005.116
YUSUFALI: And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.
PICKTHAL: And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden?
SHAKIR: And when Allah will say: O Isa son of Marium! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.
Above are three different translations of Sura 5.116 from the Quran. Notice anything wrong? The second and third members of the Trinity? Jesus and… Mary?! Christianity has never considered Mary as a god or a member of the Trinity. Muslims consider the Quran to be Allah’s perfect revelation. One mistake, and the Quran is not Allah’s book. One mistake and Allah and Muhammad are frauds.
Placing Mary in the Trinity shows Muhammad’s ignorance of one of Christianity’s central tenets. The Trinity is composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; not the Father, Son, and Mary. Muhammad denied the Trinity repeatedly, but it’s no wonder. I don’t know a single Christian that believes in his conception of the Trinity.
If you are a Muslim reading this, I’m sure your first response will be disdain and maybe then some shock. How could Muhammad have been so wrong? If Muhammad was wrong about something so basic, what else was he wrong about? Let’s talk.
You may want to go back and look at the History of Christianity. Western/Roman Christianity (and its offshoots) were not the only type of Christianity.
I am aware of the history of Christianity. Roman Christianity was a later historical development. The first council was Nicea, and there were Christians from the East. The East did not separate from the West until the 11th century, and their only disagreement about the Trinity was whether or not Jesus sent the Spirit. So when Muhammad came along in the 7th century and said Mary was god, it was a mistake.
Christianity is defined narrowly as those who follow the teachings of Jesus as set forth in the apostolic testimony of the New Testament. Nowhere in the New Testament is it justifiable to say that Christians (narrowly defined) believed that Mary was a god.
First of all, let me refute strongly that The Last Messenger Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is not the author of The-Qur’an. It was revealed to him (PBUH) by Almighty God directly and through Arcgangel Gabriel. Gabriel (PBUH) taught him by the command of God: To Read. Otherwise he (PBUH) was unlettered. Such is the miracle of God Who Creates from Nothing, Be He Glorified -01.
So from this verse (5: 116) you assert that The-Qur’an did not know what the Trinity was, as Mary is not in the Trinity, hence The Qur’an was wrong.
“GOD will say, “O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, `make me and my mother idols beside GOD?’ “He will say, “Be You glorified. I could not utter what was not right. Had I said it, you already would have known it. You know my thoughts, and I do not know your thoughts. You know all the secrets” [The – Qur’an - 5:116].
You are committing an error, not the Qur’an, if anyone reads Surah 5:116 they will see that the verse says NOTHING about a Trinity. So we need to ask our Christian friends from where they assert that this verse is mentioning the Trinity. You have simply read what is not there.
In fact in the very same Surah, in passage 73, the Qur’an does mention the Trinity: yet it says nothing about Mary being included in the Trinity of the Christians: “Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is a third of a trinity. There is no god except the one god. Unless they refrain from saying this, those who disbelieve among them will incur a painful retribution [5:73].
The Qur’an also mentions the Trinity in another Surah:
“Oh people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, “Trinity.” You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens (skies) and everything on earth (planets). GOD suffices as Lord and Master” [4:171].
Here again the Qur’an attacks the Trinity, yet again there is nothing about Mary. So already we can see a problem with your argument, the Qur’an when it attacks the Trinity it mentions the Trinity quite clearly, and when it does so it says nothing about Mary being involved within the Trinity. Now when the Qur’an mentions Jesus and Mary being worshiped as gods it never mentions the Trinity at all! So the burden of proof is now on you, show us where the Qur’an says anything about Mary being in the Trinity, I have quoted two passages from the Qur’an which attack the Trinity, and neither of these two passages say that Mary is in the Trinity-01.
Khanson,
1) The verse doesn’t have to say Trinity. The context is an address to the Christians about three gods. The only three gods listed are God (Allah), Jesus, and Mary. So, it would follow rather logically that Trinity in Muhammad’s mind was Father, Son, and Mother. He nowhere else defines who the Trinity is, and he may not have even known.
2) Christians have never believed in more than one God. We still hold to the Shema, the basic confession of Judaism, that says, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” We do not believe that Jesus is a separate god, and never had. Muhammad misrepresented the Christian position because he did not take the time to understand it, and he probably had no one around him to explain it. That is the main problem. Muslims today continue this distortion, teaching other Muslims that Christians are polytheists. This is simply not true. You have failed to understand your opponents and misrepresented them at every turn.
3) Christians, narrowly defined (see above), have never considered Mary a god. Some offshoots of Christianity have, due to their pagan roots. But for Muhammad to address these as Christians tells us that he did not know what a Christian was. In all likelihood, he never met an actual Christian. That is problematic for a religion that stands only on its polemic against Christianity and Judaism. If its basic premises are false (i.e. that the Bible was corrupted, that the Christians believed in multiple gods), then it is necessarily false. Islam does not have its own two legs to stand on. It stands on the shoulders of Judaism and Christianity. Muhammad stands on the shoulders of the prophets who came before him. If his interpretation of their work is false, then his entire message is false. If Jesus did indeed die on the cross, which every shred of evidence we have corroborates (and no serious scholar rejects), then Muhammad was a false prophet. It’s really that simple.
4) Take this further and what you will find is that the evidence leads us to the conclusion that the Bible we have today has in no way been altered to affect its core doctrines. The biblical manuscripts are there for you to see in every major museum and even on the internet (i.e. http://csntm.org/). We have manuscripts that we can compare and find which reading is original. Most of the differences are completely inconsequential, and the ones that make any difference still do not lend themselves to the Muslim position (but often show evidence of being altered toward a Roman Catholic position or smoothed out to a less difficult reading). The evidence simply cannot back up Muhammad’s claims.
Where are the Qu’ranic manuscripts? If you believe your Muslim leaders, the Qu’ran has never changed so there is no need for manuscripts. This is simply false. In 1972, in a mosque in Yemen, a manuscript graveyard was discovered that dates back to the first two centuries of Islam. The manuscripts discovered there could forever change Islam. Indeed, they could destroy Islam. Why have they not been published yet? It’s quite simple. Muslims fear the truth, and the scholars studying them fear the backlash.
Andrew
There are obvious problems with your reasoning here, :
1- Those who considered Mary to be a god, did indeed consider themselves to be Christians, and so did a multitude of sects and groups throughout the history of Christianity with whom you and others disagree. Your statement: “Christians (narrowly defined) have never considered Mary as god” is subjective and obviously false.
2- The verse is not about the trinity, as Khanson correctly pointed out to you. It is not directed to the -narrowly defined by you- Christians, nor to Christians in general. It depicts a scene from the hereafter when Allah will ask Jesus about the conduct of some of those who believed they were followers of Jesus, and wrongly worshipped Jesus and his mother. Such people undeniably did exist.
3- The msulim view is that God the Creator of heavens and earth, is distinct from Jesus and the Holy Spirit, both of which were created by Him. It follows that, those who believe in the trinity do indeed believe in three gods, regardless of what explanation they give to the relationship between the constituents parts of the trinity. This is because, according to Islam, the relationship between those constituents only exists in the believer’s mind and bear no relation to reality.
4- I am truly glad that you are trying to find faults and mistakes in the Quran, I sincerely hope you continue your efforts on this front. Indeed the Quran itself encourages disbelievers to do so.
5- Your comments about Yemeni (Sana Manuscripts) is incomplete and inaccurate. Before jumping with excitement, I suggest you read what the original claims were (before the hype was added).
Here is a link to what Gerd R. Puin wrote:
http://ho-logos.blogspot.com/2009/04/observations-on-early-quran-manuscripts.html
The claims have been summarized by the Guardias as:
There is nothing new or radical about what is claimed here.
Moreover, according to Wikipedia, since 1997, there have been 35000 Microfilm pictures of those manuscripts in the custody of a Christian scholar from Germany, Graf von Bothmer. He promised to make them public and would not have hesitated to publish them if they contained anything that would demolish the Quran’s claim of preservation.
Rasheed
Rasheed,
Welcome back! It’s been a while!
1) There are not problems with my reasoning on this one. Christians are people who follow Jesus as the Bible prescribes. There is nothing in Scripture that would allow us to consider Mary as a god. It is impossible to both be a Christian and consider Mary as god. Christians hold to the Shema of Judaism: Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. We believe in only one God. Mary was a human being used by God in His purposes.
2) The context suggests that this verse had to do with the Trinity. It is not stated. I’ll concede that, but nowhere else does Muhammad define what he means by Trinity, which would be a logical first step in making any argument: define your terms.
I don’t doubt that there were people who mistakenly worshiped Mary because of the influence of pagan worship and tendency toward syncretism, but arguing against a pagan offshoot of Christianity is not an argument against Christianity. This would be no different than addressing polemics against Muslim toward a group such as the Druze (are you familiar with them?). The problem here is, Muhammad’s polemic was directed at Christianity as a whole. In order for Islam to be true, the heart of Christianity must be shown to be false. He never understood Christianity, and therefore miserably failed in this aspect. His three basic arguments; that Christians were polytheists, that the Bible has been irreparably changed, and that Jesus never died on the Cross, are all false.
3) The problem here is that the Muslim view has developed apart from and in contradiction to the Christian view. You cannot argue against something you have failed to comprehend or appreciate. The Bible makes clear that Jesus was with God in the beginning (John 1:1, etc.), and was the agent of Creation (Hebrews 1:2, etc.). It is God’s Spirit who hovered over the waters of Creation (Genesis 1:2). If you familiarize yourself with the Church councils of the 4th and 5th century, you will find that Muslims have always generally against those whose views were condemned as heresy. This is the problem we have. You rush to judgment and condemn us for what we are not saying before you understand what we are saying.
5) I realize that what has been published is not much regarding the findings in Yemen. The problem is, the Muslim view of Scripture is a house of cards. If any evidence is found that the Qu’ran has changed from its original form (which it has), the whole thing comes crashing down.
The article you cited is from 1996. The year before the manuscripts began to be digitized. These are only preliminary conclusions with more to follow.
Regarding your statement that von Bothmer “would not have hesitated to publish them”: Would you? Do you know what happens to people who question the establishment in Islam? Would he ever have access to another document again? Would he even live to see his findings published? There is too much at stake for too many countries to take this so lightly. If the Qu’ran is proven false, then every Muslim nation has no more basis for their governmental structure. Islamic society could collapse. There are riots in the streets over cartoons of Muhammad. How much worse would the fallout be over a finding of this magnitude? Don’t be so naive.
Andrew,
Thanks.
There are a few points that need to clarified:
1- Do you include the Catholic Church and The Eastern Church of Alexandria in your definition of Christians? Those two churches are amongst the oldest institutions of Christianity and both of them had a history and continue to practice the worship of Mary in various forms. The worship of Mary is more common than what you suggest, maybe not in America, or Protestant churches in general but it can not be described as a pagan off shoot or a minority within Christianity. Even if you disqualify those people from being Christians, there is no reason for the Quran to adopt “your” definition of who a Christian is. Others who call themselves Christians might not include you in their definition, and this is your and their problem not the Quran. However, the debate about who can be called a “Christian” is irrelevant to the subject matter of you post as you can see in 3 below
2- Whether those worshipping Mary correctly interpreted the Bible or otherwise, is also outside the scope of our discussion here. There are large number of Muslims who, in one way or another, practise the worship of people, such as Shiites who glorify Fatima daughter of Muhammed and Ali his cousin. What we are discussing here is scriptures,The Quran, and a particular verse in the Quran which speaks about worshippers of Mary.
3- The verse does not even call them Christians or any other name, because it does not really matter. These people are:
a) significant in number and,
b) believed themselves to be followers of Christ.
4- You keep on insisting that the context is about the trinity. This is not true at all. I have read this verse hundreds of times and never occurred to me that it is about the trinity. There is not even a passing reference to the trinity. Khanson has referred to the verse that mention the “trinitarian belief” and it is clearly spelled out there.
5- The Quran is not concerned with defining the trinity, firstly because you can not define something that does not exist, and secondly, Christians themselves can not really agree on the concept. You must be aware of various explanations and theological battles that flared throughout history, about the subject. The Quran simply says, if you believe God to be three in one, in whatever shape or form, you are committing a grave mistake.
6- If you acknowledge that what has been published from the Sana Manuscripts does not amount to much, then there is absolutely no basis for speculating about what might or might not be discovered in them.
Until this moment in time, there is nothing in these manuscripts that contradicts what Muslims have said and known about the transmission of the Quran.
If anything at all, the Sana discovery corroborates Muslim tradition about the history of the Quran. Please take the time to read this paper, written in 1999 by G. R. Puin himself:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/402793/GerdR-Puin-II-Bedeutung-der-Koranfragmente-aus-Sanaa-magazin-forschung1-1999?
Best regards
Rasheed
Rasheed,
I realize there are some who have wrongly worshiped Mary as a god, usually because they have only cloaked their pagan polytheism in the terminology of Christianity. This happens regularly in places such as Congo in Africa. I have a friend who grew up worshiping three men who called themselves the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These however, are in the minority. For Muhammad to attempt to correct their wrongs is fine, but to base his entire argument against Christianity on groups such as these is fallacious at best.
Catholics do not worship Mary as a god. Nor do Orthodox. They do venerate her, which is not the same as worshiping as a god. You are wrong here. These people are not nearly as significant in number as you suggest, which is a serious flaw to your argument.
As to the Islamic judgments of Christianity, how can you call Christians a “people of the book” and then refuse my definition that Christianity is narrowly defined by those who follow the Bible? You can’t have it both ways here. Which one is it? This is not outside the scope of our argument. You are basing much of your argument off people that should in no way be considered Christians. If you want to argue against Christians, you must first establish who they are. If you include those following the men in Congo (see above), Mormons, etc. then your view of Christianity is skewed, and your arguments suffer from an untenable starting point.
You are ignoring the context of Sura 5. Verses 72-75 speak of trinity (v. 73) and then name Jesus and Mary (v. 75). It follows from these verses that Jesus and Mary were the second and third person of Muhammad’s conception of Trinity. Instead of Father, Son, and Spirit, he had Father, Son, and Mother.
4:171 says, “…do not speak of a ‘Trinity’—stop, that is better for you—God is only one God…” This is a blatant misrepresentation of Christian beliefs. Christians have NEVER believed in more than one God.
“You cannot define something that does not exist.” This statement is problematic. Regardless of whether or not the Trinity exists, the Christian definition does exist and must be dealt with. This is merely an avoidance of the question.
The fact that there have been disputes about the Trinity does not give Islam a carte blanche on defining what is being argued against. The fact of the matter is that Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox agree on the Trinity, with the exception of the filioque clause (the Orthodox believe that only the Father sends the Spirit, but Catholics and most Protestants see evidence that the Son does as well). It is impossible to attack an opponent’s argument if you don’t know what it is.
Regarding Puin’s findings: I will have to read the article later, but as I said, even one slight change in the manuscripts brings down your whole house of cards. If you read further in the site you first linked to, you will find evidence of differences between today’s Qu’ran, and Uthman’s text. The Islamic doctrine of inerrancy (or whatever you call it) cannot allow for a single change. This is your most used attack on Christianity, but it is being turned against you. Your manuscripts are hidden in scholar’s libraries; ours are available to see in museums and online (i.e. http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/). Where are your manuscripts?
Andrew,
How can you say
when it is quite clear that the verse you based your post on, argues not only against the worship of Mary, but also the worship of Jesus which is a central tenet of “Christianity”.
As to your assertion that Catholics do not worship Mary but rather venerate her, we may have different interpretations of what constitutes worshipping, but, If you prostrate yourself, and seek her super natural powers to help you, build hundreds of shrines and altars for her, pray to her, and ask her to save you, not to mention numerous claims by priests of Mary’s miraculous apparitions (the latest was in Egypt in 2009)..etc, then this is worship in my book.
Mary was given official titles in various Catholic Catechisms, including “Mother of God” and “Queen of Heaven”. Please consult the Catholic Encyclopaedia for information on the subject and judge for yourself.
Next you move to a completely new subject of Islam judgement of Christian beliefs and how they are called “People of the Book”.
This is obviously another discussion for another day, which I am glad to contribute to, but for now, I hope you stick to the core subject of your post, which is verse 5:116 of the Quran.
You then say that the context is about the trinity citing verses 71-75. This is clearly wrong because, the verses’ focus has moved from the topic of the trinity long before. Verse 116 is not a continuation of the same topic. This is a characteristic of the Quran’s style and structure, where a Surah is not necessarily about one particular topic. There would be any number of different subjects and the focus shifts smoothly between them. In many cases, a single verse is a complete statement, that is independent of the preceding and following verses.
Between verse 75 and 116, there are a number of topics including but not limited to:
i- The relationship between Jews, Christians and Muslims
ii- The rules governing hunting in Pilgrimage season
iii- Rules on sea food
iv- Rules on giving oath and swearing
v- Prohibition of Alcohol, gambling, dead meat, blood, pork, pagan sacrifices …etc.
vi- Rules on wills.
Verse 116 is at the beginning of a distinct block of verses (starting with verse 109),and deals with a particular topic, namely a scene from the Day of Judgement, demonstrating that neither the worship of Jesus nor that of Mary were part of the teachings of Jesus.
There is just no rationale for saying “this must be what the the Quran means by the trinity, because it has condemned the trinitarian belief in the preceding verses”.
By the way, where did you get your information on the “Islamic doctrine of inerrancy” and what is allowable under its rules, from?
Rasheed
http://hardquestions.wordpress.com
Rasheed,
The key statement in this whole thing is “as a god.” Even if Catholics hold a high place for Mary (often too high in my opinion), they do not worship her “as a god.” So this statement is a false accusation, regardless of what you think of their practice of veneration (which I find detestable, but on other grounds).
I understand that you don’t think this verse is an attempt at stating a trinitarian formula. You may be correct, but this leaves us with the question what did Muhammad think the Trinity was? If he could not bother to define what he was arguing against, then his arguments hold little weight of their own right (especially since he repeatedly identifies trinitarianism with teachings Christians never tolerated; i.e. that there were three gods). It comes back to whether or not we accept him as a prophet. His only hope as a prophet is in falsifying Judaism AND Christianity. Because he claimed to be in the line of prophets through the two religions, he does not have his own two legs to stand on. Did he succeed? Far from it!
The definition of a Christian is not “another question for another day.” You cannot have a discussion about teachings of Christianity Islam disagrees with if you do not first define what Christianity is and why. Your religion calls us “People of the Book.” Why not allow that this is a true definition? By this definition, those who worship Mary are not Christians, and the whole issue is irrelevant to the discussion between Christians and Muslims. Then we can come back to the core difference, the deity of Jesus.
The deity of Christ is demonstrably present in nearly all if not all of the books of the NT, as well as some of the OT (cf. Zech 12:10 and the change in pronouns). If you do a search of the references to Isaiah 40:3, I believe all four gospels reference this verse, applying the title LORD, the Hebrew Divine Name, to Jesus. In Romans 10:13, Paul quotes Joel 2:32, which also applies the Divine Name to Jesus. James’ letter opens with the affirmation of Jesus’ divinity and calls Jesus the Lord of Glory, a term used of God in the OT. It is clearly present in Titus and in 2 Peter. It is present in Matthew 28:19 where Jesus and the Holy Spirit share in the Divine Name.
It is repeatedly seen in Jesus’ statements in the book of John. Jesus claims to be the Temple (2:19), which is only possible to say because he is God, and John has just said that Jesus “dwelt” among us using the Greek verbal form of the word used for the Tabernacle in the OT (the predecessor of the Temple). John says that Jesus was with God, and was God in the beginning; that he was the agent of creation (which is affirmed again in the opening verses of Hebrews).
There is a mountain of biblical evidence to the deity of Christ that cannot be addressed by a simple “cease!” from the mouth of Muhammad. Your best strategy is that employed by many biblical critics: systematically deny the authorship and integrity of every book that states the divinity of Christ. The only problem is, the arguments are often downward spirals of circular reasoning based on rejecting Pauline authorship of one book based on rejecting Petrine authorship of another book based on ad infinitum, ad nauseum. The fact of the matter is, the Bible is the most well attested book in human history, with over 6,000 ancient manuscripts in addition to the quotes in the Church Fathers.
Jesus died on the cross, which Muhammad denied. This fact is the most accepted of any in the Bible by any biblical scholar. The conversion of Paul alone is enough to call into question everything Muhammad said about Jesus. The problem is, Muhammad saw the deity of Christ as an affirmation of polytheism, which is exactly what the Church councils were so careful to avoid. The assumption that if Jesus is God, then necessarily there is more than one god is not a necessary nor logical assumption. Muhammad miscalculated and vastly overstated his case, based not upon facts, but upon visions and an angelic messenger. This is exactly what the Bible warns against (Galatians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 11:14-15; 1 John 2:22; 4:3; 1 Kings 22; cf. 2 Chronicles 18; etc.).
____________________________________________
The Islamic “doctrine of inerrancy,” for lack of a better term, is regularly stated by every Muslim apologist under the sun. The strategy of Islam is simple: 1) Attack the credibility of the Bible through the use of textual criticism. 2) Exalt the Qu’ran as a perfect uncorrupted and incorruptible book from God. It’s a basic bait and switch. Muslims regularly refer to the Qu’ran as Allah’s very words, and make clear that these are not Muhammad’s words at all. If these words have been changed in the least, whether in order or the actual words, then you have a very significant problem that has the potential to bring down all the walls. Even the small differences noticed from these Yemeni scrolls is evidence that the Qu’ran is not what Muslims claim.
Andrew,
Worshipping is not confined to verbal uttering, but it has more to do with what you actually do or believe. If you treat Mary in away, or perform acts that are due only to god, you would be worshipping her as a god, for worship is not only by words but also by deed.
Prostrating, praying and offering sacrifices are forms of worship, and are performed to this day by many Christians, I have seen sacrifices offerings before my own eyes in Mary-Girgis Church in Khartoum North, Sudan by followers of the Coptic Church of Alexandria as a child, my grandmother was duped by her neighbours to offer a yearly sacrifice at the said church (My granny was Muslim and her neighbours were Christians
and the offering was for a saint called Mary-Girgis”.
The Quran says
The preceding verse says:
The Quran starts by negating the divinity of Jesus, so our theology is that God (What you refer to as The Father) is unique and that Jesus is merely a created human, and you have correctly identified this as the main difference between Islam and Christianity.
By clearly negating any notion of divinity of Jesus, the Quran then says those who claim God “The father in your speak” to be a part of Three, have blasphemed. Any attempt to delve further into who the third person of the supposed trinity, becomes redundant!
The Quran also mention the “The Holy Spirit”, another created angel, Gabriel who was responsible for delivering the revelation to Muhammed, but was commanded by God to support Jesus, son of Mary:
[Yusufali 5:110] Then will Allah say: “O Jesus the son of
_________________________________________
From the times of the Prophet, and throughout the history of Islam, there existed variant readings that were all recognised and accepted by Muslims. They are Not of the type found in the Bible because they are either differences of pronunciation, or a change in the tense of verb in such a way that the meaning remains exactly the same, for example, in this post, by an obvious Islamophobe, the best example he could
find is the difference between the words
“Anjana” (he saved us)
and “Anjaitana” (you saved us).
In both cases the pronoun (he and you, which I have written in italics) are not in the text but are to be inferred from the structure of the word and both refer to Allah. Both words have the root “Naja” meaning (save), and in both readings the one doing the saving is Allah, and the ones being saved are he speakers. Moreover, both readings have been preserved and recognised by Muslims, so even if you want to argue that only one of them is correct, the Quran has still been preserved because we have
always had the two variant readings with us.
I am sure that you would have loved it if the textual variations inthe Bible were similar to this.
We Muslims have never had a problem with these variant readings. In
the first centuries of Islam it was common for scholars to say ” I prefer this reading or that reading” and none of them saw a need to disown any of the established variants. They are so trivial and do not in any way affect the text of the Quran, and more importantly, they are also preserved for us until today.
Rasheed,
I understand that what Catholics and Orthodox do in regards to Mary looks a lot like worship. I share your discomfort with this practice. In Catholic theology, Mary often takes the role of mediator between God and man, which the New Testament reserves for Christ alone (cf. 1 Tim 2:5). This places them at odds with the teachings of the Bible, and outside of what pure Christian doctrine should be.
I know that Islam attempts to establish that Jesus is not divine. I realize that this makes the Trinity necessarily false if Jesus is not who the Bible says he is. The problem is, Islam must first deal with what the Bible says about Jesus. I can show you dozens of passages which clearly state or point to the divinity of Christ. Since Islam is founded on the presupposition that Christianity and Judaism have perverted true religion, the weight remains on Islam to show how this is so.
This is where textual criticism comes in. I’m glad that you have openly recognized that this issue exists with the Qu’ran as well. If only more Muslims were open to this discussion, rather than hypocritically using TC against the Bible, while ignoring any variants in the Qu’ran. Here’s where it gets good though… the variant you pointed to in the Qu’ran… most of the variants in the Bible are trivial in the same way. Many people like to quote Bart Ehrman’s books where he states that there are ‘more variants than words in the NT.’ While this statement may be true, it is extremely misleading (and downright deceptive of Ehrman). What Ehrman counts is not points of variation in the NT, but variants across every manuscript.
We have over 6,000 manuscripts of the New Testament, not including the quotations in the Church Fathers (from which we could nearly reconstruct the entire NT). Every error that Ehrman counts he counts every manuscript that makes the error. So if we have 2,000 early, trustworthy manuscripts that are correct, and 4,000 later manuscripts which misspell a word, Ehrman counts this as 4,000 variants! If we look at the errors, most of them are not difficult to figure out. It’s a matter of simple spelling errors, or instances where a scribes eyes skipped a line and picked up on the same word or phrase a few lines later. Some of the variants come from notes in the margin where a later scribe compared manuscripts and noted a difference.
Of all the variants we have (like yours in the Qu’ran) none of them affect any major Christian doctrine! Where significant portions have been found missing or different in early manuscripts, they have been corrected or removed (e.g. 1 John 5:7-8; Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11). And where there are places we are uncertain about the correct reading, we have the variant readings (like the Qu’ran; cf. Romans 5:1 where we have ‘exomen’ “we have” or ‘exwmen’ “let us have”). This means that the reading has not been lost, but we must choose between the possibilities, none of which allow us to throw away what the Bible says and adopt Islam. Textual criticism simply cannot be used honestly in Islam’s favor by anyone who has studied it. It is deceitful to claim otherwise.
I would highly recommend reading some of Bruce Metzger’s work on the subject (Ehrman studied and worked under him). Metzger is more honest and thorough than Ehrman by far when it comes to what we know about the manuscripts and the originals.
So this puts us back at square one. Islam cannot stand simply on its own assertions. Islam is based on two premises:
1) Christianity and Judaism corrupted the message of the prophets.
2) Muhammad taught the same message as those prophets before him.
Premise 2 hinges on the truth of premise 1. Islam must first demonstrate that Christianity AND Judaism are somehow wrong (premise 1), before its own claims can be examined (premise 2). It is not enough to say that Jews and Christians are wrong. For our purposes, since we both agree that Jesus was a prophet, we can set Judaism aside and primarily deal with Christianity as it is; a Messianic extension of Judaism (if Judaism is right, and Jesus wasn’t a prophet, then Islam is necessarily false). You must prove that Christians are wrong from the pages of the Bible, which cannot be done. It is also insufficient to show that SOME group of Christians are wrong in practice (e.g. venerating Mary). What you must demonstrate is that the New Testament somehow leads to the doctrine and theology of Islam, which is also impossible.
In short, you must disprove the deity of Christ from the NT itself. If you show that Jesus is not God, then neither was he the Messiah (Christ) or a prophet. If he did not die, then he did not fulfill the Scriptures, and no part of Christianity was ever correct. It was a delusion from the start, which Islam cannot logically maintain. You cannot hold Jesus as a prophet and he not be divine. It is impossible. The two ideas are incompatible with what the NT says.
Can you show me this from the NT?