Monday, September 15, 2025

Muhammad’s Inconsistencies

More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies –

Doing to others what he didn’t want to be done to him

It comes as no surprise to those who have studied the life of Muhammad with any depth that he was someone that was grossly inconsistent since he failed to practice what he preached, and gave himself certain privileges and favors which he withheld from others. Muhammad was also guilty of doing to others what he did not anyone to do to either himself or his followers.

For example, when a man came to Muhammad to ask him permission to fornicate, or have sex with women, the latter asked him a series of questions in order to highlight just how perverted and selfish his request truly was:

“… Imam Ahmad recorded Abu Umamah saying that a young man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Give me permission to commit Zina (unlawful sex).’ The people surrounded him and rebuked him, saying, ‘Stop! Stop!’ But the Prophet said…

<<Come close.>> The young man came to him, and he said…

<<Sit down.>> so he sat down. The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it (unlawful sex) for your mother?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their mothers.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your daughter?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their daughters.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your sister?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their sisters.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your paternal aunt?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, O Allah's Messenger! may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their paternal aunts.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your maternal aunt?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, O Allah's Messenger! may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their maternal aunts.>> Then the Prophet put his hand on him and said…

<<O Allah, forgive his sin, purify his heart and guard his chastity.>> After that the young man never paid attention to anything of that nature.” (Tafsir, Q. 17:32)

What makes this advice rather troubling is that Muhammad did not practice it himself, nor did his followers, since he permitted them to take women captive and have sex with them, even married ones whose husbands were still alive!

Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, - desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali

As shocking as it may sound, this passage is basically stating that the only time a Muslim man (which includes Muhammad) can sleep with a married woman is when she happens to be one of the female slaves that he has taken captive!

Unfortunately, this verse was tragically and shamefully put into practice by the jihadists:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri: O Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)

Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)

How unfortunate that Muhammad and his deity did not share the shame and concern of their followers regarding the morality of raping captives whose husbands were still alive, but actually rushed in to compose a text to justify such a wicked and perverted act!

This same narration is found in all of the major hadith collections:

Chapter 36. What Has Been Related (About A Man) Who Captures A Slave Woman That Has A Husband, Is It Lawful For Him To Have Relations With Her?

1132. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess. (Hasan) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, From Hadith No. 544 to 1204, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 2, p. 502; underline emphasis ours)

(3) 3016. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. SO SOME OF THE MEN DISLIKED THAT, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….’” (Sahih)

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.

(4) 3017. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “we captured some women on the Day of Awtas and they had husbands among their people. That was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah so Allah revealed: ‘…And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….” (Sahih)

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.

This is how it was reported by Ath-Thawri, from ‘Uthman Al-Batti, from Abu Al-Khalil, from Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri from the Prophet and it is similar. “From Abu ‘Alqamah” is not in this Hadith and I do not know of anyone who mentioned Abu ‘Alqamah in this Hadith except in what Hammam mentioned from Qatadah. Abu Al-Khalil’s name is Salih bin Abi Mariam. (Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, From Hadith No. 2606 to 3290, Chapter 4. Regarding Surat An-Nisa’, pp. 331-332; capital and underline emphasis ours)

To make matters worse, Muhammad granted his men permission to marry women for a short period of time for the sole purpose of gratifying their sexual cravings:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah and Salama bin Al-Akwa': While we were in an army, Allah's Apostle came to us and said, "You have been allowed to do the Mut’a (marriage), so do it." Salama bin Al-Akwa' said: Allah's Apostle's said, "If a man and a woman agree (to marry temporarily), their marriage should last for three nights, and if they like to continue, they can do so; and if they want to separate, they can do so." I do not know whether that was only for us or for all the people in general. Abu Abdullah (Al-Bukhari) said: ‘Ali made it clear that the Prophet said, "The Mut’a marriage has been cancelled (made unlawful)." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 52)

Narrated Abdullah:
We used to participate in the holy battles led by Allah's Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we said, "Shall we get ourselves castrated?" He forbade us that and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract and recited to us: -- ‘O you who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.’ (5.87) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 13o)

This practice continued to be observed until the time of Umar’s caliphate:

Ibn Uraij reported: 'Ati' reported that Jabir b. Abdullah came to perform 'Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet and during the time of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3248)

Tragically, there were some instances in which women got pregnant through such unions:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Khawla ibn Hakim came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, "Rabia ibn Umayya made a temporary marriage with a woman and she is pregnant by him." Umar ibn al-Khattab went out in dismay dragging his cloak, saying, "This temporary marriage, had I come across it, I would have ordered stoning and done away with it!" (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 28, Number 28.18.42)

Today such a practice would be called prostitution, plain and simple.

With the foregoing in view, it is obvious that Muhammad and his followers did to other people’s mothers, wives, daughters, nieces, aunts etc., the very thing that he did not want to be done to the mothers, wives, daughters, nieces, aunts etc. of Muslims.

In light of this, we would like to ask the followers of Muhammad the very same questions that their prophet asked the young man.

Would the Muslims like it if someone contracted temporary marriage with their mothers? What about with their daughters, sisters, paternal or maternal aunts? How about their grandmothers, granddaughters, female cousins, nieces etc.?

Moreover, would the Muslims be okay with a group of invaders coming to their lands and taking their women captive in order to have sex with them? And would they be perfectly all right with such men taking their wives and having sex with them before selling them off to someone else (or even keeping them as their own personal property)?

If the Muslims would have a problem with all of this then why do they follow a man who permitted his hordes to basically rape captive women, including married ones whose husbands were still alive? And why would they want to believe in a man who virtually allowed women to be treated like prostitutes by permitting his followers to contract temporary marriages whose only objective was to satisfy the carnal, lustful desires of men who didn’t have the will power to control their sexual urges?

The fact is that Muhammad stands condemned by his own teachings and Muslims should therefore abandon such a man and turn to the risen Lord Jesus who is their only hope of salvation and eternal bliss.

Muhammad’s Jewish Sex-Slave

According to the Sunni traditions, Muhammad had at least two sex slaves that he did not marry, namely, a Christian Coptic girl named Mariyah and a Jewish concubine named Rayhanah. I have written at length about Mariyah, so here I will focus on Rayhanah.

Here is what a modern biography on Muhammad, which is based on the earliest surviving Islamic sources, writes in respect to this Jewish girl whom Muhammad had taken captive and enslaved:

As to the other women and children, they were divided, together with the property, amongst the men who had taken part in the siege. Many of these captives were ransomed by the Bani Nadir at Khaybar. As part of his share the Prophet had chosen Rayhanah, the daughter of Zayd, a Nadirite, who married her to a man of Qurayzah. She was a woman of great beauty and she remained the Prophet’s slave until she died some five years later. At first he put her in the care of his aunt Salma, in whose house Rifa‘ah had already taken refuge. Rayhanah herself was averse to entering Islam, but Rifa‘ah, and his kinsmen of the Bani Hadl spoke to her about the new religion and it was not long before one of the three young converts, Tha‘labah by name, came to the Prophet and told him that Rayhanah had entered Islam, whereupon he greatly rejoiced. When it became clear that she was not pregnant, he went to her and offered to set her free and to make her his wife. But she said: “O Messenger if God, leave me in thy power; that will be easier for me and for thee.” (Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources [Inner Traditions International, Ltd., One Park Street, Rochester, Vermont 05767; 1983], p. 233; emphasis mine)

Even the Muslim writings are not able to hide the fact of Muhammad being a vile, immoral, sexual deviant.

MUHAMMAD’S GOD: A YOUNG CURLY-HAIRED, BEARDLESS BOY!

There are “sound” hadiths where Muhammad claimed that Allah appeared to him as a beautiful man, in which his deity then placed his palm between his shoulders, where he then felt the coolness of Allah’s fingers on his chest:

Al-Tirmidhi Hadith – 237

Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A’ish

Allah’s Messenger said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious, IN THE MOST BEAUTIFUL FORM. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders, and I felt its coldness in my chest, and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: `Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth, and it was so that he might have certainty.’ (6:75)

Darimi reported it in a mursal form, and Tirmidhi also reported. (Alim.org http://www.alim.org/library/hadith/TIR/237; capital and underline emphasis mine)

And:

Al-Tirmidhi Hadith – 245

Narrated Mu’adh ibn Jabal

Allah’s Messenger was detained one morning from observing the dawn prayer (in congregation) along with us till the sun had almost appeared on the horizon. He then came out hurriedly, and Iqamah for prayer was observed, and he conducted it (prayer) in brief form. When he had concluded the prayer by saying As-salamu alaykum wa Rahmatullah, he called out to us saying: Remain in your places as you were. Then turning to us, he said: I am going to tell you what detained me from you (on account of which I could not join you in the prayer) in the morning. I got up in the night and performed ablution and observed the prayer as had been ordained for me. I dozed in my prayer till I was overcome by (sleep) and lo, I found myself in the presence of my Lord, the Blessed and the Glorious, IN THE BEST FORM. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these highest angels contend about? I said: I do not know. He repeated it thrice. He said: Then I saw Him put HIS PALMS between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of HIS FINGERS between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me, and I could recognize everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, and abandon abominable deeds, to love the poor, that Thou forgive me and show mercy to me and when Thou intendst to put people to trial Thou causes me to die unblemished and I beg of Thee Thy love and the love of one who loves Thee and the love for the deed which brings me near to Thy love. Allah’s Messenger said: It is a truth, so learn it and teach it.

Transmitted by Ahmad, Tirmidhi, who said: This is a HASAN SAHIH hadith, and I asked Muhammad ibn Isma’il about this hadith, and he said: It is a SAHIH hadith. (Alim.org http://www.alim.org/library/hadith/TIR/245; capital and underline emphasis mine)

Here’s another version of the foregoing narrative:

Jami` at-Tirmidhi

Chapters on Tafsir

Narrated Mu’adh bin Jabal:

“One morning, the Messenger of Allah was prevented from coming to us for Salat As-Subh, until we were just about to look for the eye of the sun (meaning sunrise). Then he came out quickly, had the Salat prepared for. The Messenger of Allah performed the Salat, and he performed his Salat in a relatively quick manner. When he said the Salam, he called aloud with his voice saying to us: ‘Stay in your rows as you are.’ Then he turned coming near to us, then he said: ‘I am going to narrate to you what kept me from you this morning: I got up during the night, I performed Wudu and prayed as much as I was able to, and I dozed off during my Salat, and fell deep asleep. Then I SAW MY LORD, Blessed and Most High, IN THE BEST OF APPEARANCES. He said: ‘O Muhammad!’ I said: ‘My Lord here I am my Lord!’ He said: ‘What is it that the most exalted group busy themselves with?’ I said: ‘I do not know Lord.’ And He said it three times.” He said: “So I saw Him place HIS PALM between my shoulders, and I sensed the coolness of HIS FINGERTIPS between my breast. Then everything was disclosed for me, and I became aware. So He said: ‘O Muhammad!’ I said: ‘Here I am my Lord!’ He said: ‘What is it that the most exalted group busy themselves with?’ I said: ‘In the acts that atone.’ He said: ‘And what are they?’ I said: ‘The footsteps to the congregation, the gatherings in the Masajid after the Salat, Isbagh Al-Wudu during difficulties.’ He said: ‘Then what else?’ I said: ‘Feeding others, being lenient in speech, and Salat during the night while the people are sleeping.’ He said: ‘Ask.’ I said: ‘O Allah! I ask of you the do of good deeds, avoid the evil deeds, loving the poor, and that You forgive me, and have mercy upon me. And when You have willed Fitnah in the people, then take me without the Fitnah. And I ask You for Your love, the love of whomever You love, and the of the deeds that bring one nearer to Your love.’” The Messenger of Allah said: “Indeed it is true, so study it and learn it.”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam)

English reference: Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3235

Arabic reference: Book 47, Hadith 3543 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/urn/642690; capital emphasis mine)

This report is also found in another hadith collection:

4 Prayer

(8c) Chapter: Mosques and places of Prayer – Section 3

Mu’adh b. Jabal said: God’s Messenger was detained one morning from observing the prayer with us till the sun had almost appeared over the horizon. He then came cut quickly, and when the iqama had been uttered he conducted the prayer in a shortened form; then when he had given the salutation he called out to us saying, “Keep to your rows as you were.” Then turning to us he said, “I shall tell you what detained me from you this morning. I got up during the night, performed ablution, and prayed what I could; but during my prayer I dozed and was overcome, and there and then I saw my Lord in the most beautiful form. He addressed me by name, and when I replied, ‘At Thy service, my Lord,’ He asked, ‘What do the angels near My presence dispute about?’ and I replied that I did not know. He asked it three times. Then I saw Him put the palm of His hand between my shoulder-blades, so that I experienced the coolness of His fingers between my nipples so everything became clear to me and I attained knowledge. He then addressed me by name, and when I replied, ‘At Thy service, my Lord,’ He asked, ‘What do the angels near My presence dispute about?’ I replied, ‘Expiation.’ He asked what they were, and I replied, ‘Walking on foot to the congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers are over, and performing complete ablution in difficult circumstances. He asked what next they disputed about, and when I said it was about degrees, He asked what they were and I replied, ‘Providing food, speaking gently, and praying at night when people are asleep.’ He then told me to make a request, and I said, ‘O God, I ask Thee for power to do good things and abandon objectionable things, for love towards the poor, that Thou shouldest forgive me and show mercy to me, and that when Thou intendest to test any people Thou wilt take me to Thyself without being led astray. And I ask for Thy love, the love of those who love Thee, and a love of doing things which will bring me near to Thy love.’” Then God’s Messenger said, “It is true, so study it and learn it.”

Ahmad and Tirmidhi transmitted it, and Tirmidhi said, “This is a hasan sahih tradition. I asked Muhammad b. Isma’il (AL-BUKHARI) about this tradition, and he said it is A SAHIH TRADITION.”

Reference: Mishkat al-Masabih 748

In-book reference: Book 4, Hadith 176 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/mishkat:748; emphasis mine)

If this weren’t shocking enough, other versions state that Allah appeared as a beautiful beardless young man with short curly hair!

“I saw my Lord in the most beautiful form like a youth with abundant hair.” (al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya, 332-333; 356-357; similar reports from Umm al-Tufayl, Anas b. Malik, Mu’adh b. ‘Afra, Ibn ‘Umar, ‘A’isha, Ibn ‘Abbas; Reported by Tabarani; Ibn Abi ‘Asim; al-Bayhaqi; al-Suyuti; al-Haythami; Ibn ‘Adi, al-Baghdadi)

I saw my Lord in the form of a young man, beardless (amrad) with short curly hair (ja’d) and clothed in a red garment. (Narrated by Ahmad b. Hanbal in Tabarani; AUTHENTICATED BY AHMAD B. HANBAL in Creed 3 citing isnad, ‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218, al-Marrudhi (d. 888) in Tabaqat, 3:81, Ibn ‘Aqil in Makdisi, Ibn ‘Aqil, 130; Ibn ‘Adi al-Qattan, al-Kamil fi du’afa’ al-rijal, 3:49-50, al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya, 332-333, 356-357; al-Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, 25:143; SAHIH BY ABU L-HASAN B. BASHSHAR in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:59; Abu Ya’la, al-Muta’mad, 85; ACCEPTED BY IBN TAYMIYYA in Bayan Tablis al-Jahmiyya, 7:192-198, 290)

Here’s what one of sunni Islam’s greatest hadith scholars said about the aforementioned report:

Ahmad b. Hanbal said about the above hadith: “Report it because the ‘ulama have reported it.” (‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya reported in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218)

In case the readers are unaware, ibn Hanbal was not only a compiler of hadiths, whose massive collection of narrations is called Musnad Ahmad, he even has a school of Islamic jurisprudence (madhab) named after him.

There’s more:

The Prophet saw Allah before death as is the doctrine of the majority of Ah al-Sunna thus related from al-Nawawi by al-Qari. The evidence for this is the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas whereby the Prophet said: “I saw my Lord” (ra’aytu rabbi). Ibn Kathir cited it in his commentary on Sura al-Najm and declared its chain sound, but considered it part of the hadith of the dream cited below. Ibn Qayyim [see excerpt below] relates that Imam Ahmad considered such sight to be in the Prophet’s sleep but remains a true sight – as the dreams of Prophets are true – and that some of the Imam’s companions mistakenly attributed to him the position that the Prophet saw his Lord “with the eyes of his head.”
Al-Bayhaqi also narrated the hadith “I saw my Lord” in al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat WITH A SOUND CHAIN but with the addition: “in the form of a curly-haired, beardless young man wearing a green robe,” a condemned, disauthenticated addition and concatenation with another hadith that refers to Gibril. Hence al-Suyuti interpreted it either as a dream or, quoting his shaykh Ibn al-Humam, as “the veil of form” (hijab al-sura)… (Islamic Doctrines and Beliefs: Volume 1: The Prophets in Barzakh, The Hadith of Isra’ and Mir’aj, The Immense Merits of Al-Sham, The Vision of Allah, Al-Sayyid Muhammad Ibn ‘Alawi al-Maliki, translation and notes by Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad [As-Sunna Foundation of America 1999], pp. 137-138; bold and capital emphasis mine)

In a footnote the translator mentions another narration that says Allah appeared as a man:

… and from Umm al-Tufayl by al-Tabarani (6:158 #3385). The latter chain actually states: “I saw my Lord in the best form of a beardless young man” and was rejected by al-Dhahabi in Tahdhib al-Mawdua’at (p. 22 #22)… (p. 139, fn. 257; bold emphasis mine)

The aforementioned narrations are either assuming that Allah took the form of a man, or that this is his actual uncreated shape or form.

Commenting on the anthropomorphic beliefs of ibn Hanbal, Islamic scholar Dr. Wesley Williams noted that:

Ibn Hanbal, then, was an anthropomorphist. He affirmed for the divine a human form, including a face, eyes, curly hair, mouth, voice breath, chest and two elbows, back, arms, hands with a palm, five fingers and fingertips, legs, shin, feet, soul, physical beauty, a limit, and even, shockingly, loins. He affirmed the external meaning of these attributes and refused to qualify them with balkafa. (Williams, “Aspects of the Creed of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: A study of Anthropomorphism in Early Islamic Discourse,” in International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 34 (2002), 441-463)

Hence, ibn Hanbal like the so-called Salafi Muslims of today, was an anthropomorphist literalist who held that Allah literally has a body of some kind. This explains why Ibn Hanbal was adamant that Muslims must take the apparent words employed in the Quran and Muhammad’s ahadith, and are to refrain from interpreting them in an allegorical or figurative manner:

One should not dispute with anyone, nor engage in formal debate, nor learn the art of argument. Verily, kalam regarding predestination, the sight (of God in the afterlife), the Qur’an, and other topics of the traditions is rejected and forbidden. Whoever does it, even if his kalam should agree with the Sunna, is not of the people of the Sunna until he rejects argument and surrenders. Ahmad b. Hanbal (‘Aqida III, in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 2:167, ed. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin)

God is over [‘ala] the Throne. The Footstool is at the place of His Two Feet… He moves, speaks, observes, looks, laughs [yadhaku], rejoices, and loves… He descends every night to the lowest heaven however He wills… The servants’ hearts are between two of the Most Merciful’s fingers… He will put His foot in the Fire, causing it to recoil. Ahmad b. Hanbal (‘Aqida I, Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 1:61-62)

According to us, Hadith is taken according to its apparent meaning (zahirihi) just as what came from the Prophet. Talking [kalam] about it is an innovation. But we believe in it as it came to its apparent meaning (‘ala zahirihi). Hanbal (‘Aqida III, Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:168)

As another Muslim authority explained:

The zahir of the wording is what comes first to the mind from that text, irrespective of whether it is literal [haqiqa] or figurative. (Ibn Qudama, Dhamma al-taw’il, 55)

So, there you have it folks!

Muhammad’s god is a beautiful beardless young pubescent boy with short curly hair who wears a red dress!

Revelation 22 — Paradise Restored, Judgment Declared, the King Returns

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

Revelation 22 serves as the climax of the biblical canon, uniting the beginning of Scripture in Genesis with the consummation of God’s redemptive plan. It presents Eden restored and transcended, judgment declared with finality, and the imminent return of Christ, the eternal King. This chapter does not merely close the Apocalypse; it seals the testimony of divine revelation with both warning and invitation.

1. The River and the Tree (vv. 1–2)

The angelic vision opens with the river of the water of life, clear as crystal, flowing directly from the throne of God and the Lamb. This imagery draws from Genesis 2:10–14 and Ezekiel 47:1–12, but unlike Eden, the source here is explicitly divine. The Tree of Life, once barred by cherubim in Genesis 3:24, is now open, bearing twelvefold fruit for perpetual sustenance. This signifies unbroken fellowship with God and an eternal abundance that transcends Eden’s provisional state.

2. The End of the Curse and Eternal Worship (v. 3)

John declares: “No longer will there be anything accursed.” The Edenic curse (Gen. 3:17–19) is decisively removed. Worship (Greek: latreuō) here is not servitude but joyful participation in God’s reign, restoring humanity’s original vocation as image-bearers (cf. Gen. 1:26–28).

3. The Beatific Vision (v. 4)

The most profound promise emerges: “They will see His face.” Throughout Scripture, the divine face is lethal to sinners (Ex. 33:20). Yet in Christ, believers receive the consummation of hope (1 John 3:2). His name on their foreheads signifies eternal identity and belonging, in stark contrast to the mark of the beast (Rev. 13:16–17).

4. Eternal Light and Shared Reign (v. 5)

Here, “Night will be no more.” The Shekinah glory (cf. Isa. 60:19–20) replaces created luminaries. God’s people not only dwell in light but also reign with Christ forever (Rev. 5:10), highlighting the priest-king motif rooted in Israel’s covenantal history (Ex. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9).

Final Words of the Coming King (vv. 6–21)

The remainder of the chapter alternates between divine assurances, ethical exhortations, and eschatological warnings.

5. The Truthfulness of Revelation (v. 6)

John affirms the trustworthiness of prophecy. Unlike allegory or myth, this vision comes directly from “the God of the spirits of the prophets.”

6. Christ’s Imminent Return (v. 7)

“Behold, I am coming soon.” The blessing rests upon those who keep (tēreō) the words, emphasizing obedience, not mere intellectual assent.

7. Worship God Alone (vv. 8–9)

John’s attempted prostration before the angel is sharply corrected: “Worship God.” This affirms the exclusivity of divine worship, rejecting angelolatry or idolatry in every age.

8. The Unsealed Prophecy (v. 10)

Unlike Daniel (Dan. 12:4), John is told not to seal the vision. The eschatological urgency demands present proclamation.

9. Eternal Choices (v. 11)

The fixedness of character at Christ’s coming recalls Hebrews 9:27: judgment is final. The righteous remain righteous, and the wicked persist in wickedness—time for repentance closes.

10. Christ the Just Judge (vv. 12–13)

Christ identifies as Alpha and Omega, declaring His eternal sovereignty. He comes with recompense, rewarding faithfulness and executing justice.

11. Right to the Tree (v. 14)

Those who “wash their robes” in the Lamb’s blood (Rev. 7:14) gain access to the Tree of Life and the holy city—salvation rooted in grace, not works.

12. Exclusion of the Wicked (v. 15)

“Outside are dogs, sorcerers, and murderers.” This exclusion underscores God’s holiness; evil cannot coexist with His dwelling.

13. Christ’s Identity Declared (v. 16)

Jesus proclaims: “I am the root and descendant of David, the bright morning star.” He is both David’s progenitor and heir, fulfilling messianic prophecy (Isa. 11:1; 2 Sam. 7:12–16).

14. The Final Invitation (v. 17)

“The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’” This is the ultimate gospel call—salvation is freely given (Isa. 55:1). Even at Scripture’s end, divine grace extends an open hand.

15. Warning Against Alteration (vv. 18–19)

A solemn curse rests upon anyone who adds to or subtracts from this prophecy, emphasizing the sacred integrity of God’s Word.

16. The Final Promise (v. 20)

Christ’s last words in Scripture are, “Surely I am coming soon.” The Church replies: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”—echoing the early cry: Maranatha!

Spiritual Theological Takeaways

Eden Restored and Surpassed – God’s redemptive plan brings creation not merely back to Eden but forward to eternal perfection.
The Imminence of Christ’s Return – Urgency characterizes the Christian life; obedience is essential.
The Final Invitation Still Stands – Grace remains the last word of Scripture.
Judgment Is Irrevocable – Eternal destinies are sealed at Christ’s coming.

Conclusion

Revelation 22 unites cosmic restoration, divine justice, and the blessed hope of Christ’s imminent return. It closes the canon with both a warning and an invitation: judgment is certain, yet grace is freely offered. For the thirsty, the water of life remains without cost (Rev. 22:17). For the Church, the cry remains: “Come, Lord Jesus!”

📖 Key Reference Verse:
“The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’ Let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.” (Revelation 22:17, ESV)

The Return of the Jews to Israel: A Prophetic Fulfillment of Daniel’s 70 Weeks

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The rebirth of the State of Israel in 1948 is not only a political or historical phenomenon but one of the most staggering fulfillments of biblical prophecy in human history. No other ancient nation has been scattered across the globe for nearly two millennia, preserved its language, faith, and identity, and then returned to its ancestral homeland. This unique event is unparalleled and constitutes clear evidence of divine intervention. It is deeply rooted in the prophetic Scriptures, particularly in the visions of Daniel and the messages revealed through the angel Gabriel concerning the restoration of Israel.

Israel: A Nation Preserved by Providence

Israel’s survival defies the logic of history. Ancient empires such as the Babylonians, Assyrians, Amalekites, and even mighty Rome have disappeared, yet Israel lives. The Jewish people were dispersed in 70 A.D. after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, leading to nearly 1,900 years of exile. And yet, against every human prediction, the people, the name, the language, and the land converged again in May 1948 when Israel was declared a sovereign state.

Mark Twain, during his visit to the land in 1867, described it as a “desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere.” Today, Israel flourishes with agriculture, forests, cities, and technological innovation. What Twain witnessed was the “valley of dry bones” (Ezekiel 37), but what we see now is its resurrection.

Prophetic Foundations in the Torah and the Prophets

The restoration of Israel was foretold in multiple passages of the Old Testament:

Deuteronomy 30:3–5: “Then the LORD your God will restore your fortunes and have compassion on you… and will bring you into the land that your fathers possessed…”
Ezekiel 37:21: “Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone… and bring them into their own land.”
Isaiah 66:8: “Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be brought forth in one moment?”

On May 14, 1948, in a single day, the prophecy was fulfilled as Israel was declared a nation, echoing Isaiah’s vision of a nation born in one day.

Daniel’s Prophecy of the 70 Weeks

Central to understanding the modern rebirth of Israel is Daniel’s prophecy of the 70 weeks (Daniel 9:24–27). The angel Gabriel revealed to Daniel a timeline concerning Israel’s destiny, the coming of the Messiah, and the restoration of the holy city.

Seventy Weeks Decreed: Daniel was told that seventy “weeks” (symbolic of seventy sets of seven years = 490 years) were appointed for his people and his holy city (Daniel 9:24).
Messiah’s Coming: The prophecy pointed to the coming of Messiah the Prince who would be “cut off” (Daniel 9:26), foretelling the crucifixion of Christ.
Desolation of Jerusalem: Following the rejection of the Messiah, Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in 70 A.D.—precisely as predicted.
Restoration and Final Fulfillment: The prophecy also looks ahead to the ultimate restoration of Israel in the end times, aligning with the reestablishment of the state of Israel in 1948 as a prelude to final redemption.

Thus, Daniel’s prophecy frames Israel’s rebirth not merely as a political event but as a fulfillment within God’s redemptive calendar.

The Exile and the Long-Awaited Return

The exile of nearly 1,900 years was both a divine judgment and a preparatory period. As the prophets warned, disobedience led to dispersion (Leviticus 26:33; Deuteronomy 28:64). Yet the same Scriptures promise regathering: “I will plant them on their land, and they shall never again be uprooted” (Amos 9:15).

Israel’s restoration in 1948 was not accidental but a sovereign act of God aligning with His covenantal promises. It was a necessary stage for the fulfillment of end-time prophecies, particularly concerning the return of Messiah and the establishment of His millennial kingdom.

Expository Commentary on Prophetic Fulfillment

Historical Uniqueness: No other nation in world history has been scattered and preserved in such a manner. This demonstrates God’s covenant faithfulness (Jeremiah 31:35–37).
Linguistic Revival: The revival of Hebrew, once considered a “dead language,” into a national tongue fulfills Zephaniah 3:9, which speaks of a purified language for God’s people.
Geopolitical Witness: The return of the Jews to their homeland in the face of global opposition reflects Zechariah 12:2–3, which foretells Jerusalem as a burdensome stone for all nations.
Spiritual Implication: The rebirth of Israel is a sign of the approaching Messianic age, reminding the Church that God’s prophetic clock revolves around Israel.

Conclusion

The return of the Jews to Israel and the rebirth of their nation in 1948 is one of the clearest demonstrations of fulfilled prophecy in modern history. Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy, illuminated by the angel Gabriel, connects the first coming of Messiah, the judgment upon Jerusalem, and the latter-day restoration of Israel. The survival, regathering, and flourishing of the Jewish people bear witness to God’s covenant faithfulness and serve as a prophetic signpost for the world.

As Isaiah declared: “Shall a nation be brought forth in one day?”—and history answers with a resounding yes. The restoration of Israel is not merely history; it is theology written in flesh and stone, confirming the reliability of God’s Word and pointing us to the culmination of His redemptive plan.

References and Bibliography

The Holy Bible: ESV, NKJV, NASB translations.
Twain, Mark. The Innocents Abroad. Hartford: American Publishing Company, 1869.
Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Ariel Ministries, 1993.
Keil, C.F., and Delitzsch, Franz. Commentary on the Old Testament. Hendrickson Publishers, 1989.
Walvoord, John F. Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Moody Press, 1971.
Wright, N.T. The New Testament and the People of God. Fortress Press, 1992.
Feinberg, Charles L. The Prophecy of Daniel. Moody Press, 1981.
Shimba, Maxwell. Theology of Prophecy and Restoration. Orlando: Shimba Theological Institute Press, 2024.

Jesus is God: “If You’ve Seen Me, You’ve Seen the Father”

Jesus is God — “If You’ve Seen Me, You’ve Seen the Father”

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The question of Jesus’ divinity lies at the very heart of Christian theology. Among His most striking declarations is found in John 14:9: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” This statement reveals that in Jesus Christ, the fullness of God’s being and nature is manifested. Unlike prophets, patriarchs, or angels who served as mediators of God’s word and presence, Jesus speaks as the incarnate God. This chapter examines the biblical, theological, and historical dimensions of this claim, showing why the Church affirms that Jesus is God.

1. The Biblical Context

1.1 Old Testament Longing for God’s Presence

Moses pleaded, “Show me Your glory” (Exod. 33:18). Yet God replied, “You cannot see My face, for no man shall see Me and live” (Exod. 33:20). Israel experienced God’s presence in veiled forms: the burning bush, the cloud of glory, the tabernacle. The divine essence remained inaccessible.

1.2 Fulfillment in Christ

In the New Testament, this longing is fulfilled in Christ. Paul proclaims, “He is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15). Likewise, Hebrews 1:3 declares, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being.” Thus, when Philip requested, “Show us the Father” (John 14:8), Jesus responded that seeing Him was equivalent to beholding the Father.

1.3 Unity of Father and Son

Jesus’ unity with the Father is explicit throughout John’s Gospel:

“I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).
“Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58).
“All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15).

These are not metaphors of closeness alone, but ontological claims of shared essence.

2. Theological Foundations

2.1 The Trinity and Homoousios

The doctrine of the Trinity articulates that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct persons yet of one essence (homoousios). The Nicene Creed (AD 325) affirmed Christ as “true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.” John 14:9 therefore functions as a doctrinal anchor: to see the Son is to encounter the Father’s being.

2.2 Patristic Witness

Athanasius, in On the Incarnation, argued that only God Himself could save humanity, hence Christ must be fully divine.
Augustine, in De Trinitate, emphasized that the Son reveals the Father’s essence, not merely His works.
Gregory of Nazianzus proclaimed, “What is not assumed is not healed.” Since Christ assumed full humanity without losing divinity, salvation becomes complete.

2.3 Christ’s Divine Works

The Gospels attest to divine prerogatives exercised by Christ:

Forgiveness of sins (Mark 2:5–7), a right belonging only to God.
Authority over nature (Mark 4:39–41), calming storms with divine command.
Reception of worship (John 20:28; Matt. 28:9), which would be blasphemy if He were not God.
Resurrection power (John 11:25), declaring, “I am the resurrection and the life.”

3. Christ as the Revelation of the Father

3.1 Compassion and Mercy

In His healing of lepers, His mercy toward sinners, and His embrace of the marginalized, Jesus reveals the Father’s love.

3.2 Holiness and Justice

In His rebuke of hypocrisy and cleansing of the temple, He embodies the Father’s holiness and justice.

3.3 Sacrificial Love

The cross is the ultimate revelation of the Father’s heart. In giving His Son, the Father reveals His love for the world (John 3:16). Jesus’ obedience unto death displays divine self-giving love.

4. Implications for Faith and Worship

4.1 Worship of Christ as God

Since Jesus reveals the Father, worship directed to Christ is worship of God. This is why the earliest Church prayed in His name and sang hymns exalting Him (Phil. 2:6–11).

4.2 Assurance of Divine Presence

Believers need not search for hidden revelations of God. In Christ, God is fully present. The believer’s relationship with God is secured in the incarnate Son.

4.3 Hermeneutical Lens

Christ becomes the interpretive key to understanding God. Any conception of God must align with His revelation in Jesus Christ. To see Him is to see the Father.

Conclusion

Jesus’ declaration, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” is a cornerstone of Christian faith. It reveals that in Him, the invisible God becomes visible, the transcendent becomes immanent, and the unknowable becomes intimately known. To confess Jesus as God is not merely doctrinal precision but the foundation of salvation, worship, and eternal hope. The fullness of deity dwells bodily in Him (Col. 2:9), and in Him the Father is revealed.

References

Athanasius. On the Incarnation. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998.
Augustine. De Trinitate (On the Trinity). Translated by Edmund Hill. New City Press, 1991.
Holy Bible, King James Version (KJV).
Holy Bible, Amplified Bible (AMP).
Kelly, J.N.D. Early Christian Doctrines. Harper & Row, 1978.
Oden, Thomas C. Classic Christianity: A Systematic Theology. HarperOne, 2009.
The Nicene Creed, Council of Nicaea (325 AD).
Torrance, Thomas F. The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church. T&T Clark, 1988.
Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Fortress Press, 1996.

Jesus Is God: The Revelation of the Invisible God in Flesh

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The central claim of Christianity is that Jesus Christ is God incarnate—God revealed in human flesh. This doctrine is not a theological invention of later centuries but arises directly from the witness of Scripture. The apostle Paul, in Colossians 1:15, declares that Christ “is the image of the invisible God” (KJV), underscoring the truth that in Jesus, the eternal, unseen God has made Himself visible and accessible to humanity. This profound reality lies at the heart of Christian faith: the invisible God of eternity entered human history through the person of Jesus Christ, not merely as a messenger, but as God Himself.

Jesus as the Visible Image of the Invisible God

The invisibility of God is affirmed throughout the Old Testament. Exodus 33:20 records the Lord telling Moses, “You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” Likewise, 1 Timothy 1:17 refers to God as “the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God.” Humanity, bound by finitude and sin, cannot behold the infinite divine essence directly.

However, Paul teaches in Colossians 1:15 that Jesus Christ is “the image of the invisible God.” The Greek word for “image” (eikōn) conveys more than a mere likeness; it denotes manifestation, representation, and embodiment. Thus, in Jesus, God is not partially revealed but fully disclosed. As the author of Hebrews affirms: “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb. 1:3, NIV). To see Jesus is to see God Himself—not in a symbolic sense, but in true and personal reality.

The Incarnation: God in Flesh

The doctrine of the Incarnation is the defining mystery of the Christian faith. John 1:14 states with authority: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (NKJV). The eternal Logos, who was with God and was God (John 1:1), became human without ceasing to be divine.

This means that Jesus Christ is not merely a prophet or moral teacher but the eternal God made flesh. In Him, divine transcendence and human existence unite. As Athanasius, the great fourth-century defender of Christ’s divinity, proclaimed: “He became what we are that He might make us what He is.” The Incarnation is therefore both revelation and redemption: revelation because God makes Himself known in Jesus, and redemption because through His death and resurrection, humanity is reconciled to God.

Jesus’ Self-Revelation as God

Jesus’ words and works further affirm His divine identity. In John 14:9, He declared, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” This statement surpasses the authority of any prophet; it asserts that Jesus is the visible manifestation of the invisible Father. Similarly, in John 10:30, Jesus said, “I and the Father are one,” signifying an essential unity of being, not merely purpose.

The miracles of Jesus, His authority over nature, demons, sin, and death, all reveal divine prerogatives. When Jesus forgave sins (Mark 2:5–7), the scribes rightly recognized that such authority belongs to God alone. When He accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 20:28), He did not rebuke His followers, for He Himself is worthy of divine honor.

The Theological Significance

The truth that Jesus is God in flesh has profound theological implications. First, it affirms the reliability of divine revelation. God is not distant or unknowable but has spoken in the clearest possible way—by becoming human. Second, it grounds Christian salvation. Only God Himself could bear the full weight of sin and conquer death. Third, it shapes Christian worship and devotion. To worship Christ is to worship God.

As Paul declares in Philippians 2:6–11, Jesus, though “in very nature God,” humbled Himself in the Incarnation and was exalted so that “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow… and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Conclusion

Jesus Christ is not simply a reflection of God’s glory but the glory of God incarnate. He is the visible image of the invisible God, the eternal Word who became flesh, the full and final revelation of God to humanity. To know Jesus is to know God, to see Jesus is to see God, and to worship Jesus is to worship God. The Christian confession that “Jesus is Lord” (Romans 10:9) is therefore not merely a title of honor but the acknowledgement of His eternal divinity.

In a world longing for truth, hope, and salvation, the message stands unshaken: Jesus is God—the revelation of the invisible made visible, God in flesh for the redemption of the world.

References

Athanasius. On the Incarnation. Translated by John Behr. Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2011.
Holy Bible, King James Version.
Holy Bible, New International Version.
Holy Bible, New King James Version.
Oden, Thomas C. The Word of Life: Systematic Theology, Volume Two. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1989.
Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

Sunday, September 14, 2025

Hosea 11:1, Surah 5:18, and the Contradictions of Muhammad’s Message

Hosea 11:1, Surah 5:18, and the Contradictions of Muhammad’s Message: A Critical Theological Examination

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The central claim of Islam is that Muhammad is the final prophet of God, Allah is the God of Abraham, and the Qur’an is the uncorrupted revelation completing the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel. However, when one compares the Qur’an with the Hebrew Bible and Christian Scriptures, a pattern of dissonance emerges. One stark contradiction lies between Hosea 11:1—where God declares Israel to be His child—and Surah 5:18, where Muhammad, speaking in the name of Allah, rebukes Jews and Christians for claiming to be God’s children. This raises a profound theological question: If Allah is the same God as Yahweh, why would He contradict His own revealed Word? This inconsistency calls into question the reliability of Muhammad’s message, the identity of Allah, and the Qur’an’s claim to divine authorship.

God as Father in the Hebrew Bible

The Hebrew Bible presents Yahweh’s covenantal relationship with Israel in parental terms. Hosea 11:1 states: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” The metaphor of fatherhood conveys divine intimacy, covenantal care, and enduring love. Other Old Testament passages echo this truth:

“Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you?” (Deuteronomy 32:6).
“You are the children of the LORD your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1).
“Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?” (Malachi 2:10).

The fatherhood of God is not merely symbolic but covenantal—establishing Israel’s identity as God’s people. Yahweh Himself uses the language of family, calling Israel “My son, my firstborn” (Exodus 4:22).

Muhammad’s Rebuke of God’s Fatherhood

The Qur’an, however, directly repudiates this concept. Surah 5:18 records:

“But the Jews and the Christians say, ‘We are the children of Allah and His beloved.’ Say: ‘Why then does He punish you for your sins? Rather, you are humans from among those He created.’”

This rebuke dismisses divine fatherhood as illegitimate, reducing God’s relationship with humanity to one of master and servant. Furthermore, the Qur’an categorically denies that God has children in any sense:

“It is not befitting for Allah to take a son.” (Surah 19:35).
“They say: ‘The Most Merciful has taken a son.’ Exalted is He! Rather, they are honored servants.” (Surah 21:26).

By rejecting divine fatherhood, Muhammad’s Allah presents a radically different theology from the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus Christ.

Theological Implications: Is Allah the God of the Bible?

If Allah were truly Yahweh, He would not contradict His own revelation. God’s Word is eternal and unchanging:

“The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8).
“God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind.” (Numbers 23:19).

Thus, the contradiction between Hosea 11:1 and Surah 5:18 indicates that Allah is not Yahweh. Instead, Allah emerges as a false deity fabricated within Muhammad’s seventh-century Arabian context. Muhammad, therefore, cannot be regarded as a prophet of the biblical God, since his message fundamentally undermines the covenantal truths revealed in Scripture.

Muhammad as a False Prophet

The Bible provides clear criteria for identifying false prophets:

Contradiction with Previous Revelation – “If a prophet… says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ … you shall not listen” (Deuteronomy 13:1–3).
- Muhammad directed followers toward a god whose nature contradicted Yahweh’s self-revelation.
False Testimony of Christ – “Every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist” (1 John 4:3).
- The Qur’an denies Jesus’ Sonship (Surah 112:3) and crucifixion (Surah 4:157).
Self-Glorification – Muhammad claimed to be the “seal of the prophets” (Surah 33:40), elevating himself above all others.

These elements identify Muhammad not as a prophet of God, but as a deceiver who distorted biblical truths.

The Falsehood of Islam’s Claim: “All Prophets Were Muslims”

Islam asserts that Abraham, Moses, David, and Jesus were all Muslims who submitted to Allah. Yet, the scriptural evidence contradicts this:

Abraham worshiped Yahweh, not Allah (Genesis 12:7–8).
Moses addressed Yahweh as Israel’s Father (Deut. 32:6).
David wrote of God as Father and King (Psalm 103:13).
Jesus called God Abba, Father (Mark 14:36), affirming divine fatherhood explicitly.

To claim all prophets were Muslims is a historical and theological distortion, designed to appropriate Jewish and Christian heritage while erasing its substance.

Conclusion

The contradiction between Hosea 11:1 and Surah 5:18 exposes the theological fault line between the God of Israel and Allah of the Qur’an. Yahweh revealed Himself as Father, yet Muhammad’s Allah denied divine fatherhood. This reveals that Muhammad was not a prophet of the God of Abraham, but a false prophet who misled his followers. Therefore, the Qur’an cannot be trusted as divine revelation, and Islam’s claim that all prophets were Muslims collapses under the weight of biblical truth.

The world must recognize that Muhammad’s message stands in opposition to God’s eternal Word, and that salvation is found not in submission to Allah, but in relationship with the Father through His Son, Jesus Christ (John 1:12; John 14:6).

References

The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV).
Al-Qur’an, Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:18; Surah Maryam 19:35; Surah Al-Anbiya 21:26; Surah An-Nisa 4:157; Surah Al-Ahzab 33:40; Surah Al-Ikhlas 112:3.
Kaiser, Walter C. Toward an Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.
Wenham, Gordon. The Book of Leviticus. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.
Bruce, F. F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1988.
Geisler, Norman, and Abdul Saleeb. Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.
Stott, John R. W. The Cross of Christ. Downers Grove: IVP, 1986.

Jesus is God, According to James and Jude

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

The epistles of James and Jude, though brief in length compared to Pauline letters, hold profound Christological significance. Both writers—James, the brother of Jesus, and Jude, also identified as a servant of Christ—make explicit references that affirm the divinity of Jesus Christ. In James 1, Jesus is called “Lord,” a divine title rooted in Old Testament Yahwistic theology. In Jude 1, the Lord who brought Israel out of Egypt is identified as Jesus, affirming that Christ was not merely a historical teacher, but the eternal God active in redemptive history. This article seeks to examine these texts exegetically and theologically, placing them within the framework of biblical revelation and early Christian faith, ultimately demonstrating how James and Jude affirm Jesus as God.

1. Introduction

The divinity of Jesus Christ has remained a central doctrine of Christianity from its inception. The early church did not invent the idea of Christ’s divinity; rather, it recognized it as the self-disclosure of God through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. While much of the discussion on Christology centers on the writings of Paul and John, the epistles of James and Jude provide valuable insights into the apostolic witness concerning Jesus as God. These letters reveal that the very family members of Jesus recognized Him as the divine Lord.

2. James’ Confession of Jesus as Lord

2.1 The Title “Lord” in James 1:1

James opens his epistle with the words: “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1, ESV). The juxtaposition of “God” and “the Lord Jesus Christ” is theologically significant. James places Jesus alongside God without distinction of nature or authority. The Greek term Kyrios (Lord) carries immense weight, as it was consistently used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) to translate the divine name YHWH. By applying this title to Jesus, James acknowledges His divine identity.

2.2 Servanthood and Divine Authority

James identifies himself as a servant (doulos) of both God and Jesus Christ. This dual servanthood highlights that service to Jesus is not separate from service to God. Rather, James presents Jesus as the divine object of devotion, obedience, and worship—functions that in Jewish monotheism belong solely to God.

3. Jude’s Confession of Jesus as the Lord of Israel’s Deliverance

3.1 Jude 1:5 – Jesus as the Deliverer from Egypt

Jude writes: “Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe” (Jude 1:5, ESV). This statement directly attributes the Old Testament act of deliverance from Egypt to Jesus Himself. While some manuscripts read “the Lord” instead of “Jesus,” the earliest and most reliable witnesses (e.g., Codex Sinaiticus) affirm the reading of “Jesus.”

3.2 Theological Implications

If Jude identifies Jesus as the one who delivered Israel from Egypt, then Jesus is not simply a New Testament figure but the eternal Son active in the Old Testament. This aligns with Pauline Christology, where Christ is seen as the pre-existent rock that followed Israel in the wilderness (1 Corinthians 10:4). Jude affirms continuity between the God of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ, thereby equating them in divine identity.

4. The Familial Witness to Christ’s Divinity

It is noteworthy that both James and Jude were brothers of Jesus according to the flesh (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3). During Jesus’ earthly ministry, His brothers initially doubted Him (John 7:5). However, following the resurrection, both became leading figures in the early church, boldly proclaiming Him as Lord and God. This radical transformation testifies to their conviction that Jesus was not merely their brother but the incarnate Lord.

5. Christological Continuity in Early Christianity

The witness of James and Jude complements the broader New Testament affirmation of Jesus’ deity:

Pauline witness: Jesus is identified as “God over all” (Romans 9:5) and as the one in whom “the fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9).
Johannine witness: The prologue of John identifies Jesus as the eternal Word who “was God” (John 1:1).
Petrine witness: Peter calls Jesus “our God and Savior” (2 Peter 1:1).

James and Jude, therefore, stand in harmony with the wider apostolic teaching that Jesus is fully God.

6. Inspirational Implications for Believers

The recognition of Jesus as God by James and Jude should inspire contemporary Christians in several ways:

Faith in Christ’s power – If Jesus is the Lord who delivered Israel from Egypt, He is able to deliver us from sin, bondage, and death.
Confidence in suffering – James calls believers to steadfastness (James 1:2–4) because Jesus, the divine Lord, rules over all circumstances.
Worship and devotion – Jude urges believers to keep themselves in the love of God (Jude 1:21), affirming that worship of Jesus is inseparable from worship of God.

7. Conclusion

The epistles of James and Jude, though often overlooked, provide profound evidence for the divinity of Jesus Christ. James identifies Him as Lord, placing Him alongside God as the object of faith and service. Jude identifies Jesus as the divine Lord who brought Israel out of Egypt, revealing His eternal role in salvation history. Together, these testimonies affirm that Jesus is not merely a moral teacher or prophet, but the eternal God who redeems His people.

References

The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (Crossway, 2016).
Bauckham, Richard. Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990.
Carson, D.A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
Green, Gene L. Jude and 2 Peter. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Moo, Douglas J. The Letter of James. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
Schreiner, Thomas R. New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

ALLAH NEVER SAID TO ADAM “I AM GOD, WORSHIP ME”

A Debate Challenge to Islamic Apologetics
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

For centuries, Islamic polemicists have sought to undermine the divinity of Jesus Christ by demanding Christians produce an explicit verse from the Bible in which Jesus declares in verbatim: “I am God, worship me.” This rhetorical strategy attempts to place the Christian faith under a burden of proof that is not applied consistently to Islam itself. While this approach may appear persuasive at a superficial level, it collapses under the weight of its own logic when mirrored back onto the Qur’an and its theology of Allah’s self-revelation.

The central challenge, therefore, is this: If Muslims insist that Jesus must utter in verbatim “I am God, worship me” for His divinity to be valid, then where does Allah ever tell Adam—the first man and prophet in Islam—“I am God, worship me”?

The Qur’anic Silence

According to Islamic tradition, Adam is not only the first human but also the first prophet. If Allah truly is the God of Adam, the foundational prophet of Islam, then one would reasonably expect the Qur’an to contain a direct, unequivocal declaration where Allah introduces Himself in clear divine self-identification to Adam. Yet upon examining the Qur’an, there exists no single ayah where Allah says to Adam explicitly: “I am God, worship me.”

Instead, the Qur’an provides vague references to Allah creating Adam (Qur’an 2:30–34; 7:11–18), breathing into him (Qur’an 15:29), and commanding angels to bow before Adam. But strikingly absent is the explicit divine command of self-revelation to Adam in the form of “I am God, worship me.”

This silence raises an academic problem: if Muslims demand verbatim divine self-identification from Jesus as proof of divinity, consistency demands they also produce verbatim divine self-identification from Allah to Adam. Their inability to do so, using their own standard, disqualifies Allah as Adam’s God.

The Double Standard of Islamic Polemics

The Muslim objection to Christ’s divinity often functions on a false standard of linguistic exactness. By demanding that Christians locate exact wording absent from Scripture, they ignore the overwhelming theological witness of the New Testament in which Jesus claims divine prerogatives:

He forgives sins (Mark 2:5–7), a prerogative belonging to God alone.
He identifies Himself with Yahweh’s “I AM” (John 8:58).
He accepts worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).
He declares unity with the Father (John 10:30).

The Qur’an, however, offers no parallel clarity for Allah’s self-revelation to Adam. If Jesus’ divinity is denied because the Bible does not contain the precise sentence Muslims demand, then Allah’s claim to deity over Adam must likewise be denied, since the Qur’an never records such a statement.

Theological Consequences

For Islam:
By its own argumentative logic, Islam cannot affirm that Allah is Adam’s God, since Allah never utters to Adam, “I am God, worship me.”
For Christianity:
The Christian faith rests not on contrived verbatim formulas but on the totality of Christ’s words, deeds, and identity as God Incarnate. The New Testament provides abundant testimony that Jesus is God, without the need for artificial proof-texting.
For Debate Consistency:
Muslim apologists must abandon their double standard. Either they admit that divine identity can be communicated without a rigid verbatim formula (thus validating Christ’s divinity), or they must accept that Allah fails to qualify as Adam’s God.

Conclusion

The polemic that demands Christians show Jesus saying verbatim “I am God, worship me” ultimately backfires on Islam. The Qur’an contains no record of Allah saying to Adam, “I am God, worship me.” By the very standard Muslims apply to deny Christ’s divinity, Allah is disqualified from being the God of Adam.

Therefore, the debate challenge stands: If Muslims reject Jesus’ divinity for lack of verbatim phrasing, then where in the Qur’an does Allah introduce Himself to Adam in the same explicit manner? Until such an ayah is produced—which does not exist—Muslim polemics remain inconsistent and self-defeating.

References

The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV).
The Qur’an (translations by Pickthall, Yusuf Ali, and Sahih International).
Ali, A. Yusuf. The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an. Amana Publications, 2006.
Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to New Testament Christology. Paulist Press, 1994.
Stott, John. Basic Christianity. IVP Books, 2008.
Walker, Andrew. “Jesus’ Divine Self-Understanding in the Gospels.” Journal of Theological Studies 64.3 (2013): 450–472.