The Spirit of Inconsistencies and Contradictions within the Quran

 The Spirit of Inconsistencies and Contradictions within the Quran: A Theological Review

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

The Quran, revered as the final revelation in Islam, claims to be free of contradictions, fully explanatory, and of divine origin. However, a careful examination of its text against logic, science, and divine revelation in the Torah and Injil reveals profound inconsistencies that question these claims. Below are a few theological issues requiring honest scrutiny:

1. The Moon Was Split (Quran 54:1)
The Quran alleges that the moon split in the time of Muhammad as a miracle. Historical, astronomical, and theological records — from Jewish, Christian, Roman, and Persian sources — report no such event. The absence of a globally witnessed cosmic occurrence undermines the claim of its factuality.

2. The Universe Has Two Easts and Two Wests (Quran 55:17)
Islamic texts present a cosmology inconsistent with observable science and the Torah's account of creation. The claim of two literal easts and wests contradicts both scriptural revelation and empirical reality.

3. Nobody Knows What is in the Womb (Quran 31:34)
Modern science has disproven this claim, with prenatal imaging and genetic testing offering detailed insights into fetal development and gender — a capability that, according to the Quran, should be beyond human reach.

4. Nobody Knows When it Will Rain (Quran 31:34)
While absolute precision in long-term forecasting is impossible, meteorology allows for accurate short-term predictions. The Torah and Injil attribute control over weather to YHWH but acknowledge man's ability to observe and forecast through wisdom imparted by God (Job 38:33-37).

5. No One Can Produce a Book Like the Quran (Quran 2:23)
This challenge is theological sophistry. The Torah and Injil contain far older, coherent, and doctrinally consistent revelations. The Quran itself borrows extensively from these texts while introducing contradictions and anthropomorphic errors.

6. The Sun Sets in a Muddy Spring (Quran 18:86)
This geocentric misconception contradicts established astronomy. The Bible, while employing phenomenological language, never ascribes literal geographic resting points to the sun.

7. The Quran is Self-Explanatory
Islamic scholars themselves concede the necessity of hadiths and tafsirs for interpretation — proving the Quran is neither fully clear nor internally explanatory.

8. The Quran Has No Contradictions
Doctrinal and narrative inconsistencies abound: from differing accounts of creation to conflicting teachings on salvation, divine nature, and scriptural integrity. The Torah and Injil uphold divine consistency (Numbers 23:19; James 1:17).

9. Allah is All-Knowing and All-Seeing
Islam claims Allah possesses omniscience, yet multiple verses depict him as unaware, surprised, or learning from human actions — contradicting the attributes of the eternal, unchanging God revealed in the Torah (Isaiah 46:9-10).

Conclusion:
The Quran's assertions not only contradict observable reality but often stand in opposition to the eternal, self-consistent revelation of God in the Torah and Injil. This critical theological examination invites Muslims and non-Muslims alike to reflect on the inconsistencies presented and earnestly seek the God revealed through the unchanging scriptures — the God who is both Father and has revealed His Son, worthy of all worship (Proverbs 30:4; John 1:1-14).

For more studies, visit:
Shimba Theological Institute

The Spirit of Inconsistencies and Contradictions within the Quran: A Theological Review

 The Spirit of Inconsistencies and Contradictions within the Quran: A Theological Review

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

The Quran, revered as the final revelation in Islam, claims to be free of contradictions, fully explanatory, and of divine origin. However, a careful examination of its text against logic, science, and divine revelation in the Torah and Injil reveals profound inconsistencies that question these claims. Below are a few theological issues requiring honest scrutiny:

1. The Moon Was Split (Quran 54:1)
The Quran alleges that the moon split in the time of Muhammad as a miracle. Historical, astronomical, and theological records — from Jewish, Christian, Roman, and Persian sources — report no such event. The absence of a globally witnessed cosmic occurrence undermines the claim of its factuality.

2. The Universe Has Two Easts and Two Wests (Quran 55:17)
Islamic texts present a cosmology inconsistent with observable science and the Torah's account of creation. The claim of two literal easts and wests contradicts both scriptural revelation and empirical reality.

3. Nobody Knows What is in the Womb (Quran 31:34)
Modern science has disproven this claim, with prenatal imaging and genetic testing offering detailed insights into fetal development and gender — a capability that, according to the Quran, should be beyond human reach.

4. Nobody Knows When it Will Rain (Quran 31:34)
While absolute precision in long-term forecasting is impossible, meteorology allows for accurate short-term predictions. The Torah and Injil attribute control over weather to YHWH but acknowledge man's ability to observe and forecast through wisdom imparted by God (Job 38:33-37).

5. No One Can Produce a Book Like the Quran (Quran 2:23)
This challenge is theological sophistry. The Torah and Injil contain far older, coherent, and doctrinally consistent revelations. The Quran itself borrows extensively from these texts while introducing contradictions and anthropomorphic errors.

6. The Sun Sets in a Muddy Spring (Quran 18:86)
This geocentric misconception contradicts established astronomy. The Bible, while employing phenomenological language, never ascribes literal geographic resting points to the sun.

7. The Quran is Self-Explanatory
Islamic scholars themselves concede the necessity of hadiths and tafsirs for interpretation — proving the Quran is neither fully clear nor internally explanatory.

8. The Quran Has No Contradictions
Doctrinal and narrative inconsistencies abound: from differing accounts of creation to conflicting teachings on salvation, divine nature, and scriptural integrity. The Torah and Injil uphold divine consistency (Numbers 23:19; James 1:17).

9. Allah is All-Knowing and All-Seeing
Islam claims Allah possesses omniscience, yet multiple verses depict him as unaware, surprised, or learning from human actions — contradicting the attributes of the eternal, unchanging God revealed in the Torah (Isaiah 46:9-10).

Conclusion:
The Quran's assertions not only contradict observable reality but often stand in opposition to the eternal, self-consistent revelation of God in the Torah and Injil. This critical theological examination invites Muslims and non-Muslims alike to reflect on the inconsistencies presented and earnestly seek the God revealed through the unchanging scriptures — the God who is both Father and has revealed His Son, worthy of all worship (Proverbs 30:4; John 1:1-14).

For more studies, visit:
Shimba Theological Institute

A THEOLOGICAL CHALLENGE TO ISLAM: JESUS AND THE “FATHER” QUESTION

 By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

A THEOLOGICAL CHALLENGE TO ISLAM: JESUS AND THE “FATHER” QUESTION

How can Muslims claim that Jesus was a Muslim while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Jesus openly addressed God as His Father?

In Islam, calling Allah a “Father” is blasphemy, punishable by death under Sharia law. The Qur'an categorically denies the concept of Allah being a father to anyone (Qur’an 112:3, 5:18, 19:88-92).
So how could Jesus — whom they claim was a prophet of Islam — consistently address God as “My Father” and “Our Father” in the Torah and Injil (New Testament)?

Either:

1. Jesus was not a Muslim, as the Qur'an falsely claims.
   OR

2. Islam and the Qur'an are lying to us by trying to force Jesus into an identity He never claimed.

Questions Muslims must honestly answer:

• If Jesus was a Muslim, why did He repeatedly call God “Father” (John 10:30, Matthew 6:9, John 14:2)?

• Why did Jesus claim equality with God, something no prophet of Islam has ever done (John 10:33-36)?

• Is Allah the Father? If not, why did Jesus, whom Muslims claim as a prophet, refer to God in such a way?

• If Jesus is just a prophet in Islam, why does even the Qur'an ascribe to Him powers and miracles (like raising the dead and creating life from clay) that no other Islamic prophet is allowed (Qur’an 3:49)?

• If Allah has no son (Qur’an 112:3), why does the Torah and Injil — which Islam claims to honor — consistently refer to the Son of God?

Islam cannot hold both positions without contradiction: Jesus cannot be a Muslim and call God “Father.”

It’s time to decide — either accept the Jesus of the Bible, the Son of God, or admit that the Qur'an misrepresents Him.

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given…” — Isaiah 9:6
“I and the Father are one.” — John 10:30

Truth demands honesty. Let the Muslims answer.

#JesusIsGod #FalseIslamicNarratives #MaxwellShimba #ShimbaTheologicalInstitute

The Origin of the Paper Quran: A Theological and Textual Critique

 The Origin of the Paper Quran: A Theological and Textual Critique

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the significant theological dilemmas within Islamic scripture lies in its conflicting declarations about the nature of the Quran itself. A careful examination of several Quranic verses reveals profound contradictions that challenge the traditional Muslim claim that the Quran is the immutable, literal word of God delivered from heaven.

In Quran 6:7, the text reads:

“And if We had sent down to you a written scripture on paper, and they touched it with their hands, those who disbelieve would have said, ‘This is nothing but clear magic.’”

Here, Allah himself acknowledges that had the Quran been sent in tangible, written form — as sacred texts traditionally are — it would have been dismissed as mere witchcraft. This raises a theological question: if the physical manifestation of divine revelation was prone to be labeled as sorcery by its witnesses, how then did the Quran come to exist today in printed and paper-bound form across the Muslim world? Was not such a form explicitly described as a vehicle of deception according to the Quranic text itself?

Further supporting this critique is Quran 74:24–26, where it is stated:

“And he said, ‘This is nothing but magic passed down.’” (v.24)
“This is nothing but the word of a human being.” (v.25)
“I will cast him into Saqar (Hellfire).” (v.26)

These verses attribute accusations of human authorship and transmitted sorcery to what Muslims revere as divine scripture. This admission within the Quran of its perception as magic and human words invites a deeper textual and theological investigation.

From a biblical and Judeo-Christian scholarly perspective, divine revelation has always been entrusted to written text — from the tablets given to Moses (Exodus 31:18) to the recorded words of the prophets and apostles. Scripture is historically authenticated by eyewitness testimony, prophetic consistency, and divine preservation. The Bible acknowledges its textual transmission without the ambiguity or contradictory claims found in Islamic sources.

This raises an unavoidable theological contradiction: if the Quran itself anticipates its paper form being dismissed as witchcraft and human invention, how does Islam reconcile this with the current widespread veneration of the physical mushaf (written Quran)?

Conclusion:
The scholarly critique advanced here, grounded in both Quranic text and theological reasoning, demonstrates that the Quran undermines its own claim to divine origin. It inadvertently admits human interference and anticipates accusations of sorcery — admissions absent in the consistent, theologically sound narrative of biblical scripture.

As we continue this inquiry at Shimba Theological Institute, further evidence will be presented affirming that the Quran is not the immutable book of the Living God, but a human text interwoven with pre-Islamic magic traditions and folklore, later canonized into religious orthodoxy.

#TheologyOfTheText | #QuranicContradictions | #MaxwellShimba

Jesus Christ: Declared God by His Disciples, Affirmed by Himself

 Jesus Christ: Declared God by His Disciples, Affirmed by Himself

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the most powerful and undeniable affirmations of the divinity of Jesus Christ in Scripture is found in John 20:28, where the apostle Thomas, upon encountering the risen Christ, exclaims:

“My Lord and my God!”

Notice carefully — Jesus did not rebuke Thomas for this declaration. In Jewish custom and theology, attributing divinity to anyone other than the one true God would have been considered blasphemy, a sin punishable by death (Leviticus 24:16). If Jesus were merely a prophet or a good moral teacher, as Islamic theology suggests, this would have been the moment for Him to correct Thomas. But instead, Jesus accepted this worship.

The acceptance of worship and divine titles is consistent throughout the New Testament narrative. In multiple instances:

• Matthew 14:33 — After calming the storm, the disciples worshiped Him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

• Hebrews 1:8 — The Father Himself declares of the Son, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.”

• Revelation 5:13-14 — All creation offers worship to “Him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb.”

In contrast, faithful servants of God like angels and apostles consistently refused worship (Revelation 19:10, Acts 14:14-15). This highlights a crucial theological distinction: Jesus accepted what only God is due — worship and divine titles.

Islamic theology, as presented in the Quran, denies the divinity of Jesus (Surah 5:72), reducing Him to a prophet. Yet the New Testament, authenticated by apostolic witness and consistent prophetic revelation, firmly proclaims the deity of Christ. John 1:1 boldly declares, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

The testimony of Thomas represents the climax of Johannine Christology — acknowledging Jesus as both sovereign Lord and eternal God, a truth Jesus affirmed through His actions, teachings, and acceptance of divine worship.

Conclusion:
The biblical witness is unmistakable. Jesus is not a mere prophet; He is God incarnate. His resurrection, acceptance of worship, and divine authority confirm His eternal nature as both Lord and God. Any theology denying this truth stands in opposition to apostolic Christianity and the unbroken testimony of Scripture.

Another Clear Proof of the Man-Made Nature of Allah in the Quran

 Another Clear Proof of the Man-Made Nature of Allah in the Quran

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the glaring theological inconsistencies found within the Quran is exposed in passages such as Surah 23:14 and Surah 37:125, where Allah is referred to as “the best of creators.”

Quran 23:14:

“…Blessed be Allah, the best of creators.”

Quran 37:125:

“Will you call upon Baal and forsake the best of creators?”

Now, this raises an unsettling theological question for any serious student of monotheism: If Allah is ‘the best of creators,’ who are the other creators he is competing against?

The very phrase “best of creators” presupposes the existence of multiple creators — a notion fundamentally incompatible with the pure monotheism (Tawhid) Islam claims to uphold. In biblical theology, the God of the Bible declares without ambiguity:

Isaiah 45:5 (ESV):

“I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God.”

There is no suggestion of competing deities or creators — because in true monotheism, there can only be one Creator. The God of the Bible is exclusively sovereign over creation, without rival or peer.

The Quran’s wording betrays its human authorship, reflecting the polytheistic and syncretistic environment of 7th-century Arabia, where multiple deities and creators were commonly believed in. By inadvertently preserving this pluralistic language, the Quran confirms its own origins in the context of man-made, cultural mythology rather than divine revelation.

Conclusion:
Passages like these serve as theological proof that Allah, as presented in the Quran, is a product of human invention — a god competing within a pantheon rather than reigning alone in sovereign supremacy. This stands in sharp contrast to the consistent, absolute monotheism of the Bible.

Stay tuned for more scriptural and doctrinal contrasts as we continue to shed light on the differences between biblical truth and Quranic mythology.

Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Founder & President, Shimba Theological Institute

A Talking Quran? Another Proof of Islamic Mythology Exposed

 A Talking Quran? Another Proof of Islamic Mythology Exposed

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the most puzzling — and frankly mythological — narrations in Islamic tradition is recorded in Sunan Ibn Majah 3781:

It was narrated from Ibn Buraidah that his father told that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “The Quran will come on the Day of Resurrection like a pale man, and will say: ‘I am the one that kept you awake at night and made you thirsty during the day.’”
(Sunan Ibn Majah 3781 | Graded Hasan by Darussalam)

This hadith paints a bizarre eschatological picture where the Quran — supposedly the eternal, uncreated word of Allah in Islam — takes human form as a pale man on the Day of Resurrection. It allegedly speaks, introduces itself, and claims credit for the hardships believers endured.

The Theological Problem:
From a Biblical and sound theological perspective, this concept is pure myth-making. The idea that a book — supposedly divine and uncreated in Islamic theology — would take on anthropomorphic form contradicts the transcendent, immutable nature of God’s word as understood in Scripture.

The Bible teaches that only the Word made flesh is Jesus Christ (John 1:14) — not a written text assuming human form. Nowhere in Biblical eschatology do sacred writings become sentient beings on the Day of Judgment.

Furthermore, the Quran’s own theology becomes entangled in contradiction:

• Is the Quran an attribute of Allah, eternal and uncreated — or a being capable of independent action and speech on Judgment Day?

• This narration exposes remnants of the animistic and allegorical beliefs that permeated pre-Islamic Arabian culture, now embedded in Islamic eschatology.

A Scriptural Contrast:
The Bible clearly teaches that it is God Himself who judges, not a book walking and talking.

2 Corinthians 5:10 (ESV):

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ…”

Notice — it’s Christ who judges, not scripture with a mouth and a face.

Conclusion:
This hadith highlights yet another mythical, human-constructed element within Islamic theology. A talking, pale Quran roaming about on Judgment Day is not the revelation of a transcendent, sovereign God — it’s the storytelling of human religious invention.

At Shimba Theological Institute, we stand firm on the revealed, consistent, and coherent nature of Biblical truth. Islam’s mythical narrations continue to expose its human authorship and distance from divine revelation.

Stay with us for more theological examinations and scriptural truth.

Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Founder & Director, Shimba Theological Institute

A Prophet Striking the Angel of Death? Another Theological Absurdity in Islamic Tradition

 A Prophet Striking the Angel of Death? Another Theological Absurdity in Islamic Tradition

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

Among the perplexing and mythological narrations preserved within Islamic hadith literature is one recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari 1339:

Arabic Text:

حَدَّثَنَا مَحْمُودٌ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، أَخْبَرَنَا مَعْمَرٌ، عَنِ ابْنِ طَاوُسٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ ‏"‏ أُرْسِلَ مَلَكُ الْمَوْتِ إِلَى مُوسَى ـ عَلَيْهِمَا السَّلاَمُ ـ فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُ صَكَّهُ...

English Translation:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Angel of Death was sent to Moses (peace be upon him). When he came to him, Moses struck him on the eye, causing him to return to his Lord and complain, saying, “You have sent me to a servant who does not want to die.” So Allah restored his eye and said, “Return to him and tell him to place his hand on the back of an ox, and for every hair that his hand covers, he will be granted one year of life.” Moses said, “O Lord, then what?” He said, “Then death.” Moses said, “Let it be now.” And he asked Allah to let him die near the Holy Land at a distance of a stone’s throw.” The Prophet (ﷺ) added, “If I were there, I would show you his grave beside the red sand hill by the roadside.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari 1339)

---

Theological Analysis:

From a Christian theological and biblical standpoint, this narration is irreconcilable with the nature of prophecy and the order of divine authority as revealed in Scripture.

1. Prophets of God in the Bible are obedient servants, not aggressors against heavenly beings. Nowhere in the Old Testament do we find Moses striking an angel of death or resisting God’s decree. In fact, Scripture teaches submission to the will of God:

“So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.” — Psalm 90:12

2. The idea of Allah being overruled or outmaneuvered by one of His servants is theologically incoherent. The sovereign God of the Bible executes His will perfectly without obstruction or negotiation from His creation.

3. Anthropomorphizing the Angel of Death to the extent that a human can strike out his eye reflects the pre-Islamic mythological culture of attributing human vulnerabilities to celestial beings — something strictly refuted in biblical monotheism.

---

Final Reflection:
This hadith illustrates one of many narrations that expose the mythic traditions within Islamic literature, lacking harmony with biblical revelation. Moses, a revered prophet of God, would never lay violent hands on a divine messenger.

Hebrews 11:24-25 affirms Moses' faithful obedience:

“By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin.”

Such biblical texts contrast sharply with Islamic narrations that blur the line between myth and divine truth.

At Shimba Theological Institute, we remain committed to unveiling these contradictions, illuminating the unchanging truth of Scripture and exposing the theological inconsistencies of other religious traditions.

Does the Quran Know Jesus? A Theological Exposé

 Does the Quran Know Jesus? A Theological Exposé

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

The Quran repeatedly claims to honor Isa (Jesus) as a prophet and messenger of God. Yet, a careful, objective examination reveals that the Quran lacks even the most basic historical and biographical details about the life and ministry of Jesus Christ — details that are well-documented in both Biblical Scripture and early Christian history. This absence exposes the Quran not as the Word of the Living God but as a man-made text borrowing fragments from apocryphal legends and oral traditions.

Let’s critically ask the Quran:

1. In which city was Jesus born?
Answer: The Quran never names Bethlehem as the birthplace of Jesus. In contrast, Micah 5:2 prophesied it, and Matthew 2:1 confirms it. The Quran’s silence is striking for a supposed divine revelation.

2. How many years did Jesus minister on earth?
Answer: The Quran gives no information about the length of Jesus' earthly ministry, while the Bible reveals it was around 3½ years (Luke 3:23).

3. At what age did Jesus begin His ministry?
Answer: Again, the Quran is mute. The Bible clearly records Jesus began His ministry at about 30 years of age (Luke 3:23).

4. How long did He perform miracles and preach publicly?
Answer: Nowhere does the Quran offer this timeline — yet the Gospels meticulously document His miracles and teachings across towns and regions for about three years.

5. Where did Jesus die?
Answer: The Quran denies the crucifixion altogether (Surah 4:157), while historical records and secular historians like Josephus and Tacitus verify that Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem under Pontius Pilate.

6. Where is Jesus buried according to the Quran?
Answer: The Quran neither records the burial of Jesus nor any location, whereas the Bible details His burial by Joseph of Arimathea (Matthew 27:59-60).

7. Who were the 12 disciples of Jesus according to the Quran?
Answer: The Quran mentions vague “hawariyun” (helpers) but names none, while the Bible lists all twelve apostles (Matthew 10:2-4).

8. What sermons did Jesus preach?
Answer: The Quran offers no record of the Sermon on the Mount, the Parables, or His teaching on the Kingdom of God — all central to the Biblical Gospel.

9. Who were His family members?
Answer: The Quran only names Mary (Maryam) and omits His earthly father figure Joseph, and His brothers like James and Jude (Matthew 13:55).

10. What prophecies did Jesus fulfill?
Answer: The Quran does not mention a single Old Testament prophecy fulfilled by Jesus — yet the Bible lists over 300 prophecies completed by Him.

---

Conclusion:
These glaring omissions unmistakably prove that the Quran does not possess divine knowledge concerning Jesus Christ, the most significant figure in human redemption history. The absence of these critical details reflects a document assembled from fragmented, second-hand oral myths rather than a true revelation from the Living God.

As the Apostle Paul rightly declared:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” — Galatians 1:8

The Bible is complete, accurate, prophetically fulfilled, and historically verified — while the Quran remains an inconsistent, man-centered document lacking divine signature.

Jesus Christ is not just a prophet. He is the Son of the Living God, the Word made flesh, crucified, risen, and coming again as King of kings.

Why the Islamic Concept of Preparing a Bed for the Devil Contradicts God’s Righteousness and Biblical Doctrine

 Why the Islamic Concept of Preparing a Bed for the Devil Contradicts God’s Righteousness and Biblical Doctrine

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

In the Islamic hadith literature, specifically Sunan Abi Dawud 4142, it is narrated by Jabir bin ‘Abdullah that the Prophet of Islam said:

"There should be bedding for a man, bedding for his wife, and third for a guest, but a fourth for the devil."

This peculiar tradition raises profound theological concerns when measured against the light of God’s Word as revealed in the Holy Bible. In biblical doctrine, the presence of devils, demons, and unclean spirits is consistently portrayed as hostile, oppressive, and contrary to God's holiness, goodness, and order.

In the biblical worldview, there is no provision for preparing a place for the devil. Rather, the Scriptures command believers to resist the devil (James 4:7), cast out demons (Mark 16:17), and to live in houses consecrated to the Lord (Joshua 24:15). Nowhere in the inspired Word of God are believers instructed to make allowances, spaces, or hospitality for satanic entities within their homes or lives.

In fact, the Lord Jesus Christ consistently expelled demonic presences wherever He encountered them (Luke 8:27-33), and instructed His followers to do the same through the power of the Holy Spirit. The Christian home is to be a dwelling of peace, godliness, and purity — not one where evil is entertained, invited, or allotted a place, even symbolically.

The theological implications of such a hadith are troubling:

• It implies a form of coexistence with evil.

• It normalizes the presence of the devil within domestic life.

• It fundamentally contradicts God’s holiness and call for His people to be separate from darkness (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

Biblical Values Affirm:

“Do not give the devil a foothold.” (Ephesians 4:27)

Christian theology firmly teaches that demons are adversaries of God and His people, and their rightful place is not in beds, homes, or lives — but under the authority of Christ and ultimately in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10).

Conclusion:
This Islamic tradition reveals a theological deficiency that not only undermines the seriousness of spiritual warfare but directly opposes the moral and spiritual purity demanded by the Living God. The followers of Christ are called to be holy, to sanctify their dwellings, and to ensure no provision is made for evil spirits.

At Shimba Theological Institute, we call upon seekers of truth to critically examine such traditions against the flawless light of the Word of God — where devils are expelled, not accommodated.

“Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.”
(James 4:7)

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Founder, Shimba Theological Institute

The Quran’s Implication in 43:81 That Validates the Worship of the Son of God

 The Quran’s Implication in 43:81 That Validates the Worship of the Son of God: A Theological Analysis

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

---

Introduction:
For centuries, the divinity of Jesus Christ has remained the cornerstone of Christian theology and salvation. Yet intriguingly, within the Islamic scripture itself, one finds conditional statements that inadvertently affirm this Christian belief. One such passage is Qur'an 43:81, where Allah supposedly commands Muhammad to declare:

“If the Most Gracious had a son, I would be the first to worship.” (Qur'an 43:81)

At first glance, the Muslim argument dismisses the existence of any son of God. However, this verse presents an undeniable implication: if it were a fact that God had a son, then such a being would be inherently worthy of divine worship — a position fully embraced within Christian doctrine.

---

The Conditional Reality:

The Arabic construct of "لو" (law) translated as “if” in this verse, introduces a conditional statement. In theological terms, this is a hypothetical admission which, if fulfilled, would necessitate action — in this case, worship. The Quran thus indirectly acknowledges that the Son of God, by nature and essence, must be divine and worthy of the same worship as the Father.

This is significant because it dismantles any accusation of blasphemy against Christians for worshipping the Son, provided that God indeed has a Son — which the Bible asserts unequivocally.

---

Does the Torah and Injil Affirm God Has a Son?

The Bible leaves no ambiguity regarding this:

Proverbs 30:4 (Torah/Writings)

“Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son’s name? Surely you know!”

This rhetorical verse acknowledges not only the existence of God but also that of His Son — an eternal, uncreated, divine being sharing in the nature of the Father.

John 1:1-3, 14 (Injil)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made. And the Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us.”

The Bible teaches that Jesus (Isa Al-Masih) is not a created being but the eternal Logos, co-existent with the Father and deserving of all worship.

---

The Theological Implication for Islam:

While Muslims reject the idea of God having a son, Qur’an 43:81 inadvertently reveals that should such a Son exist, His divinity and the legitimacy of worshipping Him would be theologically sound — even within the Islamic worldview. This is precisely what Christianity holds: that Jesus is the uncreated Son of God, fully divine, and worthy of worship.

---

Conclusion:

The Qur’an, in its attempt to preempt Christian theology, inadvertently leaves a theological crack that affirms the Christian belief in the Son of God. As the Torah and Injil testify of God’s Son, and as the Qur’an hypothetically allows for the worship of such a Son, the evidence compels an honest seeker of truth to reckon with the person of Jesus Christ.

As it is written:

John 20:28

“Thomas answered and said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God!’”

May those seeking the truth come to know the Son who alone reveals the Father.

- Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

The Origin of the Paper Quran: A Theological and Textual Critique

 The Origin of the Paper Quran: A Theological and Textual Critique

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the significant theological dilemmas within Islamic scripture lies in its conflicting declarations about the nature of the Quran itself. A careful examination of several Quranic verses reveals profound contradictions that challenge the traditional Muslim claim that the Quran is the immutable, literal word of God delivered from heaven.

In Quran 6:7, the text reads:

“And if We had sent down to you a written scripture on paper, and they touched it with their hands, those who disbelieve would have said, ‘This is nothing but clear magic.’”

Here, Allah himself acknowledges that had the Quran been sent in tangible, written form — as sacred texts traditionally are — it would have been dismissed as mere witchcraft. This raises a theological question: if the physical manifestation of divine revelation was prone to be labeled as sorcery by its witnesses, how then did the Quran come to exist today in printed and paper-bound form across the Muslim world? Was not such a form explicitly described as a vehicle of deception according to the Quranic text itself?

Further supporting this critique is Quran 74:24–26, where it is stated:

“And he said, ‘This is nothing but magic passed down.’” (v.24)
“This is nothing but the word of a human being.” (v.25)
“I will cast him into Saqar (Hellfire).” (v.26)

These verses attribute accusations of human authorship and transmitted sorcery to what Muslims revere as divine scripture. This admission within the Quran of its perception as magic and human words invites a deeper textual and theological investigation.

From a biblical and Judeo-Christian scholarly perspective, divine revelation has always been entrusted to written text — from the tablets given to Moses (Exodus 31:18) to the recorded words of the prophets and apostles. Scripture is historically authenticated by eyewitness testimony, prophetic consistency, and divine preservation. The Bible acknowledges its textual transmission without the ambiguity or contradictory claims found in Islamic sources.

This raises an unavoidable theological contradiction: if the Quran itself anticipates its paper form being dismissed as witchcraft and human invention, how does Islam reconcile this with the current widespread veneration of the physical mushaf (written Quran)?

Conclusion:
The scholarly critique advanced here, grounded in both Quranic text and theological reasoning, demonstrates that the Quran undermines its own claim to divine origin. It inadvertently admits human interference and anticipates accusations of sorcery — admissions absent in the consistent, theologically sound narrative of biblical scripture.

As we continue this inquiry at Shimba Theological Institute, further evidence will be presented affirming that the Quran is not the immutable book of the Living God, but a human text interwoven with pre-Islamic magic traditions and folklore, later canonized into religious orthodoxy.

#TheologyOfTheText | #QuranicContradictions | #MaxwellShimba

Jesus Christ: Declared God by His Disciples, Affirmed by Himself

 Jesus Christ: Declared God by His Disciples, Affirmed by Himself

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the most powerful and undeniable affirmations of the divinity of Jesus Christ in Scripture is found in John 20:28, where the apostle Thomas, upon encountering the risen Christ, exclaims:

“My Lord and my God!”

Notice carefully — Jesus did not rebuke Thomas for this declaration. In Jewish custom and theology, attributing divinity to anyone other than the one true God would have been considered blasphemy, a sin punishable by death (Leviticus 24:16). If Jesus were merely a prophet or a good moral teacher, as Islamic theology suggests, this would have been the moment for Him to correct Thomas. But instead, Jesus accepted this worship.

The acceptance of worship and divine titles is consistent throughout the New Testament narrative. In multiple instances:

• Matthew 14:33 — After calming the storm, the disciples worshiped Him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

• Hebrews 1:8 — The Father Himself declares of the Son, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.”

• Revelation 5:13-14 — All creation offers worship to “Him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb.”

In contrast, faithful servants of God like angels and apostles consistently refused worship (Revelation 19:10, Acts 14:14-15). This highlights a crucial theological distinction: Jesus accepted what only God is due — worship and divine titles.

Islamic theology, as presented in the Quran, denies the divinity of Jesus (Surah 5:72), reducing Him to a prophet. Yet the New Testament, authenticated by apostolic witness and consistent prophetic revelation, firmly proclaims the deity of Christ. John 1:1 boldly declares, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

The testimony of Thomas represents the climax of Johannine Christology — acknowledging Jesus as both sovereign Lord and eternal God, a truth Jesus affirmed through His actions, teachings, and acceptance of divine worship.

Conclusion:
The biblical witness is unmistakable. Jesus is not a mere prophet; He is God incarnate. His resurrection, acceptance of worship, and divine authority confirm His eternal nature as both Lord and God. Any theology denying this truth stands in opposition to apostolic Christianity and the unbroken testimony of Scripture.

When Misunderstanding Becomes Doctrine: How the Quran Misconstrues Biblical Christianity

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the clearest evidences of theological confusion within the Quran is its misrepresentation of core Christian doctrines — particularly concerning the identity of God and the Messiah. A prime example is found in Surah 9:31, which astonishingly states:

“They take their rabbis and their monks as lords besides Allah and the Christ, the son of Mary.”

Here’s the issue: the Quran inadvertently admits what it elsewhere denies — that there are two Lords to whom allegiance is due: Allah and the Christ. In Islam’s own theological system, this is a grammatical and doctrinal anomaly. Islamic theology teaches strict monotheism (tawhid), yet this verse pairs Allah and the Christ together in a way that echoes the biblical distinction between God the Father and God the Son.

This flawed framing arises from a profound misunderstanding of biblical Trinitarian theology. In the Bible, God reveals Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — one Being, three persons. The Quran, however, consistently mischaracterizes Christian belief as either polytheistic or confused, often suggesting Christians worship Mary as part of the Trinity (Surah 5:116) — a claim historically and theologically false.

Compare this with the consistent testimony of Scripture:

• Psalm 110:1 prophesies, “The LORD said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand.’” A clear distinction within the Godhead.

• Luke 22:69, “The Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.”

• Jeremiah 30:9 speaks of a future where people serve both the LORD their God and David their king (Messiah).

• Revelation 11:15 declares the kingdom belongs to “our Lord and of his Christ.”

The biblical message is harmonious: God’s identity includes the eternal Son, Jesus Christ, seated at the right hand of the Father, reigning in power and glory. The Quran, while trying to dismiss this, paradoxically affirms it through accidental admissions like Surah 9:31.

This serves as a theological caution: When a religious text critiques another faith without truly grasping its doctrines, contradictions and misrepresentations are inevitable. The Quran’s portrayal of Christianity is not a reflection of biblical truth but of 7th-century misunderstandings recycled into religious text.

At Shimba Theological Institute, we urge serious students of theology to engage with primary sources — the Bible itself — and not secondhand interpretations. Truth is too precious to outsource to error.

In Christ’s wisdom,
Dr. Maxwell Shimba

The Forgotten Daughters of Allah: A Contradiction in Islamic Monotheism

 The Forgotten Daughters of Allah: A Contradiction in Islamic Monotheism

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Islam proudly upholds the doctrine of strict monotheism (Tawhid), claiming there is no god but Allah. Yet, buried within the early Islamic texts lies a glaring theological inconsistency: the acknowledgment of Allah’s so-called daughters — al-Lat, al-Uzza, and al-Manat.

Surah 53:19-20 (An-Najm) states:

“Have you seen al-Lat and al-Uzza, and another, the third (goddess), Manat?”

These were ancient Arabian deities, venerated at the Kaaba alongside Allah before Muhammad's rise to power. Early Islamic tradition and historical sources (such as al-Tabari and Ibn Ishaq) confirm that these goddesses were believed to be the daughters of Allah, a concept shockingly incompatible with Islam’s claim of absolute monotheism.

Muhammad, at one point, allegedly sanctioned their intercession in what became known as the “Satanic Verses” incident — a moment later abrogated and vehemently denied in later Muslim theology. But the remnants remain embedded in the Quran, exposing the polytheistic roots of early Meccan belief and highlighting an unresolved contradiction within the very fabric of Islam.

Theological Contradiction:
If Islam truly teaches that Allah is one and without partners or offspring (Surah 112:3), how could early Quranic texts reference these so-called daughters? The evidence reveals a compromised theology, where political and social expediency mingled with religious doctrine in Muhammad's formative years.

In Contrast:
The Bible presents consistent monotheism from Genesis to Revelation — one God, revealed in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. No interceding goddesses, no cultural compromises. The God of Scripture never wavers in His nature or revelation.

Conclusion:
This historical and theological reality dismantles the sanitized version of Islamic history presented today. It calls for serious reflection on the origins of Islamic doctrine and challenges the claim of its unbroken monotheistic purity.

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” (John 8:32)

The True Name of Salvation: Yeshua Revealed

 The True Name of Salvation: Yeshua Revealed

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the most profound theological revelations is the divine origin of the name Yeshua—the Hebrew name for Jesus—which literally means “salvation.” This name is not a New Testament invention, but deeply rooted in the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, or Tanakh.

In Psalm 9:14, David declares: “I will rejoice in your salvation.” In the Hebrew text, the word for “salvation” is יְשׁוּעָה (Yeshua)—the very name the angel would later instruct Joseph to give to the child born of Mary, for “He shall save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).

This isn’t coincidental. It’s prophetic design. The Old Testament repeatedly points to a Savior whose very name proclaims His mission: to save. Every time an ancient Israelite read the word “Yeshua” in the Psalms, Isaiah, or other prophetic books, they unknowingly proclaimed the name of the coming Messiah.

The Divine Signature
What makes this even more profound is how the name of Jesus is embedded throughout the Tanakh. In moments of deliverance, healing, and divine rescue, the word Yeshua appears—proclaiming not just an act of salvation, but a person who would embody salvation itself.

Contradicting Islamic Claims
This powerful truth also stands in direct contradiction to Islamic theology, which attempts to diminish the divine identity of Jesus (Isa). The Quran acknowledges Jesus as a prophet and denies His divinity, yet the Tanakh and New Testament both reveal that Yeshua is Salvation personified, the very fulfillment of messianic prophecy.

Conclusion
Jesus is not merely a prophet; He is Salvation Himself. The Hebrew Scriptures testify of Him, His mission, and His divine nature. His name wasn’t a cultural coincidence — it was a heavenly signature placed across sacred history.

“And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” — Acts 4:12

Shalom and Blessings,
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

The Dual Nature of Christ Jesus: Fully God and Fully Man

 The Dual Nature of Christ Jesus: Fully God and Fully Man

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the foundational doctrines of biblical Christianity is the hypostatic union — the theological term describing the dual nature of Christ Jesus: fully divine and fully human in one person. This mystery is at the heart of the Christian faith and is powerfully revealed through Scripture, lexicographical analysis, and centuries of theological reflection.

---

I. The Divine Nature of Christ

The New Testament unmistakably affirms the deity of Jesus Christ.

John 1:1 (Strong’s G2316) states:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

The Greek word Θεός (Theos, G2316) unequivocally refers to God Himself, showing that Jesus, the Logos, is fully divine from eternity past.

Colossians 2:9 (G4138) affirms:
"For in Him dwells all the fullness (πλήρωμα — plērōma, G4138) of the Godhead (θεότης — theotēs, G2320) bodily."

The term theotēs is used exclusively to denote the essential nature of God — indicating that Christ embodies undiminished deity in human form.

Old Testament Prophecy:
Isaiah 9:6 (H410) declares the coming Messiah as “Mighty God” (El Gibbor) — the same Hebrew word אֵל (El, H410) used elsewhere for Yahweh.

Jeremiah 23:6 names the Messiah as “YHWH our Righteousness”, applying the covenant name of God Himself to the promised King.

---

II. The Human Nature of Christ

Simultaneously, Scripture affirms Christ’s complete humanity.

John 1:14 (G4561) says:
"And the Word was made flesh (σάρξ — sarx, G4561) and dwelt among us."

This confirms that Jesus took on true human nature — not merely an appearance or a temporary form, but full humanity, subject to hunger (Matthew 4:2), fatigue (John 4:6), sorrow (John 11:35), and death (Luke 23:46).

Hebrews 2:17 (G3666) emphasizes this necessity:
"Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren."

The Greek ὁμοιόω (homioō, G3666) means “to become fully alike,” signifying Christ’s identification with human experience, yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15).

---

III. The Hypostatic Union — Scholarly Spectrum

The Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451) provided the definitive creedal statement affirming Christ as “one person in two natures, without confusion, change, division, or separation.” This means:

• Jesus’ divine nature did not diminish in His incarnation.

• His human nature was not absorbed into His deity.

• Both natures retain their own attributes, united in one person.

Gregory of Nazianzus wisely observed: “What He has not assumed, He has not healed.” In other words, for Christ’s atonement to be effective, He must be fully God (to offer infinite worth) and fully man (to represent humanity).

---

IV. Conclusion: The Eternal Mediator

1 Timothy 2:5 (G3316) declares:
"For there is one God, and one mediator (μεσίτης — mesitēs, G3316) between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."

Only one who is both God and man can mediate between the two.
As God, He reveals the Father; as man, He represents us before the throne.

This dual nature is not a contradiction but a divine mystery woven throughout Scripture — affirmed by prophetic witness, apostolic testimony, and historical orthodoxy.

---

Final Thought
To deny either the humanity or deity of Christ is to fall into ancient heresies like Arianism or Docetism. The biblical witness, lexicon evidence, and theological consensus together proclaim one glorious truth:
Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man — our perfect Redeemer and eternal Lord.

---

Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute
“Rightly dividing the Word of Truth” — 2 Timothy 2:15

Bible vs. Quran: The Pathways of Blessing and Bondage

Bible vs. Quran: The Pathways of Blessing and Bondage
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

When it comes to charting a path for life, the Bible and the Quran could not be further apart. The Bible is a divine blueprint for hope, prosperity, and victory, while the Quran presents a theology of hardship, fatalism, and deferred hope that traps its followers in cycles of suffering.

The Bible: God’s Blueprint for Success
The Word of God boldly declares in Jeremiah 29:11 that “I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” The Christian faith celebrates the dignity and destiny of each person, elevating them to be “the head and not the tail” (Deuteronomy 28:13).

The Scriptures teach that wisdom is not only spiritually enriching but practically rewarding: “Length of days is in her right hand, and in her left hand riches and honor” (Proverbs 3:16). In Matthew 5:3, the poor in spirit inherit the kingdom of heaven — not as a call to earthly poverty, but as a reminder of eternal worth beyond material status. And in Matthew 5:41, Christ encourages believers to go the extra mile, seizing opportunities for excellence rather than settling for mediocrity.

The Bible shuns the culture of complaint. “Do all things without murmuring and disputing, that you may be blameless and harmless, shining as lights in the world” (Philippians 2:14-15). It celebrates diligence: “In all labor there is profit, but idle chatter leads only to poverty” (Proverbs 14:23). This is a divine call to productivity, vision, and progress.

The Quran: A Theology of Imprisonment
In stark contrast, the Quranic worldview binds its followers in a theology of hardship. Sahih Muslim 2956 proclaims “The world is a prison for the believer and a paradise for the unbeliever.” Instead of inspiring believers to rise, it confines them to endure.

Surah Al-Baqarah 2:286 resigns mankind to burdens dictated by fate, while Surah Al-Mulk 67:2 describes life as a test filled with suffering, where hope is perpetually deferred. While oil-rich lands flaunt wealth in gold-plated palaces, ordinary followers are taught to embrace hardship as a virtue rather than pursue progress and enterprise.

The Clear Contrast
The Bible offers a faith that empowers, uplifts, and transforms, while the Quranic message too often binds its adherents in spiritual and social stagnation. Where the Bible equips you to overcome, Islam calls you to endure. Where Christianity grants sonship and inheritance in Christ, Islam grants a lifetime of striving under the weight of rigid laws and fatalism.

The Choice is Yours
In the final analysis, the Bible hands you a life manual for success, prosperity, and hope, rooted in the grace of a living God. The Quran, however, offers a theology of deferred hope, legalistic burden, and earthly restraint.

Choose wisely. Choose Christ.

— Dr. Maxwell Shimba
President, Shimba Theological Institute

---

The Discrepancies Between Allah and Muhammad: A Doctrinal Dilemma

The Discrepancies Between Allah and Muhammad: A Doctrinal Dilemma

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

One of the most troubling aspects of Islamic theology, which rarely receives open scrutiny, is the glaring contradiction between what Allah supposedly decrees in the Qur’an and what Muhammad later commands through hadith literature. This theological discord reveals a disturbing inconsistency within Islam’s foundations — an inconsistency believers deserve to examine honestly.

The attached chart highlights some of these contradictions:

1. The Number of Daily Prayers

• Allah’s command: Muslims are instructed to pray three times a day (Qur'an 24:58).

• Muhammad’s command: Later, Muhammad increases it to five times a day (Sahih al-Bukhari 528).

If Allah’s word is perfect and eternal, why would Muhammad alter a direct divine command?

---

2. The Right of Intercession

• Allah states: All intercession belongs to Him alone (Qur'an 39:44).

• Muhammad claims: He has been granted the exclusive right of intercession on Judgment Day (Sahih al-Bukhari 335).

This is a bold contradiction. If no one can intercede but Allah, how does Muhammad assume a privilege denied to all creation?

---

3. Mut’a (Temporary Marriage)

• Allah permits it: Qur'an 33:51 allows temporary marriages.

• Muhammad cancels it: Later abrogated by Muhammad in Sahih al-Bukhari 5523.

Did God change His mind, or did Muhammad override divine permission?

---

4. Laws Regarding Slave Women

• Allah decrees: Slave women must observe a waiting period after separation (Qur'an 4:24).

• Muhammad contradicts: Declares no waiting period is necessary (Sahih al-Bukhari 2235).

This inconsistency highlights the moral and doctrinal confusion embedded in Islamic jurisprudence.

---

The Theological Implications

These contradictions suggest that Muhammad often revised, altered, or overruled Quranic declarations for situational convenience. This is not merely a matter of differing interpretations but direct conflicts between Allah’s supposedly eternal decrees and Muhammad’s evolving rulings.

For Christians, this underscores the reliability and consistency of the Gospel message. In contrast to Islam’s shifting commands, the New Testament reveals a Savior whose word is unchanging and whose authority is absolute.

As Hebrews 13:8 declares:

“Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”

---

Conclusion:
This doctrinal tug-of-war between Allah and Muhammad is a fatal flaw within Islamic theology — exposing it as a man-made system rather than a divine revelation. It’s time for seekers of truth to reevaluate Islam’s claims in light of these undeniable inconsistencies and consider the unchanging truth of Jesus Christ.

---