Saturday, February 7, 2026

Monday, February 2, 2026

Trinity 101 || Part 1|| 1 John 5:7

Sunday, January 25, 2026

Ancient Jewish Wedding Ceremony: “No man knows the day or hour, only the Father”

The Ancient Jewish Marriage Rite: A Detailed Exposition of Betrothal, Preparation, and Consummation

Dr. Maxwell Shimba

Shimba Theological Institute

Within the cultural and religious framework of ancient Judaism, the institution of marriage was a meticulously structured covenant, rich with symbolic action and profound theological implication. The process, far more elaborate than a single ceremony, unfolded in distinct, legally and ritually significant stages, creating a powerful narrative of commitment, expectation, and union. This exposition delineates the traditional sequence, from initial arrangement to final celebration, as understood in the historical context of the Second Temple period and its surrounding centuries.

The foundation of a marriage was typically established not by the couple alone, but within the broader familial and social structure. It was customary for parents, with particular authority vested in the father of the prospective groom, to initiate and arrange the union. This practice finds resonance in scriptural injunction, such as that recorded in the book of the prophet Jeremiah, where the divine exhortation is given: "Take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands" (Jeremiah 29:6). Upon the identification of a suitable bride, the young man, aspirant to the role of bridegroom, would undertake a solemn journey to the dwelling of the bride and her family. His approach was marked by four tangible tokens of his serious intent: a skin of wine, a substantial monetary sum known as the mohar (commonly referred to as the bride-price), an assortment of gifts intended for the bride herself, and a meticulously composed marriage contract termed the ketubah. The arrival of a suitor bearing these items rendered his purposes transparent and formal.

The initial encounter was one of negotiation and covenant. The parents of the maiden would be formally summoned, and the suitor would seek their express permission to pursue their daughter’s hand. Should their consent be granted, the bride would be presented. At this pivotal moment, the ritual moved to its first libation. The hopeful bridegroom would pour a cup of wine, specifically designated the “cup of betrothal” or the cup of covenant, and present it to the young woman. Her acceptance of this cup—consuming the wine set before her—constituted her affirmative response to the proposal. This act was not a casual promise but a legally binding commitment. Upon her drinking of the cup, the state of betrothal (erusin or kiddushin) was immediately and irrevocably established. The contractual phase of the marriage was thereby initiated.

Following this solemn acceptance, the stipulated mohar was transferred to the bride’s parents, formalizing the economic aspect of the covenant. Subsequently, the ketubah was executed. This document was far more than a simple contract; it was a legally binding instrument detailing the groom’s solemn pledges and responsibilities toward his bride, most notably his unwavering commitment to provide for her material welfare and protection throughout their lives. The signing of the ketubah solidified a legal marriage bond. It is critical to understand that from this point forward, the betrothed couple were considered legally husband and wife. Dissolution of this bond could only be achieved through a formal divorce (get), despite the fact that cohabitation and the full physical expression of the marriage had not yet commenced. This legal nuance illuminates the New Testament account of Joseph and Mary, who are described as being “betrothed” at the time of Mary’s pregnancy with Jesus. They existed in a state of complete legal matrimony, awaiting only the final stage of the wedding process to commence their life together in one household.

Having established the covenant, the bridegroom would then bestow upon his bride the gifts he had brought, which served as a tangible pledge of his fidelity and a foreshadowing of his eventual return. His subsequent departure was a necessary and expected phase of the custom. He would leave his bride at her father’s house and return to his own paternal home. His primary mission during this interval was to prepare a dwelling place for his new bride, most specifically to construct or substantially adorn a bridal chamber, known as the chuppah, within or adjacent to his father’s estate. This chamber was intended as the sanctuary for the second and culminating act of the wedding: the consummation.

The duration of the bridegroom’s absence was indeterminate and subject to a single authority. The task of preparing the chamber was undertaken with diligence, but its completion and suitability rested not with the bridegroom’s own assessment. The final approval belonged exclusively to his father. Only when the father had inspected the accommodations and deemed them fully satisfactory, complete, and worthy of his son’s bride would he grant his son permission to depart and retrieve her. This patriarchal prerogative gave rise to a common idiom within the culture regarding the uncertainty of the bridegroom’s return: “no man knows the day or hour, only the father.” For a contemporary Jewish audience, this phrase carried immediate and specific connotations—it directly referenced the imminent, yet unpredictable, moment when the bridegroom would go to retrieve his bride.

Meanwhile, the bride entered a period of vigilant anticipation and preparation. From the moment of her betrothal, her status in the community was transformed. She was considered set apart, consecrated to one man. In public, she would often be veiled, a visible symbol of her new identity and sequestration, embodying the principle articulated in the apostolic writings: “not [her] own, [she was] bought at a price” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). Her days were spent in readying herself for her future life, often by sewing and embroidering her own wedding garments, ensuring that she would be prepared for the sudden summons that could come at any moment. She lived in a state of constant expectation, perpetually watchful for the signs of her bridegroom’s approach.

When the father of the groom at last signaled his satisfaction, typically within a year of the betrothal, the climactic events were set in motion. The return was never a private affair but a communal celebration heralded with great festivity. The bridegroom’s close friends, acting as his attendants, would sound the shofar (a ram’s horn trumpet) and proceed through the streets of the town, proclaiming jubilantly, “Behold the bridegroom cometh!” This announcement served as the final, public warning of the imminent procession. The bridegroom, accompanied by his retinue of friends and torchbearers, would then form a joyous and noisy procession leading from his home to the house of the bride. This journey frequently occurred at midnight, enhancing the drama and suddenness of the event. The arrival at the bride’s home and the subsequent “abduction” of the bride from her family was a customary and expected element of the ritual, a symbolic act of claiming his own. It is from this cultural practice that the metaphor of the bridegroom as “the thief in the night” derives its meaning—his coming was sudden, at an unknown hour, requiring the bride to be in a perpetual state of prepared readiness.

The conveyance of the bride from her paternal home to her new dwelling was a ceremonial transition of great importance. She would be placed in a palanquin, a covered litter, which would be borne aloft on the shoulders of four men. This procession, known as the nissuin (the “taking” or “elevation”), represented her formal translation into the household and lineage of her husband. The way was illuminated by a procession of ten virgins, each carrying tall, brightly burning torches, casting light on the path and symbolizing purity and celebration. The entire company would wind its way back to the bridegroom’s father’s house, culminating at the entrance to the prepared bridal chamber.

At this threshold, the second cardinal ritual libation was performed. The couple would share the “cup of consummation,” a cup of wine that sealed and celebrated the commencement of their physical union. Having drunk from this cup, the bride and groom would then enter the chuppah, the bridal chamber, and remain there in seclusion for a period of seven days. This week-long interval was dedicated solely to the consummation of the marriage, a time of intimate communion and joy, sheltered from public view. Throughout these seven days, the wedding guests would celebrate in the home, awaiting the couple’s emergence.

Finally, upon the completion of this sacred week of seclusion, the friends of the bridegroom would take their place at the door of the chamber. As the couple prepared to step forth, these attendants would announce their emergence to the assembled family and the multitude of guests who had gathered and waited in anticipation. This announcement signaled the commencement of the grand and celebratory wedding feast, a week-long festival of food, wine, and rejoicing that marked the full, public inauguration of the couple’s new life together as a fully united household.

Friday, January 23, 2026

Who revealed the Qur’an to Muhammad? Jibreel or the enemy of Jibreel?Thi...

Jesus is God, and He loves you

Allah swears by the one who created a male and a female

Jesus said My Father is greater than I

Thursday, January 22, 2026

Why did Jesus say, "No one knows the day or the hour, only the Father"?

Why did Jesus say, "My Father is Greater than I?

Muslim Women wearing perfume is haram and makes you a prostitute

The Islamic claim that Jesus, Isa bin Maryam, practiced Islam is FAKE an...

Jesus Christ, True Worship, and the Problem of Mechanical Religion

Ritual or Relationship?

Jesus Christ, True Worship, and the Problem of Mechanical Religion

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

One of the clearest distinctions between the teaching of Jesus Christ and later ritualistic religious systems lies in the very definition of worship itself. Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of the Most High God, did not institute a choreographed, bodily ritual as the essence of devotion. Instead, He consistently redirected worship away from outward performance and toward inward transformation.

In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus explicitly warned against empty, repetitive prayer: “When you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the pagans do” (Matthew 6:7). He further instructed His followers to pray privately rather than publicly, emphasizing sincerity over spectacle: “When you pray, go into your room, shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret” (Matthew 6:6). The prayer He taught begins not with formulaic postures but with intimate relationship—“Our Father” (Matthew 6:9).

This theology of worship centers on the heart, not the body; on obedience, not performance; on transformation, not display.

The Rise of Mechanical Worship

Seven centuries after Christ, a rigid system of ritual prayer—Salah—emerged within Islam. This practice mandates specific bodily movements (standing, bowing, prostrating), precise verbal recitations, fixed times, and a mandatory geographic orientation toward Mecca. While Muslims regard this system as an act of devotion, from a biblical and theological perspective it raises a fundamental question: Can mechanical ritual substitute for moral transformation?

Jesus directly addressed this issue when He warned against religious performance designed for public recognition: “When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others” (Matthew 6:5). Worship that becomes public theater—especially when used to signal religious superiority—misses the very essence of what God desires.

The prophet Isaiah captured this problem centuries earlier:
“These people draw near to Me with their mouth and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me” (Isaiah 29:13).

Can Ritual Erase Moral Failure?

Perhaps the most troubling theological claim within some strands of Islamic teaching is the idea that ritual prayer itself can erase even the gravest moral offenses. According to this framework, a person may commit serious sins—violence, dishonesty, injustice—and then perform the prescribed prayers correctly, thereby securing forgiveness.

This concept stands in stark contrast to biblical theology.

Scripture never teaches that bodily posture or verbal precision can cleanse moral corruption. Instead, God demands repentance, justice, and a transformed life:
“Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:1–2).

Forgiveness in the biblical worldview is never detached from repentance, accountability, and ethical change. Ritual without righteousness is meaningless.

True Worship According to Jesus

Jesus summarized authentic devotion in unmistakable terms:
“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24).

True worship is not measured by the number of bows, prostrations, or public demonstrations of piety. It is measured by mercy, humility, obedience, love, and moral integrity. Jesus consistently emphasized care for the poor, forgiveness, self-sacrifice, and holiness of life—not ritual performance.

Christian worship, therefore, is not choreography. It is transformation.

Conclusion

God is not impressed by repetition, posture, or public display. He seeks hearts renewed, lives changed, and righteousness practiced. Any religious system that reduces forgiveness to physical movements or verbal formulas—while leaving the heart untouched—fails to meet the standard of true worship revealed in Jesus Christ.

If one truly seeks closeness with God, the path is not through mechanical ritual, but through repentance, obedience, love, mercy, and faith grounded in truth. Only a transformed heart defines authentic worship.

Islam asserts Jesus was Muslim—but the Quran does not demonstrate it

FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS (TEXTUAL SILENCE)

Where in the Quran is Jesus (ʿĪsā) shown performing salat in the Islamic form—with rukūʿ (bowing), sujūd (prostration), and tashahhud?
- No verse.
Where does the Quran say Jesus faced the Kaaba in Mecca when praying?
- No verse.
- Qibla toward Mecca was commanded only to Muhammad (Quran 2:144).
Where does the Quran state that Jesus fasted Ramadan?
- No verse.
- Ramadan fasting is commanded only in Quran 2:183, centuries after Jesus.
Where does the Quran say Jesus kept Islamic dietary laws (halal/haram meat regulations)?
- No verse.
Where does the Quran say Jesus performed wudu (ablution) before prayer?
- No verse.
- Wudu is legislated in Quran 5:6, again for Muhammad’s community.

HISTORICAL & LOGICAL QUESTIONS

If Jesus was a Muslim in the Muhammadic sense, why did Allah wait 600 years to reveal how Jesus supposedly prayed, fasted, and worshiped?
Why does the Quran never command Muslims to pray “the prayer of Jesus”?
Why does the Quran never say: “Pray as Jesus prayed”?
If Islamic prayer is eternal, why is it absent from all prophets before Muhammad in Quranic detail?
How could Jesus practice Islam when Islam’s legal system (Sharia) did not yet exist?

CHRISTOLOGICAL QUESTIONS (QURAN VS ISLAMIC CLAIMS)

Why does the Quran call Jesus “Kalimatullah” (Word of God) (Quran 4:171) — a title never given to Muhammad?
Why is Jesus called “Rūḥun minhu” (a Spirit from Him) while Muhammad is not?
Why was Jesus born of a virgin (Quran 19:19–21), yet Muhammad was not—if both were merely “Muslims”?
Why does Jesus create life from clay by Allah’s permission (Quran 3:49), an act reserved for God alone in the Old Testament?
Why does Jesus speak as a baby (Quran 19:30) but Muhammad does not—even though Muhammad is said to be the final and greatest prophet?

WORSHIP & AUTHORITY QUESTIONS

Why does the Quran never record Jesus commanding people to follow Muhammad?
Why does Jesus say, “I am a servant of Allah” (Quran 19:30) but also performs divine acts?
Why does the Quran never accuse Jesus of shirk, yet repeatedly accuses Jews and Christians?
Why does Allah defend Jesus against accusations (Quran 4:157–158) but not Muhammad in the same miraculous way?
Why is Jesus alive with Allah (Quran 4:158) while Muhammad is dead and buried?

CLOTHING, CULTURE & RETROACTIVE PROJECTION

Where does the Quran describe Jesus wearing Islamic clothing (thawb, kufi, turban)?

No verse.

Is dressing like Arabs from the 7th century equal to obeying God—or is that cultural imitation?
Why do Muslims project Arab culture backward onto a 1st-century Jewish Messiah?
If Jesus was a Muslim, why does the Quran never call his followers “Muslims” during his lifetime?

FINAL LOGICAL QUESTIONS (THE CORE ISSUE)

If Jesus practiced Islam exactly as Muhammad taught it, why is the Quran silent about it?
Is Islam claiming continuity—or rewriting history?
Is Jesus being honored—or absorbed and redefined to validate a later religion?
If Islam is the original religion, why does it need to retrofit Jesus into Muhammad’s system instead of deriving Muhammad from Jesus?
Why does the Quran affirm the Torah and Gospel (Quran 5:46–47) yet contradict their central message about Jesus?
If Jesus never prayed like a Muslim, fasted Ramadan, faced Mecca, or followed Sharia—on what basis is he called a Muslim?

CONCLUSION (IMPLICIT, NOT ASSERTED)

Islam asserts Jesus was Muslim—but the Quran does not demonstrate it.
What Islam provides is theological assertion without historical or textual evidence.

Monday, January 19, 2026

Muhammad was a white man, according to Sahih Al-Bukhari

Allah claims the world has two Easts and two Wests. Surah Ar Rahman Ayah 17

Muhammad was a prophet for the Arabs only

Jesus is God and is worshipped by all creatures

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

Thursday, January 15, 2026

ALLAH IS ONE OF MANY CREATORS IN THE QUR'AN

Where is the copy of the book revealed to Abraham by Allah?

Is the mark of the BEAST 666 Here?

Jesus is God, Hebrews 1:8-9

Tuesday, January 13, 2026

Qur’an 10:92 Was Pharaoh drowned or not? Qur’an contradictions

Who was the first Muslim?Contradictions in the Qur’an

CONTRADICTIONS IN THE QUR'AN

CONTRADICTIONS IN THE QUR'AN

INTRODUCTIONThe Quran, with its many ambiguous statements, is an ideal scripture to find contradictions. At the same time, its ambiguity provides a good opportunity for Muslims to find some explanation or the other to negate a contradiction. Some of the contradictions mentioned below might have already appeared on other Web Sites with slight variations.Though Muslim scholars emphasize on the need to understand the CONTEXT of every verse to understand its implication better, the job is easily said than done. The innumerable repetitions and frequent appearance of irrelevant verses make the CONTEXT-finding task indeed difficult. One would expect a scripture to be organized in some logical manner to enable people to understand it better. Unfortunately the Quran, often projected by Muslims as the FINAL TESTAMENT from God, fails in this criterion too.

1. Embryonic Sex Determination
One of the references on human reproduction which Muslims often quote from the Quran is verse 53:45-46. This is interpreted as a reference to the determination of sex at the fertilization stage itself. However, elsewhere, the Quran says that the sex of a developing embryo is determined well after the leech-like clot stage!

(53:45-46)
"That He did create the pairs - male and female from a sperm-drop* (nutfah) when lodged (in its place)"

(75:38-39)
"Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)? Then did he become a leech-like clot; then did (Allah) make and fashion (him) in due proportion. And of him He made the sexes, male and female" **

___________
* Note the conspicuous absence of ovum required for fertilization.
** This view is further supported by this Hadith: "When 42 nights have passed over the drop (nutfah), Allah sends an Angel to it, who shapes it and make its ears, eyes, skin, flesh and bones. Then he says, "O Lord, is it male or female?" and your Lord decides what He wishes" (Hadith, Muslim, Book 33, No. 6392)

2. Width of the Garden
There is a clear discrepancy with reference to the width of the Paradise or Garden in the Quran. Verse 3:133 says that it is all the heavens (Samawath: plural) and the earth combined. Verse 57:21 says that the width is the (lower?) heaven (Sama: singular) and the earth combined.

(3:133)
".... a Garden whose width is that (of the whole) of the heavens and the earth, prepared for the righteous,"

(57:21)
".... a Garden (of Bliss), the width whereof is as the width of the heaven and the earth, prepared for those who believe in Allah .... "

3. Who misleads people? Satan or Allah?
According to verse 4:119-120, Satan (the rejected one) is the one who creates false desires and misleads people. Refer also 15:42. However, according to verse 16:93, it is God who leaves people astray as He wills! See also 4:78.

(4:119-120)
"I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires....." (says Satan)
"Satan make them promises and creates in them false hopes...." (vouched by Allah)

(16:93)
"If Allah so willed, He could make you all one people. But He leaves straying whom He pleases and He guides whom He pleases ...."

4. Attitude towards unbelieving parents
Al-Quran givens contradicting information as to what a believer should do when unbelieving parents and brothers insist on worshipping their gods. Verse 31:15 asks believers to keep company with unbelieving parents even if they insist (on following their religion?), but verse 9:23 asks believers not to take their fathers and brothers as protectors if they disbelieved!

(31:15)
"But if they strive (Jahada) to make thee join in worship with Me things of which thou hast no knowledge, obey them not; yet bear them company in this life with justice (and consideration)..."

(9:23)
"O ye who believe! Take not protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above faith: If any of you do so, they do wrong"

These verses of course appear in different contexts. Apologists can argue that verse 9:23 is applicable only in the context of hostilities and not otherwise. Then we have to define what is hostility. We must not forget that many passages in the Quran reflect an hostile environment of fluctuating fortunes between believers and unbelievers. Since neither the Suras nor all the verses within Suras are arranged chronologically, the contexts of these `revelations' become that much difficult to understand. Interestingly, verse 31:15 also seems to appear in the context of `Striving' from the Unbelievers' side. Note the word `Jahada'!

5. Which enters the Paradise: Soul or Body or Both?
After resurrection, it is the body (after reuniting with the soul?) which enters the Paradise. This has been emphasized throughout the Book. See verses 13:5, 17:98-99, 20:55, 34:7, 75:3-4. However verses 27-30 in Sura 89 state that it is the Soul (Nafs)* which enters the Garden!

(17:99)
"See they not that Allah who created the heavens and the earth has the power to create the like of them (anew)? ...."
(75:3-4)
"Does man think that We cannot assemble his bones? Nay we are able to to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers..."

(89:27-30)
(To the righteous soul will be said) "O (tho) soul, in (complete) rest and satisfaction! Come back thou to thy Lord - well pleased (thyself), and well-pleasing unto Him! Enter thou, thee among my Devotees! Yea, enter thou My Heaven!"
(31:28)
"Your creation and your rising (from the dead) are only as (the creation and the rising of) a single soul..." (Pickthall)

    In Islam, the bliss in Paradise is not complete without the corporeal and sense pleasures. Otherwise, how can one drink Zanzabil (76:17), feel the moderate temperature (76:13), enjoy maidens (55:56) and drink honey and milk (47:16-17). These are all joys in state for the faithful.
    Yousuf Ali (note 6128 for verse 89:27-30) also says that it is the soul which enters the heaven, and not the gross body which perishes (His comment is contradictory to what verse 75:3-4 says!). Read verse 31:28 also. It says man's creation or resurrection is in no wise but as an individual soul*. Pickthall's translation (see box above) is more clear.
_____________
    * Unlike in Vedic scriptures, the Quran does not clearly recognize the SOUL as a distinct entity from the BODY. The soul is often referred as a source of all inclinations and desires (3:61, 12:53). The Arabic word `Nafs' has been translated differently by different translators: as SOUL, MIND, SPIRIT and even as HEART! The word `Nafs' at times refers to the individual (12:53), sometimes to the Soul (6:93, 39:42), and sometimes to God Himself (6:12,54)!. Of particular interest is verse 21:35 which says "Every soul shall have a taste of death.... ". This verse could mean: (i) that the Soul gets a taste of death after separation from the body, as Yousuf Ali interprets or (ii) that the Individual gets a taste of death as it is generally implied on most occasions (3:61, 51:21). Those who are of the opinion that `Nafs' in 21:35 only mean the real Soul would then have to consider this verse as another contradiction to verses 39:42 and 89:27-30 which imply that the Soul is taken back by Allah, momentarily during sleep and decisively at death. Does it mean that the Soul has no death?

6. God needs man or man needs God?
A very clear contradiction exists between verses 51:56 and 35:15. While the former verse says that God created Jinns and mankind for His own reasons (read also 67:2), the latter one says it is man who is in need of God! Read also 51:57.

(51:56)
"I have only created Jinns and men, that they may serve me" *
(67:2)
"He who created Death and Life, that He may try which of you is the best in deed"

35:15
"O mankind! It is you that have need of God: but God is the One Free of all wants, worthy of all praise"

_____________
* Of interest in this regard is the popular (but probably fabricated) Hadith: "I was a secret treasure, and I created the creatures in order that I might be known" (*, *)

7. EVIL AND GOOD: Where do they come from?
While one verse says that both Evil and Good issue from Allah, the very next verse says only Good comes from Allah!

(4:78)
".... If some good befalls them, they say "This is from Allah". But if evil, they say "This is from thee" (O prophet). Say: "All things are from Allah....."*

(4:79)
"Whatever good, (O man!) happens to thee, is from Allah. But whatever evil happens to thee, is from thyself"

________________
* Interestingly, the remainder of this verse goes like this: "But what has come to these people. That they fail to understand a single fact?" Can anyone understand what God says here? The fact that both Good and Evil are from Allah or only Good is from Allah?

8. Who has to be blamed for BELIEF AND DISBELIEF ?

(6:12)
"It is they who have lost their own souls, that they will not believe"

(10:100)
"No soul can believe except by the will of Allah"

No explanation required for this contradiction!

9. Who has to be blamed for the wrongs done?
From verses 35:8, 16:93, 74:31, 2:142, we learn that it is Allah who has to be blamed for all the misguidance. While other verses hold man himself responsible for the wrongs done (30:9, 4:79).

(35:8)
"Allah leaves stray whom He wills and guides whom He wills"

(30:9)
"It was not Allah who wronged them, but they wronged their own souls"

10. UNBELIEVERS: To be persecuted or forgiven?
Verses 23:117 and 98:6 say that unbelievers will not prosper and are the worst of creatures!. Verse 9:29 also asks believers to fight those who do not believe in Allah, the Last Day, His rules and His religion of truth. But verse 45:14 says otherwise. Read also 16:128.

(9:29)
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth ....."

(45:14)
"Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not hope for the Days of Allah; It is for Him to recompense (for good or evil) each people according to what they have earned"

Apologists can argue that verse 9:29 was revealed in the context of war and 45:14 perhaps towards the end of hostilities. The fact is that the Quran does not specify what verses are applicable in the context of war and what is to be followed during other occasions. And also what rulings were for the past, what are for the present and what are for the future! God has unfortunately left everything to our discretion. Ironically, Apologists claim that the Quran contains solutions for the problems of the Past, Present and Future. There is little doubt that their claims is more emotional than factual.

11. God's advice to Muhammed on propagating Islam
We have seen apologists quoting verses from the Quran in support of their claim that the Quran does not recommend forceful conversions. The verse they often quote is 2:256 which says "There is no compulsion in religion". There are also many verses in the Quran which suggest otherwise and these have already appeared on web pages. Here we see two contradicting directives from God on conveying Allah's religion to the people:

(3:20)
"So if they dispute thee, say: "I have permitted my whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me"..... "Do you (also) submit yourselves? If they do, they are in right guidance. But if they turn back, thy duty is to convey the message. And in Allah's sight are (all) His servants"

(8:38-39)
"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from disbelief), their past would be forgiven; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning to them). And fight them on until there is no more persecution and the religion becomes Allah's in its entirety... "

Is verse 8:38-39 an abrogation of verse 3:20? If that is the case, can we recommend the directives in verse 8:38-39 as the standard method to be followed by all Muslims? Or is the latter verse given during the context of war? To me, these verses reflect the changing moods of the prophet in response to the public reaction he received. We see a content & tolerant messenger in verse 3:20 and a contempt and aggressive messenger in verse 8:38-39!

I am yet to see a scripture without any apparent internal/external contradiction in it. In general, the bigger the size of the Book, greater the number of contradictions. Particularly when the texts are a compilation of `revelations' attributed to many seers or prophets. We are living in a pluralistic environment and our effort must to understand the sublime teachings of all religious texts. Those who sincerely wish to investigate the Truth should do it without any bias and prejudice. Emotion should not take an upper hand at the expense of common sense!

Sunday, January 11, 2026

Contradictions in the Qur’an: How was Adam created?

Friday, January 9, 2026

JESUS IS GOD MALIK AL AMLAK

Tuesday, January 6, 2026

The Prophethood of Muhammad

The Prophethood of Muhammad: A Critical Theological Evaluation

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute, New York, NY

The claim of Muhammad to be a prophet presents serious theological and historical difficulties when evaluated against the biblical standards of true prophecy. According to Scripture, a prophet of God is one who faithfully communicates divine truth, proclaims holiness, and often reveals future events in accordance with God’s will (Deuteronomy 18:20–22; Jeremiah 23:16–22). Yet when the life and teachings of Muhammad are examined critically, his so-called “prophecies” and religious innovations fail to meet these fundamental criteria.

1. Superstitions Elevated to Divine Law

Islamic sources themselves preserve practices and rulings that resemble superstition or cultural taboos more than divine wisdom. For example:

Camel urine as medicine – “Some people from the tribe of ‘Ukl … drank milk and urine of the camels (as a medicine)” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 8, Book 82, Hadith 794).
Black dogs declared evil – “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘The black dog is a devil’” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Book 9, Hadith 3504).
Adult breastfeeding ruling – A hadith records Muhammad’s directive that adult men could establish kinship through breastfeeding: “Go back to Abu Hudhaifa and tell him that Salim should suckle from her (his wife) so that he will become unlawful for her to marry, and thus their problem would be solved” (Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Hadith 3425).

Such prescriptions reflect folkloric or situational solutions elevated to religious law, rather than timeless revelation from a holy God.

2. Moral Contradictions and Exploitation of Women

The ethical record of Muhammad’s life presents contradictions with biblical holiness.

Child marriage – Aisha herself reported: “The Prophet married me when I was six years old, and consummated the marriage with me when I was nine years old” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 64).
Concubinage through war captives – The Qur’an sanctions sexual relations with female captives: “…lawful to you are … those your right hands possess” (Qur’an 4:24; see also 33:50).
Women deemed inferior – Muhammad said: “Is not the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man? … This is the deficiency in her mind” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3, Book 48, Hadith 826).

Such practices institutionalize the degradation of women rather than upholding their dignity as bearers of God’s image (Genesis 1:27).

3. Cultic Self-Exaltation

Unlike biblical prophets who pointed people to God alone, Muhammad often required prayers and devotion directed toward himself. The Qur’an commands: “Indeed, Allah and His angels send blessings upon the Prophet. O you who have believed, ask [Allah to confer] blessing upon him and ask [Allah to grant him] peace” (Qur’an 33:56).

Moreover, he consistently tied obedience to himself with obedience to God: “Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah” (Qur’an 4:80). Such conflation between God’s authority and a man’s authority is characteristic of cult leaders, not prophets of the living God.

4. Violence and Religious Coercion

Muhammad’s prophetic role was also tied to military conquest and coercion.

The Qur’an sanctions violence against unbelievers: “When the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them …” (Qur’an 9:5).
Muhammad himself said: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshiped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, Book 2, Hadith 25).

This militant vision contradicts the biblical model of a prophet who calls people to repentance through truth and holiness, not by compulsion or sword.

5. The Contrast with Jesus Christ

When compared with Jesus Christ, the differences between the two figures are stark and theologically decisive.

Holiness and Purity – Jesus lived a sinless life (Hebrews 4:15) and never sought to gratify personal desires at the expense of others. Muhammad’s example, however, includes indulgence in multiple wives, child marriage, and sanctioned sexual relations with captives.
Treatment of Women – Jesus honored women, lifting them to full dignity as disciples and witnesses (John 4:27; Luke 8:1–3; John 20:11–18). Muhammad reduced women’s testimony to half a man’s and legalized polygamy and concubinage.
Self-Exaltation vs. Humility – Jesus directed all glory to the Father (John 8:50), washing the feet of His disciples (John 13:14–15). Muhammad demanded prayers for himself and tied obedience to him with obedience to God.
Message of Peace vs. Sword – Jesus rebuked Peter for using violence (Matthew 26:52) and taught love for enemies (Matthew 5:44). Muhammad, by contrast, declared he was commanded to fight until Islam was universally acknowledged.
Salvation vs. Law – Jesus brought the good news of salvation through grace (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8–9). Muhammad offered submission to a legal code that enslaves rather than liberates.

In the biblical framework, Jesus is not merely another prophet but the final revelation of God’s truth and the fulfillment of all prophecy (Hebrews 1:1–2). He is the eternal Word made flesh (John 1:14), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29), and the only mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5).