Thursday, July 24, 2025

The Theological Problem of Predestined Damnation: Questioning the Racial Determinism in Islamic Traditions

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This article critically examines a controversial narration found in Mishkat al-Masabih, which suggests that Allah created the descendants of Adam in differing colors, allegedly preassigning white individuals to Paradise and black individuals to Hell. This analysis addresses the theological, ethical, and moral implications of such racial determinism within Islamic doctrine. It raises fundamental questions about divine justice, racial equality, and the attributes of God as both merciful and just. The article seeks to explore whether such a narrative aligns with the broader teachings of Islam or represents a later sociopolitical interpolation incompatible with a just and omnibenevolent deity.

Introduction

Islam claims universality and racial equality, exemplified by verses in the Qur’an that emphasize moral conduct over ethnicity:

“Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.” (Qur’an 49:13)

Yet, certain Hadiths, particularly the narration in Mishkat al-Masabih, appear to contradict this inclusive ethic. The Hadith in question states:

“Allah created Adam, then wiped his back, and there fell from his back every soul that He would create until the Day of Resurrection. He made some of them white and some black. Then He said: ‘To Paradise and I do not care,’ and ‘To Hell and I do not care.’”

This narration, which has deeply racial overtones, raises profound theological concerns. If Allah predetermined black people to Hell and white people to Paradise, how can this be reconciled with Islamic assertions of divine justice and accountability?

Historical Context and Textual Reliability

The Hadith in question is not found in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim, the most authoritative Hadith collections in Sunni Islam, but appears in Mishkat al-Masabih, which draws from various earlier compilations, including Musnad Ahmad and Sunan al-Tirmidhi. This calls for an immediate investigation into the authenticity (ṣaḥīḥ), chain of transmission (isnād), and content integrity (matn) of the narration.

Was this Hadith genuinely attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, or was it a later fabrication echoing the racial hierarchies of early Islamic empires or Abbasid racial theory?

Theological Implications

1. Divine Justice vs. Arbitrary Damnation

If Allah predetermined black people for Hell simply based on their skin color, this challenges the Islamic concept of Adl (divine justice). According to the Qur’an:

“Every soul earns not [blame] except against itself, and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164)

This verse affirms individual moral responsibility. The idea that skin color alone can determine eternal damnation undermines this teaching and presents Allah as capricious—a concept rejected by Islamic theology.

2. Free Will and Predestination (Qadar)

Islamic thought has long wrestled with the tension between divine decree (qadar) and human free will. If racial identity predetermines one’s eternal fate, then human agency is rendered meaningless. How then can individuals be held accountable for what they neither chose nor can change?

3. Ethical Monotheism vs. Racial Determinism

The Qur’anic vision is one of ethical monotheism, where moral conduct, piety, and belief determine salvation—not ethnicity or lineage:

“O mankind, We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.” (Qur’an 49:13)

To suggest that blackness itself is a marker of divine rejection is to align Islam with a form of racial fatalism, incompatible with this verse.

Comparative Religious Reflection

This narrative mirrors other ancient worldviews in which pigmentation was linked to spiritual destiny—such as Gnostic doctrines of light vs. darkness, or certain interpretations in Hindu caste systems. However, monotheistic religions—including authentic Islam, Christianity, and Judaism—typically root divine judgment in moral action, not melanin levels.

Racism and Hadith: Social Construct or Divine Design?

There is scholarly consensus that some Hadiths were fabricated for political, sectarian, or cultural motives. The Umayyad and Abbasid periods saw increased Arab supremacy narratives that often denigrated non-Arabs and darker-skinned peoples. Is this Hadith an expression of such racial elitism rather than divine revelation?

If the Prophet Muhammad truly said this, then his own multiethnic community, which included black companions like Bilal ibn Rabah, is inexplicable. Bilal was honored by Muhammad and described as having a voice that would precede him in Paradise. Such examples contradict the Hadith's implications.

The Moral Problem of a Racist God

This leads to the ultimate theological question: Can God be racist? If so, then God ceases to be morally perfect, and religion loses its claim to universal ethics. For any true faith to maintain credibility, it must offer a vision of salvation that transcends ethnicity, race, and national origin.

Conclusion

The Hadith portraying black people as destined for Hell is not only theologically inconsistent with core Islamic teachings but also morally reprehensible. It must be questioned, critiqued, and likely rejected as a fabricated artifact of human prejudice—not divine decree.

To accept such a Hadith without scrutiny is to do violence to the very nature of God as Just, Merciful, and Righteous. Islam must be disentangled from cultural racism to remain a credible moral force in the modern world.

References

  • Qur’an 49:13, 6:164

  • Mishkat al-Masabih, Book of Faith

  • Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk

  • Jonathan A.C. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad

  • Khaled Abou El Fadl, Speaking in God's Name

  • Wansbrough, J., Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation

Dr. Maxwell Shimba is a theologian, scholar, and director of Shimba Theological Institute. His research focuses on comparative religion, restorative justice, and the critical evaluation of theological claims through both scriptural and rational inquiry.

at No comments:

From Zaynab to Zion: The Symbolic and Strategic Role of Women in Jewish-Muslim Conflicts

From Zaynab to Zion: The Symbolic and Strategic Role of Women in Jewish-Muslim Conflicts

Author:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract:
This article explores the historical and symbolic role of women in Jewish-Muslim conflicts, beginning with the controversial account of the Prophet Muhammad’s alleged poisoning by Zaynab bint Al-Harith, and extending to the modern-day participation of Israeli women in military and intelligence operations. Through theological, historical, and gender studies lenses, the paper interrogates the evolution of female agency from biblical times to contemporary geopolitical warfare, with attention to how religious narratives and military realities intersect in shaping perceptions of power, prophecy, and divine silence.

1. Introduction

The relationship between Jewish and Muslim communities has been shaped by centuries of religious, political, and military tensions. Among the many stories that animate this historical conflict, the account of Muhammad’s poisoning by a Jewish woman, Zaynab bint Al-Harith, stands out for its enduring theological and symbolic implications. In modern times, the prominent role of Israeli women in the military—especially in elite units like Caracal and Bardelas—presents a fascinating reversal of traditional gender narratives and invites reflection on divine justice, martial symbolism, and religious trauma.

2. The Death of Muhammad and the Legacy of Zaynab bint Al-Harith

Islamic tradition, particularly sources such as Ibn Sa'd's Tabaqat al-Kubra and al-Bukhari’s Sahih, record that the Prophet Muhammad was poisoned by a Jewish woman after the Battle of Khaybar (cf. Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd, Vol. 2, p. 249). Zaynab, motivated by vengeance or perhaps suspicion of Muhammad’s prophethood, allegedly served him poisoned lamb. When asked why, she responded: “If you are a prophet, it will not harm you. If you are not, then we are rid of you.”

This episode, though contested in terms of historical reliability and theological interpretation, remains a provocative moment in Islamic historiography. Some Muslim scholars view this as a test of prophetic endurance, while others see it as divine martyrdom. Orientalist perspectives have sometimes used this account to critique Islamic conceptions of invincibility and divine protection (cf. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, 1967).

3. The Emergence of Jewish Women as Combatants

Fast forward to the 21st century: Israeli women have increasingly taken on combat and intelligence roles within the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and intelligence agencies like Mossad. Units such as Caracal, Bardelas, and Oketz integrate women into front-line operations, including border security, counter-terrorism, and surveillance missions (Sasson-Levy, 2003). The Mossad also reportedly employs female agents in high-level espionage and assassination operations, including some allegedly linked to countering Iranian and Palestinian threats (Katz, The Mossad: The Great Operations, 2012).

This shift has altered the gender dynamics of conflict, particularly in confrontations with militant Islamist groups who uphold patriarchal ideologies. The irony is stark: men who traditionally oppose female empowerment are increasingly facing skilled, disciplined female adversaries on the battlefield.

4. Gender, Warfare, and Asymmetrical Power

From a gender studies perspective, the image of Jewish women confronting militant Muslim men offers a rich site for analysis. Scholars such as Cynthia Enloe (2000) and Carol Cohn (2013) have examined how militarized femininity can subvert traditional gender hierarchies. In the case of Israeli military women, their symbolic role challenges Islamist narratives that depict women as subordinate, domestic figures.

Moreover, the use of advanced technology—often operated remotely by female personnel—creates a new layer of asymmetrical warfare. Drone warfare, for instance, distances the soldier from the battlefield, yet retains a psychological dominance over targets, especially when filtered through theological or cultural lenses.

5. Theological Reflection: Divine Silence or Judgment?

The apparent “silence of Allah” during conflicts where Muslim fighters face defeat, especially at the hands of women, raises important theological questions. While some Islamic apologists explain these outcomes as tests of faith, critics may argue that these events reflect a deeper crisis of theological coherence in the face of military and spiritual humiliation.

From a Judeo-Christian perspective, the empowerment of women in defending Israel may be interpreted as a fulfillment of biblical prophecies, where daughters of Zion rise as warriors (cf. Judges 4:4–10; Isaiah 31:9). Some Christian Zionists view this as divine vindication in the face of eschatological battles.

6. Conclusion

The symbolic continuity from Zaynab bint Al-Harith to modern Israeli female combatants reveals a layered narrative of vengeance, empowerment, and divine irony. While the story of Muhammad’s death by poison remains contested, its symbolic resonance—coupled with the military effectiveness of Jewish women today—offers a rich terrain for exploring how gender, theology, and geopolitics continue to shape Jewish-Muslim interactions.

References

  • Guillaume, A. (1967). The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press.

  • Ibn Sa’d. Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir (Vol. 2), ed. E. Sachau, translated by S. Moinul Haq. Pakistan Historical Society.

  • Katz, S. (2012). The Mossad: The Great Operations. Frontline Books.

  • Sasson-Levy, O. (2003). Feminism and Military Gender Practices: Israeli Women Soldiers in ‘Masculine’ Roles. Sociological Inquiry, 73(3), 440–465.

  • Enloe, C. (2000). Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives. University of California Press.

  • Cohn, C. (2013). Women and Wars: Contested Histories, Uncertain Futures. Polity Press.

Would you like this version turned into a formal PDF manuscript or submitted to a theological journal?

at No comments:

Quran Textual Dependency and Theological Divergence

Title:
Textual Dependency and Theological Divergence: A Critical Evaluation of Quranic Appropriations of Biblical Narratives

Author:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute, New York, NY

Abstract

This article examines the Quran’s extensive appropriation of Biblical content and its simultaneous theological divergence from Judeo-Christian doctrine. While the Quran purports to be a divine and inerrant revelation in “clear Arabic,” its reworking of key Biblical figures and narratives—such as Mary, the crucifixion, and the Christian doctrine of the Trinity—demonstrates historical confusion and doctrinal misrepresentation. The Quran's dependence on the Bible, juxtaposed with its reconfiguration of Biblical theology, raises critical questions about its claimed independence, authenticity, and divine origin.

Introduction

Islamic theology posits the Quran as the final, infallible revelation from Allah, correcting distortions in the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel. Yet, an in-depth analysis of the Quranic text reveals that it leans heavily on earlier Biblical scriptures for characters, stories, and theological frameworks. This dependency becomes problematic when the Quran diverges significantly from both the content and theology of the Bible. This study explores specific examples where the Quran borrows from the Bible but introduces contradictions and historical inaccuracies that undermine its divine claims.

1. Quranic Echoes of Biblical Narratives

From Adam to Jesus, the Quran recounts stories that are unmistakably derived from Biblical tradition. However, many of these accounts are presented in truncated, ambiguous, or distorted forms. Quranic retellings assume prior knowledge of the stories, indicating a derivative, rather than revelatory, origin. Scholars such as Sidney Griffith and Angelika Neuwirth have highlighted this textual interdependence, noting the Quran’s reliance on extrabiblical Jewish and Christian oral traditions circulating in the Arabian Peninsula during Muhammad’s time.

2. Maryam and Miriam: A Genealogical Anachronism

A prominent error is the confusion of Mary (mother of Jesus) with Miriam (sister of Moses and Aaron). In Surah Maryam 19:28, Mary is called the “sister of Aaron,” and in Surah At-Tahrim 66:12, she is described as the “daughter of ‘Imran”—the same name given to Moses and Aaron’s father in the Torah (Exodus 6:20). This conflation ignores the historical gap of over 1,400 years between the two women. Islamic apologists have attempted to explain this away as a spiritual or honorary title, yet the textual evidence suggests a deeper historical misunderstanding within the Quranic narrative.

3. Denial of the Crucifixion: A Historical and Theological Crisis

The Quran’s assertion that Jesus was neither killed nor crucified (Surah An-Nisa 4:157) stands in direct opposition to historical evidence and the central message of the Christian Gospel. The crucifixion is attested not only by the New Testament but also by non-Christian sources such as Josephus (Antiquities 18.3.3), Tacitus (Annals 15.44), and the Babylonian Talmud. Rejecting the crucifixion nullifies the salvific message of Christianity and isolates Islam from the foundational truths of Christian theology.

4. Misrepresentation of the Trinity as Polytheism

The Quran charges Christians with polytheism (shirk), particularly for their belief in the Trinity (Surah An-Nisa 4:171, Surah Al-Ma’ida 5:73). However, this criticism rests on a fundamental misrepresentation. Christianity affirms monotheism—one God in three persons, not three gods. Moreover, Surah Al-Ma’ida 5:116 appears to assume that Christians worship Mary as part of the Trinity, a doctrine held by no orthodox Christian tradition. This strawman argument reveals a theological misunderstanding incompatible with historical and doctrinal accuracy.

5. The Quran’s Theological and Narrative Dependence

Despite its claim to supersede previous scriptures, the Quran cannot stand independently of the Bible. Its characters, moral lessons, and eschatological themes are only intelligible when understood through the lens of Judeo-Christian scripture. Paradoxically, while claiming to correct the Bible, the Quran relies upon it for narrative substance. Without the Bible, the Quran's references to figures like Abraham, Joseph, Moses, and Jesus would lack coherence and context.

Conclusion

The Quran’s dependence on Biblical material—combined with its distortion of foundational doctrines such as the crucifixion and the Trinity—undermines its claim of divine perfection. The confusion of historical timelines, theological mischaracterizations, and reliance on prior scriptures point not to a transcendent origin, but to a composite text drawn from oral and written traditions prevalent in 7th-century Arabia. Far from confirming the Bible, the Quran appears to borrow from it—and misinterpret it. The Bible stands independently as a coherent and historically anchored revelation. The Quran, however, cannot claim the same without facing its own internal contradictions.

References

  • Ayoub, Mahmoud M. Redemptive Suffering in Islam. Mouton, 1978.

  • Brown, Raymond E. The Death of the Messiah: From Gethsemane to the Grave. Yale University Press, 1994.

  • Geisler, Norman L., and Abdul Saleeb. Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross. Baker Books, 2002.

  • Griffith, Sidney H. The Bible in Arabic: The Scriptures of the 'People of the Book' in the Language of Islam. Princeton University Press, 2013.

  • Khalidi, Tarif. The Muslim Jesus: Sayings and Stories in Islamic Literature. Harvard University Press, 2001.

  • Neuwirth, Angelika. Scripture, Poetry and the Making of a Community: Reading the Qur’an as a Literary Text. Oxford University Press, 2014.

  • Watt, W. Montgomery. Bell's Introduction to the Qur'an. Edinburgh University Press, 1970.

  • Wood, David. “The Quran and the Crucifixion.” Answering Islam. 2010.


at No comments:

ALLAH KILLED HIS OWN GREATEST PROPHET!

Muhammad attacked the unsuspecting 

Jewish settlement of Khaibar without provocation, around 629 a.d (my estimate). He killed all males and tortured Kinana, the leader before beheading him. Why? He wanted Kinana to reveal the location of their wealth. 

After the massacre, he had a party where he was poisoned by a Jewish woman. The poison weakened him, and he died 3 years later in 632 A.d from it's effects. This is what he told Aisha, the child bride during his slow decline and demise! 


Narrated `Aisha:

The Prophet (ﷺ) in his ailment in which he died, used to say, "O `Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison."  

Sahih Al Bukhari 4428


Earlier, Muhammad had this revelation : 

"And if he (Muhammad) had forged a false saying concerning Us, We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might) and then certainly should have cut off his life artery (Aorta)." Surah 69:44-46?


So , there can only be one conclusion, Allah killed Muhammad. Muhammad himself said so but Muslims , as vocal as ever, deny it! 

Now Muslims,  either your scholars lie, Allah lied, Muhammad lied or you lie! Come on, Pick your own poison!!!


at No comments:

Divine Judgment or Historical Irony?

Title: Divine Judgment or Historical Irony? An Examination of Muhammad’s Death in Light of Quranic and Hadith Sources

Author: Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute, New York, NY

Abstract:

This article critically examines the circumstances surrounding the death of Prophet Muhammad by analyzing Quranic revelation, canonical Hadith literature, and historical events such as the raid on Khaibar. It interrogates the theological and prophetic implications of Muhammad’s own testimony regarding his terminal illness, allegedly caused by poison administered after the Khaibar massacre. A striking correlation is drawn between his manner of death and a Quranic passage (Surah 69:44–46), which articulates the punishment that would befall a prophet who falsely attributed revelations to God. This paper challenges Islamic orthodoxy by posing the question: was Muhammad’s death a fulfillment of divine judgment as outlined in the Qur’an?

1. Introduction

The legacy of Prophet Muhammad in Islamic theology is that of the Seal of the Prophets—a man divinely protected and inspired. Yet, there remains a critical and largely avoided episode in Islamic history that continues to spark theological debate: the poisoning incident at Khaibar. This article revisits the historical context of the Jewish settlement of Khaibar, the actions taken by Muhammad and his followers, and his eventual death from long-term complications attributed to poisoning. Through this inquiry, we explore the unsettling yet unavoidable question: did Allah himself end Muhammad’s life in accordance with Qur’anic judgment reserved for false prophets?

2. The Raid on Khaibar and Its Aftermath

In approximately 629 A.D., Muhammad led a surprise military expedition against the Jewish community of Khaibar. The Muslim biographer Ibn Ishaq and hadith compilers such as Al-Bukhari and Muslim detail the capture, killing, and torture of the Jewish chieftain, Kinana ibn al-Rabi. Kinana was reportedly tortured to disclose hidden wealth, and upon his refusal, he was executed.

Following the conquest, a Jewish woman, Zaynab bint Al-Harith, offered Muhammad poisoned meat—an act motivated by vengeance or divine test. Muhammad consumed a portion and immediately sensed the poison but did not expel it fast enough. Although he survived the initial poisoning, he continued to complain of its effects until his death three years later.

3. Hadith Evidence: Muhammad’s Own Words

The most telling admission comes from the Sahih al-Bukhari:

*Narrated Aisha:** *"The Prophet (ﷺ) in his ailment in which he died, used to say, 'O Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison.'"
(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4428)

This statement is particularly significant as it aligns with a dire warning from the Qur’an:

4. Qur'anic Cross-Reference: The Aorta Verse

Surah Al-Haqqah (The Reality) 69:44–46 reads:

"And if he (Muhammad) had forged a false saying concerning Us, We surely should have seized him by his right hand; then We certainly would have cut off his aorta."

This passage clearly outlines divine punishment for any prophet who fabricates revelation. The use of the term aorta (al-watin) in both the Qur’an and Muhammad’s own reported statement is noteworthy and cannot be dismissed as linguistic coincidence. If taken literally, it would imply that Muhammad died under the very judgment described in the Qur’an.

5. Theological Implications

If Muhammad’s cause of death corresponds to the Qur’anic warning for false prophets, three possibilities emerge:

  • Muhammad falsely attributed words to Allah and was punished accordingly.

  • The Qur’anic warning was not fulfilled, which would challenge the Qur’an’s own integrity.

  • Or, Muhammad's death was coincidental, and his aortic pain was unrelated to any divine warning—an unlikely proposition given his own testimony.

Muslim apologists argue that the verse is metaphorical or the hadith is weak in interpretation. However, both sources—Sahih Bukhari and the Qur’an—are deemed authoritative in Sunni Islam, making such dismissals theologically problematic.

6. Conclusion

This analysis brings to light a deeply controversial, yet scripturally and historically rooted dilemma in Islamic theology. The convergence of Muhammad's statement about his poisoning, the historical events at Khaibar, and the Qur’anic criteria for divine punishment of false prophets must prompt honest scholarly dialogue.

If we are to take the Qur'an and Hadith literature seriously, then by Muhammad's own words and Allah's own revelation, we are left with an unavoidable question: Was Muhammad's death divinely orchestrated in judgment?

Muslim scholars, believers, and critics alike must grapple with this question, as avoiding it does no justice to the integrity of religious scholarship.

References:

  1. Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 4428.

  2. Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, trans. A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad.

  3. Qur’an, Surah Al-Haqqah (69:44–46).

  4. Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, Sahih Muslim, various hadiths on the Khaibar incident.

  5. Watt, W. Montgomery. Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press, 1961.

  6. Haykal, M.H. The Life of Muhammad. Islamic Book Trust.


at No comments:

WHY DID JESUS NOT OPENLY REVEAL HIS FULL IDENTITY?

Some people ask, “If Jesus is God, as you Christians claim, why didn’t he say so clearly?”  Others say, “Show me one place in the Bible where Jesus said, ‘I am God’ and I will believe it.”  Still others believe that the Bible does not say Jesus is God, but over zealous Christians have simply exaggerated things to the point of deifying him.


It does seem strange that Jesus appeared to hide himself and avoid public exposure as much as possible. Even his own family found his behavior strange, since they assumed he was trying to become a famous “public figure”:


“But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, Jesus’ brothers said to him, ‘You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do.  No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret.  Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.’  For even his own brothers did not believe in him.” (John 7:2-5)


So what is the truth about Jesus?

Let’s first look at what Jesus said about His own identity:


A.  JESUS THE MESSIAH SEEMED TO AVOID REVEALING HIS FULL IDENTITY:


1.  Jesus Very Seldom Revealed His Full Identity:


a) JESUS AS GOD:


Jesus never said clearly in so many words, "I am God!"  But He did say it indirectly:


“At this the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, ‘I am the bread that came down from heaven.’  They said, ‘Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know?  How can he now say, “I came down from heaven”?’” (John 6:41,42)


“‘I tell you the truth,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’  At this, they picked up stones to stone him…” (John 8:58)


[Note: “I Am” is the name God used for Himself when He spoke to Moses.  Stoning was the punishment for blasphemy prescribed in the Mosaic Law.]


(Jesus prayed) “I have brought you glory on earth by completing the work you gave me to do.  And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” (John 17:4,5)


[ For more about the deity of Christ see the article entitled,

“BIBLE INDICATIONS OF THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST” ]


b) JESUS AS MESSIAH:


Jesus never stood in the open market declaring publicly, "I am the Messiah!"  He did say it privately to the Samaritan woman, and He did not deny it when the Jews demanded He declare whether or not He was the Messiah:


“The woman said, ‘I know that Messiah (called Christ) is coming.  When he comes, he will explain everything to us.’  Then Jesus declared, ‘I who speak to you am he.’” (John 4:25,26)


“The high priest said to him, ‘I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.’  ‘Yes, it is as you say,’ Jesus replied.” (Matthew 26:63,64)


[Note: “Christ” is the Greek translation of the Hebrew, “Messiah”]


c) JESUS AS A PROPHET:


Jesus almost never called Himself a prophet.  Here is the one time mentioned:


“And they took offense at him.  But Jesus said to them, ‘Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.’  And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.” (Matthew 13:56-58)


d) JESUS AS THE SON OF GOD:


Jesus very seldom called Himself “the Son of God.”  He did not deny it when the Jews demanded that He say clearly whether or not He was the Son of God:


“‘If you are the Christ,’ they said, ‘Tell us.’  Jesus answered, ‘If I tell you, you will not believe me, and if I asked you, you would not answer.  But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.’  They all asked, ‘Are you then the Son of God?’  He replied, ‘You are right in saying I am.’” (Luke 22:67-70).


Many people spoke to Jesus calling Him the “Son of God” and He never denied it.  Here are a few examples:


“‘He saved others,’ they said, ‘but he can’t save himself!  He’s the King of Israel!  Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him.  He trusts in God.  Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, “I am the Son of God.”’” (Matthew 27:42,43)


“And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down.  Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God.’” (Matthew 14:32,33)


“When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell at his feet, shouting at the top of his voice, ‘What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?  I beg you, don’t torture me!’  For Jesus had commanded the evil spirit to come out of the man.” (Luke 8:28,29)


Jesus certainly implied He was the Son of God by repeatedly calling God His "Father" [117 times are recorded in the New Testament].


He Himself almost never called Himself the “Son of God” (see the only four examples below):


“… Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son.’?” (John 10:36)


“I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.  For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.” (John 5:25)


“When he heard this, Jesus said, ‘This sickness will not end in death.  No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.’” (John 11:4)


e) JESUS AS THE SON OF MAN:


Instead, He constantly referred to Himself as, “The Son of Man” (more than 50 times), and, on the face of it, the most obvious meaning of “Son of Man” is an average human being and a descendant of Adam.


2.  Furthermore, Jesus Forbid Those Who Recognized His Full Identity to Tell Anyone:


a) His disciples:


“‘But what about you? Who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter answered, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!’ ... Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.” (Matthew 16:15,16,20; see also Mark 8:29,30)


b) The demons:


“... He also drove out many demons, but He would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was.” (Mark 1:34; see also verses 24,25)


“Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him, and cried out, 'You are the Son of God.' But he gave them strict orders not to tell who he was.” (Mark 3:11,12)


“Moreover, demons came out of many people, shouting, 'You are the Son of God!' But He rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew He was the Christ.” (Luke 4:41)


c) Those He healed:


“... and he healed all their sick, warning them not to tell who he was.” (Matthew 12:15,16)


“Immediately he was cured of his leprosy. Then Jesus said to him, ‘See that you don't tell anyone ...’” (Matthew 8:3,4)


“Immediately the (dead) girl stood up and walked around. At this they were completely astonished. He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this.” (Mark 5:42,43)


3.  Jesus Refused to Prove His Identity When He Was Challenged to Do So:


a) By Satan:


“If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread ... If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down ...” (Matthew 4:3,6)


b) By the common people:


“Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘... Save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God.’” (Matt. 27:39,40)


c) By the chief priests, teachers and elders:


“He saved others, but he can't save himself!  He's the King of Israel!  Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him ... for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” (Matthew 39:41-43)


4. Jesus Usually Spoke to The People in Parables:


“Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable. So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: 'I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world.’” (Matthew 10:34,35)


 


B.  THE REASONS WHY JESUS THE MESSIAH DID NOT CLEARLY REVEAL HIS FULL IDENTITY:


1.  Because Jesus Knew That His Identity Is Beyond Human Understanding, and Is Revealed Only to Believers Who Are Enabled By God to Search For This Truth:


If Messiah Jesus has stood on the corner and proclaimed, “I am God!  Worship me!”  How many people do you think would have believed him and worshiped him?


a) There are two things about Christ which a person can understand only as God reveals them:


1) Who Jesus Really is:


“Simon Peter replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God’ ... ‘Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in Heaven.’” (Matthew 16:15-17)


2) The True Meaning of What Jesus Did on The Cross:


“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing … The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 1:18; 2:14)


b) Jesus Reveals Himself Only to Those Who Truly Love Him:


“‘Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest [reveal] myself to him.’ Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, ‘Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.’” (John 14:21-23)


c) This is How God Reveals Jesus to Those Who Truly Love Him:


i) God’s Holy Spirit Supernaturally Reveals this Secret Wisdom About Christ to Us:


“‘No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.  None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.’ ... no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him’ but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit ... we have … received ... the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.” (1 Corinthians 2:7-13)


ii) Jesus is Supernaturally Revealed to Us Through the Word of God:


“… these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31; see also John 5:39,40; Romans 16:25,26; Ephesians 3:4,5)


iii) True Believers Are Supernaturally Enabled by The Father to Receive Christ:


“All that the Father gives me will come to me ... No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him ... This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him.” (John 6:37,44,65)


2.  Because He Did Not Want People To Be Distracted From His Basic Purpose And Message:


Jesus’ reason for coming to earth the first time was to become a complete and perfect human being just like us, so that he could be our substitute in paying the full penalty for our sin.  He was not looking for people to worship or honor Him.  Instead, He wanted people to accept Him as a perfect man who had come to be their Savior from the disastrous results of their sins.  Showing people that He was God, the King of Israel or a great prophet would only distract them from this purpose.  When Christ comes back again He will come to be exalted and honored as King and Lord of Lords.


“… the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:28)


“For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.” (Luke 19:10)


“… Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.  And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a cross!” (Philippians 2:5-8)


“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men.” (1 Timothy 2:5)


“… Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.” (Titus 2:13,14)


“For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.  He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.” (1 Peter 1:18-20)


3.  Because Jesus Knew Many People Have So Hardened Their Hearts And Surrendered To Satan, That They Could Not Recognize Who He Really Is And Why He Came:


“The disciples came to him and asked, 'Why do you speak to the people in parables?' He replied, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them ... This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand." In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes ...”’” (Matthew 13:10-11,13-15)


“He [Jesus] was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.  He came to that which was his own (Israel), but his own did not receive him.” (John 1:10,11)


“The god of this world [Satan] has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the good news of the glory of Christ …” (2 Corinthians 4:4)


“No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.  None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” (1 Corinthians 2:7,8)


 


C.  IN FACT, GOD’S WORD IS FILLED WITH STATEMENTS ABOUT GOD’S SECRET WISDOM UNDERSTOOD ONLY BY THOSE TO WHOM GOD REVEALS IT:


“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.” (Deut. 29:29)


“... He brings hidden things to light.” (Job 28:11)


“It is the glory of God to conceal a matter.” (Proverbs 25:2)


“Truly you are a God who hides himself.” (Isaiah 45:15)


“From now on, I will teach you of new things, of hidden things unknown to you.” (Isaiah 48:6)


“Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know.” (Jeremiah 33:3)


“He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what lies in darkness, and light dwells with him.” (Daniel 2:22)


“It is written in the prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’” (John 6:45)


“When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence of superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified ... My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words ... not the wisdom of this age ... we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden ...” (1 Corinthians 2:1-8)


“... that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge ... the mystery of Christ ...” (Colossians 2:2,3; 4:3; see also 1:26,27)


Max Shimba Ministries Org


at No comments:

Why Did Jesus Not Openly Reveal His Full Identity?

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

A central question in Christological debate is why Jesus of Nazareth, believed by Christians to be God incarnate, did not explicitly and publicly proclaim His divine identity. This article investigates this theological issue through a biblical-theological lens, analyzing key New Testament passages and examining the Christological self-disclosure of Jesus. It argues that Jesus’ indirect revelation of His identity aligns with the redemptive-historical purpose of His first advent and the spiritual discernment required to perceive divine truth.

I. Introduction

Critics and skeptics often challenge the Christian doctrine of Jesus’ divinity by questioning why Jesus never openly declared, “I am God.” Others assert that the elevation of Jesus to divine status was the result of later Christian exaggeration. However, a careful reading of Scripture reveals that Jesus deliberately avoided open declarations of His divine nature, employing veiled language, symbolic terminology, and parables to communicate His identity.

This article aims to explore the biblical reasons for Jesus’ reserved self-revelation and how this approach was necessary for the fulfillment of His mission and for spiritual discernment.

II. Jesus’ Reserved Revelation of His Identity

A. Indirect Claims to Deity

Jesus did not frequently declare “I am God” in explicit terms, but He made profound indirect claims:

  1. Preexistence and Divine Title:

    • “Before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58)
      — “I AM” references God's self-revelation to Moses (Exodus 3:14).

  2. Descent from Heaven:

    • “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” (John 6:41–42)

  3. Divine Glory:

    • “Glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” (John 17:5)

  4. Use of "Son of God":

    • “Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?” (John 10:36)

  5. Acceptance of Worship:

    • Jesus never rebuked those who worshiped Him (e.g., Matthew 14:33).

B. Jesus’ Identity as the Messiah and Son of Man

  1. Private Confessions:

    • To the Samaritan woman: “I who speak to you am he [the Messiah].” (John 4:26)

    • Before the High Priest: “Yes, it is as you say.” (Matthew 26:64)

  2. The Son of Man Title:

    • Jesus referred to Himself as the “Son of Man” over 50 times (e.g., Matthew 20:28), a term that combines humility and the divine-human figure in Daniel 7:13–14.

C. Jesus Forbade Public Proclamations of His Identity

  1. To His Disciples:

    • “Then He warned His disciples not to tell anyone that He was the Christ.” (Matthew 16:20)

  2. To Demons:

    • “He gave them strict orders not to tell who He was.” (Mark 3:12)

  3. To the Healed:

    • “See that you don't tell anyone.” (Matthew 8:4; Mark 5:43)

D. Refusal to Prove Identity Under Challenge

Jesus rejected demands to perform miracles as proof of His identity:

  • “If you are the Son of God…” (Matthew 4:3,6 – Satan’s temptations)

  • “Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God.” (Matthew 27:40)

E. Use of Parables to Conceal and Reveal

Jesus often spoke in parables to selectively reveal spiritual truths:

“Though seeing, they do not see… This is why I speak to them in parables…” (Matthew 13:10–15)

III. Theological Reasons for Jesus’ Reserved Self-Revelation

A. Divine Identity Requires Spiritual Revelation

  1. Revelation by the Father:

    • “Blessed are you… for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 16:17)

  2. The Cross is Spiritually Discerned:

    • “The message of the cross is foolishness… because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 1:18; 2:14)

  3. Love as the Key to Revelation:

    • “He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will… manifest myself to him.” (John 14:21–23)

  4. Role of the Holy Spirit:

    • “God has revealed it to us by His Spirit… the Spirit who is from God.” (1 Corinthians 2:7–13)

B. Jesus’ Purpose Was Redemption, Not Public Fame

  1. Mission as a Servant:

    • “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve…” (Matthew 20:28)

    • “He humbled Himself… even to death on a cross.” (Philippians 2:6–8)

  2. Christ's First Advent as Savior, Not Judge:

    • “The Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.” (Luke 19:10)

C. Hardness of Human Hearts and the Work of Satan

  1. Spiritual Blindness:

    • “The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers…” (2 Corinthians 4:4)

  2. Isaiah’s Prophecy:

    • “Though hearing, they do not understand… For this people’s heart has become calloused.” (Matthew 13:13–15)

  3. Unbelief of His Own People:

    • “He came to His own, but His own did not receive Him.” (John 1:11)

IV. The Hidden Wisdom of God in Christ

Scripture affirms that God's redemptive plan in Christ was veiled from the world and revealed only to the faithful:

  • “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter.” (Proverbs 25:2)

  • “Truly, you are a God who hides Himself.” (Isaiah 45:15)

  • “He reveals deep and hidden things…” (Daniel 2:22)

Apostolic witness testifies to the hidden wisdom of Christ:

  • “We speak of God's secret wisdom… if the rulers had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” (1 Corinthians 2:7–8)

  • “The mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom…” (Colossians 2:2–3)

Conclusion

Jesus did not openly declare His divinity in simplistic terms because His identity is not a matter of intellectual assent but spiritual revelation. His mission as Redeemer necessitated humility, obscurity, and rejection. The veiled nature of His identity ensured that only those with hearts open to the Father’s calling and the Spirit’s illumination could truly recognize Him as God incarnate. In doing so, Jesus fulfilled prophetic Scripture, protected the integrity of His redemptive mission, and ensured that genuine faith would be the response to His true identity.

Bibliography

  • Bruce, F.F. The Hard Sayings of Jesus. IVP Academic, 1983.

  • Carson, D.A. The Gospel According to John. Eerdmans, 1991.

  • Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Zondervan, 1994.

  • Hurtado, Larry. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Eerdmans, 2003.

  • Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Fortress Press, 1996.

  • Shimba, Maxwell. The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John. Shimba Theological Institute, 2023.

  • Shimba, Maxwell. Christology and Hidden Wisdom in Pauline Theology. Shimba Theological Journal, 2022.


at No comments:

Did Pharaoh (Firaun) Submit and Become a Muslim?

By Dr. Max Shimba, Servant of Jesus Christ, Our Great God and Savior (Titus 2:13)

Max Shimba Ministries Org ©2016

Introduction

Dear reader,

Surah Yunus (10:90–92) of the Qur'an, revealed in Mecca and translated into Swahili by Sheikh Ali Muhsin Al-Barwani, appears to suggest that Pharaoh (known in Arabic as Firaun) submitted to God and became a Muslim at the time of his death. However, upon further reading of the Qur'an, a significant theological contradiction arises—challenging the consistency of this claim.

Surah Yunus 10:90–92: Pharaoh’s Supposed Conversion

Surah Yunus 10:90–92 states:

90: “We took the Children of Israel across the sea. Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them out of transgression and enmity. When he was about to drown, he said, ‘I believe that there is no deity except the One in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am among the Muslims!’

91: ‘Now? But you disobeyed before and were among the corrupters.’

92: ‘So today We will preserve your body so that you may be a sign for those after you. And indeed, many among mankind are heedless of Our signs.’

This passage clearly portrays Pharaoh as declaring his faith in the God of the Children of Israel and submitting at the moment of death. Many Islamic scholars, including Muhammad Asad in The Message of the Qur'an (Dar al-Andalus Limited, Gibraltar, 1993, p. 306, fn. 112), interpret this as Pharaoh becoming a Muslim before his death and being forgiven.

The Theological Dilemma: Contradictions in the Qur'an

However, this interpretation raises profound theological concerns when we compare it with other Qur'anic verses that seemingly contradict this account.

1. Surah An-Nisa’ 4:17–18: Toba (Repentance) Must Be Timely

17: “Verily, repentance with Allah is only for those who do evil in ignorance and then repent soon after. It is they to whom Allah will turn in forgiveness.”

18: “But repentance is not accepted from those who continue to do evil deeds until death faces one of them and he says: ‘Now I repent.’ Nor of those who die as disbelievers; for them We have prepared a painful punishment.”

Observation:
According to these verses, repentance at the point of death—after a life of knowing rebellion—is not accepted. Pharaoh, who willfully opposed Moses and committed evil knowingly, clearly does not fit the Qur'anic criteria of “those who sin in ignorance”. Hence, the Qur'an itself appears to invalidate Pharaoh’s deathbed repentance.

2. Surah Ghafir 40:83–85: Repentance After Punishment Is Not Accepted

83: “When their messengers came to them with clear signs, they arrogantly disbelieved in what they had been given of knowledge...”

84: “Then when they saw Our punishment, they said, ‘We believe in Allah alone and disbelieve in what we used to associate with Him.’”

85: “But their faith was of no benefit to them once they saw Our punishment. Such is Allah’s established way with His servants. And the disbelievers then were utterly lost.”

Observation:
This passage underscores that faith or repentance after witnessing divine punishment is ineffective and unacceptable. Again, this disqualifies Pharaoh’s last-minute submission, as it occurred precisely after he had seen the punishment—the drowning in the sea.

Contradiction Within the Qur'an?

If, according to Surah Yunus 10:90–92, Pharaoh’s repentance is preserved as a sign, but other verses such as Surah An-Nisa 4:17–18 and Surah Ghafir 40:83–85 state that repentance at the point of death or during punishment is rejected, then the Qur’an seems to be in internal contradiction. Does Allah forgive those who repent at the brink of death—or not?

Moreover, a serious theological paradox arises concerning Muslim funerary practices. Muslims pray for forgiveness for the dead—even though, by Qur’anic logic, the dead have already tasted death and thus, are beyond repentance (as per 4:18). How, then, is forgiveness expected?

The Call to Certainty in Jesus Christ

As I continued to study the Qur’an, I encountered numerous such contradictions—raising fundamental doubts about its consistency and divine authorship. Can a God who claims to be all-knowing and wise contradict Himself within His own revelation?

In stark contrast, the Holy Bible is clear and consistent in presenting salvation through Jesus Christ. Jesus Himself declared:

“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
(John 14:6)

And the apostles affirmed:

“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
(Acts 4:12)

An Invitation to Salvation Through Christ

Do you want to give your life to Jesus Christ today so He may save you and give you eternal life? Receiving Jesus means acknowledging Him as the only Savior and Lord.

Pray This Prayer of Salvation

“O Holy God, I come before You. I confess that I am a sinner. Please forgive all my sins. I repent with all my heart. I ask that the blood of Jesus Christ, shed on the cross for me, cleanse me now—spirit, soul, and body. I open my heart. Lord Jesus Christ, I welcome You into my life. Come in by the power of Your Holy Spirit. Be my Lord and Savior now and forever. Make me the person You desire me to be. Thank You for forgiving me and saving me. I surrender to serve You all the days of my life. Satan has no authority over me—In Jesus’ Name. Amen.”

If you prayed this prayer sincerely and with faith, then you are now saved, and all your sins are forgiven. The blood of Jesus now covers you.

Next Steps After Salvation

  1. Pray daily and speak with God – (John 15:7)

  2. Read the Bible daily – (Acts 17:11)

  3. Allow the Holy Spirit to lead your life – (Galatians 5:16–25; Romans 8:14–17)

  4. Trust God in all things – (1 Peter 5:7; Zechariah 4:6)

  5. Fellowship regularly with other believers – (Hebrews 10:25)

  6. Reject sin and live a holy life – (James 4:7–8)

  7. Witness to others about your new faith – (Matthew 10:32–33; Romans 1:16)

Conclusion

Congratulations on your new life in Christ. You are now a new creation. May you walk in His blessings, truth, and power from now on.

In Christ’s service,
Dr. Max Shimba
Servant of Jesus Christ, our Great God and Savior (Titus 2:13)
For Max Shimba Ministries Org
March 20, 2016
©2016 All Rights Reserved


at No comments:

Monday, July 21, 2025

The Qur'anic Affirmation of Jewish Ownership of the Holy Land: A Textual and Historical Analysis of Qur'an 5:21

Title:

The Qur'anic Affirmation of Jewish Ownership of the Holy Land: A Textual and Historical Analysis of Qur'an 5:21

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This article explores the theological and historical implications of Qur'an 5:21, where Allah unequivocally grants the Holy Land to the Children of Israel. Through a close exegetical analysis of the Qur'anic text, supported by classical Islamic commentaries and historical records, the paper demonstrates that the Qur'an recognizes the Jewish people's ancestral and divine claim to the Land of Israel. Furthermore, this study reveals that the term Palestine never appears in the Qur'an, nor was such a political entity or ethno-national identity recognized during the time of Muhammad. This analysis corrects prevalent misconceptions and offers a scripturally grounded perspective on the issue of Israel’s legitimacy within Islamic thought.

1. Introduction

The ongoing geopolitical conflict between Israel and various regional actors has often been framed through religious and historical narratives. Among Muslims, the question of rightful ownership of the land commonly called Palestine is frequently contested. However, a meticulous reading of Islamic scripture, particularly Qur'an 5:21, reveals a consistent acknowledgment of Jewish sovereignty over the Holy Land. This article aims to present a scholarly, text-based examination of this assertion, emphasizing that Allah Himself decreed the land to the Children of Israel. Furthermore, it argues that the modern concept of Palestine as a national or ethnic entity did not exist during Muhammad’s lifetime, nor does it find mention in the Qur'anic text.

2. Qur'an 5:21 and the Divine Grant to the Children of Israel

The key passage for this study is Qur'an 5:21, which reads:

يَا قَوْمِ ادْخُلُوا الْأَرْضَ الْمُقَدَّسَةَ الَّتِي كَتَبَ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ وَلَا تَرْتَدُّوا عَلَى أَدْبَارِكُمْ فَتَنقَلِبُوا خَاسِرِينَ
“O my people, enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned to you and do not turn back, or you will become losers.” (Qur'an 5:21, Sahih International)

In this verse, Moses addresses the Children of Israel, commanding them to enter the Holy Land (al-ard al-muqaddasah) which Allah has assigned (kataba) to them. The Arabic term kataba implies a binding decree or divine ordinance, indicating that the land was granted to the Jewish people by divine will.

Classical Islamic exegetes such as Ibn Kathir, Al-Tabari, and Al-Qurtubi concur that this land refers to the region historically known as the Land of Canaan, later Judea and Israel. Ibn Kathir, in his Tafsir, explicitly states:

“It is the land of Ash-Sham, specifically Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem) and its surrounding areas, which Allah wrote for the Children of Israel.”

Thus, according to both the Qur'anic text and authoritative Islamic exegesis, the Jewish people were divinely assigned this territory.

3. Absence of "Palestine" in the Qur'an and Early Islamic History

Notably, the term Palestine (فلسطين) never appears in the Qur'an. At no point does the Islamic holy text refer to a nation, people, or territory by that name. During the Prophet Muhammad’s lifetime (570–632 CE), the area encompassing modern Israel was known in Greco-Roman usage as Provincia Syria Palaestina, a designation made by the Roman Emperor Hadrian in 135 CE following the suppression of the Bar Kokhba Jewish revolt.

Islamic historiography, as documented in early texts such as Al-Baladhuri’s Futuh al-Buldan and Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, references the region as Bayt al-Maqdis, Iliya (from Aelia Capitolina, the Roman name for Jerusalem), or Bilad al-Sham (Greater Syria). Nowhere is it called Palestine, nor is there any recognition of a distinct Palestinian identity.

The absence of this terminology in the Qur'an is significant, indicating that Islamic scripture recognizes territorial continuity associated with earlier Abrahamic traditions, particularly the Jewish claim to the land.

4. Theological Implications and Modern Misinterpretations

Modern Islamic political rhetoric often invokes religious sentiment against Israel by framing the conflict as a religiously mandated struggle over Palestinian land. However, this position lacks scriptural support within the Qur'an. On the contrary, Qur'an 5:21 establishes a clear divine grant to the Jewish people.

Even subsequent Qur'anic passages (e.g., Qur'an 7:137 and Qur'an 17:104) reaffirm the idea that Allah favored the Children of Israel with this land:

“And We caused the people who were oppressed to inherit the eastern and western parts of the land, which We had blessed.” (Qur'an 7:137)

“And We said to the Children of Israel after Pharaoh: 'Dwell in the land, and when the promise of the Hereafter comes to pass, We shall bring you as a mixed gathering.’” (Qur'an 17:104)

These verses confirm a Qur'anic pattern that associates Jewish people with the Holy Land, making contemporary claims of exclusive Muslim entitlement to the territory theologically untenable from a Qur'anic perspective.

5. Conclusion

A careful, text-based analysis of the Qur'an reveals that the Jewish people hold a divinely sanctioned claim to the Holy Land, as articulated in Qur'an 5:21. Neither the term Palestine nor any Palestinian national or ethnic identity appears in the Qur'an or early Islamic sources. The Qur'anic position, corroborated by classical Islamic scholars, situates Jewish ownership of the land within a divine covenantal framework that modern political narratives cannot easily dismiss.

This study calls for an honest, scripture-based discourse among Muslim and Jewish communities alike, recognizing the textual evidence within Islamic scripture itself.

References

  1. The Qur'an, Sahih International Translation.

  2. Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Azim.

  3. Al-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan fi Ta'wil al-Qur'an.

  4. Al-Qurtubi, Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur'an.

  5. Al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan.

  6. Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah.

  7. Wensinck, A. J. (2012). The Holy Land in Early Islam. Brill.


at No comments:

What Is Islam? A Critical Theological and Historical Analysis of Islam’s Origins and Claims

What Is Islam? A Critical Theological and Historical Analysis of Islam’s Origins and Claims

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba | Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This paper critically examines the theological claims of Islam as formulated by Muhammad, interrogating the Qur'anic, Hadithic, and historical evidences that Muslims often cite to authenticate their religion. It argues that the foundational constructs of Islam, including the identity of Allah, the authenticity of the Qur'an, the role of Jibril (Gabriel), and the prophetic status of Muhammad, are inventions rooted in Arabian paganism and distorted Judeo-Christian narratives. The study employs a comparative theological approach by juxtaposing Qur'anic claims with biblical scriptures, especially in examining Qur'an 48:29’s assertion of foreheads marked by prostration in the Law (Taurat) and Gospel (Injeel). The paper concludes by affirming the messianic work of Jesus Christ as prophesied in Isaiah 53, offering salvation in contrast to the theological constructs of Islam.

Introduction

Islam, professed by over a billion adherents globally, claims divine origin through revelations allegedly given by Allah to Muhammad via the angel Jibril (Gabriel). Central to Islamic theology is the belief that Muhammad is the final prophet, the Qur'an is the literal word of God, and the Kaaba in Mecca is the holiest site ordained by divine decree. However, a closer examination of Islamic primary sources—specifically the Qur'an, Hadith collections, and early Islamic historiography—reveals significant theological, historical, and logical inconsistencies. This paper contends that Islam is a syncretic religion shaped by pre-Islamic Arabian paganism and borrowed Judeo-Christian elements, packaged under the authority of Muhammad.

1. The Claim of Islam’s Divine Origin: An Internal Contradiction

The Qur'an claims that "the religion before Allah is Islam" (Qur'an 3:19), asserting Islam as the primordial faith of humanity. However, historical scrutiny reveals that the term Islam in the sense of a structured religion emerged only through Muhammad’s prophetic claims in 7th-century Arabia. The invocation of earlier scriptural communities (People of the Book) as having rejected Islam out of envy presupposes the prior existence of Islam, which no historical or biblical evidence substantiates.

Qur'an 3:19
"The religion before Allah is Islam. Nor did the People of the Book refuse it except through envy, after knowledge had come to them."

This suggests an anachronism, as neither Judaic nor Christian texts reference "Islam" as a divinely instituted faith preceding Muhammad.

2. The Invention of Allah and the Idol of Hubal

Pre-Islamic Mecca housed a pantheon of idols at the Kaaba, including the chief deity Hubal. Historical and archaeological evidence identifies Allah as a high god among Arabian deities, associated with the Moon. The Qur'an inadvertently preserves this legacy in Qur'an 38:5–7, where critics of Muhammad accuse him of consolidating various gods into one:

Qur'an 38:5–7
"Has he made the gods [only] one Allah? Indeed, this is a curious thing."

The passage confirms the existence of polytheistic worship before Islam, contradicting the Qur'an's later monotheistic claims.

3. The Fabrication of Jibril (Gabriel)

The Qur'an frequently mentions Jibril as the angelic intermediary delivering Allah’s revelations to Muhammad (e.g., Qur'an 2:97). However, the biblical Gabriel serves as a messenger to Daniel and Mary, never associated with delivering scripture. Muhammad’s Jibril is a reappropriation of Judeo-Christian angelology.

Qur'an 2:97
"Whoever is an enemy to Jibril—it is [none but] he who has brought it [the Qur'an] down upon your heart by permission of Allah..."

This divergence points to a manufactured narrative, borrowing the name Gabriel to authenticate Muhammad’s revelations.

4. The Qur'an’s Borrowing from Biblical Texts

Early Islamic historiography acknowledges that Muhammad was influenced by Waraqa ibn Nawfal, a Christian monk who allegedly taught him biblical stories. Qur'an 16:102–103 admits accusations that a human source instructed Muhammad:

Qur'an 16:103
"We know that they say, 'It is only a human being who teaches him.' The tongue of the one they refer to is foreign, yet this [Qur'an] is in clear Arabic language."

Despite claiming divine origin, the Qur'an’s content reflects distorted and recontextualized biblical narratives.

5. Muhammad’s Self-Investiture as Prophet

In Qur'an 48:29, Muhammad declares himself the Apostle of Allah, describing his followers as marked by their prostrations—a claim said to find precedent in the Torah and Gospel.

Qur'an 48:29
"Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah, and those with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating, seeking bounty from Allah... Their mark is on their faces from the traces of prostration. That is their likeness in the Torah and their likeness in the Gospel..."

This claim demands biblical evidence:

  • Question 1: Where is the evidence in the Old Testament (Torah) that people have a mark on their foreheads from prostration?
    Answer: No Old Testament passage supports this. Marks in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 9:4) signify divine protection from judgment, not physical traces from prayer.

  • Question 2: Where is the evidence in the New Testament (Gospel) of such a mark?
    Answer: No New Testament passage attributes physical marks on foreheads from prayer. The Book of Revelation (7:3, 14:1) speaks of a symbolic seal of God on the foreheads of the righteous but unrelated to physical prostration marks.

  • Question 3: If Muslims argue the Taurat and Injil are separate from the Bible, where are these texts?
    Answer: No independent, authenticated pre-Islamic texts titled "Taurat" and "Injil" exist outside the Bible. Islam itself acknowledges the Torah as revealed to Moses and the Gospel to Jesus, corresponding to the Old and New Testaments.

6. Theological Synthesis: Muhammad as Allah, Jibril, and the Qur'anic Author

Islamic narratives blur the distinction between Muhammad, Jibril, and Allah. Given Muhammad's exclusive claim to receive revelation through Jibril—whom no one else witnessed—the possibility arises of a constructed religious system where Muhammad functioned as prophet, angel, and deity figurehead.

Further, Sahih al-Bukhari 5:58:206 describes pre-Islamic Mecca’s idol worship centered around the Kaaba’s 360 idols, including the Black Stone—a practice Islam continues by venerating the Kaaba, which originally housed idols.

7. Christ’s Redemptive Work: The Biblical Alternative

In stark contrast, the Bible proclaims Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God, whose atoning death and resurrection fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah 53:1–12. Unlike Muhammad’s militaristic and legalistic theology, Christ offers grace and salvation:

Isaiah 53:5
"But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes, we are healed."

This Messianic prophecy underscores Christianity's emphasis on redemption through divine self-sacrifice rather than human works.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that Islam's theological foundation is rooted in pre-Islamic paganism, biblical distortions, and Muhammad's self-serving claims. It exposes the inconsistencies between Qur'anic assertions and both historical fact and biblical revelation. The paper calls readers to reconsider Islam’s claims in light of scriptural evidence and embrace the redemptive work of Jesus Christ as the only path to salvation.

References

  • Qur'an 3:19; 38:5–7; 2:97; 16:102–103; 48:29

  • Sahih al-Bukhari 5:58:206

  • Holy Bible: Isaiah 53:1–12; Ezekiel 9:4; Revelation 7:3; 14:1


at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

TRENDING NOW