Spiritual Misinterpretations and Their Consequences: A Theological Reflection on Galatianism, Ceremonialism, and Antinomianism

Spiritual Misinterpretations and Their Consequences:

A Theological Reflection on Galatianism, Ceremonialism, and Antinomianism
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This article examines three significant errors of biblical interpretation—Galatianism, Ceremonialism, and Antinomianism—and their detrimental effects on the believer’s spiritual and physical life. These theological distortions, rooted in confusion and propagated by Satanic deception, result in spiritual abuse and a distorted understanding of grace and salvation. Using scriptural exegesis, this paper underscores the centrality of faith in Christ as the sole work required by God and clarifies the believer’s motivation for good works.

---

Introduction

False interpretations of Scripture, particularly those concerning salvation and sanctification, have led to widespread spiritual abuse within the Christian community. The Apostle Paul’s epistle to the Galatians addresses similar distortions, where believers were pressured to rely on works of the law for justification (Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1–3). Such errors persist today in various forms, notably Galatianism (seeking justification through works), Ceremonialism (placing salvific value on rituals), and Antinomianism (rejecting moral obligation under grace). These deviations from biblical truth enslave believers, producing guilt, confusion, and spiritual trauma.

---

The Nature of Spiritual Abuse

Spiritual abuse occurs when religious teachings distort the believer’s understanding of God, compelling them to strive for acceptance rather than rest in the finished work of Christ. Victims of spiritual abuse often believe they must “work to please God” or perform religious duties to regain His favor. This mindset fosters either true guilt for forgiven sins or false guilt for imagined offenses, resulting in internalized shame and physical consequences of spiritual distress.

Jesus Himself addressed this works-based mentality:

“Then they asked him, ‘What must we do to do the works God requires?’ Jesus answered, ‘The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.’” (John 6:28–29, KJV).

Thus, the only “work” God demands for salvation is faith in His Son, not the accumulation of meritorious acts. Good works flow from salvation, not toward it.

---

Biblical Clarification: Salvation by Grace Through Faith

The New Testament consistently affirms that salvation is an act of divine grace, not human effort. John writes:

“For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.” (John 3:17, KJV).

Furthermore, Jesus assures His followers of eternal security:

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (John 10:27–28, KJV).

Believers do not perform good works to earn salvation but because they have already received it. This distinction is vital to prevent spiritual abuse and to cultivate genuine Christian discipleship rooted in love and trust (#LOVE #TRUST).

---

Perseverance of the Saints

Misinterpretations of passages such as Matthew 24:13—“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved”—have also been used to burden believers with insecurity regarding their salvation. Proper exegesis recognizes this verse as a call to perseverance amid tribulation, not a condition for earning salvation. The doctrine of perseverance affirms that those truly saved by grace will indeed endure to the end, not by their own works but by the sustaining power of God.

---

Conclusion

Confusion in biblical interpretation—whether Galatianism, Ceremonialism, or Antinomianism—is not from God but from Satan, who seeks to distort the believer’s understanding of grace and truth. Such errors create spiritual abuse that “rapes the spirit” and trickles into physical and emotional well-being. The antidote is a return to sound doctrine: salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone, with good works flowing naturally from a transformed life. This theological clarity restores believers to freedom, love, and trust in the Shepherd who holds them securely in His hand.

---

Temporary Marriage in Early Islam: A Critical Analysis of Sahih al-Bukhari 4615

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba

---

Abstract

This paper examines the controversial hadith narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari 4615, which recounts the Prophet Muhammad’s (ﷺ) permission for his companions to engage in temporary marriages during military campaigns. By analyzing the historical, theological, and ethical implications of this practice, the study argues that such acts closely align with the modern definition of prostitution. This raises critical questions regarding the moral consistency of Islamic teachings, especially in comparison with biblical and universal ethical frameworks.

---

1. Introduction

The canonical hadith collections of Sunni Islam are widely considered by Muslims as authentic historical records of the sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad. Among them, Sahih al-Bukhari holds the highest authority after the Qur’an. However, certain narrations within it raise profound moral and theological questions. One such narration, Hadith 4615, describes the Prophet’s companions requesting permission for castration to avoid sexual temptation during military expeditions, only for Muhammad to instead allow them to marry women temporarily—even for as little as the price of a garment.

This study seeks to critically examine the implications of this narration, arguing that the practice sanctioned therein mirrors prostitution by definition and undermines the ethical claims of Islamic moral superiority.

---

2. Textual Background of Sahih al-Bukhari 4615

The hadith reads:

“Narrated `Abdullah: We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet (ﷺ) and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said (to the Prophet (ﷺ)), ‘Shall we castrate ourselves?’ But the Prophet (ﷺ) forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman (temporarily) by giving her even a garment, and then he recited: ‘O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari 4615, Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 139)

This hadith explicitly acknowledges that Muhammad sanctioned temporary unions, later referred to as Mutʿah. Such unions were short-term contractual arrangements with women, involving financial or material compensation in exchange for sexual access.

---

3. Mutʿah and the Question of Prostitution

From a sociological and ethical standpoint, prostitution is defined as the exchange of sexual services for material compensation without intent of a lifelong marital commitment. The narration in question meets these criteria:

• Temporary arrangement: The union lasted only for the duration of need, such as during military campaigns.

• Compensation: The hadith specifies that even a garment was sufficient as payment.

• Lack of permanence: Unlike traditional marriage, these unions did not involve lifelong commitment, family establishment, or enduring responsibility.

Thus, despite being couched in religious terminology, the practice reflects institutionalized prostitution.

---

4. Theological and Ethical Tensions

The Qur’an itself presents marriage as a solemn covenant (mithaqan ghalidhan, Qur’an 4:21), rooted in permanence, fidelity, and mutual responsibility. By contrast, Mutʿah undermines this vision by reducing women to objects of temporary sexual gratification.

Moreover, Muhammad’s prohibition of castration in favor of temporary marriage raises serious theological questions: Was sexual restraint impossible without institutionalized prostitution? Did divine morality prioritize male satisfaction over female dignity?

Christian ethics, in contrast, emphasize chastity, self-control, and marriage as a lifelong covenant (Matthew 19:6; 1 Corinthians 7:2). The divergence highlights significant moral inconsistencies between Islamic and biblical frameworks.

---

5. Historical Interpretations and Sunni-Shi’a Divide

While Sunni Islam eventually prohibited Mutʿah, Shi’a Islam continues to permit it to this day, citing the very hadith in Bukhari and other canonical sources. Sunni apologetics often claim that Muhammad later abrogated the practice. However, the historical record reveals confusion and contradiction, as some companions—including Ibn Abbas—continued to defend its permissibility after Muhammad’s death.

The persistence of Mutʿah in Shi’a tradition further illustrates the moral ambiguity of its origins. If the Prophet truly sanctioned prostitution-like arrangements, questions arise regarding his role as a “perfect moral example” (Qur’an 33:21).

---

6. Ethical Implications for Women

Temporary marriage reduces women to disposable objects, legitimizing exploitation under a veneer of religious law. In wartime contexts, where vulnerable women were already displaced or enslaved, this practice risked institutionalizing abuse. The material exchange (“even a garment”) underscores the transactional nature of the act, stripping it of genuine relational or spiritual significance.

---

7. Conclusion

The narration in Sahih al-Bukhari 4615 raises profound moral, theological, and historical questions about the foundations of Islamic sexual ethics. By sanctioning temporary sexual unions, Muhammad blurred the line between legitimate marriage and prostitution. From a critical academic perspective, this practice stands in tension with universal moral principles of dignity, fidelity, and responsibility.

Thus, while Muslims hold Sahih al-Bukhari as sacred history, this hadith challenges the claim of Muhammad as the ultimate moral exemplar and invites deeper comparative theological reflection.

---

References

• Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Ismail. Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 4615.

• Qur’an 4:21, Qur’an 33:21.

• Cook, D. Muslim Apocalypticism. Syracuse University Press, 2002.

• Brown, J. Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World. Oneworld, 2009.

• The Holy Bible, Matthew 19:6; 1 Corinthians 7:2.

---

Miracles and Prophetic Integrity: A Theological Comparison between Jesus and Muhammad

Title:
Miracles and Prophetic Integrity: A Theological Comparison between Jesus and Muhammad

Author:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

---

Abstract

This article explores the nature, purpose, and theological authenticity of the miracles attributed to Jesus Christ in the Bible and those ascribed to Muhammad in Islamic sources. Grounded in Christian and Islamic textual analysis, this study argues that the miracles of Jesus were acts of compassion and divine confirmation, while the miracles associated with Muhammad—often supernatural in form—lack historical corroboration and deviate from biblical prophetic tradition. Furthermore, the study critiques apocryphal attributions that portray Jesus as performing trivial wonders, suggesting such accounts are inconsistent with the nature of biblical revelation.

---

Introduction

The use of miracles in religious texts often serves as divine validation of a prophet's message. However, not all miracle claims are equal in theological coherence, moral intent, or historical verification. Within Christian theology, miracles are acts of divine mercy and signs pointing to the kingdom of God (John 20:30-31). In contrast, many miracles attributed to Muhammad in Hadith literature are either unverifiable or serve no clear salvific or compassionate function. This article seeks to examine the authenticity, purpose, and theological consistency of such miracles by comparing biblical narratives of Jesus and the apostles with Islamic traditions surrounding Muhammad.

---

1. Jesus' Miracles: Divine Power with Compassion

Jesus' miracles, as recorded in the New Testament, are rooted in love, compassion, and the affirmation of His divine mission. His first miracle—turning water into wine at Cana—was not for spectacle but to spare a poor couple from social disgrace (John 2:1–11). His acts of healing the blind (Mark 10:46–52), cleansing lepers (Luke 17:11–19), feeding multitudes (Matthew 14:13–21), casting out demons (Mark 5:1–20), and raising the dead (John 11:1–44) reflect divine compassion rather than showmanship.

Significantly, Jesus never performed miracles for entertainment. His ministry emphasized the kingdom of God, repentance, and reconciliation (Luke 4:18–19). Unlike pagan miracle-workers or mythological figures, Jesus’ signs were consistent with Old Testament prophecy (Isaiah 35:5–6) and served to authenticate His identity as the Messiah and Son of God.

---

2. Apocryphal Accounts and the Clay Bird Story

The Qur’an presents a story in which Jesus creates a bird from clay and breathes life into it (Qur’an 3:49; 5:110). This narrative does not appear in the canonical Gospels but closely resembles stories from the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, a non-canonical text composed in the second century and rejected by the early Church as heretical.

Church Fathers such as Irenaeus and Origen dismissed these writings as Gnostic fabrications with no apostolic authority. Scholars note that these stories reflect a distorted image of Jesus, portraying Him as a child magician rather than the Messiah (Ehrman, 2003). Thus, the Qur'anic inclusion of such narratives, while affirming Jesus’ miraculous birth, borrows from apocryphal sources rather than from divinely preserved Scripture.

---

3. Old Testament Prophets: Purposeful and Verifiable Signs

Biblical prophets such as Moses, Elijah, and Elisha performed miracles as signs of divine authority and for the deliverance of God's people. Moses parted the Red Sea to save Israel (Exodus 14), Elijah called down fire to affirm the true God (1 Kings 18), and Elisha raised a child from the dead (2 Kings 4). These were not acts for spectacle but pivotal moments in redemptive history.

In the New Testament, Jesus’ disciples—especially Peter and Paul—continued this prophetic tradition. Peter healed the lame (Acts 3:1–10), and Paul raised the dead (Acts 20:7–12), but always to authenticate the Gospel.

---

4. Muhammad's Claimed Miracles: Lack of Historical and Theological Substance

Islamic tradition attributes various miracles to Muhammad, such as water flowing from his fingers, trees weeping, and the alleged splitting of the moon (Sahih Bukhari 4.56.831; Qur’an 54:1). Yet these claims are conspicuously absent in the Qur’an itself, which presents Muhammad primarily as a "warner" (Qur’an 88:21) and not as a miracle-worker.

The lunar splitting miracle (Qur’an 54:1–2), interpreted by some Muslims as literal, lacks external historical confirmation, especially from civilizations such as the Romans, Persians, or Chinese, who meticulously recorded astronomical events. Furthermore, many of Muhammad’s miracles—like riding the Buraq to Jerusalem (Isra and Mi’raj)—are unverifiable visionary experiences (Qur’an 17:1) rather than witnessed, public signs.

Unlike Jesus, Muhammad did not perform any miracle to heal the sick, restore sight to the blind, or raise the dead. Even Muslim scholars like Al-Ghazali acknowledged the Qur’an itself as Muhammad’s primary "miracle" (i’jaz), making his signs more literary than supernatural.

---

5. Moral Contrasts and Prophetic Integrity

Prophetic integrity involves not only public works but private character. Jesus lived a sinless life (Hebrews 4:15), called others to humility (Matthew 5–7), and demonstrated sacrificial love. In contrast, Muhammad’s life raises ethical questions: multiple wives (Qur’an 33:50), including a marriage to a minor (Sahih Bukhari 5.58.234), and controversial political and military actions (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah).

Christian theology holds that prophets do not merely speak God's Word but embody it (John 1:14). Therefore, when prophetic character contradicts divine holiness, the authenticity of the messenger is called into question.

---

Conclusion

This comparative study illustrates that the miracles of Jesus Christ, rooted in love and historical testimony, stand in stark contrast to the often unverifiable and theatrically styled miracles attributed to Muhammad. Moreover, Jesus' actions consistently reflected divine compassion and moral perfection, qualities essential to true prophetic identity. The apocryphal distortions of Jesus as a magician—and the adoption of such tales into the Qur'an—only serve to emphasize the distance between biblical theology and later religious innovations. Real prophets, as shown in Scripture, act not to impress but to serve.

---

References

• Ehrman, B. D. (2003). Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament. Oxford University Press.

• Holy Bible, New International Version (NIV).

• Ibn Ishaq. Sirat Rasul Allah. Translated by A. Guillaume. Oxford University Press, 1955.

• Sahih al-Bukhari. Hadith Collection.

• The Qur'an. Trans. M. A. S. Abdel Haleem. Oxford University Press, 2004.

• Al-Ghazali. The Incoherence of the Philosophers.

• Irenaeus. Against Heresies.

• Origen. On the First Principles.

---

Jesus the Guiding Light: The Eternal Word and the Lamp of Life

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

The Christian confession of faith affirms that Jesus Christ is Lord, the Light of the world, and the eternal Word of God revealed to humanity through Scripture. The sacred text of the Bible testifies that Christ is not merely a historical teacher but the divine Logos through whom creation, redemption, and eternal life are made possible. This article explores the theological foundations of Jesus as Light and Lord, the centrality of the Bible as the eternal Word, and the spiritual imperative of reading, studying, praying, and meditating upon Scripture for wisdom and discernment.

---

1. Jesus as Lord and Light

The Lordship of Jesus Christ is a central proclamation of Christian theology, rooted in passages such as Philippians 2:9–11: “Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow… and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” The supremacy of Jesus is not symbolic but ontological, affirming His divinity and sovereign rule.

Moreover, Jesus declares Himself the Light of the world in John 8:12: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” The motif of light reflects divine revelation, purity, and truth. Within biblical theology, light symbolizes God’s presence that guides humanity from sin’s darkness into eternal salvation.

---

2. The Eternal Word and the Lamp of Scripture

The psalmist’s declaration—“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” (Psalm 119:105)—provides the hermeneutical lens for understanding Scripture as divine illumination. The Word of God, both incarnate in Christ and inscribed in the Bible, functions as humanity’s compass in navigating the complexities of moral, spiritual, and existential questions.

Jesus is identified as the eternal Word (John 1:1–3), the Logos who was with God and was God, through whom all things were made. To affirm that Jesus is Lord and Light is simultaneously to affirm that the Scriptures, inspired by the Spirit of God, carry divine authority. The Bible thus becomes not merely a record of ancient faith but a living Word, active and eternal, guiding believers into wisdom and holiness.

---

3. The Practice of Scripture Engagement

True discipleship requires not only acknowledgment of Jesus’ Lordship but also intentional engagement with His Word. The Christian tradition has long emphasized four disciplines of Scripture engagement:

• Reading: Regular exposure to God’s Word grounds faith in truth.

• Study: Deeper inquiry into context, language, and theology cultivates understanding.

• Prayer: Scripture must be read with a heart attuned to God, turning knowledge into communion.

• Meditation: Silent reflection on God’s Word allows its truths to penetrate and transform the believer’s life.

Through these practices, the believer gains not only information but transformation, being conformed to the image of Christ. The fruit of such engagement is discernment, spiritual wisdom, and eternal knowledge that transcends temporal concerns.

---

Conclusion

The Christian proclamation that Jesus is Lord and the Light of the world stands at the center of faith and theology. The Bible, as the eternal Word of God, continues to serve as a lamp to guide believers’ paths. In a world marked by uncertainty and competing voices, the Word of Christ remains the sure foundation. Reading, studying, praying, and meditating upon Scripture are not optional but essential disciplines for anyone seeking divine wisdom and eternal life.

Let Christ be your guiding Light, and let the Word of God illuminate every step of your journey.

---

📖 Citation: Shimba, Maxwell. Jesus the Guiding Light: The Eternal Word and the Lamp of Life. Shimba Theological Institute Journal of Theology and Ministry Studies, Vol. 1, Issue 3.

---

Ex-Muslims Turning to Christ: A Global Spiritual Awakening

✝️ Shimba Theological Institute Newsletter

Ex-Muslims Turning to Christ: A Global Spiritual Awakening

Across the world today, we are witnessing a remarkable spiritual movement—thousands of Muslims are encountering Jesus Christ and embracing Him as their Lord and Savior. This turning point is not confined to one nation or culture; it is a divine work unfolding on a daily basis as hearts are being transformed by the living Christ.

Former Muslims testify of visions, dreams, and miraculous encounters with Jesus, affirming the truth of the Gospel. Others are being led through the faithful witness of Christian believers who courageously share God’s Word. Each confession of faith is a victory for the Kingdom of God, and a reminder of Christ’s promise: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32).

Christians worldwide should rejoice in these testimonies. God’s Spirit is moving in unprecedented ways, breaking down barriers of fear, tradition, and cultural bondage. Yet, with this awakening comes a responsibility. The Church must rise to provide ex-Muslims with access to the Gospel, discipleship, and the solid teaching of God’s Word. These new believers, often facing rejection and persecution, need the warmth of Christian fellowship, pastoral care, and the foundation of biblical truth to grow strong in faith.

At Shimba Theological Institute, we recognize this as both a prophetic sign and a divine mandate. We call upon Christians everywhere to support this movement through prayer, discipleship initiatives, and missions outreach. The harvest is plentiful, and the Lord of the harvest is at work. Let us, as the body of Christ, welcome our brothers and sisters with open arms and partner with heaven in this global revival.

“The Lord has done great things for us, and we are filled with joy.” – Psalm 126:3

---

📖 Shimba Theological Institute
Equipping the Church. Defending the Faith. Transforming Nations.

---

Questioning the Angelic Identity of Jibril: A Critical Examination of Qur’anic Interpretation

 Title:

Questioning the Angelic Identity of Jibril: A Critical Examination of Qur’anic Interpretation
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba – Shimba Theological Institute

---

Abstract

Islamic theology traditionally identifies Jibril (Gabriel) as one of the four archangels of Allah. However, a critical reading of the Qur’an reveals an absence of explicit declaration where Allah directly calls Jibril an angel (malak). The question arises: If the Qur’an is the ultimate source of truth, why does it never clearly say, “Jibril is one of the angels”? This article engages in a theological and exegetical debate challenging the conventional Islamic interpretation, particularly through the lens of Surah Al-Baqarah 2:98, where Jibril and Michael (Mikail) are mentioned separately from “the angels.”

---

1. Introduction: The Foundational Question

The Qur’an, in Surah Al-Baqarah (2:98), states:

“Whoever is an enemy to Allah, and His angels, and His messengers, and Jibril and Mikail, then indeed, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.”

This verse explicitly distinguishes between “angels” (mala’ikah) and “Jibril and Mikail.” The immediate linguistic and theological question is:
If Jibril and Mikail are indeed angels, why are they mentioned separately from ‘the angels’?
In classical Arabic rhetoric, separation of nouns within a list usually indicates categorical distinction rather than redundancy. Hence, this verse invites critical scrutiny:
Was Jibril truly considered an angel by the Qur’an’s author, or was his nature conceptually different?

---

2. The Missing Declaration: “Jibril is an Angel”

Unlike the Bible, where Gabriel is explicitly called “the angel Gabriel” (Luke 1:26, Daniel 8:16), the Qur’an never once describes Jibril using the title malak (angel).
There is no verse in the Qur’an where Allah says:

“Jibril is one of My angels.”

This silence raises profound theological and linguistic questions:

• Why is Jibril’s angelic status assumed rather than stated?

• If Jibril were truly an angel, why does the Qur’an not use the same grammatical structure it uses for other angels, such as the angels of death, punishment, or recording?

• Could Jibril have been a different class of celestial being—a spirit, or a divine messenger distinct from the angelic order?

---

3. Qur’anic Terminology: Jibril as “Ruh” (Spirit)

In multiple verses, Jibril is called Ruh al-Qudus (the Holy Spirit) or Ruh al-Amin (the Trustworthy Spirit):

• “Say, the Holy Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth” (Surah An-Nahl 16:102)

• “The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down upon your heart” (Surah Ash-Shu‘ara 26:193–194)

If Jibril is consistently identified as a Ruh (Spirit) and never explicitly as a Malak (Angel), one must ask:
Are “Ruh” and “Malak” identical terms in the Qur’an?
If not, why has Islamic theology merged the two into one category?

Moreover, the Qur’an in Surah Al-Qadr (97:4) says:

“The angels and the Spirit descend therein by permission of their Lord.”
Here again, the Spirit (Ruh) is listed alongside the angels, implying a distinct being, not one of them.

---

4. The Linguistic Distinction and Theological Implications

Arabic linguists and Qur’anic commentators have long recognized that when two entities are mentioned separately, it indicates difference of essence or category.
Thus, when the Qur’an says:

“The angels and the Spirit,”
it cannot mean “the angels including the Spirit.”
Rather, it suggests:
“The angels (a class of beings) and another distinct being known as the Spirit.”

Therefore, from a purely linguistic standpoint, the Qur’an consistently differentiates Jibril (the Spirit) from the angelic hosts.

This raises further theological questions:

• If Jibril is the Spirit, how can he simultaneously be an angel?

• Did early Muslims or the Qur’an’s redactors misunderstand the original Judeo-Christian references to the Holy Spirit and the angel Gabriel as separate entities?

• Could the conflation of “Ruh” and “Malak” reflect a later interpretive tradition rather than the Qur’an’s original intent?

---

5. Comparative Scriptural Context

In the Bible, Gabriel is clearly defined as an angel:

“I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God” (Luke 1:19).
“The man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision, came to me in swift flight” (Daniel 9:21).

In contrast, the Qur’an never uses such clarity.
Instead, it attributes the Qur’an’s revelation to Ruh al-Qudus and Ruh al-Amin, titles that align more with the Christian understanding of the Holy Spirit than with an angelic messenger.

Hence, one might debate:

• Did the Qur’an adopt the name “Jibril” from Judeo-Christian sources but reinterpret his role to fit Islamic theology?

• Was Jibril originally conceived as the Spirit of Revelation, not an angelic being, and only later identified as one through Islamic exegesis (tafsir)?

---

6. Debate Questions for Muslim Scholars

To stimulate further scholarly debate, the following critical questions should be addressed:

1. Where in the Qur’an does Allah directly call Jibril an angel (malak)?

2. Why does Surah Al-Baqarah 2:98 separate Jibril and Mikail from “the angels”?

3. Why does the Qur’an refer to Jibril as Ruh al-Qudus and Ruh al-Amin, but never Malak Jibril?

4. If Ruh and Malak are the same, why are they consistently distinguished in Qur’anic grammar and syntax (e.g., Surah Al-Qadr 97:4, Surah An-Nahl 16:2)?

5. Could “Jibril” in the Qur’an represent a metaphor for divine inspiration or spirit, rather than a literal angelic being?

6. How does Islamic theology reconcile the Qur’anic “Ruh” with the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit?

---

7. Conclusion

The Qur’an’s portrayal of Jibril raises significant linguistic, theological, and hermeneutical questions. Nowhere is Jibril explicitly called an angel; rather, he is identified as the Spirit. Moreover, Qur’anic verses consistently separate him from “the angels,” suggesting a distinct identity or nature.
Thus, the Islamic assumption that Jibril is an angel appears to stem not from Qur’anic revelation itself but from post-Qur’anic interpretation and theological construction.

This invites a re-examination of Islamic angelology and the origin of revelation within the Qur’an’s framework—questions that remain unresolved within orthodox Islamic scholarship.

---

Author:
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Orlando, Florida, USA

---

Seeking the Lord: A Theological Reflection on Isaiah 55:6–8

 By Dr. Maxwell Shimba

Shimba Theological Institute

---

Seeking the Lord: A Theological Reflection on Isaiah 55:6–8

The passage in Isaiah 55:6–8 serves as a profound theological invitation to repentance, divine intimacy, and spiritual renewal. The prophet Isaiah calls humanity to an urgent pursuit of God’s presence—“Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call ye upon Him while He is near.” This appeal emphasizes the immediacy of divine grace and the temporal nature of human opportunity. God’s accessibility is not indefinite; it demands a timely response of faith and surrender.

Isaiah’s exhortation—“Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts”—reveals that repentance involves both external conduct and internal transformation. Sin is not merely behavioral but also intellectual and volitional. To return to the Lord is to align one’s heart and mind with divine truth. The promise that God “will abundantly pardon” reveals the infinite depth of divine mercy, reminding humanity that forgiveness is not measured by human limitation but by God’s immeasurable compassion.

Finally, the statement “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord” transcends human comprehension. It highlights the vast epistemological gap between divine wisdom and human understanding. God’s redemptive logic often contradicts human expectations, yet it is through this divine paradox that salvation and healing flow.

This passage thus embodies the spiritual philosophy of Glory to God Healing Ministries, a brotherhood devoted to helping others through love and trust. It calls every believer to embrace divine transformation, seek God with urgency, and trust His higher purpose even when human reasoning fails.

---

#Love #Trust #GloryToGodHealingMinistries

MUHAMMAD’S PROPHECY THAT HIS COMPANIONS WOULD ABANDON ISLAM AND RETURN TO CHRISTIANITY

MUHAMMAD’S PROPHECY THAT HIS COMPANIONS WOULD ABANDON ISLAM AND RETURN TO CHRISTIANITY

(Friday, January 21, 2022)

The Prophet’s Words to His Companions

In Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, under the chapter “The Saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him),” it is recorded that the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) said to his Companions:

“You will surely follow the ways of those who came before you!”

This narration is reported by ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yasār from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī, who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) declared:

“You will certainly follow the path of those before you, step by step and cubit by cubit, even if they were to enter into a lizard’s hole, you would surely follow them.”

The Companions asked, “O Messenger of Allah, do you mean the Jews and the Christians?”
The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied, “Who else could it be if not them?”
(Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, p. 151)

This prophetic statement corresponds with the Qur’anic verse in Surah Āl ʿImrān (3:144), which says:

“Muhammad is no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. If he dies or is slain, will you then turn back on your heels?”

The Fulfillment of the Prophecy After the Prophet’s Death

The words of Allah and His noble Messenger began to manifest immediately after the Prophet’s death. It had scarcely been a moment after his passing when a man—identified as ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb—emerged from the Prophet’s house with his sword unsheathed and proclaimed before the gathered people:

“Let no one dare say that Muhammad is dead!”

ʿUmar’s resistance to acknowledging the Prophet’s death revealed an inner motive—a denial and emotional rebellion that the Qur’an had forewarned: “Will you turn back on your heels?”

Later, ʿUmar summoned his close companion Abū Bakr, who was at that time outside Madinah with his wife. When Abū Bakr arrived, he entered the Prophet’s house, confirmed his death, and then came out to address the people, saying:

“Indeed, Muhammad was but a Messenger; Messengers have passed away before him. Now Muhammad has died.”

Following this declaration, Abū Bakr and ʿUmar hastened to Saqīfah, where they became involved in a heated dispute with the Anṣār (the Helpers) over the issue of succession. Abū Bakr was eventually chosen as Caliph after threats, pressure, and promises of wealth were made to secure allegiance.

This political struggle marked the beginning of what the Qur’an described as “turning back on their heels.”

Following the Path of Those Who Came Before

The subsequent actions of Abū Bakr, ʿUmar, and their supporters mirrored the Prophet’s warning that his community would imitate the previous nations “step by step and cubit by cubit.” Just as the earlier communities had deviated from divine truth, certain Companions also diverged from the Prophet’s teachings immediately after his death.

Today, we witness many Muslims who pride themselves on being “pure believers” yet follow in the footsteps of those early figures, Abū Bakr and ʿUmar—figuratively entering the “lizard’s hole” that the Prophet described.

They frequently invoke terms such as bidʿah (innovation), claiming that the Prophet did not perform certain acts, while insisting that revering and blessing Abū Bakr and ʿUmar is obligatory, equivalent to the pillars of prayer and fasting.

Some even go so far as to utter blasphemous statements about the Prophet himself—such as ʿUmar’s alleged remark that “the Prophet is delirious”—a statement that deeply contradicts the honor and infallibility accorded to him by Islam.

Conclusion

This narration, as cited from Sahih al-Bukhari and correlated with Qur’an 3:144, has been interpreted by some scholars as a prophetic forewarning: that after his death, certain followers would deviate from the true path of Islam and adopt practices or ideologies resembling those of past religious communities.

Such interpretations continue to inspire theological debates concerning the succession crisis, the legitimacy of early caliphs, and the fulfillment of the Prophet’s words regarding imitation of previous nations.

---

The Disobedience of Some Companions of Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) and Their Return to Disbelief

Friday, January 21, 2022

The Disobedience of Some Companions of Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) and Their Return to Disbelief

Abstract:
This paper examines the controversial theological question concerning the conduct of some companions (Sahabah) of Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) following his death, and the claim—rooted in both Sunni and Shia narrations—that certain companions deviated from the Prophet’s teachings, committing acts tantamount to disbelief (kufr). Drawing primarily from Sahih al-Bukhari and Shia interpretations, this analysis seeks to address whether the companions of the Prophet remained steadfast in faith or whether some fell into moral and spiritual corruption after his demise.

---

1. Introduction

Among various Islamic schools of thought, particularly within Sunni and Shia Islam, there exists a profound theological divergence regarding the sanctity and moral infallibility of the Prophet’s companions. While Sunni traditions generally uphold that all companions (Sahabah) were righteous and praiseworthy, the Shia Ithna'ashari (Twelver Shia) perspective challenges this notion by asserting that not all companions maintained their faith and integrity after the Prophet’s death.

This issue is not merely historical—it touches on the very question of authority, legitimacy, and moral integrity in early Islamic leadership. The Shia tradition, for instance, maintains that certain companions engaged in acts of disobedience and injustice so grave that they effectively returned to disbelief (kufr), betraying the message of Islam and the Prophet’s household (Ahl al-Bayt).

---

2. Sunni Narratives in Sahih al-Bukhari

A key point of reference in this debate is a narration found in Sahih al-Bukhari, widely regarded by Sunni scholars as the most authentic collection of Hadith after the Qur’an. According to the narration reported by Abu Huraira, the Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) described a future event involving his companions on the Day of Judgment at the Pond of Kawthar.

Abu Huraira narrated that:

“A group of my companions will come to me at the Pond (of Kawthar), and they will be driven away by the angels. I will say: ‘They are my companions!’ But it will be said: ‘You do not know what they innovated after you.’ Then I will say: ‘Away with those who changed (the religion) after me!’”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, Hadith 584)

This narration implies that certain individuals who were once close companions of the Prophet will be denied access to Paradise due to their posthumous deviations from his teachings. It thus raises significant theological questions about the presumption of universal righteousness among the companions.

---

3. Theological Implications and Shia Interpretation

From the Shia Ithna'ashari perspective, this narration corroborates their position that some companions, despite being close to the Prophet, later committed acts of apostasy (irtidad) or grave injustice, particularly in matters of political succession and treatment of the Prophet’s family.

Shia scholars argue that the Prophet’s warning at the Pond of Kawthar symbolizes divine disapproval of those companions who distorted his message, oppressed the Ahl al-Bayt, or usurped leadership unjustly.

According to this view, prominent figures such as Abu Bakr, Umar ibn al-Khattab, Uthman ibn Affan, Mu‘awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, and Khalid ibn al-Walid are among those accused of having deviated from the Prophet’s intended path. Shia theologians maintain that their political and military actions after the Prophet’s death constituted rebellion against divine will and betrayal of the Prophet’s legacy.

---

4. Sunni Counterarguments

Sunni scholars, on the other hand, interpret this hadith differently. They argue that the narration does not refer to the core companions (Sahabah al-Kibar) who faithfully transmitted Islam, but rather to later followers (munafiqeen or hypocrites) who pretended to be companions while secretly opposing the Prophet.

Furthermore, Sunnis emphasize that the Prophet (SAWW) declared in another hadith, “The best of my nation is my generation, then those that follow them,” (Bukhari, Muslim). This statement is often cited as evidence of the overall integrity and virtue of the Prophet’s companions, despite possible individual transgressions.

---

5. The Abu Huraira Controversy

The narration’s transmitter, Abu Huraira, has also been a point of contention. Critics from the Shia tradition question his reliability, accusing him of fabricating or misinterpreting narrations that diminish the status of the Ahl al-Bayt. The Shia argument presented in the text challenges Sunni consistency:

If Abu Huraira’s hadith portrays some companions as apostates, does that mean he has “insulted” the companions—an act for which Shia Muslims are often condemned? If so, why is he not likewise accused of blasphemy (takfir) or deceit?

This rhetorical question underscores the perceived inconsistency in Sunni defense of the companions while accepting hadiths that appear to condemn them.

---

6. Conclusion

The question of whether some companions of Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) fell into disbelief or moral corruption remains one of the most contentious theological issues between Sunni and Shia Islam. While Sunni traditions maintain the general uprightness of all companions, Shia theology insists that righteousness must be measured by faithfulness to the Prophet’s teachings and loyalty to his purified household (Ahl al-Bayt).

The narration of the Pond of Kawthar continues to serve as a critical scriptural point in this discourse, highlighting the possibility that proximity to the Prophet did not necessarily guarantee enduring faith or obedience.

Ultimately, this debate reveals the deep complexities within Islamic historiography and theology—where questions of faith, leadership, and moral integrity intersect with the very foundations of Islamic identity.

---

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Academic Analysis on Early Islamic Apostasy and the Companions of the Prophet (SAWW)

---

GOD IS IMPARTIAL, BUT ALLAH IS PARTIAL—FAVORING ONLY THE ARABS

GOD IS IMPARTIAL, BUT ALLAH IS PARTIAL—FAVORING ONLY THE ARABS

By Dr. Max Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Wednesday, May 4, 2022

When you first learned the truth about Jehovah, the God of the Bible, and understood His divine purpose, your faith began to grow. You realized that although you were born in sin and separated from God, the Father, through Jesus Christ, opened the way for you to attain the perfection that Adam lost and to receive the gift of eternal life.

The Bible, written more than six hundred and fifty years before the birth and establishment of the Qur’an, clearly teaches that God shows no favoritism.
As it is written:

Romans 2:11 – “For there is no respect of persons with God.”
Acts 10:34 – “Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons.”

This is the essence of Jehovah’s divine character: our God loves all people equally, without discrimination or favoritism.

However, when I read the Qur’an, I discovered that Allah exhibits clear favoritism toward a specific group of people—particularly the Arabs—and expresses disdain toward others.

A reference from the Qur’an, Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:3, declares:

“Forbidden to you are carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah, and the strangled, the beaten to death, the fallen, the gored, and that which wild beasts have eaten—except what you are able to slaughter before death—and that which has been sacrificed on stone altars. Also forbidden is dividing (meat) by raffling with arrows; that is defiance. This day those who disbelieve have despaired of your religion, so fear them not, but fear Me. This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and chosen for you Islam as your religion. But whoever is forced by hunger without inclination to sin—then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”
(Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:3)

This verse reveals that Allah “has chosen Islam for you,” addressing specifically the Arabian community. Hence, Islam emerges as a religion of favoritism—a faith designed for the Arabs and imposed upon others. This raises an important theological question: When did God, the Creator of all humanity, ever show such partiality or enmity toward other peoples?

The God of the Bible stands in complete contrast. Scripture declares:

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.”
— John 3:16–17

Jehovah’s love embraces all humanity—Jews, Arabs, Africans, Asians, and every nation under heaven. His salvation through Christ is universal, not ethnic or regional.

Therefore, the Gospel must be proclaimed to all nations, as it is written:

“And this Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”
— Matthew 24:14

Let us, therefore, dedicate ourselves to the Great Commission—bringing the message of salvation through Jesus Christ to all people everywhere.

For Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
— Hebrews 13:8

---

May God bless you all.
By Dr. Max Shimba, Servant of Jesus Christ, our Great God and Savior.
— Titus 2:13

For Max Shimba Ministries Org
© 2016 Max Shimba Ministries Org. All Rights Reserved.
Permission is granted to copy and distribute this document verbatim, provided no alterations are made.

---