Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature (view source)

Revision as of 07:50, 6 June 2021

3,543 bytes added ,  6 June 2021
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
(35 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=1|Content=4|Language=2|References=3}}
{{QualityScore|Lead=3|Structure=4|Content=4|Language=4|References=3}}




The similarities between the Qur'an and previous scriptures have been noted since the advent of Islam. However, the Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic counterparts do not always match. A claim found in the Qur'an and other Islamic literature is that the Jews and Christians deliberately changed their scriptures to obscure the truth of the Qur'an. There is no documentary evidence in the textual traditions of those religions to support this claim, and as it would require a conspiracy of people across centuries and empires, speaking different languages and holding radically different beliefs, as such the claim is generally not taken seriously by modern scholars.  
The similarities between the Qur'an and previous scriptures have been noted since the advent of Islam. The Judeo-Christian tales and their Qur'anic doppelgangers, however, rarely match perfectly. A claim found in the Qur'an and other Islamic literature is that the Jews and Christians deliberately changed their scriptures to obscure the truth of the Qur'an. There is no documentary evidence in the textual traditions of those religions to support this claim, and as it would require a conspiracy of people across centuries and empires, speaking different languages and holding radically different beliefs, as such the claim is generally not taken seriously by modern scholars.  


The more accepted theory is that the Qur'an burrows stories from the ancient milieu in which it arose--Christianity and Judaism of the late antique period in the near or middle east. Contrary to the Islamic tradition, most scholars today agree that the Qur'an must have been composed in an environment in which Christian and Jewish stories were very familiar, both to the person(people) writing the Qur'an and to the audience. As such borrowings are to be expected, and in a semi-literate culture before the advent of the printing press different versions of the same story as well as mistakes in transmission from one medium to the other are also to be expected.  
The more accepted theory is that the Qur'an borrows stories from the ancient milieu in which it arose--Christianity and Judaism of the late antique period in the near or middle east. Contrary to the Islamic tradition, most scholars today agree that the Qur'an must have been composed in an environment in which Christian and Jewish stories were very familiar, both to the person(people) writing the Qur'an and to the audience. As such borrowings are to be expected, and in a semi-literate culture before the advent of the printing press different versions of the same story as well as mistakes in transmission from one medium to the other are also to be expected.  


In such an environment it is also unsurprising that many of the stories one finds in the Qur'an do not comes from the canonical books of the Christian or Jewish bibles, but often from secondary literature which played a huge role in the spiritual life of believers in that time.  
In such an environment it is also unsurprising that many of the stories one finds in the Qur'an do not comes from the canonical books of the Christian or Jewish bibles, but often from secondary literature which played a huge role in the spiritual life of believers in that time.  


===Charges of Borrowing from Within the Tradition===
==Charges of Borrowing from Within the Tradition==
   
   
The Qur'an records that doubts claim of its verses that they are "tales of the ancients." According to the Islamic tradition itself these verses are all found in the Meccan Qur'an, despite the fact that some of these verses have been inserted into Medinan suras, such as Sura al-Anfal 8. The tradition indicates that the unbelievers, who spoke of the fairy-tales of the ancients in the Qur'an, were of the people of Mecca. None adopted this opinion in Medina after the migration.<ref>[http://www.light-of-life.com/eng/answer/a4990et2.htm#p120 Ignorance and illiteracy] - A Struggle that Led to Conversion</ref>
The Qur'an records that doubts claim of its verses that they are "tales of the ancients." According to the Islamic tradition itself these verses are all found in the Meccan Qur'an, despite the fact that some of these verses have been inserted into Medinan suras, such as Sura al-Anfal 8. The tradition indicates that the unbelievers, who spoke of the fairy-tales of the ancients in the Qur'an, were of the people of Mecca. None adopted this opinion in Medina after the migration.<ref>[http://www.light-of-life.com/eng/answer/a4990et2.htm#p120 Ignorance and illiteracy] - A Struggle that Led to Conversion</ref>
Line 32: Line 32:
{{Quote| {{Quran|83|13}}| When Our verses are recited to him, he says: 'Fictitious tales of the ancients!'}}  
{{Quote| {{Quran|83|13}}| When Our verses are recited to him, he says: 'Fictitious tales of the ancients!'}}  


The evidence that at least some of these ''tales of the ancients'' were Judeo-Christian tales and not that of the fanciful Quranic “Arabic/Arabized” fairy-tales of Jinns, Houris and the like is the context, particularly those relating to the Resurrection, and the charge that another nation had supplied these tales (meaning the Jews and possibly also Sabeans and Christians).  
The evidence that at least some of these ''tales of the ancients'' were Judeo-Christian tales and not that of the fanciful Quranic “Arabic/Arabized” fairy-tales of Jinns, Houris and the like is the context of these verses, particularly those relating to the Resurrection, and the charge that another nation had supplied these tales (meaning the Jews and possibly also Sabeans and Christians--nations such as the Byzantine Empire at the time were associated with certain religions such as Chalcedonian Christianity).  


There is a sahih hadith that seems to indicate that the Arabs had heard the Judeo-Christian tales from the Jews. The implication of the hadith is that these tales were common-place from the phrase, ‘used to explain…’, so much so as to warrant Muhammad’s warning to the Muslims to both disbelieve and believe the Jews.  
There is a sahih hadith that seems to indicate that the Arabs had heard the Judeo-Christian tales from the Jews. The implication of the hadith is that these tales were common-place from the phrase, ‘used to explain…’, so much so as to warrant Muhammad’s warning to the Muslims to both disbelieve and believe the Jews.  
Line 44: Line 44:
Note how Aisha noticed Muhammad vigorously adopting the Jewish belief of ‘punishment in the grave’ only ''after'' she had told him the tale. Before she told him she never saw this belief in him.
Note how Aisha noticed Muhammad vigorously adopting the Jewish belief of ‘punishment in the grave’ only ''after'' she had told him the tale. Before she told him she never saw this belief in him.


==Possible Sources of the Judeao-Christian Fables==
=Sources of Individual Qur'anic Narratives=


There is strong evidence from the sahih hadiths that Muhammad learned at least some of them from Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail. These hadiths show that Zaid told the then still-pagan Muhammad about Allah and the religion of Abraham. Also of note is how Zaid claimed before the Ka'aba that he was the only one of the Quraysh who followed the religion of Abraham which he learned from a Jew and a Christian:  
There is strong evidence from the sahih hadiths that Muhammad learned at least some of them from Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail. These hadiths show that Zaid told the then still-pagan Muhammad about Allah and the religion of Abraham. Also of note is how Zaid claimed before the Ka'aba that he was the only one of the Quraysh who followed the religion of Abraham which he learned from a Jew and a Christian:  
Line 61: Line 61:
Thus, it can be seen that there was ample opportunity for Muhammad to learn from Zaid long before the first revelation in 610 AD. Some accounts state Muhammad first went to Mt Hira when he was around 35, i.e. around 605 AD. It is possible that Muhammad first visited Mt Hira when he was 33, when the “first unseen secrets” revealed themselves to him. Zaid died around 607 AD. The cave in Mt Hira is very small, measuring 4 yards long and 1.75 yard wide – there seems no way Zaid and Muhammad could have avoided each other if this cave is truly where they went. Clearly they knew each other; the sahih hadiths make that apparent, and we also know that Muhammad spent weeks and months in that cave which Zaid was reputed to have lived.  
Thus, it can be seen that there was ample opportunity for Muhammad to learn from Zaid long before the first revelation in 610 AD. Some accounts state Muhammad first went to Mt Hira when he was around 35, i.e. around 605 AD. It is possible that Muhammad first visited Mt Hira when he was 33, when the “first unseen secrets” revealed themselves to him. Zaid died around 607 AD. The cave in Mt Hira is very small, measuring 4 yards long and 1.75 yard wide – there seems no way Zaid and Muhammad could have avoided each other if this cave is truly where they went. Clearly they knew each other; the sahih hadiths make that apparent, and we also know that Muhammad spent weeks and months in that cave which Zaid was reputed to have lived.  


====Zaid’s religious principles  adopted by Muhammad====  
===Zaid’s religious principles  adopted by Muhammad===


#the prohibition of killing infant daughters by burying them alive, according to the cruel custom of the Arabs of the time.
#the prohibition of killing infant daughters by burying them alive, according to the cruel custom of the Arabs of the time.
Line 123: Line 123:
'''''1. There were no Arabic copies of the Judeo-Christian scriptures available to Muhammad.'''''
'''''1. There were no Arabic copies of the Judeo-Christian scriptures available to Muhammad.'''''


This is a straw-man argument as the Quran itself claims the charges were that Muhammad heard what was recited to him {{Quran|25|4-6}} or that he learned them from a foreigner {{Quran|16|103-104}}. Thus, the existence or otherwise of Arabic translations in Muhammad’s time is an irrelevancy. Moreover, epigraphic and historical evidence from the the time points to an Arabia which was awash in Greek and Syriac literature, and in which knowledge of both the Syriac and Greek alphabets were widespread, and both of these were used to write Arabic along with the Hismaetic and Safaitic scripts <ref>Al-Jallad. 2020. The Linguistic Landscape of pre-Islamic Arabia pages 117-124 </ref>.   
This argument ignores the Qur'an itself. which claims the charges were that Muhammad heard what was recited to him {{Quran|25|4-6}} or that he learned them from a foreigner {{Quran|16|103-104}}. Thus, the existence or otherwise of Arabic translations in Muhammad’s time is an irrelevancy. Moreover, epigraphic and historical evidence from the the time points to an Arabia which was awash in Greek and Syriac literature, and in which knowledge of both the Syriac and Greek alphabets were widespread, and both of these were used to write Arabic along with the Hismaetic and Safaitic scripts <ref>Al-Jallad. 2020. The Linguistic Landscape of pre-Islamic Arabia pages 117-124 </ref>.   


'''''2. There was no center of Judaism and/or Christianity in Mecca or the Hijaz in Muhammad’s time.'''''  
'''''2. There was no center of Judaism and/or Christianity in Mecca or the Hijaz in Muhammad’s time.'''''  
Line 153: Line 153:
'''''5. The Qur'an contains stories absent in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, thus the charge of borrowing is erroneous.'''''  
'''''5. The Qur'an contains stories absent in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, thus the charge of borrowing is erroneous.'''''  


The presence of such extra-biblical stories doesn't really say much about the material which does have parallels with earlier Judeao-Christian history.  
The presence of such extra-biblical stories doesn't really say much about the material which does have parallels with earlier Judeao-Christian history.


===Corruption of the Previous Scriptures===
===Corruption of the Previous Scriptures===
Line 176: Line 176:
As such, the parallelism in the Qur'an seems to stem not from divine revelation, but from mundane religious contact.
As such, the parallelism in the Qur'an seems to stem not from divine revelation, but from mundane religious contact.


===Talking Baby Jesus===
==Talking Baby Jesus==
 
The story of the baby Jesus speaking found in Suras 19:29-31 and 3:46 parallels that in the apocryphal works:  
The story of the baby Jesus speaking found in Suras 19:29-31 and 3:46 parallels that in the apocryphal works:  
‏{{Quote|{{Quran|19|29-31}}|But she pointed to him. They said: How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle? He said: I am indeed a servant of Allah. He has given me the Book and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and poor-rate so long as I live:}}
‏{{Quote|{{Quran|19|29-31}}|But she pointed to him. They said: How should we speak to one who is a child in the cradle? He said: I am indeed a servant of Allah. He has given me the Book and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I may be, and He has enjoined on me prayer and poor-rate so long as I live:}}


Line 186: Line 184:
The following is the relevant excerpt taken from the Arabic Infancy Gospel:  
The following is the relevant excerpt taken from the Arabic Infancy Gospel:  


{{Quote|[http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/gospels/infarab.htm The Arabic Gospel of The Infancy of The Saviour]|1. “We find what follows in the book of Joseph the high priest, who lived in the time of Christ. Some say that he is Caiaphas. He has said that Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when He was lying in His cradle said to Mary His mother: I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.”}}
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20040927133541/http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/gospels/infarab.htm The Arabic Gospel of The Infancy of The Saviour]|1. “We find what follows in the book of Joseph the high priest, who lived in the time of Christ. Some say that he is Caiaphas. He has said that Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when He was lying in His cradle said to Mary His mother: I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.”}}


The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  
The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  
Line 196: Line 194:
The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sirah as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.
The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sirah as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.


===Sanhedrin 37A===
==Sanhedrin 37A==


The Qur'an parallels a passage in the Talmud, specifically a rabbinical commentary in the Book of Sanhedrin.
The Qur'an parallels a passage in the Talmud, specifically a rabbinical commentary in the Book of Sanhedrin.
Line 210: Line 208:
'''The salient points are:'''  
'''The salient points are:'''  


*<p>a. The Qur'an itself admits to the borrowing, with the phrase, 'We <u>decreed</u> (katabnā) for the Children of Israel…’</p><p>This word katabnā كَتَبْنَا is from the same Arabic root as kitāb, meaning book, as in 'People of the Book', and the verb kataba literally means he wrote. It is used a few verses later (wakatabnā) in {{Quran|5|45}} regarding some things that are certainly in the written Torah, and in another example {{Quran|7|145}} it is used for Allah writing on the stone tablets. Lane's Lexicon includes 'prescribed', 'ordained' among its definitions for this verb <ref>katabā [http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume7/00000118.pdf Lane's Lexicon book 1 page 2590]</ref>, though it is likely that this usage arose from royal decrees and legal rulings being written down. In some other verses exactly the same word is translated 'We have written'. It is quite obvious that the author believed that this 'decree' was in the law book of the Jews, the written Torah.</p>
*<p>a. The Qur'an itself admits to Judeao-Christian origin  of this story with the phrase, 'We <u>decreed</u> (katabnā) for the Children of Israel…’</p><p>This word katabnā كَتَبْنَا is from the same Arabic root as kitāb, meaning book, as in 'People of the Book', and the verb kataba literally means he wrote. It is used a few verses later (wakatabnā) in {{Quran|5|45}} regarding some things that are certainly in the written Torah, and in another example {{Quran|7|145}} it is used for Allah writing on the stone tablets. Lane's Lexicon includes 'prescribed', 'ordained' among its definitions for this verb <ref>katabā [http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume7/00000118.pdf Lane's Lexicon book 1 page 2590]</ref>, though it is likely that this usage arose from royal decrees and legal rulings being written down. In some other verses exactly the same word is translated 'We have written'. It is quite obvious that the author believed that this 'decree' was in the law book of the Jews, the written Torah.</p>


*b. The Sanhedrin parallel is not in the Torah as it is merely a rabbinical commentary on Cain’s murder of Abel, derived from the use of the plural, "bloods", in Genesis 4:10. It is a Mishnayot – a teaching of a Jewish sage, and not from the biblical tradition as such but rather an extension of it.
*b. The Sanhedrin parallel is not in the Torah as it is merely a rabbinical commentary on Cain’s murder of Abel, derived from the use of the plural, "bloods", in Genesis 4:10. It is a Mishnayot – a teaching of a Jewish sage, and not from the biblical tradition as such but rather an extension of it.
Line 220: Line 218:
Some Muslims (e.g. [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBCandA.html Dr Saifullah]) claim that the parallelism is inexact, as the Sanhedrin 37a should be limited to ‘whoever destroys a single soul <u>of Israel</u>’. They claim that since the Qur'an lacks this reference to the 'single soul of Israel' but instead, generalizes the injunction to any soul, then the charge of parallelism has failed.
Some Muslims (e.g. [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBCandA.html Dr Saifullah]) claim that the parallelism is inexact, as the Sanhedrin 37a should be limited to ‘whoever destroys a single soul <u>of Israel</u>’. They claim that since the Qur'an lacks this reference to the 'single soul of Israel' but instead, generalizes the injunction to any soul, then the charge of parallelism has failed.


'''Dr Saifullah has made a number of errors here:'''  
'''Problems with this argument'''  


#Dr Saifullah's argument that the two stories are not exact copies doesn't hold water, since stories usually change in transmission.
#Dr Saifullah's argument that the two stories are not exact copies doesn't hold water, since stories usually change in transmission.
Line 230: Line 228:
Thus the use of the word "katabna" / decreed / ordain / prescribe / write something was used for a commentary written by a Jewish Rabbi. The conclusion seems to be that the Qur'an sees this tradition as being on the same level as the Bible, or else is not aware that it does not in fact stem from the Bible.
Thus the use of the word "katabna" / decreed / ordain / prescribe / write something was used for a commentary written by a Jewish Rabbi. The conclusion seems to be that the Qur'an sees this tradition as being on the same level as the Bible, or else is not aware that it does not in fact stem from the Bible.


===The Raven and the Burial of Abel===
==The Raven and the Burial of Abel==


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===
Line 280: Line 278:
{{Quote||“They (i.e. Saifullah and co) also omitted a point that was made in another response to "Islamic Awareness" - that there are at least two ancient manuscripts of the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer. The ancient Vienna manuscript, which has only in recent years been translated into English, shows every evidence of being pre-Islamic.”<ref>Andrew Vargo - [http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/cain-abel2.htm Responses to Islamic Awareness] - Answering Islam</ref>}}
{{Quote||“They (i.e. Saifullah and co) also omitted a point that was made in another response to "Islamic Awareness" - that there are at least two ancient manuscripts of the Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer. The ancient Vienna manuscript, which has only in recent years been translated into English, shows every evidence of being pre-Islamic.”<ref>Andrew Vargo - [http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/cain-abel2.htm Responses to Islamic Awareness] - Answering Islam</ref>}}


===Midrash Tanhuma===
==Midrash Tanhuma==
   
   
The general scholastic view is that Midrash Tanhuma is also known as '''Tanhuma Yelamdenu''', although some scholars believe they are different manuscripts.  
The general scholastic view is that Midrash Tanhuma is also known as '''Tanhuma Yelamdenu''', although some scholars believe they are different manuscripts.  
Line 310: Line 308:
Of this kind of Midrashim, we have several versions: (1) An older Midrash which was known to the early scholars of Italy and France by the name Yelamdénu, but which is now practically lost except for a few fragments; (2) the printed Tanhuma; (3) the manuscript Tanhuma which was edited and published in 1883 by the late Solomon Buber. All three belong to one Midrashic cycle, and the Yelamdénu seems to have been the earliest, as collections of such homilies where the Halakah was joined to the Agada, inasmuch as the preacher was a teacher of both, existed in large numbers. It is these collections which served as the background and source books for the late Midrashim, the compilers of which drew upon them in abundance. For this reason, we find the homilies beginning with the formula, "May our master teach us," scattered through all Midrashic cycles such as the Tanhuma, Pesiktu (Sec. 84) and in the books of the Rabba (Sec. 82). The date of the Yelamdénu collection is, therefore, an early one and is probably contemporaneous with the Genesis Rabba, about the beginning of the sixth century C.E., and the place of origin, Palestine.”}}It is likely that the raven burial story in the Midrash Tanhuma (or the Tanhuma Yelamdenu) pre-date the advent of Islam. Buber’s version of the Midrash Tanhuma, although compiled in the mid-eighth century is generally believed to have sourced material from the fourth-century or earlier, while the Tanhuma Yelamdenu dates to the beginning of the sixth century. Thus the pre-Islamic Jewish folklore of the raven burial story is paralleled in the Qur'an and is likely its source.
Of this kind of Midrashim, we have several versions: (1) An older Midrash which was known to the early scholars of Italy and France by the name Yelamdénu, but which is now practically lost except for a few fragments; (2) the printed Tanhuma; (3) the manuscript Tanhuma which was edited and published in 1883 by the late Solomon Buber. All three belong to one Midrashic cycle, and the Yelamdénu seems to have been the earliest, as collections of such homilies where the Halakah was joined to the Agada, inasmuch as the preacher was a teacher of both, existed in large numbers. It is these collections which served as the background and source books for the late Midrashim, the compilers of which drew upon them in abundance. For this reason, we find the homilies beginning with the formula, "May our master teach us," scattered through all Midrashic cycles such as the Tanhuma, Pesiktu (Sec. 84) and in the books of the Rabba (Sec. 82). The date of the Yelamdénu collection is, therefore, an early one and is probably contemporaneous with the Genesis Rabba, about the beginning of the sixth century C.E., and the place of origin, Palestine.”}}It is likely that the raven burial story in the Midrash Tanhuma (or the Tanhuma Yelamdenu) pre-date the advent of Islam. Buber’s version of the Midrash Tanhuma, although compiled in the mid-eighth century is generally believed to have sourced material from the fourth-century or earlier, while the Tanhuma Yelamdenu dates to the beginning of the sixth century. Thus the pre-Islamic Jewish folklore of the raven burial story is paralleled in the Qur'an and is likely its source.


===The Qur'anic Trinity===
==The Qur'anic Trinity==


===God, Jesus and Mary: The Trinity?===
===God, Jesus and Mary: The Trinity?===
Line 328: Line 326:
'''1 - The heretical Christian sect of the Collyridians may have existed in Muhammad’s time and the Quran was specifically addressing their understanding of the Trinity.'''
'''1 - The heretical Christian sect of the Collyridians may have existed in Muhammad’s time and the Quran was specifically addressing their understanding of the Trinity.'''


The Collyridians are known chiefly through the work of 4th-century Christian arch-heresy hunter and defender of Christian/Nicean orthodoxy Epiphanius of Salamis (a saint in both the Nicean Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church). This is what he has to say about them:  
The Collyridians are known chiefly through the work of 4th-century Christian arch-heresy hunter and defender of Christian orthodoxy Epiphanius of Salamis (a saint in both the Nicaean Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church). This is what he has to say about them:  


{{Quote||1,1 < Another > sect has come to public notice after this, and I have already mentioned a few things about it in the Sect preceding, in the letter about Mary which I wrote to Arabia. (2) This one, again, was also brought to Arabia from Thrace and upper Scythia, and word of it has reached me; it too is ridiculous and, in the opinion of the wise, wholly absurd. ( }}  
{{Quote|{{citation|title=(Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies, 79) Frank Williams - The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III|ISBN=978-90-04-23312-6 (e-book)|year=2013|publisher=Brill|author1=Epiphanius of Salamis (d. 320)|editor=Frank Williams|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Panarion_of_Epiphanius_of_Salamis/tKtzRNP0Z70C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=The+Panarion+of+Epiphanius+of+Salamis+Books+II+and+III.+De+Fide&printsec=frontcover|page=637-645}}|1,1 < Another > sect has come to public notice after this, and I have already mentioned a few things about it in the Sect preceding, in the letter about Mary which I wrote to Arabia. (2) This one, again, was also brought to Arabia from Thrace and upper Scythia, and word of it has reached me; it too is ridiculous and, in the opinion of the wise, wholly absurd...For as, long ago, those who, from an insolent attitude towards Mary, have seen fit to suspect these things were sowing damaging suspicions in people’s minds, so these persons who lean in the other direction are guilty of doing the worst sort of harm. In them too the maxim of certain pagan philosophers, “Extremes are equal,” will be exemplified. (5) For the harm done by both of these sects is equal, since one belittles the holy Virgin while the other, in its turn, glorifies her to excess. For certain women decorate a barber’s chair or a square seat, spread a cloth on it, set out bread and offer it in Mary’s name on a certain day of the year, and all partake of the bread–as I partially discussed in my same letter to Arabia. Now, however, I shall speak plainly of it and, with prayer to God, give the best refutations of it that I can, so as to grub out the roots of this idolatrous sect and with God’s help, be able to cure certain people of this madness...As Maker and Master of the thing [to be made] he formed himself from a virgin as though from earth—God come from heaven, the Word who had assumed flesh from a holy Virgin. But certainly not from a virgin who is worshiped, or to make her God, or to have us make offerings in her name, or, again, to make women priestesses after so many generations. (3) It was not God’s pleasure that this be done with Salome, or with Mary herself. He did not permit her to administer baptism or bless disciples, or tell her to rule on earth, but only to be a sacred shrine and be deemed worthy of his kingdom. (4) He did not order the woman called the mother of Rufus to advance < to* > this rank22 or the women who followed Christ from Galilee, or Martha the sister of Lazarus and [her sister] Mary, or any of the holy women who were privileged to be saved by his advent < and > who assisted him with their own possessions—or the woman of Canaan, or the woman who was healed of the issue of blood, or any woman on earth.}}  


Some claim that the Collyridians were in existence from the fourth century and flourished during the fifth century, although since they have fallen out of the pages of history, nobody knows for sure how long they existed as a sect. Edward Gibbon in 'the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' [Chapter 50] states that they were still in existence in the seventh century (without providing any corroborating evidence). One explanation is that Gibbon's simply took the clear parallelism of verse 5:116 with Collyridianism to mean they were present during Muhammad’s day.  
According to Epiphanius, the Collyridians seem to merge pagan goddess-worship with Christian Mariolatry. They had female priests and, interestingly for purposes of this study, seem to have been found in Arabia. It's important to remember that this is one of dozens of heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, and this is the only mention extant of them. Epiphanius doesn't give any indication of how many people actually followed this heresy, and it's not possible to know how long after his time they lasted exactly. It's also not possible for us to know how accurately this section actually describes their beliefs, since we have no extant writings from them; it is possible that Epiphanius is exaggerating here and they did not actually worship Mary as a god.  
 
Edward Gibbon in 'the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' [Chapter 50] states that they were still in existence in the seventh century (without providing any corroborating evidence). One explanation is that Gibbon's simply took the clear parallelism of verse 5:116 with Collyridianism to mean they were present during Muhammad’s day.  


Thus, there is clear parallelism between the Qur'an’s version of the Trinity and the Collyridian belief.  
Thus, there is clear parallelism between the Qur'an’s version of the Trinity and the Collyridian belief.  


As previously stated, Muslims claim that this verse was alluding to the belief of some Christians at the time of Muhammad. This is clearly false, as it specifically states that the belief occurred during the time of Jesus. Remember, Allah asked Jesus whether he had told the people to worship him and Mary besides Allah. Since the Collyridians are post-Jesus (probably originating in the late fourth century, as reported by Epiphanius) the parallelism with the Collyridians is anachronistic. Hence, the Qur'an could not have been alluding to the Collyridians at all, unless of course, Jesus was a Collyridian.  
As previously stated, Muslim apologists often claim that this verse was alluding to the belief of some Christians at the time of Muhammad. This is not how the Qur'an presents the material, though; the Qur'an here seems to state that the belief was around during Jesus' own time and he personally refuted it. Since the Collyridians are post-Jesus (probably originating in the late fourth century, as reported by Epiphanius) the parallelism with the Collyridians is anachronistic, as with many of the polemics put by the Qur'an into the mouths of biblical prophets.  


What was the purpose of verse 5:116? The most plausible explanation is Muhammad’s need to explain to his followers the Christian concept of the Trinity in relation to the strict monotheism of Islam. As he claimed Jesus a prophet of Islam, and Allah being the same god to the Christians as the Muslims, and thus Christianity as a predecessor religion to Islam, this perceived inconsistency would have required explanation. So this verse has Jesus denying the concept of the Trinity – implying that the Christians had corrupted his teaching. In doing so, Muhammad had unwittingly exposed his lack of understanding of what the Trinity means. He probably thought Jesus had taught this doctrine, as he thought the Trinity comprised of God, Jesus and Mary.  
As to the purpose of verse 5:116, the most plausible explanation is clearly that it was a polemic against real or imagined Christian belief in the trinity. Whether or not the Collyridians still existed at Muhammad's time or before is not knowable from the extant evidence, but either by mistak or over-generalization the Qur'an does seem to apply this polemic to all Christians as a whole, whereas at most this belief was marginal within Chrisitanity.


'''2 - Some Muslims such as Dr Saifullah of Islamic-awareness claim that it is unreasonable to point out the clear parallelism with Collyridianism as something erroneous as early Christians did not believe in the Trinity.'''
'''2 - Some Muslims such as Dr Saifullah of Islamic-awareness claim that it is unreasonable to point out the clear parallelism with Collyridianism as something erroneous as early Christians did not believe in the Trinity.'''
Line 344: Line 344:
{{Quote||“…there is no point calling the modern day Trinitarian Christianity as 'true' Christianity and all others as 'false' since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late. The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures. Moreover the Jesus(P) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it. Would then the modern day 'true' Christianity brand them as heretics?”<ref>Mustafa Ahmed & M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/marytrin.html Mary(P) & Tri-unity] Islamic Awareness</ref>}}  
{{Quote||“…there is no point calling the modern day Trinitarian Christianity as 'true' Christianity and all others as 'false' since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late. The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures. Moreover the Jesus(P) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it. Would then the modern day 'true' Christianity brand them as heretics?”<ref>Mustafa Ahmed & M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/marytrin.html Mary(P) & Tri-unity] Islamic Awareness</ref>}}  


This is a pseudo-defense. The issue is not if modern Christians view the Collyridians as heretics, but whether the Quranic version of the Trinity has any basis. After all, Allah should know what the Trinity is. But apparently he thought the Collyridian version of the Trinity was the prevailing one during the time of Jesus Christ.  
While Dr Saifullah is on good grounds when he remarks that delineating "true" Trinitarian Christianity from "false" Trinitarian Christianity is not the place of the scholar, it must be remarked that in presenting this version of the Trinity the Qur'an is presenting a highly inaccurate view of the beliefs of Christians and at the very least should be called "inaccurate" for this claim. Moreover, the interesting point to the scholar is the possibility that (A) the author of this verse was for some reason very familiar with the Collyridian heresy which otherwise escaped remark for 3 centuries,  to the point of assuming that all Christian follow it, or (B) that the author just has a skewed and inaccurate view of Christian theology, which is noteworthy in and of itself.


'''3 - Modern Christians also believe Mary as the Mother of God and prayers are sent to her.'''
'''3 - Modern Christians also believe Mary as the Mother of God and prayers are sent to her.'''


This is a subtle point and one that Muslims fail to address: Neither in the New Testament nor the Qur'an does Jesus claim Mary to be a co-divinity with God. In fact, the Qur'an is specific in Jesus’ denial of this charge. So where does this charge against Jesus come from? Orthodox Christians such as the Catholics do venerate Mary as a saint and the Mother of Jesus, but are very clear in not ascribing divinity to her.  
Neither in the New Testament nor the Qur'an does Jesus claim Mary to be a co-divinity with God. Meanwhile, the Qur'an is specific in Jesus’ denial of this charge. Orthodox Christians such as the Catholics do venerate Mary as a saint and the Mother of Jesus, but are very clear in not ascribing divinity to her.  


Praying to saints is an Orthodox/Catholic practice. It does not mean that the object of prayer is divine. Catholics do not solely pray to Mary, but to all manners of saints who have passed-away without ascribing divine status on any of them. Thus, it is nonsense to suggest that prayers to Mary absolves the Qur'an from its error about her divinity.
Praying to saints is an Orthodox/Catholic practice. It does not mean that the object of prayer is divine. Catholics do not solely pray to Mary, but to all manners of saints who have passed-away without ascribing divine status on any of them. Thus, it is nonsense to suggest that prayers to Mary absolves the Qur'an from its error about her divinity.
Line 358: Line 358:
Considering all that has been discussed, it is reasonable to suggest that Muhammad heard of the Collyridian version of the Trinity and assumed that it were the standard Christian belief taught by Jesus himself. It probably didn’t occur to him that the Trinity was a doctrinal development of the early church or that the worship of Mary as a divinity long post-dated Jesus himself.
Considering all that has been discussed, it is reasonable to suggest that Muhammad heard of the Collyridian version of the Trinity and assumed that it were the standard Christian belief taught by Jesus himself. It probably didn’t occur to him that the Trinity was a doctrinal development of the early church or that the worship of Mary as a divinity long post-dated Jesus himself.


===Jesus Christ and the Clay Birds===
==Jesus Christ and the Clay Birds==


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===
Line 384: Line 384:
{{Quote|[http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/infancy2.htm The Second Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ: Chapter 1]|1. “I, Thomas, an Israelite, judged it necessary to make known to our brethren among the Gentiles, the actions and miracles of Christ in his childhood, which our Lord and God Jesus Christ wrought after his birth in Bethlehem in our country, at which I myself was astonished; the beginning of which was as follows. 2. When the child Jesus was five years of age and there had been a shower of rain that was now over, Jesus was playing with other Hebrew boys by a running stream, and the waters ran over the banks and stood in little lakes; 3. But the water instantly became clear and useful again; they readily obeyed him after he touched them only by his word. 4. Then he took from the bank of the stream some soft clay and formed out of it twelve sparrows; and there were other boys playing with him. 5. But a certain Jew seeing the things which he was doing, namely, his forming clay into the figures of sparrows on the Sabbath day, went presently away and told his father Joseph, 6. Behold, your boy is playing by the river side, and has taken clay and formed it into twelve sparrows, and profanes the Sabbath. 7. Then Joseph came to the place where he was, and when he saw him, called to him, and said, Why do you that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day? 8. Then Jesus clapping together the palms of his hands, called to the sparrows, and said to them: Go, fly away; and while you live remember me. 9. So the sparrows fled away, making a noise. 10. The Jews seeing this, were astonished and went away and told their chief persons what a strange miracle they had seen wrought by Jesus.”}}
{{Quote|[http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/infancy2.htm The Second Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ: Chapter 1]|1. “I, Thomas, an Israelite, judged it necessary to make known to our brethren among the Gentiles, the actions and miracles of Christ in his childhood, which our Lord and God Jesus Christ wrought after his birth in Bethlehem in our country, at which I myself was astonished; the beginning of which was as follows. 2. When the child Jesus was five years of age and there had been a shower of rain that was now over, Jesus was playing with other Hebrew boys by a running stream, and the waters ran over the banks and stood in little lakes; 3. But the water instantly became clear and useful again; they readily obeyed him after he touched them only by his word. 4. Then he took from the bank of the stream some soft clay and formed out of it twelve sparrows; and there were other boys playing with him. 5. But a certain Jew seeing the things which he was doing, namely, his forming clay into the figures of sparrows on the Sabbath day, went presently away and told his father Joseph, 6. Behold, your boy is playing by the river side, and has taken clay and formed it into twelve sparrows, and profanes the Sabbath. 7. Then Joseph came to the place where he was, and when he saw him, called to him, and said, Why do you that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day? 8. Then Jesus clapping together the palms of his hands, called to the sparrows, and said to them: Go, fly away; and while you live remember me. 9. So the sparrows fled away, making a noise. 10. The Jews seeing this, were astonished and went away and told their chief persons what a strange miracle they had seen wrought by Jesus.”}}


===Muslim Objection===
===Muslim Apologetics===


This parallelism has never been explained by Muslims except to use it to perversely claim that the Bible is corrupted. They argue that the original Bible contained the apocryphal story of Jesus making and animating clay birds, and that the Qur'an was merely correcting a wrongful exclusion of these apocrypha from the canon.<ref>M S M Saifullah & Hesham Azmy - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html Is The Bible In Our Hands The Same As During The Time Of Muhammad(P)?] Islamic Awareness</ref>
This parallelism has never been explained by Muslim apologists except to use it to perversely claim that the Bible is corrupted. They argue that the original Bible contained the apocryphal story of Jesus making and animating clay birds, and that the Qur'an was merely correcting a wrongful exclusion of these apocrypha from the canon.<ref>M S M Saifullah & Hesham Azmy - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html Is The Bible In Our Hands The Same As During The Time Of Muhammad(P)?] Islamic Awareness</ref>


This is erroneous as the sira tells how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness have kindly provided the following evidence [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here].
This is erroneous as the sirah itself tells how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness write more on this [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here].


{{Quote|Abu Muhammad `Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Ma`afiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), p 181-182.|“[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn `Alqama, Al-`Aqib `Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Sa`id.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three [i.e., part of Trinity] and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).  
{{Quote|Abu Muhammad `Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Ma`afiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), p 181-182.|“[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn `Alqama, Al-`Aqib `Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Sa`id.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three [i.e., part of Trinity] and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).  
Line 396: Line 396:
{{Quote|A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998, Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), p 271-272.|“The names of the fourteen principal men among the sixty riders were: `Abdul-Masih the `Aqib, al-Ayham the Sayyid; Abu Haritha b. `Alqama brother of B. Bakr b. Wa`il; Aus; al-Harith; Zayd; Qays; Yazid; Nubayh; Khuwaylid; `Amr; Khalid; `Abdullah; Johannes; of these the first three named above spoke to the Apostle. They were Christians according to the Byzantine rite, though they differed among themselves in some points, saying He is God; and He is the son of God; and He is the third person of the Trinity, which is the doctrine of Christianity. They argue that he is God because he used to raise the dead, and heal the sick, and declare the unseen; and make clay birds and then breathe into them so that they flew away; and all this was by the command of God Almighty, 'We will make him a sign to men.' They argue that he is the son of God in that they say he had no known father; and he spoke in the cradle and this is something that no child of Adam has ever done. They argue that he is the third of the three in that God says: We have done, We have commanded, We have created and We have decreed, and they say, If He were one he would have said I have done, I have created, and soon, but He is He and Jesus and Mary. Concerning all these assertions the Qur'an came down.” }}  
{{Quote|A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998, Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), p 271-272.|“The names of the fourteen principal men among the sixty riders were: `Abdul-Masih the `Aqib, al-Ayham the Sayyid; Abu Haritha b. `Alqama brother of B. Bakr b. Wa`il; Aus; al-Harith; Zayd; Qays; Yazid; Nubayh; Khuwaylid; `Amr; Khalid; `Abdullah; Johannes; of these the first three named above spoke to the Apostle. They were Christians according to the Byzantine rite, though they differed among themselves in some points, saying He is God; and He is the son of God; and He is the third person of the Trinity, which is the doctrine of Christianity. They argue that he is God because he used to raise the dead, and heal the sick, and declare the unseen; and make clay birds and then breathe into them so that they flew away; and all this was by the command of God Almighty, 'We will make him a sign to men.' They argue that he is the son of God in that they say he had no known father; and he spoke in the cradle and this is something that no child of Adam has ever done. They argue that he is the third of the three in that God says: We have done, We have commanded, We have created and We have decreed, and they say, If He were one he would have said I have done, I have created, and soon, but He is He and Jesus and Mary. Concerning all these assertions the Qur'an came down.” }}  
   
   
The parallelism between the Qur'an’s ‘Jesus animating clay birds’ verses and the apocryphal infancy gospels is strong, suggesting that Allah was not the author of the Qur'an, nor is he the God of the Christians. There are various reasons why these apocryphal gospels are not included in the canon; the First Gospel of the Infancy is a comparatively late work while the Second Gospel of the Infancy (actually a fragment of the Gospel of Thomas) is a famous forgery. Both these apocrypha contain verses that contradict the canonical Gospels.  
The parallelism between the Qur'an’s ‘Jesus animating clay birds’ verses and the apocryphal infancy gospels is strong, suggesting a very mundane and earthly source of the Qur'an's revelation here. As to the reliability of these documents themselves, there are various reasons why these apocryphal gospels are not included in the canon; the First Gospel of the Infancy is a comparatively late work while the Second Gospel of the Infancy (actually a fragment of the Gospel of Thomas) is a famous forgery. Both these apocrypha contain verses that contradict the canonical Gospels and their late date reveals itself both in style and substance.  


According to the sira, the purported sources of the story are three Christians who spoke to Muhammad. These Christians were either heretics or they were unsure of doctrine as their errancies were then repeated in the Qur'an. These errancies include Jesus animating clay birds, the talking baby Jesus, and the Trinity comprising God, Jesus and Mary (Father, Son and Mother).
According to the sira, the purported sources of the story are three Christians who spoke to Muhammad. These Christians were either heretics or they were unsure of doctrine as their errancies were then repeated in the Qur'an. These errancies include Jesus animating clay birds, the talking baby Jesus, and the Trinity comprising God, Jesus and Mary (Father, Son and Mother).
 
==Mary and Zechariah==
 
===Mary and Zechariah===


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===


The Bible, unlike the Qur'an,  is silent on Mary’s birth, upbringing and relationship with Zachariah. The following is what we find in the Qur'an:
The Bible, unlike the Qur'an,  is silent on Mary’s birth, upbringing and relationship with Zachariah. The following is what one finds in the Qur'an:


{{Quote| {{Quran|3|35-44}}| When a woman of Amran said: My Lord, I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service), so accept (it) from me; surely Thou, only Thou, art the Hearing, the Knowing.  
{{Quote| {{Quran|3|35-44}}| When a woman of Amran said: My Lord, I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service), so accept (it) from me; surely Thou, only Thou, art the Hearing, the Knowing.  
Line 432: Line 430:
*Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.
*Mary’s husband was decided by the drawing of lots.


==Apocryphal Accounts==
===Apocryphal Accounts===


The Qur'anic verses parallel the apocryphal Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary. Both apocrypha were probably written in the middle of the second century.<ref>[http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.htm The Canon of Scripture] blueletterbible.org</ref>
The Qur'anic verses parallel the apocryphal Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary. Both apocrypha were probably written in the middle of the second century.<ref>[http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.htm The Canon of Scripture] blueletterbible.org</ref>
Line 447: Line 445:
The Decretum is said to have been issued by Pope Gelasius I (492-496 AD) in 494 AD although some scholars claim it was wrongly attributed to Gelasius I and believe it was written in the sixth century.<ref>Catholic Encyclopedia – [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03281a.htm Collections of Ancient Canons] newadvent.org</ref>
The Decretum is said to have been issued by Pope Gelasius I (492-496 AD) in 494 AD although some scholars claim it was wrongly attributed to Gelasius I and believe it was written in the sixth century.<ref>Catholic Encyclopedia – [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03281a.htm Collections of Ancient Canons] newadvent.org</ref>


===Excerpts from the Protevangelium of James:===
==Excerpts from the Protevangelium of James:==


{{Quote|[http://mb-soft.com/believe/txh/james1.htm The Protevangelium of James: Chapter VII]|1. And unto the child her months were added: and the child became two years old. And Ioacim said: Let us bring her up to the temple of the Lord that we may pay the promise which we promised; lest the Lord require it of us (lit. send unto us), and our gift become unacceptable. And Anna said: Let us wait until the third year, that the child may not long after her father or mother. And Ioacim said: Let us wait.  
{{Quote|[http://mb-soft.com/believe/txh/james1.htm The Protevangelium of James: Chapter VII]|1. And unto the child her months were added: and the child became two years old. And Ioacim said: Let us bring her up to the temple of the Lord that we may pay the promise which we promised; lest the Lord require it of us (lit. send unto us), and our gift become unacceptable. And Anna said: Let us wait until the third year, that the child may not long after her father or mother. And Ioacim said: Let us wait.  
Line 468: Line 466:




The story of Mary’s upbringing in the Temple under the supervision of the High Priest Zachariah, and the choice of Joseph as Mary’s husband by the drawing of lots, is not told in the Bible but in various apocrypha. The Qur'an’s parallelism of this story casts suspicion as to its provenance. These apocrypha are clearly later Christian writings pre-dating Islam, and the oldest, the pseudepigraphal Protevangelium, dates to about 130 CE. On stylistic and theological grounds, the Protevangelium has long been considered apocrypha. Thus, one wonders how these fictional accounts written about the early life of Mary ended up in the Qur'an.
The story of Mary’s upbringing in the Temple under the supervision of the High Priest Zachariah, and the choice of Joseph as Mary’s husband by the drawing of lots, is not told in the Bible but in various apocrypha. The Qur'an’s parallelism of this story casts suspicion as to its provenance. These apocrypha are clearly later Christian writings pre-dating Islam, and the oldest, the pseudepigraphal Protevangelium, dates to about 130 CE. On stylistic and theological grounds, the Protevangelium has long been considered apocrypha. Thus, these details of the Qur'anic story should not be taken as historical detail but rather as Christian legend which, by merit of its wide circulation, entered into the Qur'an as though it were actual, canonized Christian scripture.


 
==Jesus, Mary, and the Palm Tree==
===Jesus, Mary, and the Palm Tree===


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===
Line 522: Line 519:
Christians believe that Jesus was prophesized to be born at Bethlehem ([http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah%205:2&version=KJV Micah 5:2]). It looks like Muhammad bin Abdallah never read the Old Testament.
Christians believe that Jesus was prophesized to be born at Bethlehem ([http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah%205:2&version=KJV Micah 5:2]). It looks like Muhammad bin Abdallah never read the Old Testament.


===Iblis and his refusal to prostrate===
==Iblis and his refusal to prostrate==


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===
Line 566: Line 563:


“And when the head of the lower order saw that greatness had been given to Adam, he envied him thenceforth, refused to worship him and said to his powers: ‘Worship him not and praise him not with the angels. It befits him to worship me, not me to worship dust, formed out of a grain of dust.’ Such things the rebel had uttered and was disobedient and by his own free will became separated from God. And he was felled and he fell, he and his whole band. On the sixth day in the second hour, he fell from heaven, and they were stripped of the robes of their glory, and his name was called Satana, because he had turned away from God, and Sheda, because he had been cast down, and Daiva, because he had lost the robe of his glory. And look, from that same day and until today, he and all his armies are stripped and naked and ugly to look on. And after Satan had been cast from Heaven, Adam was exalted so that he ascended to Paradise.”}}
“And when the head of the lower order saw that greatness had been given to Adam, he envied him thenceforth, refused to worship him and said to his powers: ‘Worship him not and praise him not with the angels. It befits him to worship me, not me to worship dust, formed out of a grain of dust.’ Such things the rebel had uttered and was disobedient and by his own free will became separated from God. And he was felled and he fell, he and his whole band. On the sixth day in the second hour, he fell from heaven, and they were stripped of the robes of their glory, and his name was called Satana, because he had turned away from God, and Sheda, because he had been cast down, and Daiva, because he had lost the robe of his glory. And look, from that same day and until today, he and all his armies are stripped and naked and ugly to look on. And after Satan had been cast from Heaven, Adam was exalted so that he ascended to Paradise.”}}
===Conclusion===
   
   
The Qur'anic story of Satan refusing to worship or prostate before Adam seems to have distinct antecedents in pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian sources. It is possible that this is merely coincidence. For more than fifteen centuries after God revealed Genesis to Moses he was content to leave this story untold. Then around the first century CE Jewish story tellers, independent of divine revelation, invented this story. After another six hundred years or so, Allah decided it was high time this story was properly told to humanity, thus he chose to reveal it to Muhammad in a form almost identical to that told by the non-divine Jewish writers.  
The Qur'anic story of Satan refusing to worship or prostate before Adam seems to have distinct antecedents in pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian sources. It is possible that this is merely coincidence. For more than fifteen centuries after God revealed Genesis to Moses he was content to leave this story untold. Then around the first century CE Jewish story tellers, independent of divine revelation, invented this story. After another six hundred years or so, Allah decided it was high time this story was properly told to humanity, thus he chose to reveal it to Muhammad in a form almost identical to that told by the non-divine Jewish writers.  
Line 573: Line 568:
One begs the question why an omniscient deity would leave himself open to a charge of ‘parallelism’ when the simplest solution would merely be to include the story within the first chapter of the Torah. Instead, he chose to allow Jewish rabbis to receive the distinction of co-inventing this story, long before his revelation to any prophet.
One begs the question why an omniscient deity would leave himself open to a charge of ‘parallelism’ when the simplest solution would merely be to include the story within the first chapter of the Torah. Instead, he chose to allow Jewish rabbis to receive the distinction of co-inventing this story, long before his revelation to any prophet.


===The Queen of Sheba===
==The Queen of Sheba==


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===
Line 632: Line 627:
One cannot be too dogmatic about this parallelism, as the dating of Targum Sheni is not beyond doubt. Nevertheless, it is likely that the story of the Queen of Sheba pre-dates the Qur'an as the Targum is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. It is also clear that the post-Quranic dates often ascribed to Targum Sheni are that of the final redaction and not that of the Queen of Sheba myths.
One cannot be too dogmatic about this parallelism, as the dating of Targum Sheni is not beyond doubt. Nevertheless, it is likely that the story of the Queen of Sheba pre-dates the Qur'an as the Targum is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. It is also clear that the post-Quranic dates often ascribed to Targum Sheni are that of the final redaction and not that of the Queen of Sheba myths.


===Abraham and the Idols===
==Abraham and the Idols==


The parallel between the Qur'an and the Midrash is given below.  
The parallel between the Qur'an and the Midrash is given below.


===Midrash Account===
===Midrash Account===
Line 649: Line 644:
'''The claim is that this parallelism originated from the Midrash as an invention of a Rabbi:'''  
'''The claim is that this parallelism originated from the Midrash as an invention of a Rabbi:'''  


“It will no doubt come as a shock for some to discover that the Qur'an which claims to be "divine revelation" contains one such Jewish legend and presents it as being an historical fact concerning the life of Abraham. However this story is a well known illustration invented by Rabbi Hiyya in the 2nd century CE; it is recorded in the Midrash Rabbah Genesis and all authorities agree that it was never mean't to be considered historical.  
From the perspective of a believing Muslim, it seems shocking that a Jewish legend about Abraham, created thousands of years after the event it purports to relate, made its way into the unerring Qur'an. For the secular scholar studying the Qur'an as a historical document of its time and place, the ancient near east, this is not at all surprising given the wide range of religious literature which was read and spread in the ancient near east. This story is a well known illustration invented by Rabbi Hiyya in the 2nd century CE; it is recorded in the Midrash Rabbah Genesis and all authorities agree that it was never meant to be considered historical, even by the audience for whom it was composed.  


The Quranic account of Abraham and the idols commences in {{Quran|6|74}}  where Abraham is quoted as saying "Takest thou idols for gods?" and this theme is then expanded in Sura {{Quran|21|51-71}}  . It is exactly the same theme of the Midrashic legend where Abraham takes issue over the idols of his father.  
The Quranic account of Abraham and the idols commences in {{Quran|6|74}}  where Abraham is quoted as saying "Takest thou idols for gods?" and this theme is then expanded in Sura {{Quran|21|51-71}}  . It is exactly the same theme of the Midrashic legend where Abraham takes issue over the idols of his father.  
Line 673: Line 668:
All the above points are unique both to the Qur'anic and mythical midrashic accounts. They do not appear in the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians.”<ref>[http://answering-islam.org./Quran/Sources/abraham.html Abraham and the Idols] answering-islam.org.</ref>
All the above points are unique both to the Qur'anic and mythical midrashic accounts. They do not appear in the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians.”<ref>[http://answering-islam.org./Quran/Sources/abraham.html Abraham and the Idols] answering-islam.org.</ref>


===Analysis and Refutations to Muslim Objections===
===Muslim Objections===


Dr Saifullah and the Islamic-awareness team have sought to disparage the above evidence, and these objections have been addressed by the [http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca freethoughtmecca] team.<ref>M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBrabbah.html The Story Of Abraham And Idols In The Qur'an And Midrash Genesis Rabbah] islamic-awareness.org</ref><ref>[http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/sayfallaah.html sayfallaah] freethoughtmecca</ref>
Dr Saifullah and the Islamic-awareness team have sought to disparage the above evidence, and these objections have been addressed by the [http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca freethoughtmecca] team.<ref>M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBrabbah.html The Story Of Abraham And Idols In The Qur'an And Midrash Genesis Rabbah] islamic-awareness.org</ref><ref>[http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/sayfallaah.html sayfallaah] freethoughtmecca</ref>
Line 687: Line 682:
'''Objection 3: The text is unstable due to flexibility of copying and therefore it cannot be ascertained that the compared texts are similar.'''  
'''Objection 3: The text is unstable due to flexibility of copying and therefore it cannot be ascertained that the compared texts are similar.'''  


:It is not asserted that Muhammad copied from the Bereshit Rabbah, rather he heard this Judeo-Christian story from others, possibly Jews and Christians. The Bereshit Rabbah is merely evidence to date this particular Judeo-Christian story. There are other Judeo-Christian sources as listed above.
:It is not asserted that the Qur'an copied from the Bereshit Rabbah, rather he heard this Judeo-Christian story from others, possibly Jews and Christians. The Bereshit Rabbah is merely evidence to date this particular Judeo-Christian story. There are other Judeo-Christian sources as listed above, so a different text may or may not have been the source of the parallel.


'''Objection 4: Judeo-Christian sources of the same story are different, thus the original paralleled story cannot be ascertained.'''  
'''Objection 4: Judeo-Christian sources of the same story are different, thus the original paralleled story cannot be ascertained.'''  
Line 693: Line 688:
:Again, the charge is not that Muhammad referred to any particular text, although the Bereshit Rabbah’s version comes closest to the Quranic version.
:Again, the charge is not that Muhammad referred to any particular text, although the Bereshit Rabbah’s version comes closest to the Quranic version.


It is clear the story of Abraham disdaining idol worship, destroying idols, and being thrown into the fire pre-dates Islam in various Judeo-Christian sources. It is not the contention that Muhammad copied from these texts, but that he heard this story or variants thereof from other people, probably Jews and Christians. The Judeo-Christian sources used as evidence are merely evidence of the antiquity of this story.  
It is clear the story of Abraham disdaining idol worship, destroying idols, and being thrown into the fire pre-dates Islam in various Judeo-Christian sources. It is not necessary to come to the conclusion that the Qur'an copies out of these texts, but rather that it draws from sources with similar narrativbes. The Judeo-Christian sources listed are merely evidence of the antiquity of this story.  


One is forced to wonder how a story invented by Rabbi Hiyya in the 2nd century CE managed to find its way into a source purported to be of divine origin. Allah seems prone to co-invention of many Judeo-Christian stories not believed to be of direct revelation by Yahweh or Jehovah to any pre-Islamic prophets.
One is forced to wonder how a story invented by Rabbi Hiyya in the 2nd century CE managed to find its way into a source purported to be of divine origin. Rather than divine revelation, these parallels point to a very human origin of the Qur'an.  




===The Wealth of Korah===
==The Wealth of Korah==


===Qur'anic Verse===
===Qur'anic Verse===
Line 742: Line 737:


Apparently, Rabbi Levi; a third century Haggadist who lived in Palestine and who also made up the story of Korah’s keys, was actually none other than Allah in the flesh.
Apparently, Rabbi Levi; a third century Haggadist who lived in Palestine and who also made up the story of Korah’s keys, was actually none other than Allah in the flesh.
==See Also==
==See Also==
[[Category:Previous scriptures]]
[[Category:Previous scriptures]]
Asmith
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
4,543

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/132278...132565"

Navigation menu