
period known as the 'Enlihtenment' it was commonly thouht that the Christian taith was an outdated
commodity and no time was taken to check on the leitimacy ot such a criticism. $ince then, tew people have
bothered to put thins in perspective aain. It is sad that socalled theoloians (modern) have readily accepted
and tauht this misconception stemmin trom the 'Enlihtenment'. But with the acceleration ot scientitic
proress in many tields, it has been tound that ot all people Christians have received more support tor their
taith than anybody else
"Historians like W.M. Ramsay, Ed. Meyer and A.T. Olmstead, have protested vigorously
against the excessive scepticism of some theologians in dealing with the historical writings of
the New Testament." ("The N.T. Documents" by F.F. Bruce)
We shall look brieflv at some facts.
"There are in existence about 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in whole or in
part. The best and most important of these date back to somewhere about AD 350."
"Perhaps we can appreciate how wealthy the New Testament is in manuscript attestation if we
compare the textual material for other ancient historical works. For Caesar's 'Gallic War'
(composed between 58 and 50 BC) there are several MSS (manuscripts), but only nine or ten
are good, the oldest being some 900 years later than Caesar's day. Of the 142 books of the
Roman Historian of Livy (59 BC - AD 17) only thirty-five survive; these are known to us from not
more than twenty MSS of any consequence, only one of which, and that containing fragments
of books iii-vi, is as old as the fourth century. Of the fourteen books of the 'Histories' of Tacitus
(c. AD 100) only four-and-a-half survive; of the sixteen books of his 'Annals', ten survive in full
and two in part. The text of these extant portions of his two great historical works depends
entirely on two MSS, one of the ninth century and one of the eleventh. The extant MSS of his
minor works (Dialogus de oratoribus, Agricola, Germanis) all descend from a codex of the tenth
"The History of Thucydides (c. 460-400 BC) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest
belonging to AD 900 and a few papyrus scraps, belonging to about the beginning of the
Christian era. The same is true of the History of Herodotus (c. 488-428 BC). Yet no classical
scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt
because the earliest MSS of their works which are of any use are over 1,300 years later than
the originals."
"But how different is the situation of the New Testament in this respect! In addition to the two
excellent MSS of the fourth century (the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus), which are the
earliest of some thousands known to us, considerable fragments remain of papyrus copies of
books of the N.T. dated from 100 to 200 years earlier still. The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri,
the existence of which was made public in 1931, consists of portions of eleven papyrus
codices, three of which contained most of the N.T. writings. One of these, containing the four
Gospels with Acts, belongs to the first half of the third century; another containing Paul's letters
to churches and the Epistle to the Hebrews, was copied at the beginning of the third century
(i.e. just after AD 200); the third, containing Revelation, belongs to the second half of the same
century." (ibid)
We all know that old historical annals and records hardly ever deal with anythin other than wars, heroes and
contemporary leaders. Consequently, it can hardly be expected that occurrences in such remote places as
Oalilee and ]udea would merit mention. And it they had, the events ot war and Royalty would have been the
main teatures. Even so, there are reterences that support the Biblical record.
The Roman Historian Pi:r, was sent by the Emperor Trajan as a kind ot overnor to the Province ot Bithynia
ot Asia Minor (Acts 16.7) in AD 112. He wrote a number ot letters to the Emperor, one ot which was
concerned with the Christians. He said that wherever he went in the province, in villaes and rural areas, he
met Christians. Their rapid expansion had become a bi social problem. The heathen temples had to be closed
tor lack ot visitors, their holy testivities were not celebrated and there was no loner a demand tor animals tor
sacritices. Rejection ot the rapidly expandin Christian taith, or reliious or economical sanctions, could not
alter the situation. Pliny reported that trom now, under his able supervision, this would be chaned Those who
kept the Christian taith would be executed. These men were obviously stubborn and deserved to die. He had to
admit, however, that he was contounded by the type ot crimes they committed. Those who under pressure
recanted their taith let him know that Christians did not commit atrocities at their meetins. Their only uilt
was that they retused to pay obeisance to the statutes ot Emperors and deities but athered at certain days
($undays) betore sunrise and san to Christ as their Ood (quasi deo). They made an oath (at their baptism) to
commit no crimes. Their lives were exemplary. There was no deception, adultery, thett or dishonesty amon
At their communal meals they ate common tood and not slauhtered children (Christians were otten accused
ot cannibalism, as they 'partook ot the body ot Christ'). (Translated treely trom 'Es komme mir keiner mit
Tatsachen' by Michael Oreen. Enlish title. 'Runaway World').
Corr.i:us Toc:tus, a contemporary ot Pliny, was the reatest historian ot the Roman Empire. He relates (the
emphasis on 'love' tor the brethren and sisters was otten interpreted talsely by the heathen who suspected the
Christians ot bein immoral and ot bein cannibals) how the Christians were hated by the populace tor their
crimes and made scapeoats to sutter punishment tor the Oreat Fire ot Rome which Nero caused in AD 6+.
'The name Christian,' he writes, 'is derived trom Christ, who was executed under the overnment ot the
procurator Pilate. The corruptible superstition, which was subdued tor a time, inited anew and expanded not
only throuhout ]udea, trom where this sickness oriinated, but even in Rome itselt where all the bad comes
and is celebrated.'
It is obvious that the patrician Tacitus had no sympathy tor Christianity to which enerally the lower classes
beloned, particularly the Orientals. Theretore this historical evidence is all the more valuable. (ibid).
The Historian Tioiius wrote in Rome around AD 52. His works were lost but a trament thereot appears in a
book by ]ulius Atricanus in the 2nd Century. The latter writes about the darkness which tell over the land at
the time ot the crucitixion (Mark 15.33) and says,
"Thallus declares, in volume three of this History, the darkness to have been an eclipse,
unjustified, as it appears to me."
We must respect the objection ottered by ]ulius Atricanus, at tull moon and it was tull moon at the Passover
Feast at which Christ died there cannot be a total solar eclipse. The really remarkable part ot his citation is,
however, that he shows that around the middle ot the tirst century, the death ot Christ and its circumstances
were known even in Rome. It was so well known that a nonChristian historian thouht it worthy ot comment.
The heathen ot Rome knew not only about the cross in the titties ot the tirst century (about 20 years atter the
crucitixion). They also knew ot the resurrection ot ]esus, it we jude rihtly the probable meanin ot the
tollowin material or evidence. Datin trom the rein ot Emperor Claudius Caesar (AD +15+) is a remarkable
inscription in which the Emperor expresses his indination about reports that had reached him concernin the
removal ot the dead trom the rave. He warns that repetitions ot this kind will detinitely result in capital
punishment. And where was this inscription tound. Ot all places, in Nazareth (ibid)
os.ius was one ot the ]ewish leaders involved in the insurrection aainst Rome. Atter AD 70 (the year ot the
tall and destruction ot ]erusalem) he tried to restore respect tor ]udaism in Roman society in eneral and at the
imperial Court in particular. $o he wrote in his 'Antiquitates iudaicae' (AD 93) and 'De bello iudaicae' (AD
7579) to intorm the Roman public more adequately about the reliion ot his tathers ... In these we meet many
tiures known to us trom the New Testament. Pilate, Annas, Caiaphas, Herod, Cyrenius, Felix, Festus and
others. He also writes about ]ohn the Baptist, his preachin, baptizin and execution. ]ames 'the brother ot
]esus, the so called Christ', has a ood writeup. But most siniticant ot all is his extended reterence to ]esus
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a
doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew
over to him both many Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at
the suggestion of the principal amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved
him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the
divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.
And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." "Antiquitates
iudaicae", Vol. 18, 111:3 (ibid)
When we visit a Planetarium around Christmas time we may witness a most tascinatin event. A Planetarium
must not, ot course, be contused with an Observatory trom which one may view stars throuh a telescope. A
Planetarium consists ot a lare domed room. In the centre is a most complicated device which projects thin
stron beams ot liht aainst the black dome above. When the observer looks up he has the impression ot bein
under a beautitul niht sky. The stars can, however, be moved at random by the builtin computer. All the stars,
planets and even remote nebulae (star clusters) may be seen exactly as in the constellation ot the natural sky at a
iven time and place. As the sky chanes, so the artiticial 'sky' ot the Planetarium can chane. At Christmas the
niht sky above Bethlehem at around the time ot the birth ot Christ may be viewed. $uch is the precision ot the
course ot the stars that one can reconstruct any niht sky in history This is Cosmos - order
The untrained spectator in the Planetarium will detect no ditterence in any ancient niht sky. The uidin
astronomer will point out how the planets ]upiter and $aturn, both prominent lihts on the 'sky', move
toether until they appear to be one super briht star. This conjunction occurred three times within a short
period in the year 6 BC Is there any siniticance. Let us see.
" After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the
east came to Jerusalem." Matthew 2:1
This story is well known, but not that Herod died in the year + BC Why did he order all the children ot
Bethlehem under 2 years ot ae to be killed. Cannot one distinuish between a new born baby and a toddler.
One can. But so much time must have elapsed since the Wise Men ot the East came, that he wanted to make
sure. $o we can sately accept, as historians do, that Christ was neither born in the year 0 nor in December.
We conclude, theretore that the abovementioned conjunction took place at the time ot the birth ot Christ.
]ohannes Kepler, one ot the reatest pioneer astronomers, reconstructed this constellation on paper in 160+
and calculated that it took place in 6 BC.
"In 1925 the German scholar P. Schnabel deciphered the 'papers' in Neo-Babylonian cuneiform
of a famous professional institute in the ancient world, the School of Astrology at Sippar in
Babylonia ... He came across a note about the position of the Planets in the constellation of
Pisces. Jupiter and Saturn are carefully marked in over a period of five months. Reckoned in
our calender the year was 7 BC!" "According to the Jewish tradition Pisces was the sign of
Israel, the sign of the Messiah (Christ) ... Jupiter was alway thought of by all nations as a lucky
star and a royal star. According to ancient Jewish tradition Saturn was supposed to protect
Israel." Tacitus equates him with the god of the Jews ...
"Since Nebuchadnezzar's time many thousands of Jews had lived in Babylon. Many of them
may have studied at the School of Astrology in Sippar. This wonderful encounter of Jupiter with
Saturn, guardian of Israel, in the constellation of the 'West country' of the Messiah, must have
deeply moved the Jewish astrologers. For according to astrological ways of thinking it pointed
to the appearance of a mighty king in the West (of Babylon) country, the land of their fathers.
To experience that in person, to see it with their own eyes, that was the reason for the journey
of the wise astronomers from the East." "The Bible as History", by W. Keller
Even Kepler was moved to work out details ot the said constellation atter he had read ot the rabbinic writer
Abarbanel's reterence to
"An unusual influence which Jewish astrologers were said to have ascribed to this same
constellation. Messiah would appear when there was a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in the
constellation of Pisces." (ibid)
In the Oospel accordin to Matthew we read (2:!!2):
" After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the
east came to Jerusalem

and asked, Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews?
We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him. When King Herod heard this he
was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. When he had called together all the peoples chief
priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Christ was to be born.

In Bethlehem
in Judea, they replied, for this is what the prophet has written: "But you, Bethlehem, in the
land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler
who will be the shepherd of my people Israel. Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found
out from them the exact time the star had appeared.

He sent them to Bethlehem and said, Go
and make a careful search for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too
may go and worship him. After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star
they had seen in the east went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child

When they saw the star, they were overjoyed.

On coming to the house, they saw the
child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their
treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.

And having been
warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route."
We do not know whether the Biblical account has anythin to do with the observers at $ippar and whether the
wise astronomers ot the Bible saw the abovementioned constellation and knew the ]ewish concept ot
interpretation, but there is a strikin siniticance in the discoveries.
The disciples marvelled.
"Who is he, that even the wind and the sea obey him?"
This was atter the stillin ot the storm on the Lake ot Oalilee. Perhaps we can say.
"Who is He, Whom even the stars report?"
This is by no means an encouraement to enae in modern astroloy The Bible condemns this practice
outriht. But Ood was so racious as to let seekin men tind the Kin ot Kins even here
Every writer ot a Oospel narrative describes the scene ot the crucitixion in reat detail.
The Muslim's arument would be that all this may seem to have happened ($urah +.157), but in reality Ood
took ]esus away and the one actually nailed to the cross had only the appearance ot ]esus, but was not Him.
This arument is neated completely by the tact.
That atter His resurrection, Christ appeared to more than 500 Christians, who testitied to that tact and to
whom he showed the marks ot the nails and the spear,
That He died 'accordin to the scriptures' ot the Old Testament, which prophesied this event lon betore,
That Christ predicted His death a number ot times,
That eyewitnesses (the Apostles) testitied to this, and
That historians reported it.
Aain the whole thrust ot the arument aainst this event, like everythin else in Islam, rests on the testimony
ot one person, and that is in contrast with all the other evidence.
Another question otten raised reters to Matthew 12.38+0.
" Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, Teacher, we want to see a
miraculous sign from you. He answered, A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a
miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

For as Jonah
was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days
and three nights in the heart of the earth."
Critics ask. 'HOW was ]onah in the belly ot the sea monster. Was he alive or dead. This is obviously shittin
the emphasis, tor the text says. 'As ]onah was three days and three nihts in the belly ...'. A parable or
metaphor is tryin to illustrate a point. In this case it concerns the lenth ot time
We observe that Christ had iven many sins already and continued doin so atter this request. The sin to
the unbeliever remains essentially the death ot Christ and His resurrection accordin to the $criptures. Now,
critics tell us, ]esus was crucitied on Friday mornin, died at about 3.00 p.m. and was laid in the rave betore
the teast day bean, i.e. betore the settin ot the sun. That allows at best the days ot Friday and $aturday (two),
because on $unday betore sunrise, Christ had already arisen. He was in the rave durin the niht trom Friday
to $aturday and trom $aturday to $unday, so we cannot make up the tiure ot three days. We are dealin with a
ditticult question, tor it requires the reader's appreciation ot the customs.
First ot all with reard to the use ot lanuae, we must realise that the words 'days and nihts' were always
used with the identical number ('three days and three nihts' or 'Forty days and torty nihts' etc., and never tor
instance 'three nihts and two days' or 'Five days and tour nihts'). Consequently the Hebrew idiom 'yom
layelah' corresponds to our use ot the word 'a day', meanin 2+ hours or part thereot. (S.. oiso: oroi !:!7, !
So.ui. 3:!2, oo 2:!3, G.r.s:s 7:4, Eocus 24:!8, 34:28, D.ut.roro, 9:9!u,!8,25,!u:!u, 28:66, ! K:rs !9:8 orc
Motti.u 4:2)
A day bean with the settin ot the sun, i.e. about 6 p.m. ]esus was dead by 3 p.m. on Friday. This is
considered a day. He was dead and 'in the heart ot the earth' the whole ot $aturday, which would be the
second day, and rose probably haltway throuh the third day, i.e. at sunrise on $unday, which constitutes the
third day. That He rose on the third day is contirmed in several places in the New Testament. (Lui. 24:2!, !
Cor:rti:ors !5:4 .tc)
To substantiate this we read in the book 'Esther' and tind the passae where Esther says to Mordecai. '... hold
a tast on my behalt ... tor three days, niht or day. I and my maids will also tast as you do ... On the third day ...
Esther said, 'It it please the kin, let the kin ... come this day to a dinner that I have prepared tor the kin.'
(Esti.r 4:!65:5) They tasted three days but had dinner on the third day. Likewise the book Tobiah, narratin
trom the time ot the Old Testament ( BC 200) reads (3:!2!3): 'At such words she went into an upper room
in the house and did not eat and drink three days and three nihts, and continued to pray and weep askin
Ood to keep her trom shame (she was accused ot murder). Thereatter, on the third day, havin completed her
prayer, she praised Ood ...' This coincides with the N.T. reports that ]esus 'was raised on the third day' (!
Cor:rti:ors !5:4 .tc)
Islamic objections to the claim of the Universality of Jesus
Muslims have tried their best to deny Christ His universal claim.
"Jesus answered, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except
through me." John 14:6
The best way ot achievin this, has been to demote Him to bein a national prophet ot Israel. Thus He loses
siniticance tor the Oentiles to whom Muhammad claimed to be sent.
Islam arues that Christ repeatedly claimed to be this national prophet.
"I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 15:24;
"he will save his people from their sins." Matthew 1:21; ("His people" being the Jews)
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: Do not go among the Gentiles or
enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 10:5-6
Here the universality ot the Oospel is disputed. Is this claim correct. Why did ]esus Christ stick to the ]ews.
The answer has its oriins in G.r.s:s !2:2:
"All nations of the earth shall be blessed"
throuh Abraham, or more correctly throuh his seed. This is in the covenant line ot Isaac, and this leads to
]esus. In His conversation with the $amaritan woman at the well (oir 4), ]esus contesses that 'salvation is ot
the ]ews.' Note. Not 'to the ]ews'
Only the ]ews could understand the siniticance ot ]esus. No Roman, Indian or ]apanese could have
accommodated Him, because He was embedded in the history and the inspired writins ot Israel alone. The
.us were waitin tor Him. He had to be a .u (D.ut.roro, !8:!5), he had even to provide His enealoy to
prove His descent trom the tribe ot ]udah and the house ot David. (Oenesis +9.10, 2 $amuel 7.13) $o every ]ew
expected the Messiah, even thouh they did not reconize Him at His comin.
Only the ]ews and only atter they had reconized and understood Him could proclaim Him universally,
hence all the Apostles and almost all the tirst Christians were ]ews. But even they at tirst, had reat ditticulty in
comprehendin this. They proclaimed the Oospel to the ]ews only until Ood spoke to Peter on the housetop
in ]oppa (Acts!u), to $aul on the way to Damascus (Acts 9) and to Philip in the loneliness ot the desert road in
the Oaza strip. (Acts 8) Even atter Christ had iven the Oreat Commission to o to oii the world, to brin the
Oood News to oii nations (Motti.u 28:!92u), the Apostles preached exclusively to the ]ews. Then the Holy
$pirit uided them turther atield. (S.. oiso Acts !:8, Lui. 24:47)
$hortly betore His death ]esus told His disciples.
"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.
But when he, the Spirit of
truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth." John 16:12
This experience bean with Pentecost.
Only atter a strane experience at ]oppa and in the house ot Cornelius were the Apostles able to see the Oreat
Commission in a ditterent liht, namely that it was not a national, but universal Oospel.
"At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian

He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in
need and prayed to God regularly.

One day at about three in the afternoon he had a vision. He
distinctly saw an angel of God, who came to him and said, Cornelius! Cornelius stared at him
in fear. What is it, Lord? he asked. The angel answered, Your prayers and gifts to the poor
have come up as a memorial offering before God. Now send men to Joppa to bring back a man
named Simon who is called Peter. He is staying with Simon the tanner, whose house is by the

When the angel who spoke to him had gone, Cornelius called two of his servants and a
devout soldier who was one of his attendants. He told them everything that had happened and
sent them to Joppa. About noon the following day as they were on their journey and
approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.

He became hungry and wanted
something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance.

He saw heaven
opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners.

contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air.

Then a voice told him, Get up, Peter. Kill and eat. Surely not, Lord! Peter replied. I have
never eaten anything impure or unclean. The voice spoke to him a second time, Do not call
anything impure that God has made clean. This happened three times, and immediately the
sheet was taken back to heaven. While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision,
the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simons house was and stopped at the gate. They
called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there. While Peter was still
thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, Simon, three men are looking for you.

So get
up and godownstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."
Atter Cornelius had explained to Peter what happened, Peter replied.
"I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism

but accepts men from every
nation who fear him and do what is right.

You know the message God sent to the people of
Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all.

You know what
has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached -

how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around
doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.
We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed
him by hanging him on a tree,

but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused
him to be seen.

He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already
chosen - by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.

He commanded us to
preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living
and the dead.

All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives
forgiveness of sins through his name." Acts 10:1-20,34-43
Perhaps an illustration will help our understandin. Without an irriation system a desert has no water, so a
dam is constructed. Without pipes or channels, however, the water trom the reservoir cannot tlow on to the
tields. The channels tor the litebrinin water were the ]ews. Christ called Himselt the Water ot lite. $o the
Apostles were, likewise, the tinal sluiceates which issue the water to the tields that represent the world.
It is consistent that in His litetime, Christ prepared the channels that would issue the water to the tields. This
makes His lite universal quite apart trom His death. In the early part ot His ministry, Christ discerned reat
taith in a Roman captain. He then said.
"I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.

I say to you that
many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown
outside, into the darkness " Matthew 8:10-12
When His work was tully accomplished He ave His last order, the Oreat Commission, as it is known.
"Then Jesus came to them and said, All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to
me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

and teaching them to obey everything I have
commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." Matthew 28:18-20
To the Muslim reader it may be an additional contirmation to read $urah 21.91.
"We made her and her son (Jesus) a sign for all peoples."


Alleged Prophecies In The Bible
Pointing To Muhammad
The Qur'an states that.
The most popular aruments claimed by Muslims to point towards Muhammad bein prophesied in the
Bible are these.
Argument One:
"Jesus, son of Mary said ... 'I am indeed the Messenger of God
to you, confirming the Torah that is before me and giving good
tidings of a messenger who shall come after me whose name shall
be Ahmad.'" Surah 61:6
Do we tind any record thereot in the Bible.
Ahmed is a torm ot the name Muhammad, both meanin 'the praised one'. In the Oreek tonue, we are told,
this would be 'periklytos'. Now we tind in ]ohn's Oospel, Chapter 1+.16.
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever."
On the strenth ot the Qur'anic text, Muslims claim this verse to be a torery perpetrated by Christians who
intended thereby to camoutlae the predicted comin ot Muhammad, which to Muslims is so obviously
predicted in the above text. We must state, however, that all manuscript texts ot this Oospel ot ]ohn, which
contain the word 'parakletos' and not 'periklytos', date back to hundreds ot years betore the comin ot
Muhammad. Furthermore, the very next verse relates to us that the 'parakletos'
The Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him.
But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.
It should theretore be quite obvious that any interpretation that puts Muhammad in the place ot the Holy
$pirit is not in keepin with the tacts.
Argument Two:
And this is the blessin wherewith Moses the man ot Ood blessed the children ot Israel betore his death and he
said, 'The Lord came trom $inai and dawned trom Mount $eir upon them, i. sior. ,orti ,ro Mourt Poror i.
co. ,ro t.r tiousorcs o, ioi, or.s: u:ti ,io:r ,:r. ot i:s r:it iorc. Yea, he loved His people, all those
consecrated to him were in his hand. so they tollowed in thy teet, receivin direction trom thee, when Moses
commanded us a law, as a possession tor the conreation ot ]acob. Thus the Lord became Kin in ]eshurun
when the heads ot the people were athered, all the tribes ot Israel toether.' (D.ut.roro, 33:!5)
Muslims otten take the second verse ot this text and claim that when the Lord came trom $inai, he came
throuh Moses, when he rose up trom $eir, he came in ]esus, and when he shone torth trom Mount Paran and
came with ten thousands ot saints, he came in Muhammad. This study does not allow tor an exeesis ot this
$cripture, but it is quite clear trom the context that this text reters to Yahweh and not to Moses or anyone else
The Islamic interpretation ot this verse is absurd. Besides, it is based on the error that Mount Paran is
somewhere in the Arabian Peninsula not tar trom Mecca. Any student ot Biblical eoraphy knows that the two
mountains ($eir and $inai) and the hihlands ot Paran are in the $inai Peninsula, about 1,000 km away trom
Argument Three:
Another $cripture that Muslims reard as a prophecy pertainin to Muhammad, is in the Oospel accordin to
]ohn 1.1923.
Now this was Johns testimony when the Jews of Jerusalem sent priest and Levites to ask him
who he was. He did not fail to confess, but confessed freeely, I am not the Christ. They asked
him, Then who are you? Are you Elijah? He said, I am not. Are you the Prophet? He answered,
No. Finally they said, Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us.
What do you say about yourself? John replied in the words of Isaiah the Prophet, I am the
voice of one calling in the desert, Make straight the way for the Lord.
Althouh Muslims decidedly reject any other part ot the same chapter, which in no uncertain terms proclaims
the divinity ot Christ, they deem it tit to assume that 'that prophet' or, as it actually says in the oriinal 'the
prophet', was the expected Muhammad. Israel at that time was expectin a prophet, 'the' prophet trom Ood in
the situation they lived in. He is the one announced in Deuteronomy 18.15tt.
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever."
Deuteronomy 18:15-19
That this 'prophet' is ]esus is clearly stated in Acts 3.1723.
"Now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders. But this is how God
fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets, saying that his Christ would suffer.
Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may
come from the Lord,

and that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you - even
Jesus. He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he
promised long ago through his holy prophets. For Moses said, The Lord your God will raise up
for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells
you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people."
In the mind ot the ]ews, however, 'the prophet' was not the Messiah.
"On hearing his words, some of the people said, Surely this man is the Prophet. Others said,
He is the Christ." John 7:40-41
"Who do people say the Son of Man is? They replied, Some say John the Baptist; others say
Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.

But what about you? he asked.
Who do you say I am?

Simon Peter answered, You are the Christ, the Son of the living
God." Matthew 16:13-16
Apart trom anythin else, the Pharisees, bein part ot the Chosen People, could not expect any Oentile to be
the prophet that was to come. (S.. D.ut.roro, !8:!5): 'The Lord will raise tor you a prophet ... ,ro oor ,ou'
i.e. the ]ews)
Theretore the Prophet is, without a doubt, the Messiah.
Argument Four:
The most popular ot all alleed prophecies about Muhammad, is tound in the book ot Deuteronomy 18.1522.
"The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You
must listen to him.

For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the
assembly when you said, Let us not hear the voice of the Lord our God nor see this great fire
anymore, or we will die. The Lord said to me: What they say is good.

I will raise up for them a
prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell
them everything I command him.

If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks
in my name, I myself will call him to account.

But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name
anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other
gods, must be put to death. You may say to yourselves, How can we know when a message
has not been spoken by the Lord? 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. That prophet has
spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him."
The last part ot this text needs much consideration. tor Muhammad himselt stronly indicates that he is the
prophet reterred to here (Surois 2:!29,!59, 3:8!,!64, 7:!57)
The Islamic interpretation ot the text in Deuteronomy, is as tollows.
4.1 Both Moses and Muhammad had to take tliht at the hands ot their enemies, each tound a
companion in his own tatherinlaw. ]ethro had to solace his soninlaw, Moses, in the hour ot his
need (Exodus 18.1+26), but it was Muhammad, who comtorted his companion in the cave.
4.2 Moses took shelter at Midian, which was later named Yathrib atter his tatherinlaw, ]ethro.
Muhammad went to Yathrib, which later, atter his tliht, was renamed Medina. The tliht ot Moses
proved beneticial to him under the direction ot his tatherinlaw, whereas Muhammad's tliht paved
his way tor the achievement ot a series ot lorious victories.
4.3 Moses was iven a comprehensive code tor his people, while Muhammad received a pertect code,
complete in itselt, tor all people and tor all times.
4.4 The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land ot Eypt, sayin, 'This month shall be unto you the
beinnin ot months, it shall be the tirst month ot the year to you.' $imilarly, with the Muslims, the
month and the year ot the tliht ot Muhammad became the month and year ot the beinnin ot
Muslim era.
4.5 Moses set his people tree trom the bondae ot Pharaoh, Muhammad vanquished his enemies in a
handtohand tiht and won their children to his taith.
4.6 The strivins ot Moses entailed hardships and bloodshed, while those ot Muhammad were directed
at achievin reliious emancipation
4.7 The Laws ot Moses were aressive, since he had wanted to secure Canaan, which tell to his
successors, Muhammad had to carry on detensive wars and yet Arabia submitted to him in the end.
and even Canaan came under the subjuation ot his successors.
4.8 Moses sat to jude his people, Muhammad too, was a supreme jude ot his people and even the ]ews
accepted him as such.
4.9 Moses preached tor ten years at Midian, so did Muhammad in Medina .
4.10 Moses was the lawiver, eneral and uide ot his people, Muhammad too was a victorious eneral, a
pertect uide tor all people and a promulator ot an universal code, which was never to be
4.11 A hih tidal wave saved Moses trom the Eyptians who were close upon him, but it was only a
spiderweb which stood in ood stead to Muhammad in a predicament.
4.12 When the companions ot Moses saw the enemy, they cried out. '$urely we are bein overtaken' to
which Moses had to reply. 'By no means, my Lord is with me. He will show me a way out.'
Muhammad's reply in a more precarious situation in the cave ot Hira, was 'Do not worry, surely
Allah is with us.' ('The Liht' by alHaj $ultan Hatiz Abdul, revised by Maulana $yed ZiaudDin
Ahmad Oilani, paes 21+216).
Concernin these points we contend.
4.2 The Midian ot the Bible is near Mount $inai and not where Yethreb or, as it is known today, Medina, is
4.7 We tail to rasp which aspects ot Muhammad's wartare were detensive except, perhaps, in some
instances. We do not know what the Muslims were detendin in $pain or even in France, in India,
northern Atrica, $yria, Turkey and the Balkans. Did the writer really mean what he said when he used
the word 'subjuation', which means 'to put under a yoke'.
4.8 The ]ews had little choice, but to accept Muhammad as ]ude.
4.9 Moses did not preach in Midian, tor this is not a town. He was keepin sheep there. Besides, he did that
tor +0 years and not 10.
4.10 We take the 'universal code' to be the Qur'an. It is incorrect to state that no abroations took place in
it. We reter to Surois 16.101 and 2.106 and the entire theoloy behind 'mansukh' and 'nasikh' (Please
read 'Christians ask Muslims', pp. 1115)
4.11 No tidal wave saved Moses trom the Eyptians. The ]ews went throuh an alley in the sea, the water
standin like a wall on either side. Atter the ]ews had one throuh, the sea closed aain, destroyin the
pursuin Eyptian army. (Eocus !4, Suroi 2:5u)
4.12 Durin the course ot history many believers have acted similarly in situations ot distress.
We should like to object to points +.1, +.2, +.5, +.6 and +.11, which do not brin out similarities, but rather
Point +.3 is enerally accepted in the Muslim world. But as Christians we challene Muslims to substantiate the
claim that the Qur'an is superior to the Bible. We should like to know precisely in which points it is better than
the Bible or additions or extensions that improve the Qur'an in comparison with the Bible and last but not
least which superior evidence to its truth is there and in what respect Muhammad was superior to ]esus.
But besides all this, the Biblical text itselt, states clearly and distinctly, that the prophet would come trom
amon ,ou. This cor only mean that the prophet had to be a ]ew.
The arument that Muslims sometimes use, namely that the prophet had to come 'trom amon their brethren'
(i.e. the brother ot Isaac was Ishmael, so he would come trom the Ishmaelites) must be rejected, because 'amon
you' could hardly reter to those outside the Covenant. However, since we are busy with a list ot similarities
between Moses and the prophet, let us consider another list.
Moses and Christ were born in poverty. (The Israelites bein under subjuation to a torein power) (Exodus
On both intants death was plotted. (Exodus 1.1516,22, Matthew 2.13tt.)
Both were rescued by divine intervention. (Exodus 2.210, Matthew 2.13tt.)
Both were revealed by sins and wonders. (Exodus 7.10,19,20, chapters 812, 1+.2122, 17.67, Matthew 8.1+tt,
Luke 7.11, Matthew 1+.13, etc.)
Moses was prepared in the wilderness tor torty years, Christ tor torty days. (In Biblical symbolism torty
stands tor preparation). (Acts 7.23 with Exodus 7.7, Matthew +.1 tt.)
Both are called 'taithtul servant' in $cripture. (Hebrew 3.25)
Moses liberated Israel trom the bondae ot their oppressors, Christ liberated believers trom the bondae ot
sin (ot which Eypt throuhout the Bible is the type). (Exodus, Isaiah 53, ]ohn 8.3236, Romans 6.1822, 8.2,
Oalatians 5.1)
The water was subject to the authority ot both. (The Red $ea to Moses, the $ea ot Oalilee to Christ).
(Exodus 1+.21, 17.6, Matthew 1+.22tt., ]ohn 6.16tt., Matthew 8.18)
Moses spoke to Ood, 'tace to tace', so did Christ, on the Mount ot Transtiuration. (Exodus 33.11, Matthew
Atter this experience, the tace ot Moses shone, and so did the whole appearance ot Christ. (Exodus 3+.29,
Matthew 17.2)
Moses was the mediator ot the Old Covenant (Testament), Christ ot the New Covenant, or Testament.
(Exodus 19 and 20, Hebrews 12.2+)
Both prophesied events that were tultilled. (Deuteronomy 18.1522, 28.1529.67, Matthew 2+)
The ]ews rebelled aainst both. (Exodus 5.21, 1+.1112, 17.2+, Numbers 11.133, Luke +.1630, ]ohn 11.+750,
Matthew 26.5056, 27.1523 etc.)
Both died because ot sin Moses tor his own sin, Christ tor the sin ot the whole world. (Numbers 20.12,
Deuteronomy 3+.+5, I Corinthians 15.3, ]ohn 1.29, 10.1+16, Isaiah 53, etc.)
We have reason to believe that Moses rose aain (]ude 9, Luke 9.30), ]esus Christ without doubt rose trom
the dead accordin to the Oospel. (Matthew 28.1+, Luke 2+.3+, I Corinthians 15.+)
The most important and anticipated event ot the lite ot Moses happened atter his death. the occupation ot the
Promised Land. And so it was with Christ. Christ, bein the antitype ot Moses, secured new lite tor us by His
death. (Romans 5.68, 8.3+, 1 Corinthians 15.3,22, 2 Corinthians 5.15, 1 Thessalonians 5.910, etc.)
In conclusion, we may say that Mos.s rocuc.c uot.r out o, o roci and in the New Testament, we are told 'Tiot
roci uos Cir:st' and He said, 'It any man thirst, let him come to me.' (1 Corinthians 10.+, ]ohn 7.3738, +.13
There are other lesser 'prophecies', which miht be considered here, but we deem them too insiniticant to be
taken up. However, we should note that it a Muslim takes his stand upon the Bible because it contains
prophecies reardin Muhammad and it he deems those prophecies to be proot ot the truth ot his claims, then
by doin so he in ettect contesses that the Bible exists tree ot corruption, otherwise he would be buildin on
sand. (]. Christensen)

The Gospel Of Barnabas
Muslims like to challene Christians aain and aain with the socalled 'Oospel ot Barnabas'. Mr. Adam
Peerbhai ot $outh Atrica has published a booklet in which he considers the 'discovery' ot the 'ospel' to be
one ot the reatest tinds ot mankind. In a very eloquent way he states that the 'Oospel ot Barnabas' is the
reatest ot all truths (as thouh there is more than one Truth about Ood and ]esus), and that it was history's
reatest traedy that it was suppressed tor nearly 2,000 years. To Mr. Peerbhai it appears tantastic that thouh
$aint Barnabas was one ot the disciples ot Christ, (which he actually was not), yet his Oospel does not appear
in the New Testament, whilst less important ones like Mark, Luke and $t. Paul do
'The Oospel ot Barnabas' is described as a document that the Church rejected and destroyed, because it did
not aree with the rest ot the body ot Christian teachin on ]esus. Accordin to this Oospel the comin ot
Muhammad was clearly toretold. One ot the copies ot this Oospel was rediscovered in a unique way and thus
bears witness, so it is claimed, to the talsitication ot the Bible. We shall now investiate these claims objectively.
1. History
The 'Oospel ot Barnabas' (O.o.B.) tirst appeared in Holland in 1709. This manuscript was written in Italian
and supplied with tootnotes in poor Arabic. The sources ot the 'Oospel' are unknown. This document is now
preserved in the Imperial Museum in Vienna.
Oeore $ale translated the Qur'an trom Arabic into Enlish in 173+. In his pretace, he mentions another
copy ot the same 'Oospel' in $panish. This document is lost and all we know about it is what $ale wrote down.
It says in a statement on the title pae that it was a translation trom the Italian by a $panish Muslim named
Mostata de Aranda (Aranda is a town in $pain). It turther mentions that the Italian text had been stolen by a
monk, Fra Marino, trom the papal library, while Pope $ixtus V was havin a little nap. Atter readin it Fra
Marino became a Muslim. $ince that time, Muslims have claimed that the 'Oospel ot Barnabas' is an authentic
Oospel, perhaps even the 'oriinal' one. In 1907 the O.o.B. was translated into Enlish by Laura and Lonsdale
Ra. In the introduction, they provide internal and external evidence to the ettect that the O.o.B. was a
Medieval torery.
$ince then Arabic and Lrdu translations have been produced, all, however, without the introduction by the
Ras. Lt.Col. M.A. Rahim (Pakistan) reprinted the O.o.B. in Enlish in 1973, aain omittin the
introduction, but substitutin another one written trom the Islamic point ot view. This has been extensively
used to demonstrate that the Bible has been corrupted, when measured aainst a Oospel that was hidden away
tor nearly two millennia. Needless to say, the O.o.B. larely contirms the teachin ot Islam concernin ]esus.
2. The Content
Ot the O.o.B. presents another Oospel narrative, i.e. another record ot the lite and ministry ot Christ. On most
doctrinal points it ditters widely trom the accepted Oospel account and in such a way that the Islamic version ot
]esus is emphasized.
]esus Christ is neither the $on ot Ood, nor divine. He is rather. 'the voice cryin in the wilderness' to prepare
the way tor the comin Messiah, Muhammad. In the O.o.B. Christ is not the Messiah, but assumes instead a
role similar to that ot ]ohn the Baptist in our Oospel account. ]ohn the Baptist is not mentioned in the O.o.B.
Consequently, the emphasis in the O.o.B. is on the comin ot Muhammad, the saviour ot the world. (Ciot.r
96o orc 97o, .tc) As miht be expected, Christ was not crucitied (:r or...rt u:ti Suroi 4:!56), but instead
]udas was killed in His place. Durin the period ot His supposed arrest, Christ was hidin in a house in the
arden ot Oethsemane trom where He was taken out by tour () archanels (a much later tradition or leend)
throuh the window and ascended into the third ot seven heavens.
The entire O.o.B. endeavours to show the superiority ot Muhammad over ]esus.
3. The Islamic Challenge
3.1 That the existence ot the 'Oospel ot Barnabas' betore the Middle Aes is contirmed by the
'Oelasian Decree' (Pope Oelasius AD +92+95). In this decree the O.o.B. is rejected by the Church as
apocryphal with ten other writins under the names ot Thaddaeus, Matthias, Peter, ]ames (the
youner), Thomas, Bartholomew, Andrew etc. This O.o.B. was written in Oreek. The date ot the
decree, which is attributed to Oelasius, is, however, much disputed. It could well be a hundred years

3.2 It is alleed Muslims claim that the Decree ot Pope $ixtus I AD +65 also mentions the above
apocryphal writins. He was Pope trom AD +02+17 There is, however, no mention ot the O.o.B. in
this decree.
3.3 Muslims also claim that the 'Decree ot the Western Church' likewise mentions the O.o.B. in AD 382.
This obviously reters to the 'Council ot Rome'. All that we know ot this Council comes trom the
Oelasian Decree, and this is the same source as (i).
We acknowlede that a O.o.B. was mentioned. There is no trace ot it today, but it was certainly not by
Barnabas, else the Church would not have rejected it. The abovementioned 'Oospels' were banned as
heretical books, because they were tored. Barnabas was held in hih esteem everywhere. $tatements to
the contrary and about continuin disputes between Paul and Barnabas, are untrue. Decrees at
Church Councils were not arbitrarily issued by individuals, but by the leaders ot the local churches,
who were very much concerned about the Apostolic oriin ot any writin proposed tor canonization.
Whatever writin lacked this, was rejected. There is evidence that the O.o.B. ot Fra Marino is detinitely
not related in any way to the rejected O.o.B. ot the Oelasian Decree.
3.+ A copy ot the O.o.B. was tound in the arms ot Barnabas when his tomb was discovered in Cyprus AD
+78. A leend has it, that Barnabas appeared in a vision to the Bishop ot $alanus (Cyprus) and said.
'You will tind a cave and a cottin, because there my whole body has been preserved and a Oospel
written in my own hand.'
Lntortunately, the above quotation ends only haltway throuh the sentence, which continues in the oriinal.
"Which I received from the Holy Apostle and Evangelist
$o he was supposed to have held in his arms a Oospel accordin to Matthew written by himselt. Besides all this
we tind it strane that the republishers ot the O.o.B. reprinted the book without the permission ot the
translators (plaiarism) and omitted the explanatory notes, which were the outcome ot their research work.
Furthermore, we would reply that all Biblical (New Testament) writins had been accepted in practice and
circulated amon the churches everywhere by AD 200. Disputed were the books Hebrews, I and II Peter and
]ames, but all were accepted betore the Council ot Rome in AD 382. Lp to that time and thereatter, no
mention was made by any ot the Church Fathers, ot a O.o.B., whereas all other New Testament books are
reterred to extensively by name or throuh quotations. Historically, it is unacceptable that another Oospel
narrative that existed and was enuine, could have been squashed and lost without trace.
This is neither in keepin with the practice ot the early church, nor possible in view ot its system ot
overnment. Muslims like to claim that the O.o.B. is the oriinal Oospel. They reason that it there are tour
Oospel narratives there must surely be one oriinal and they happily accept that this has been rediscovered.
4. The Christian Answer
The reply that it is impossible that a Oospel could be lett out without it bein caretully scrutinised.
The books ot the New Testament were selected by the early church leaders, only it they met the criterion
ot bein Apostolic, i.e. correspondin to the teachin ot Christ as the Apostles knew them, and contemporary
to them. The O.o.B. does not meet these requirements.
4.1 External Evidence:
May be detined as proot ot the existence ot a book athered trom sources outside itselt (W.H.T. Oairdner,
pae 9). The only mention ot a O.o.B. is in the Oelasian Decree which proves that it was rejected a
considerable time atter the canonization ot the New Testament, because ot its lack ot Apostolic evidence
and heretical content. The tollowin tacts show that there is no external evidence tor the existence ot the
+.1.1 Neither trom the time ot the Apostles to the Oelasian Decree, nor thereatter was there any
mention ot a O.o.B.
+.1.2 The tact that certain Muslim scholars proved dishonest by removin the evidence in the Ras'
translation that proved the O.o.B. to be a torery, that they omitted halt ot a sentence
supposed to be about Barnabas' tomb and a Oospel in his arms, and that they promoted the
O.o.B. as an antiChristian arument, does not constitute external evidence either, but raises
instead suspicion as to their bona tides.
There is, in tact, no acceptable evidence tor the existence ot a enuine 'Oospel ot Barnabas'.
Fra Marino's account ot his discovery ot the O.o.B. in the library ot Pope $ixtus V (AD 15851589) is not a
story likely to be believed.
"... having accidentally met with a writing of Irenaeus (a
Church Father) wherein he speaks against Paul, alleging for his
authority the Gospel of Barnabas, he became exceeding desirous
to find this Gospel"; and that God ... "made him very intimate
with Pope Sixtus V. One day as they were in that Pope's
library, His Holiness fell asleep and he, reaching down for a
book to read, the first he laid his hand on proved to be the
very Gospel he wanted. Overjoyed ... he scrupled not to hide
his prize ... and on the Pope's awakening, took leave of him,
carrying with him that celestial treasure, by reading of which
he became a convert to Muhammadanism."
We note that Irenaeus never mentioned a O.o.B., nor spoke aainst Paul. He reconized Paul's writins as
inspired and claimed that our known tour Oospel narratives were the only ones ever iven by Ood. (Go:rcr.r,
o. !2) It we have a trustworthy piece ot literature this would be seltevident. It would not need any lies to
substantiate its trustworthiness. Mr. Adam Peerbhai writes ot Barnabas (:r 'Isio:sco.'):
"His name is omitted from the New Testament for obvious
Mr. Peerbhai has overlooked the tact, that Barnabas' name is mentioned 28 times in the New Testament,
thouh not in the Oospels, because he was converted only atter Pentecost. Lt.Col. Rahim, in the toreword to
his edition, reports on Paul and Barnabas as tollows.
"They returned to Jerusalem and from then onwards they parted
company and Barnabas mysteriously disappeared from the Bible
pages." Kritzinger, page 9
This is incorrect aain, tor nine years later he makes mention very positively ot Barnabas in I Corinthians 9.6.
Paul also restored his relationship with Mori (Coioss:ors 4:!u orc 2 T:oti, 4:!!), the nephew ot Barnabas. He
had been the object ot a dispute between Paul and Barnabas, which made them decide to part as associates on
Paul's second missionary journey.
4.2 Internal Evidence:
Is supplied by the content ot the book itselt. Any writin is sure to bear the mark ot a particular ae. The
style, lanuae and subject matter ot the book will betray it. (Go:rcr.r, o. 9)
First we should like to observe that all quotations in the O.o.B. trom Old and New Testament are taken
trom the Vulate translation. (Aro:ot.i, 38u AD) This Latin Bible has been used in the Catholic
Church ever since. The above is an example ot an anachronism because the O.o.B. is supposed to date trom
betore the Vulate was written.
"If someone brought you a film which he claimed to have been made in 1905 and started to
screen it and it looked every bit like an old film, with old clothes and fashions, you might believe
him. If, however, in the middle of a scene ... you saw a Concorde going across the sky, you
would say ... 'This film is a fabrication.'" (John Gilchrist)
$uch is an anachronism. How does the O.o.B. measure up to this and other tests.
+.2.1 In the O.o.B. (Chapter 1) 'Barnabas' is called an Apostle. This is not correct in its implication.
Althouh Barnabas is reterred to as an Apostle (Acts !4:4,!4), the O.o.B. concept is quite
The conversion ot Barnabas took place atter the Day ot Pentecost and consequently he does
not quality tor apostleship as outlined in Acts 1.2122 (orc o.or:r :r :rc ! Cor:rti:ors !5:8,
9:!2, !:!, Roors !:! .tc.)
+.2.2 The surprised reader ot the O.o.B. tinds Nazareth on the shore ot Lake Oalilee (Ciot.r 2u),
whereas it is a town miles away trom the Lake, surrounded by mountains.
+.2.3 In the next chapter, we see ]esus oin LP to Capernaum, whereas Capernaum is situated
riht on the shore ot the Lake.
+.2.+ In Chapter 151 we are told that ]esus embarked on a ship (trom Nazareth.) and next we read
that he arrived in ]erusalem. We miht well ask whether this was also done by boat.
+.2.5 In Chapter 6 another interestin common error is tound. It speaks here ot the three Mai or
wise men comin trom the East. The New Testament does not specity the number, but ives a
list ot three itts that were brouht by the Mai, namely old, myrrh and trankincense. This
later led to the assumption that there were three wise men trom the East. But this beliet
certainly does not derive or date trom the New Testament.
+.2.6 In Chapters 9192 we are told that ]esus and His disciples kept 'the +0 days'. The context
clearly shows that this reters to the period ot Lent betore Easter, celebrated by the church, but
trom a very much later period than the days ot the early church. (The church meditates at this
time on the sutterin ot Christ, which was obviously unknown when Christ was still alive). We
tind that Lent was celebrated only trom the tourth century AD onwards. ]esus and His
disciples are said to have one tor the +0 day tast to Mount $inai. which is some +50 km away.
There is no report in the New Testament to contirm this.
+.2.7 We are turther intormed that a certain dispute would have ended in war, but the Romans
assembled three armies each numberin 200 000 men at Mizpeh.(Chapter 91) The entire
Roman army at that time numbered only 300 000, however. (Erc,cio.c:o Br:torr:co)
+.2.8 ']esus drew near to the Priest (Hih Priest) with reverence, but he was wishtul to bow himselt
down and worship ]esus, when ]esus cried out. 'Beware ot that which thou doest, Priest ot the
Livin Ood $in not aainst our Ood' (Ciot.r 93) This statement is so contrary to the New
Testament, that it needs no explanation.
+.2.9 In Chapter 3 ot the O.o.B. the birth ot Christ is described as havin been painless. This beliet
was not current in the Church betore Thomas Aquinas (died 1278) but is mentioned in $urah
+.2.10 Accordin to the O.o.B. ]esus was born when Pilate was overnor, but in tact he only became
overnor between AD 26 and 27.
+.2.11 ]esus prayed tive times a day accordin to the O.o.B. and all the Muslim prayer times are
mentioned. (Drs. . Sio, o. !28)
+.2.12 Not betore the Fourth Century AD was the title 'Virin' iven to Mary, yet it appears in the
+.2.13 Orien AD 18+25+ was the tirst scholar to assume that Mount Tabor was the Mount ot
Transtiuration. The Bible does not contirm this. The Christian tradition that it was Mount
Moriah beins only in the Third Century, and yet the O.o.B. contains this intormation.
+.2.1+ The O.o.B. mentions tour archanels, which is also a tradition ot the church that dated trom
the early Medieval period.
+.2.15 The Islamic concept ot 'the Book' is tound in Chapter 10, where we read that the anel
Oabriel presented to ]esus as it were a shinin mirror, a book, which descended into the heart
ot ]esus. This corresponds very well with Surois 5.+9 and 2.97.
+.2.16 In Chapter 5+, the Italian text mentions a denarius, which is made up ot 60 minuti. These
old coins were used only in $pain under Khalit Abdul Malik (in 685 AD).
+.2.17 In Chapter 152 we are intormed that soldiers were 'rolled out ot the temple as one rolleth
casks ot wood when they are washed to retill them with wine.'
Wooden barrels were invented in Oaul and were not used in the East in New Testament times.
Wine and other liquids were stored in skins.
+.2.18 In Chapter 97 Muhammad is clearly called the Messiah. The Qur'an, as well as the Bible
conters this title on ]esus. It is somehow strane to realize that in the introduction ot the
O.o.B. ]esus is called Christ and in Chapters +2 and 82 'Barnabas' denies that ]esus is the
Messiah. Only a theoloically very inorant person could have made such statements, because
'Christos' is the Oreek word tor the Hebrew 'Messiah'.
+.2.19 In 'the true book ot Moses ... (it) is written that Ishmael is the tather ot Messiah, and Isaac the
tather ot the messener ot the Messiah' (Ciot.r !9!)
+.2.20 In Chapter 222, the last chapter ot the O.o.B., we read. 'Atter ]esus had departed (atter havin
been raised trom his hidin place throuh the window ot the house in the Oarden ot
Oethsemane) the disciples scattered throuh the ditterent parts ot Israel and ot the world, and
the truth, hated ot $atan, was persecuted, as it always is, by talsehood. For certain evil men,
pretendin to be disciples, preached that ]esus died and rose not aain. Others preached that
he really died, but rose aain. Others preached and yet preach that ]esus is the $on ot Ood,
amon whom is Paul deceived.' The O.o.B. herewith endeavours to correct precedin Oospels
and Paul. We wish to ask the question when and how was the writer aware that the disciples
had scattered throuhout the ditterent parts ot the world. This question is lett open, but easily
answered by us, tor we believe that it is yet another anachronism.
+.2.21 The Italian poet Dante lived about the time ot the composition ot the O.o.B. (12651321) and
it is interestin to notice a number ot quotations trom Dante's works in the O.o.B. There are
many and they can hardly be rearded as coincidences. The O.o.B. quotes ]esus as sayin to
Peter. 'Know ye theretore, that hell is one, yet hath seven centres one below another. Hence,
even as sin is ot seven kinds, tor as seven ates ot hell has $atan enerated it. $o are seven
punishments therein.' (Ciot.r !35o) This is exactly what Dante says in Cantos V, VI, etc. ot
his 'Interno'. Aain 'Barnabas' says that Ood, havin created the human senses, condemned
them 'to hell and to intolerable snow and ice' (Chapter 106, which corresponds with Cantos
XXVIII and III ot the 'Interno'). The description ot human sins and their returnin at the end
like a river to $atan, who is their source, is another indirect quotation trom Dante's
description ot the rivers ot hell. $imilarly, the passaes about the believers oin to hell, not to
be tortured, but to see the unbelievers in their torments, recalls to mind Dante's picture ot the
same. The ditterentiation between derees ot lory, and the absence ot all teuds and jealousies
in heaven, are taken entirely trom Dante's 'Paradise', Canto III. But still stroner evidence that
'Barnabas' quotes directly or indirectly trom Dante is his description ot the 'Oeoraphy ot
Heaven'. There 'Barnabas' arees with Dante and contradicts even the Qur'an itselt. The
Qur'an (Suroi 2.29) says that the heavens are seven in number, while 'Barnabas' ives the
number as nine (Chapter 178a) (Oairdner, paes 1921) These tew indications are sutticient
evidence that the writer ot the O.o.B. must have been acquainted with the writins ot Dante
and consequently must have I lived atter Dante, or else been a contemporary ot his.
+.2.22 In Chapter 1+5 ot the O.o.B. Pharisees date back as tar as the time ot Elijah and there were
supposed to have been 17,000. In tact, history tirst knows about Pharisees seven centuries
later, in the period between 13510+ BC.
+.2.23 In Chapter 82 mention is made ot the 'Years ot the ]ubilee, which now cometh every 100
years.' The Year ot ]ubilee, accordin to the Old Testament, was every 50th year (atter seven
times seven years). The oriin ot this taulty intormation is as tollows. In the year AD 1300
Pope Bonitace the VIII instituted the ]ubilee as a centenary event. Owin to its tinancial
success, however, Pope Clement VI reversed Bonitace's decision and celebrated the next
]ubilee in 1350. This was thus the only time that the Year ot ]ubilee was intended as a
centenary occasion it never was in practice. (Go:rcr.r, o. !9)
+.2.2+ Eve is said to have eaten an 'apple' in Paradise (Chapters +0 and +1) We are well aware that
Eve ate an unspecitied truit, but the beliet that this was an apple dates trom a very much later
+.2.25 Another proot ot the O.o.B. bein Medieval in oriin, is that we have a report (Ciot.r 99) ot a
duel between two rival lovers. This type ot chivalry was a creation ot Medieval society (Go:rcr.r,
o. 24)
+.2.26 In Chapter 80 ot the O.o.B. we tind a story about Daniel, which has it that he was taken
captive by Nebuchadnezzar while he was yet two years old. This statement, it will be observed,
is incompatible with what may be interred trom the Bible narrative. Accordin to the latter, it
was in the second year ot his rein that Nebuchadnezzar had his tamous dream, which Daniel
interpreted. 'Then the Kin ave Daniel hih honours and many reat itts, and made him
ruler over the whole province ot Babylon, and chiet pretect over the allwise men ot Babylon.'
(Dor:.i 2:48) Now it we suppose that Nebuchadnezzar captured Daniel in the tirst year ot his
rein (the earliest possible date, which could be assined to Daniel's captivity) and that,
accordin to 'Barnabas', Daniel was then two years old, it would tollow then that in the second
year ot Nebuchadnezzar's rein, Daniel was only three years old (Oairdner, pae 26). Daniel
was in tact born in 621 BC and the captivity bean in 605 BC, so he was 16 years old when
taken prisoner.
+.2.27 We read that Ishmael was ottered on the altar by Abraham (Ciot.r 44) This is clearly an
Islamic concept.
+.2.28 Ood is said to be the Ood ot Abraham, I$HMAEL and Isaac in Chapter 212. It should read,
accordin to the O.T. the Ood ot Abraham Isaac and ]acob.
+.2.29 We tind it hihly suspicious and wron to read that the Torah was written by an Ismaelite
(Ciot.r !92)
+.2.30 Most suspicious ot course, is any mentionin ot the name ot Muhammad. (Ir Ciot.rs 44, 54,
!!2, 97 orc !63, .tc.) It is particularly suspicious, since all the other evidence points to the tact
that the whole ot the O.o.B is a Medieval torery. But other Islamic thouht is also retlected in
the O.o.B.
+.2.31 In Chapter 39 Adam sees briht writin and the content is none other than the Kalimah.
There is only one Ood' and 'Muhammad is the Messener ot Ood.'
+.2.32 Muslims who accept the O.o.B. ouht to consider the tact that in Chapter 115 it very stronly
endorses monoamy.
+.2.33 Likewise we reter to Chapter 38, in which the Islamic principle ot abroation is rejected.
5. Conclusion
Atter examinin the text, the external and internal evidence, and atter havin discovered its medieval character
and the obvious attempt to islamise this 'Oospel', we conclude that the Oospel ot Barnabas was written by a
Muslim to convince Christians ot 'the truth ot Islam'. Instead ot propaatin Islam, he disuised the messae
and used the name ot Barnabas to make his claims seem authentic. It is theretore, a torery and a lie. It aims at
destroyin taith in the tundamentals ot the Christian taith, includin the atonin work ot Christ on the cross.
Christians disapprove tor obvious reasons to such methods as torery and lies.
We are bewildered that serious Muslims can devise such a book and promote it on such tlimsy rounds,
knowin it is a lie. Even when it is temptin to be used and expedient, this approach must be rejected. We
reard it as a teeble ettort to disuise the truth. We conclude that only when at a loss tor better aruments
could a dishonest man resort to such methods.
The Bible teaches us to.
Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. Ephesians
Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we
distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend
ourselves to every mans conscience in the sight of God. 2 Corinthians 4:2

1. 'Ti. Gos.i o, Borrooos', edited and translated by Lonsdale and Laura Ra (1907), published by Beum
Aisha, Bawany Wakt, Bank House No. 1, Habib $quare, M.A. $innah Road, Karachi Pakistan
2. 'Ti. Gos.i o, Borrooos, or Esso, orc Iru:r,', by $elim AbdulAhad and W.H.T. Oairdner. (1975).
Publishers. 'Henry Martyn Institute ot Islamic $tudies', P.O. Box 153, Hyderabad, India.
3. 'Ps.ucoBorrooos :r ti. cort.t o, Musi:Cir:st:or Aoio.t:cs', by Dr. ]an $lomp. (197+). Published by.
'Christian $tudy Centre', 126B Murree Road, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
+. A paper by ].N.]. Kritziner entitled 'Ti. Gos.i o, Borrooos Cor.,uii, Eo:r.c'
5. 'Or::rs orc Sourc.s o, ti. Gos.i o, Borrooos', by ]ohn Oilchrist
6. 'M:ss:r Docu.rts ,ro ti. Gos.i o, Borrooos', by Adam Peerbhai

Why Are There So Many Churches (Denominations)?
uslims otten ask Christians this question. To stay on tamiliar round let us tor a moment look at
divisions and sects within Islam. Accordin to a certain Hadith, Muhammad once said.
"My people will be divided into 73 sects ... Everyone will go
to hell, except one ... the religion which is professed by me
and my companions." Mishkat Vol. I Chapter 6:2
"The number (of sects) has, however, far exceeded the Prophet's
prediction, for the sects of Islam exceed even in number and in
variety those of the Christian religion." Dictionary of Islam,
page 567
(This last statement may not be true anymore today, since the Dictionary dates trom 1885).
In order to 'tultill' the prophecy ot Muhammad, the Ohiyasu'lLuhat divides 73 into six roups ot twelve
sects (- 72) and adds as number 73, the 'Najiyah' (those bein saved), ot course, the $unnis. (D:ct:oror, o, Isio,
o.s 567569) Those in excess ot 73 are not mentioned.
Ditterent lists have been compiled. None, however, mentions the latest additions. the Ahmediyyas, the
Babists and Bahais. Admittedly most ot the sects have only minor theoloical ditterences, but so, too, have most
ot the Christian denominations.
Let us tor a moment stop to detine what 'Church' really means. Most people seem to think that a church is a
buildin, somethin like a mosque, synaoue or temple. This term is enerally used, but is incorrect. We miht
also think ot an oranisation. the Anlican Church or the Presbyterian Church, just to mention two. Aain this
term is in eneral use, but is incorrect. Church is the word which translators have used to interpret the Oreek
word 'Ecclesia' which simply means 'those that have been called out'. Out ot what. Out ot the 'world',
representin the mass ot mankind rejectin Ood's claims on them. But it someone is called out, he is at the
same time 'called into' somethin. He is called into tellowship with Ood and other believers.
$chism is invariably the result ot ditterin concepts, doctrines or opinions. Already in the early Church some
leaders deviated trom the New Testament $cripture. The tirst were the socalled ]udaizers. Besides taith in
salvation throuh ]esus Christ, they demanded adherence to and practice ot the ]ewish Law ot the Old
Testament. Thereatter Oreek philosophies were introduced in addition to revelation (nosis). $ome people
tauht that asceticism was to be practiced in addition to taith. Matter was despised, spirit was all that mattered.
With that they questioned the quality ot the creation ot Ood.
Basilides, a nostic, tauht in addition that Christ was not man at all, but Ood and consequently could not
have suttered on the cross. $imon ot Cyrene had taken His place. This beliet is retlected in Islam to some
extent. Basilides, unlike the nostics, had but tew tollowers.
Many others tollowed, but the early Church Councils based their judement on the New Testament, thereby
remainin true to $cripture.
Followin public reconition ot the Christian taith under the Emperor Constantine, a spiritual decline set in.
The written Word ot Ood was replaced in practice by tradition to an ever increasin deree. Mary, the mother
ot ]esus, was called the mother ot Ood. Popes assumed reat power and eventually the ottice ot bishop could be
bouht with money. The medieval church bore little, it any resemblance to the Church as tauht in the Bible.
Those Christians who studied the Bible and raised their voices aainst this system were persecuted and killed as
Then came what is known as the Retormation. Hus, Luther,Calvin, Zwinli and others tried to retorm the
Church (AD 1517) but they were rejected. Their ettort led, however, to open rebellion by many people and
political leaders, who were aware ot the corruption ot the Church. Europe was deeply split on the issue and was
divided into the Roman Catholic Church and the 'Protestant' Churches. Wars were touht, the most terrible
bein the 30yearwar (161816+8) which achieved little more than death, sorrow, tamine and terror. This war
had as little to do with true reliion as the one in Northern Ireland or Lebanon riht now.
The people who tollowed Calvin ($witzerland, Holland, part ot Oermany), were taken up in the 'Retormed'
Churches (Presbyterian, Dutch Retormed Church, Hervormde Kerk, etc.). In Oermany Luther had taken the
spiritual initiative and subsequently the 'Lutheran' Church bean to torm. In Enland and $cotland the
retormation took a ditterent course tor political considerations and interterence by the Crown were stroner.
For rather ulterior motives Henry VIII became the titular head ot the Church ot Enland, which led to a break
between the Enlish Church and Rome. This in itselt, however, can hardly be called a retormation.
Nevertheless, there were a number ot tine Christians and it was ordered at that time that a 'Bible should be
placed in each Church and that the people be encouraed to read it.' (A.M. R.ru:ci, 'Ti. Stor, o, ti. Ciurci',
o. !29) That may sound strane. $urely that should have been normal practice. Not at all. only when Luther
and Tyndale translated the Bible into the vernacular (i.e. the lanuae ot the people. Oerman and Enlish)
could it be heard or read by the man in the street.
Betore this time (and much later in Roman Catholic countries) the Bible was available and read in Latin
only, the lanuae ot the learned. Because the Church as an institution did not provide spiritual uidance and
teachin, and because everyone, without reard to his personal conviction, taith or quality ot lite, became a
member ot the Church by birth, Biblebelievin Christians separated themselves aain and aain trom the
institution that bore little or no resemblance to the Church as envisaed in the New Testament. They came
toether around the Bible to renew their personal alleiance to Ood in taith and practice. But they were
considered 'trouble makers' and otten severely persecuted.
In Enland the Puritans were such a roup. They stressed the need to return to the Bible and to disreard the
traditions that were dominatin the Church. Their beliet was stronly motivated by the Protestants in Europe
and saw the necessity tor Christians to live morally. Rejection by the institutionalised Church torced them to
become a separatist roup. This was the beinnin ot the Conreational and Presbyterian Churches. They met
with much persecution and opposition.
A number ot them telt the only alternative was to emirate to America. They were the 'Pilrim Fathers' who
sailed in the 'Maytlower' to settle in the 'New World' in 1620.
Parallel to this development the Baptists bean to torm in Britain. They maintained that a personal decision
was needed to be a Christian. This was, ot course, the very teachin ot the Bible, which the establishment in the
church had replaced with baptism and contirmation. Ot course, baptism was an ordinance ot ]esus Christ and
the Church had practised it trom the beinnin, but it is, at least accordin to the Bible, a token or symbol
meaninless without practised taith. It means that a person protesses to have trusted ]esus Christ tor salvation
and has now 'died to sin'. Believers are 'buried with Him (]esus) by baptism into death (to sin), so that as
Christ was raised trom the dead by the lory ot the Father, we too miht walk in newness ot lite ... We know
that our old selt was crucitied with Him so that ... we miht no loner be enslaved to sin ... $o you also must
consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to Ood in Christ ]esus.' (Romans 6)
Consequently, a person cannot be a Christian without a tirm commitment ot his taith in ]esus Christ, Who
is the $alvation ot Ood.
But despite the new roups ot Biblical Christians, Enland slumped aain into a spiritual low. A reat revival
came when ]ohn Wesley bean preachin repentance all over Enland.
"In fifty years he travelled 250 000 miles, mostly on horseback, during his evangelistic tours.
Remarkable scenes were constantly witnessed as he preached the Gospel. Hardened sinners
could be seen in open-air meetings with tears of penitence rolling down their cheeks." A.M.
Renwick, "The Story of the Church"
$ad to say, he was also rejected by the institutionalized Church, which saw no need tor such a ministry. The
'Methodist' Church was tormed to provide a spiritual home tor the converts that were made.
$o we can observe, this process ot spiritual decline riht up to our own time and the tormin ot Christian
roups that want to renew, but are rejected, because they disturb the comtort ot the establishment.
Christians praise Ood tor the tact that althouh spiritual decay very otten destroyed the church, revivals have
always maintained a taithtul witness to the truth and presented a challene to the establishment. Today we see
new spiritual lite sprinin up in many a 'dead' church.
But there have also been sectarian preachers who have tauht a way very ditterent to the Bible. Most are
obscure, but some have become very prominent. These ditter in essence trom other Biblebelievin Christians
and reject each other. The ']ehovah's Witnesses' and 'New Apostolics' may be mentioned in this reard.
Today we may divide the Christian Churches into tour major roups. Ti. Roor Cotioi:c Ciurci which is still
very much on its own and is, ot course, the body trom which dissidents tirst broke away. Then we have the so
called Prot.stort Ciurci.s. These protested aainst the authority ot the Pope and the many moral and spiritual
illpractices within the Roman Church. But many ot them declined into institutionalism aain, with an
intlexible hierarchy, aain harbourin amon their members those who are protessed anostics, or even atheists.
They also tolerate sintul practices in their members, and these very otten torm the vast majority. Little wonder
that even many ministers are nominal rather than practisin and Biblebelievin Christians. The s.ctor:or
ciurci.s could be classitied next as the third roup. The tourth body comprises the E:or.i:cois. These seek to
live by Biblical norms and rihttully maintain, that noone can possibly be a Christian without bein 'born
aain' (oir 3:35) into a new lite. $ince this is beyond human capacity, a conversion must take place. A person
sees his own unrihteousness in the liht ot the Word ot Ood, and is pointed to ]esus, who provided the
remedy by otterin the required pardon by His race. He is the one Who provided this salvation by steppin
into our place and oin to the cross, where He died tor us. When a person has repented, he turns in taith to
Ood and asks tor toriveness. Then only is he tit to enter into tellowship with Ood and is now 'bornaain' to
live a new lite on the basis ot Ood's Word.
Evanelicals are tound in most denominations. They are, as Luther called them once, the Church within the
church. Accordin to Biblical standards they actually are the Church. Others may be inorant, antaonistic or
deceived and consequently, are part ot the Church only in an oranisational sense.
But there are also a number ot Evanelical Churches. Here membership is ranted only atter a clear, public
testimony by the believer reardin his taith in ]esus as $aviour.
Do these roups and churches all believe somethin ditterent. To some extent, yes, as the reader has already
observed, and as is mentioned above. There are little ditterences reardin church leadership or torms ot
worship or baptism. $ome churches tend to be rather emotional, and others more lealistic or intellectual in
their approach. But there is certainly no controversy over any important teachin ot the Bible.
Perhaps this little outline will help our Muslim reader see the diversity ot the church in perspective. $omeone
has truly said. 'Amon the Biblebelievin Christians is unity, allowin tor diversity.'
Do Christians believe in inherited sin?
To answer this question we must tirst detine words. What exactly is meant by the term 'inherited sin'. In order
to be Christian we ouht to be Biblical. What does the Bible say about inherited sin. Exactly nothin
There is, however, another term that one miht use. Oriinal sin. That is the sin Adam and Eve committed
in the Oarden ot Eden. Their sin was not, as has been speculated in earlier times, sex. $exuality is a itt trom
Ood. It may be abused. Then it is sin. But in itselt as used in the bond ot marriae it cannot be sin.
There is one verse in the Psalms (5!:5) which states. '... in sin did my mother conceive me.' It we look at the
text caretully, however, we perceive that the conception was not the sin, but in a state ot sin conception took
place. And there is a world ot ditterence between these two views.
There are only two more passaes in the Bible touchin on this subject (Roors. 5:!2!8 orc ! Cor:rti:ors
!5:2!22). It states here quite clearly that sin came into the world throuh one man, and the trespass ot that
one man led to the condemnation ot all mankind. But it also states that death (the result ot sin) spread to all
men because all men sinned.
$o no man will be condemned because Adam sinned Man will be condemned because he sinned aainst
Ood himselt. $o it is not riht to speak ot inherited sin, but rather ot oriinal sin.
$in oriinated in Adam, and since then one eneration atter another up to now inherited the sintul
nature, the compellin drive to sin. And because we sin we are sinners. $o no man inherited any sin trom his
toretathers, but the desire to sin.
We must hasten to add, however, that Ood ave with the 'sickness' a remedy. 'Then as one man's trespass led
to condemnation tor all men, so one man's rihteousness led to acquittal and lite tor all men'. This man is
]esus. We note that there is no compulsion. One man's sin led to his children's sin etc., but each man
individually consents to the actions he does. Likewise the acquittal is not by compulsion, but by choice.

What Then Is The Gospel?
any lenthy volumes have been written to answer this question. We shall have to try to condense the
subjectmatter and look at the very basics only. Thereatter you should read and study it yourselt.
'Gospel' means 'good news'. Ot course, there are many types ot ood news in the world, but in the
Biblical context it simply means this. Ood has opened a way to reconcile man with Himselt. This way has been
proressively prepared trom the beinnin ot mankind. At tirst man lived in peace and harmony with Ood.
Then came the tall. Adam (in Hebrew simply meanin 'man') and Eve driven by their seltish desires and
interests chose a way to attain their own oal under the 'uidance' ot $atan. They wanted to be like Ood. Pride
and presumption made them rebellious aainst their Lord. They were cast out ot the Oarden ot Eden. Their
ottsprin very soon exemplitied the corruption ot man without Ood one murdered his own brother.
From then on we read ot the rebellion and corruption ot mankind. Man was born with a compellin torce
within him to sin, a desire tor the low. No man needed instruction in bad behaviour ot any description.
Everyone was born with a potential tor it. The Bible states it this way.
"The Lord saw how great mans wickedness on the earth had become, and that every
inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." Genesis 6:5
Mankind, however, and that is true today rejected Ood's verdict as a ross exaeration, and chose to be
optimistic, believin in the evolution ot human quality. Ood never shared that view. Much later in the New
Testament (Roors 7:!4,,.) we read.
"We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin.

I do not
understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do I know that
nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.For I have the desire to do what is good,
but I cannot carry it out.

For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to
dothis I keep on doingSo I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there
with me.

For in my inner being I delight in Gods law;

but I see another law at work in the
members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the
law of sin at work within my members."
Every honest realist will have to consent to the truth ot this statement. And it is realization that it the tirst
steppin stone to healin The worst ot all deception appears to be that man in his sintullness compares himselt
to others and concludes that he is not all that bad atter all. When he realizes his condition betore Ood,
however, he may try to compensate tor it by reliious 'duties' and ood works an exaerated torm ot
presumption and expression ot his will tor independence trom Ood.
To continue the Oenesis story. The tlood which was the judement ot Ood tollowed. Only Noah and his
closest tamily
"Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the
people of his time, and he walked with God." Genesis 6:8-9
Ood had a purpose tor Noah and his descendents, because he believed Ood. He was 'a preacher ot
rihteousness' (II Peter 2.5), tor havin been warned by Ood, he built the ark and 'by this condemned the
world and became an heir ot rihteousness, which comes by taith' (H.or.us.!!:7)
What then was the nature ot His rihteousness. He retused to participate in sin and acted on Ood's Word. This
is what taith is all about.
$ad to say, the descendents ot Noah were not better than mankind betore the Flood. They thouht out their
plan and said.
"Come, lets make bricks and bake them thoroughly. They used brick instead of stone, and tar
for mortar.

Then they said, Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the
heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves." (Genesis 11:3-4) Why does one burn
brick? To make it water resistant and strong. Why should one use bitumen for mortar? It may
not be stronger than clay, but again it is water resistant. Why would anyone want to build a
tower that reaches to heaven? One reason is given: "Let us make a name for ourselves". It is
interesting that God said to Abraham, His servant:
"I will make your name great." Genesis 12:2
Abraham's name has siniticance, tor by Ood's race and intervention it became siniticant, whereas the people
who wanted to make a name tor themselves entered oblivion. But there is a second underlyin reason why the
tower was built. It was their means ot resistin a turther tlood judement by Ood. $hould the water rise aain as
a result ot their rebellion, they would be quite sate on the top ot the tower. That is what they thouht. When
their tower was built ('with its top in the heavens') we read, not without irony.
'But ti. LORD co. cour to s.. ti. c:t, orc ti. tou.r Ever since then man has tried to build 'towers' to escape the
judement ot Ood philosophical 'towers', political 'towers', but predominantly reliious 'towers'. The latter
are the reliious systems that promise to sateuard us aainst judement tollowin our tailure to live in
accordance with the statutes ot Ood, which is His requirement tor communion with Himselt.
'I am the Lord your Ood
You shall have no other ods betore me
You shall not make tor yourselt a raven imae
You shall not use the name ot the Lord your Ood in vain'
Added to this are the laws reulatin relations between people.
"I am the Lord your God You shall have no other gods before me You shall not make for
yourself an idol You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God. "Exodus 20:1-17
The latter part is summed up in the New Testament like this.
and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: Love
your neighbour as yourself. Love does no harm to its meighbour. Therefore love is the
fulfillment of the law. Romans 13:9-10
Where is the man with such love. Where is the women with such love.
Well, we say 'I love you' But what we mean is 'I must have you tor myselt'
Within this corrupt society lived Abram, or as he was later called, Abraham. Ood called him out trom his
tamily and reliious environment and he obeyed. He was by no means a pertect man (i:ri G.r.s:s !2:!u2u,
!5:!6 u:ti !6:!4, !7:!5!9, 2u:!!!, .tc.), but
"Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness."
Abraham took Ood at His Word, he clun to Ood's covenant.
"If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about - but not before
God." Romans 4:2
It was his taith in Ood that was accounted as rihteousness. There is a credit and a debit side in accountancy
books. There is an account kept tor everyone's lite. Every sin lovin someone or somethin more than Ood,
lovin another person less than my own selt (and we ouht to think this over tor a while), any tailure in
thouht, word or deed is recorded in 'the book' aainst us. And then we do ood deeds. Where do they
appear. No where. It is our duty to pertorm them. ]esus once said.
"So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, We are
unworthy servants; we have only done our duty." " Luke 17:10
Elsewhere we read about Abraham.
"You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete
by what he did." James 2:22
Works in themselves cannot compensate tor sin. It was Abraham's taith that was accounted on the credit side.
"Abraham believed God - this was reckoned to him as righteousness."
In Abraham and throuh his descendants Ood wanted to show mankind the basis ot lite with Him and His
principle ot reconciliation atter disobedience. Israel was to brin the ood news ot the one Ood and His plan
tor man to a world ropin in the darkness ot reliion that was based on the deception ot man and demons.
($piritism, etc.) But Israel expediently 'torot' the Ood ot Abraham and lived in their odless thouh reliious
Aain Ood intervened when He sent Moses. The Israelites livin under bondae in Eypt were rescued by
mihty sins and wonders, which Ood pertormed. No one was unaware ot the majesty and power ot Ood. And
then Ood made a covenant with Israel. This is called the 'Old Covenant', or 'Old Testament' today. Ood
commanded that Israel tollow a new way ot lite. He ave His reat commandment and stated.
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction.

For I command you
today to love the Lord your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and
laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are
entering to possess. But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are
drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them,

I declare to you this day that you
will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to
enter and possess. This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set
before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children
may live

and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For
the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your
fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Deuteronomy 30:15-20
But what would happen, it a man were to break one ot the commandments. Would he be lost.
"If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, Love your neighbor as yourself, you are
doing right.

But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.
For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of
it. For he who said, Do not commit adultery, also said, Do not murder. If you do not commit
adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker." James 2:8-11
"If a member of the community sins unintentionally and does what is forbidden in any of the
Lords commands, he is guilty. When he is made aware of the sin he committed, he must bring
as his offering for the sin he committed a female goat without defect. He is to lay his hand on
the head of the sin offering and slaughter it at the place of the burnt offering then the priest is
to pour out the.. blood at the base of the altar and the priest shall burn it on the altar as an
aroma pleasing to the LORD. In this way the priest will make atonement for him, and he will be
forgiven." Leviticus 4:27-31
A man would be lost it he broke Ood's Law without seekin reconciliation the Oodordained way But why did
Ood choose such a cruel way a sacritice. He wanted to impress on the people the seriousness ot sin. It you had
to sacritice, kill and burn your tavourite pet tor your next sin surely you would do everythin to avoid it
Ood wanted His people to control themselves and live tor Him alone. But aain the people murmured and
rebelled, even under Moses, and eventually tell into idolatry and complete darkness. Ood toether with His
order tor lite was not only abandoned, but torotten.
Later on, all the warnins ot Ood came true. Israel lived in deteat and eventually, in verbal Fultillment ot
Ood's prophecy, was dispersed amon all nations, livin under heavy persecution tor many centuries.
Israel as Ood's chosen people was put aside because ot disobedience. Nevertheless, Ood pursued His plan
with mankind. Already to Adam and Eve Ood had spoken ot someone to come trom their descendants to
'crush' the head ot $atan. This one was to come trom the lineae ot Abraham. ('by you all the tamilies ot the
earth shall bless themselves' Oenesis 12.3), and Isaac ('throuh Isaac your descendants be named' Oenesis
The ]ews called this expected liberator their Messiah (indicatin a kin, priest or ruler who would represent
the people betore Ood). Ood said that He must come trom the tribe ot ]udah, ot the descendants ot David.
"You said, I have made a covenant with my chosen one, I have sworn to David my servant, I
will establish your line forever and make your throne firm through all generations... will also
appoint him my firstborn, the most exalted of the kings of the earth. I will maintain my love to
him forever I will establish his line forever, his throne as long as the heavens endure I have
sworn by my holiness - and I will not lie to David - that his line will continue forever and his
throne endure before me like the sun;

it will be established forever like the moon, the faithful
witness in the sky."
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on Davids
throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from
that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this." Psalm 89:3-
4,19, 27-37; 132:11; Isaiah 6:9-10
David's throne was ascended by a son ot his but that kindom has lon since been destroyed torotten. $ince
Ood speaks ot an eternal throne He meant somethin else, tor no human kindom is eternal. The son, the
prophet speaks ot (oorr o, o ::r:r-Iso:oi 7:!4) is ]esus, the Messiah. the Mihty Ood, Everlastin Father, Prince
ot Peace But where is this peace the promised justice and rihteousness. Where is this Kindom. ]esus
answered these questions thus.
"The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation,

nor will people say, Here it
is, or There it is, because the kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:20-21
Those that are part ot Ood's Kindom have peace with Ood. They have been toriven and restored to Ood and
have received rihteousness.
" not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through
faith in Christ - the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith." Philippians 3:9
When ]esus was born He tultilled the many prophecies ot the Old Testament pointin to Him. He established
the Kindom ot Ood. In Him Ood has revealed Himselt. He lived sinlessly betore a watchin world, showin
mankind the Way. The He died on the cross as The $acritice that every man needs to be reconciled to Ood
the Father.
"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for
righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." I Peter 2:24
This is the 'Oood News' or 'Oospel'. Without it there is nothin a man can do, except to live accordin to the
commands ot his 'selt' 'sold under sin'. When ]esus came, as predicted, He took our uilt and sin on Himselt.
He suttered the consequences ot sin. The justice that should have hit me, hit Him.
"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for
righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." John 10:14-15,27-28
That is ood news All you cannot do has been done tor you. Now you can live the rest ot your lite in ratitude
to Ood, who became your $aviour (Isaiah 63.711). Your lite belons to Him and you, like a sheep that went
astray and was later tound, may hear His voice and tollow Him in taith. He knows His own, tor He laid down
His lite as a ransom tor them and ives His own eternal lite. That is ood news
But ]esus did not remain dead He was raised trom the dead by the lory ot Ood Oood news aain He was
raised to heaven, and
" is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us." Romans 8:34
More ood news or is it bad news to you. He is comin aain to jude in rihteousness all those who did not
want to bow their knees betore Him (Pi:i::ors 2:9!u), or were too presumptuous or proud to receive His
pardon. But He comes to raise up all those who died physically, but had placed their hope and trust in Him
All this is done under the New Covenant or New Testament. It was torecast under the Old Covenant.
" when I will make a new covenant

it will not be like the covenant they broke This is
the covenant I will make I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be
their God, and they will be my people for I will forgive their wickedness and will remember
their sins no more." Jeremiah 31:31-34
When ]esus died on the cross, the just tor the unjust, the New Testament was ratitied and is valid and open tor
all who wish to receive Ood's pardon tor their sin His Way until He returns to pronounce judement.
The ood news will no loner be valid to those who have resisted Ood's love or have preterred manmade
Peace with Ood does not come about automatically. Althouh ]esus died tor all mankind potentially, only those
who now avail themselves ot the otter ot pardon receive it. It is theretore, your personal responsibility to make
peace with Ood. You have been called upon to do so, tor the Bible says.
"God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting mens sins against them. And
he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christs ambassadors,
as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christs behalf: Be
reconciled to God." 2 Corinthians 5:19-20
We have also been commanded to return to Ood.
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to

For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice" Acts 17:30-31
$o we must respond to this call and command. This happens in practice when you make an assessment ot your
lite, realize the sin in it, and resolve to turn away trom it in remorse over it.
"This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is
no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and
do not live by the truth.

But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with
one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin. If we claim to be without
sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and
just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not
sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives." I oir !:9!u
In response to this, Ood committed Himselt.
" for I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." Jeremiah 31:34
$ince it is the sacritice ot ]esus that alone can cleanse and tree us trom our sins, we receive Him as our
$alvation (- ]esus). This is the very start ot a lite in deep union with Ood. You have now only been cleansed.
The tilth ot your lite and heart has been removed. Now your heart must be tilled with new thins, but tirst ot
all with Ood Himselt. Now he must be allowed and invited (by prayer) to sit on the throne ot our lite and
heart. The Holy $pirit ot Ood will now renew our lite. Our will is surrendered to His will.
"And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who
died for them and was raised again. So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of
view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is
in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!

All this is from God, who
reconciled us to himself through Christ." 2 Corinthians 5:15,17-18
A man who has done this is now the property ot Ood. He is accepted by Ood on His terms. He is toriven. He
now receives new power and uidance in Ood's Word to live that new lite. And that is tor Ood's lory and the
establishment ot His Kindom on earth. It will lead to a lite ot beauty and holiness without bein cranky and
unbalanced. We are restored to the oriinal meanin and purpose ot lite a lite where all the tullness ot Ood,
not only the spiritual but also that provided in creation, can be experienced day by day. Perhaps most
important ot all. I can know my destiny. There is no loner tear ot the tuture, particularly ot death, tor my sins
are torotten by Ood. He says so
"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. " Romans 8:1
]ust as Noah and his tamily in the Ark were sate, so those that are in ]esus are sate trom the wrath ot Ood that
is to come.
This new lite as a reborn believer brins out new desires.
Firstly, to live a Oodpleasin lite in devotion and ratitude in love, secondly, the lonin tor tellowship with
likeminded people, and, thirdly, to share this new lite and hope with others. That is, indeed, the very purpose
ot this book.
$o we invite you not to be shy, not to put it ott till later, but to contact us tor more intormation or tor tree and
trank discussion on any ot the topics ot this book without your teelin under any obliation to o turther than
you wish. You may be assured ot our discretion.

You may contact the compiler ot this study at.
P.O. Box 50770
Email. intolitechallene.de
or anyone trom the Christian tellowship that introduced this book to you.
But even it you do not wish to call on anyone, at the very least you ouht to obtain a New Testament in a
modern translation and study it yourselt in the liht ot these notes and in comparison with the Qur'an.
Atter havin answered the majority ot relevant questions put to Christians by Muslims, we as Christians wish to
ask our Muslim triends about the validity and the evidences ot their taith. Please write to ask tor a copy ot the