Tuesday, December 16, 2025

"You Can Hear God's Voice With Accuracy."

Sunday Fresh Manner

"You Can Hear God's Voice With Accuracy."

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute


Introduction

Beloved in Christ, one of the greatest privileges of being a child of God is the ability to hear His voice. Jesus declared in John 10:27, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” The question many believers wrestle with is this: “How do I know when I’m really hearing God?”

Is it my own thoughts? Is it the enemy whispering? Or is it truly the voice of the Holy Spirit? Today, I want to give you a fresh manner for your spirit: You can hear God’s voice with accuracy.


1. The Source of Confusion

The enemy of our souls is called “the accuser of the brethren” (Revelation 12:10). He works overtime to plant seeds of doubt, shame, and condemnation in our hearts. When you hear a voice that points out only your failures, calls you unworthy, and leaves you in despair—that is not the voice of your Father. That is the voice of the enemy.

On the other hand, when you hear words that carry peace, grace, correction in love, and truth that leads to restoration, you can be sure that it is the Father speaking.


2. The Key Question: Who Am I Hearing?

To know whether you’re hearing God, ask yourself one crucial question:

“Am I hearing a loving Father or an accuser?”

  • The Father says: “You are My beloved child in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17)

  • The accuser says: “You are a failure, you will never measure up.”

  • The Father says: “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” (Hebrews 13:5)

  • The accuser says: “God is done with you, you are alone.”

The voice of God is consistent with His character—He is Abba Father. Jesus Himself taught us to pray, “Our Father in heaven…” (Matthew 6:9). That word “Abba” means Daddy—intimate, close, and full of love.


3. The Nature of God’s Voice

God’s voice is marked by grace and truth. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

Grace and truth always go together in God’s dealings with us. Truth reveals where we need Him, and grace empowers us to walk with Him. If what you are hearing tears you down without offering hope, it’s not the voice of God. But if it convicts and then points you toward restoration in Christ, then you are hearing His Spirit.


4. Many Mistake Accusation for God’s Work

Some Christians, with good intentions, think they are doing the Lord’s work by pointing out faults, failures, and shortcomings in others. But my friends, that is not the ministry of the Holy Spirit—that is the work of the accuser.

The Spirit of God does not humiliate or destroy. He convicts to heal, rebukes to restore, and corrects to build up. Paul reminds us in Romans 8:1, “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.”


Conclusion

Child of God, you can hear His voice with accuracy. Remove yourself from the confusion of “Is this me? Is this the devil? Is this God?” Instead, ask: “Does this sound like the loving Father revealed in Jesus Christ, or like the accuser who condemns?”

The more you know God’s Word, the sharper your discernment becomes. For His voice always aligns with His Word, His Spirit, and His character of love.


Call to Action

Today, choose to silence the accuser and open your heart to Abba Father. When He speaks, His words will bring peace, love, and guidance. Train your ear to His voice by spending time in Scripture and prayer. And remember: God doesn’t put you down—He lifts you up.

May you walk this week with confidence, knowing that the Shepherd speaks, and His sheep hear Him with clarity and accuracy.

Amen.



Cain and Abel Are Not Mentioned by Their Names in the Qur’an: A Scholarly Challenge

Cain and Abel Are Not Mentioned by Their Names in the Qur’an: A Scholarly Challenge

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

The Qur’an in Surah 5:27–32 narrates the account of “the two sons of Adam,” yet it conspicuously fails to provide their names. In Judeo-Christian Scriptures, the names Cain and Abel are foundational in understanding the beginnings of human morality, fratricide, sacrifice, and divine justice. The glaring absence of their names in the Qur’an raises fundamental questions about the claim of the Qur’an as a “final revelation” that allegedly confirms and supersedes prior Scriptures.

If the Qur’an claims to be detailed (Qur’an 6:114, 12:111) and a clarification of all things (Qur’an 16:89), then why does it omit critical historical and theological details about the very first murder in human history? The omission is not accidental; it reflects a lack of awareness, context, and literary depth in what should have been a central account of humanity’s moral fall outside Eden.

Scholarly Critique and Questions

  1. Why are the names missing?

    • In Genesis 4, Cain and Abel are clearly identified by name. This provides theological depth, linking their identities with their sacrifices, characters, and destinies. The Qur’an, however, generalizes them as “two sons of Adam,” stripping the narrative of individuality and accountability. Why does the Qur’an erase their identities?

  2. Why is their mother missing?

    • The Bible consistently identifies Eve as the mother of humanity (Genesis 3:20). The Qur’an never names her, reducing her merely to “the wife of Adam.” How then do Muslims today confidently use the name Hawwa (Eve) unless borrowed directly from Jewish and Christian traditions? Is this not an admission that the Qur’an alone is insufficient for historical accuracy?

  3. Why do Muslims assume Cain and Abel?

    • Without the Bible, Muslims would have no way to identify who the “two sons” were. This dependence shows that the Qur’an is not self-explanatory but parasitic on the Bible for basic details. If the Qur’an was meant to be the “criterion” (Qur’an 25:1), why does it require the very Scriptures it claims to supersede?

  4. Why omit foundational names while emphasizing trivial ones?

    • The Qur’an mentions Mary (Maryam) more often than the New Testament, and even Pharaoh’s wife (Asiya, according to Islamic tradition) is exalted. Why then does it refuse to mention Cain, Abel, or Eve—figures who shaped the earliest human story? Is this not evidence of inconsistency in what the Qur’an chooses to preserve?

  5. Why the lack of narrative context?

    • The Qur’anic version of Cain and Abel lacks the theological framework of sin, blood sacrifice, repentance, and God’s redemptive plan found in Genesis 4. Instead, it ends with a moralizing statement about killing one person being like killing all of humanity (Qur’an 5:32)—a verse ironically borrowed from Jewish Talmudic literature (Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5). Why does a book that claims divine originality borrow from human rabbinic commentary?

Implications for the Qur’an’s Reliability

If the Qur’an fails to provide the most basic details of humanity’s first murder, how can it be trusted to give accurate knowledge of salvation history? Its silence on names, identities, and theological meaning undermines its claim of being a complete and final revelation. Instead, it demonstrates dependency on the Bible and Jewish oral traditions, thereby disqualifying itself as an independent source of divine truth.

The Qur’an presents itself as “mufassal” (detailed) and “tibyanan li-kulli shay’” (an explanation of all things). Yet when faced with the foundational narratives of human existence, it provides skeletal accounts that require the Bible for completion. A truly divine book would not rely on previous texts while simultaneously accusing them of corruption.

Conclusion

The absence of Cain, Abel, and Eve’s names in the Qur’an reveals a profound lack of awareness of humanity’s foundational narrative. It suggests that the Qur’an is not a revelation but a fragmented reworking of Biblical and extra-Biblical stories. If the Qur’an cannot name humanity’s first mother and the first victims of murder, how can it be considered the ultimate revelation of God?

Thus, the Qur’an falls below scholarly standards of historical reliability, theological consistency, and literary completeness. The challenge remains: how can Muslims claim the Qur’an is detailed, sufficient, and final, when even the names of humanity’s earliest figures must be supplied by the very Bible it seeks to replace?



ALLAH REVEALED A VERSE AND MADE IT CLEAR THAT SYNAGOGUES ARE NOT MOSQUES

Saturday, September 24, 2016

ALLAH REVEALED A VERSE AND MADE IT CLEAR THAT SYNAGOGUES ARE NOT MOSQUES

This is a shocking matter and a major blow to Islam worldwide. That is why I state openly that this is the final nail in the coffin of Islam.

In Surah Al-Hajj, verse 40, the Qur’an itself clearly speaks about different types of places of worship. It lists “monasteries,” “churches,” “synagogues,” and “mosques.” The fundamental and thought-provoking question is this: If synagogues are truly the same as mosques, why does the Qur’an distinguish them by name and present them as separate institutions?

The verse states:

“Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said, ‘Our Lord is Allah.’ And had Allah not repelled some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques—wherein the name of Allah is mentioned abundantly—would surely have been destroyed. And Allah will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, Allah is Powerful, Exalted.” (Surah Al-Hajj: 40)

Reflect carefully on these words:

Monasteries – These are places where Christian monks withdrew for prayer and worship.

Churches – Buildings set apart specifically for Christians to worship God.

Synagogues – Jewish places of worship where the Torah was read and the name of the God of Israel was proclaimed.

Mosques – Places where Muslims gather for their worship.

Why does the Qur’an not combine all these as one, if indeed they all represent worship of the same God? If synagogues and mosques were the same thing, then this listing would be mere repetition, which would even damage the eloquence of the text.

This reveals two major facts:

First, the Qur’an openly acknowledges that before Muhammad, there already existed multiple distinct places of worship—Jews and Christians had known God and worshiped Him for many centuries through synagogues and churches.

Second, this verse clearly shows that mosques are a new institution that emerged only after Muhammad. This eliminates the Muslim claim that Islam existed since the time of Prophet Abraham or that all previous religions were “Islam.” If that were the case, synagogues would have been called mosques, and churches would also have been recognized as mosques.

Therefore, the Qur’an contradicts itself. In trying to legitimize the position of Islam, it inadvertently admits that earlier religions—Judaism and Christianity—had their own genuine and distinct identities of worship.

This truth confirms my central argument: Islam is a system established by Muhammad in the 7th century AD and did not exist before him. It is a fabricated religion full of internal confusion, created to oppose and imitate the teachings of the Bible.

Therefore, the question for every Muslim reader is this:

Why does your Qur’an distinguish between synagogues and mosques?

If your religion is truly the original and true religion, why does the Qur’an clearly state that synagogues and churches already existed, where the name of God was mentioned abundantly?

Why does Allah honor Jews and Christians by mentioning their houses of worship, if their religions are truly “corrupted”?

When viewed with realism, these arguments completely dismantle the foundation of Islam.

That is why I, Max Shimba, a servant of Jesus Christ, boldly declare: There is no other name given to mankind by which we must be saved, except the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 4:12)

Conclusion

Qur’anic verse Surah Al-Hajj 40 reveals a weighty truth that cannot be concealed: that the religion of Islam had no roots prior to Muhammad. The Qur’an itself openly acknowledges that before the birth of Islam, there already existed communities who served God through their own houses of worship—Synagogues for the Jews and Churches for Christians. By stating this, the Qur’an affirms that knowledge of God did not originate in the seventh century, but began thousands of years earlier through the Old Covenant and was fulfilled in Christ through the New Covenant.

From a philosophical standpoint, this raises difficult questions for Islam:

  • If the true religion is only one, why does the Qur’an list synagogues, churches, and mosques as distinct buildings?

  • If Islam existed since the time of Abraham, why were synagogues and churches not called mosques?

  • Why does the Qur’an honor Jewish and Christian houses of worship when Muslims are often taught that these religions have been corrupted?

Historically, synagogues existed centuries before Christ, emerging especially after the Babylonian exile. They became centers where Jews gathered to read the Torah and invoke the name of the God of Israel. Likewise, Christian churches arose after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, spreading the Gospel and teachings of love and salvation. Therefore, when the Qur’an counts these buildings as places where the name of God is frequently mentioned, it directly acknowledges that Judaism and Christianity possessed legitimacy and spiritual authority long before Islam.

Scripturally, the Bible had already declared centuries before Muhammad that salvation is found only through Jesus Christ. The Apostle Peter proclaimed clearly:

“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)

Thus, when the Qur’an attempts to validate mosques as places of worship to God, it contradicts itself by recognizing that synagogues and churches are also places where God’s name is proclaimed. This confirms that the true God had already revealed Himself through Jewish history and the incarnation of Jesus Christ, not through the later teachings of Muhammad.

From a spiritual perspective, this should compel every Muslim to reflect deeply: Is your religion truly from God, or is it a later system constructed to imitate what already existed? Can salvation truly be found in a religion filled with internal inconsistencies, or in Jesus Christ, who declared Himself to be the way, the truth, and the life? (John 14:6)

The truth remains unchanged: Islam is a later religion, founded by Muhammad, and it has no authentic roots in the history of salvation. The true path—established in the Old Covenant and fulfilled in the New Covenant—is Jesus Christ alone.

Therefore, dear reader, the choice lies before you. You may continue holding onto a man-made religion, or you may choose to follow Jesus Christ, the light of the world and the Savior of your soul.

I am Max Shimba, a servant of Jesus Christ.


Divine Protection and the Sovereignty of God

Shimba Theological Institute Newsletter

Divine Protection and the Sovereignty of God

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba

Scriptural Foundation:
“For He shall give His angels charge over you, to keep you in all your ways.” – Psalm 91:11 (NKJV)

The human journey through life is fraught with challenges, dangers, and temptations. From the moment of our birth to the twilight of our years, we are constantly confronted with trials that test our strength and resilience. Yet Scripture reminds us of an often-overlooked truth: God’s invisible hand of protection is ever-present, sustaining us beyond what we can perceive.

In theological reflection, we recognize that humanity is not only confronted by natural adversities but also by spiritual forces. Satan, ever vigilant, stands as an accuser and tempter, rejoicing in our stumbling and drawing pleasure from our misfortunes. When calamities arise, when peace appears to vanish, and when we find ourselves ensnared in the webs of discouragement or despair, the enemy delights in our struggles. This spiritual reality underscores the importance of divine guardianship.

Yet, it is precisely in these circumstances that God’s sovereignty is most clearly revealed. The psalmist assures us that God commissions His angels to guard us in all our ways, steering us away from disasters unseen and dangers unrecognized. Every moment of peace, every season of joy, every blessing of safety is not the product of chance, but the direct outcome of God’s providential governance. Our lives are not subject to random fate, but are held securely within the sovereign will of the Almighty.

Therefore, the believer’s confidence does not rest in human ability or worldly security but in the faithful protection of God. His sovereignty ensures that no adversity befalls us apart from His divine permission and purpose. Recognizing this truth leads us to gratitude, humility, and worship, as we acknowledge that our very survival and wellbeing testify to God’s sustaining grace.

At the Shimba Theological Institute, we affirm this central truth: that God’s sovereignty and protective care are the foundation of human peace and joy. As we face the uncertainties of life, let us take comfort in knowing that the Lord has placed His angels in charge over us, and that our destiny remains firmly under His control.



Desecration of the Holy Qur’an in Saudi Arabia Raises Global Concern

Desecration of the Holy Qur’an in Saudi Arabia Raises Global Concern

Shimba Theological Institute – Newsletter Report

Reports have emerged from Taif, Saudi Arabia, that over fifty copies of the Holy Qur’an were desecrated after being discarded in sewerage canals. The incident, which took place in the Al-Salama district, has drawn widespread concern within the Muslim world and beyond.

According to an official from the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, the case was brought to light when a local student discovered the desecrated texts on his way home. Following the report, a municipal service company specializing in drainage maintenance was dispatched, and dozens of Qur’anic copies were retrieved from the sewer system. Photographs documenting the incident have since circulated widely on social media platforms, prompting public outrage.

This occurrence is not an isolated case. Earlier in the year, similar allegations surfaced in Al-Haer province, where prison officials were accused of mishandling and insulting copies of the Qur’an, sparking protests across different regions of the Kingdom.

The desecration of Islam’s holiest text within the birthplace of the religion has raised profound questions about internal custodianship, reverence for sacred texts, and the role of religious institutions in safeguarding what Muslims worldwide consider the unalterable Word of God. Incidents of this nature not only offend the religious sensitivities of over a billion believers but also invite renewed scrutiny on the spiritual and moral responsibilities of those entrusted with the preservation of holy scriptures.

The Shimba Theological Institute emphasizes that respect for sacred texts—whether the Qur’an, the Bible, or other religious writings—is a foundational pillar of interfaith respect and theological integrity. Desecration undermines not only faith traditions but also the spiritual dignity of religious communities.

As this issue continues to develop, the global religious community watches closely, calling for accountability, greater reverence, and the assurance that such acts are not repeated in the future.



The Irony of Muhammad as the “Best of Mankind” versus the Miraculous Claims of His Birth

The Irony of Muhammad as the “Best of Mankind” versus the Miraculous Claims of His Birth

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Islamic tradition has long advanced the claim that Prophet Muhammad was the “best of mankind” (Arabic: khayr al-bashar), a title highly revered among Muslims. However, a critical and historical analysis of early Islamic sources reveals an irony: the Qur’an itself never explicitly declares Muhammad to be the “best of mankind” nor the “greatest creation” of Allah. Instead, this claim emerges in later hadith and sira traditions, often embellished with dramatic miraculous narratives that strain historical plausibility and theological consistency.

Miraculous Fabrications at the Birth of Muhammad

Several traditions ascribed to early Islamic historians such as Ibn Hisham and al-Tabari describe extraordinary occurrences at the birth of Muhammad, including:

  1. Muhammad was allegedly born circumcised and with natural eye-liner.¹

  2. A physical mark, the so-called seal of prophethood, appeared on his shoulder.²

  3. Most notably, a bright light is reported to have shone from his mother Amina’s birth canal, illuminating palaces in Syria at the very moment of his birth.³

  4. The light allegedly extinguished a thousand-year-old Zoroastrian sacred fire in Persia.⁴

These traditions, upon scrutiny, present insurmountable geographical and logical difficulties. For instance, the distance from Mecca to Syria is approximately 1,974.7 km (via Route 328), while the fire temple in Persia would be over 2,434 km away. The notion that a localized biological light source could traverse such distances defies both physical reality and theological reason.

Critical Questions

  1. How can a vaginal light, naturally directed downward, travel nearly 2,000 km to illuminate Syrian palaces?

  2. By what mechanism could this light extinguish a sacred fire over 2,400 km away?

  3. How does a single light simultaneously illuminate and extinguish, with contradictory physical effects, at such vast distances?

These fabrications appear more as apologetic embellishments than historical events. Their function was likely to confer cosmic significance upon Muhammad’s birth, but they stand in stark contrast to the absence of such accounts in the Qur’an itself.

Comparative Parallels with Christianity

A pattern emerges when comparing these narratives with the life of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Gospels. Islamic tradition often mirrors, or arguably borrows from, Christian accounts:

  1. Triumphal Entry: Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matthew 21:5–7). By contrast, Islamic tradition describes Muhammad’s Isra and Mi’raj journey on the winged creature Buraq, sometimes confused in popular accounts with a donkey named Ya’fur.

  2. Light Motif: Jesus declares, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12). In Islamic tradition, Muhammad’s mother is said to emit light at his birth—an apparent narrative borrowing to assign him similar messianic significance.

  3. Sinlessness: The New Testament affirms Jesus as sinless (Hebrews 4:15). Islam, however, presents Muhammad undergoing an angelic “purification” ritual where Jibril opens his chest and washes his heart with Zamzam water (Sahih al-Bukhari 3207), implying inherent impurity in contrast to Christ.

  4. Ascension: Jesus truly resurrected and ascended to heaven (Acts 1:9–11). Muhammad, by contrast, claimed a visionary night journey and ascension (Qur’an 17:1; Hadith), later embellished with meetings with earlier prophets.

  5. Defeat of Death: Jesus rose on the third day, conquering death (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). Muhammad, however, was left unburied for three days, and early Islamic sources acknowledge his body began to decompose.⁵

Conclusion

The irony lies in the contrast between the Qur’an’s silence regarding Muhammad as the “best of mankind” and the later proliferation of legendary narratives intended to elevate his prophetic stature. These accounts—such as the “birth canal light” illuminating Syria and extinguishing fires in Persia—lack historical credibility and reveal a pattern of myth-making in Islam’s formative centuries.

By contrast, the New Testament provides coherent, historically anchored accounts of Christ’s uniqueness—His sinlessness, divine identity, resurrection, and ascension—without reliance on implausible physical phenomena. For this reason, the Christian claim to salvation through Jesus Christ remains unparalleled and historically grounded, while legendary fabrications surrounding Muhammad continue to underscore the fragility of his constructed prophetic image.

Salvation, therefore, is found not in fabricated lights or mythical journeys, but in the true Light of the World—Jesus Christ (John 8:12).


References

  1. Ibn Hisham, Sirat Rasul Allah, ed. Wüstenfeld, p. 166.

  2. Sahih Muslim, Book 30, Hadith 5790.

  3. Ibn Hisham, Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 166.

  4. Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rusul wa’l-Muluk, Vol. 2.

  5. Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, pp. 263–264 (reporting early decomposition of Muhammad’s body).

  6. The Holy Bible, John 8:12; Hebrews 4:15; Matthew 21:5–7; Acts 1:9–11; 1 Corinthians 15:3–4.



DOES RAIN REMOVE THE POLLUTION OF SATAN FROM MUSLIMS?

DOES RAIN REMOVE THE POLLUTION OF SATAN FROM MUSLIMS?

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute – January 14, 2022


Abstract

This paper critically examines the Qur’anic verse Surah Al-Anfal (8:11) which suggests that rain sent by Allah purifies believers from the pollution of Satan. The inquiry questions the theological coherence of associating natural rainfall with spiritual purification and evaluates the implications of such claims from a doctrinal and logical perspective.


Introduction

The Qur’an, in several verses, attributes natural phenomena such as rain to divine acts of mercy and purification. However, Surah Al-Anfal 8:11 presents an unusual theological claim that rain removes the "pollution of Satan" (rijz al-shayṭān) from believers. This verse raises questions regarding the metaphysical nature of Satan’s impurity and whether physical water can effect spiritual cleansing.


The Qur’anic Text and Translation

The verse in question reads:

Arabic Text (Qur’an 8:11):
إِذۡ یُغَشِّیكُمُ ٱلنُّعَاسَ أَمَنَةࣰ مِّنۡهُ وَیُنَزِّلُ عَلَیۡكُم مِّنَ ٱلسَّمَاۤءِ مَاۤءࣰ لِّیُطَهِّرَكُم بِهِۦ وَیُذۡهِبَ عَنكُمۡ رِجۡزَ ٱلشَّیۡطَـٰنِ وَلِیَرۡبِطَ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِكُمۡ وَیُثَبِّتَ بِهِ ٱلۡأَقۡدَامَ

English Translation (Abdul Haleem):
“Remember when He gave you sleep as a reassurance from Him, and sent down water from the sky to cleanse you, to remove Satan’s pollution from you, to make your hearts strong, and your feet firm.” (Al-Anfal 8:11)


Theological Analysis

The verse attributes to rain not only physical purification but also spiritual deliverance from the “pollution of Satan.” The key term rijz al-shayṭān (“filth” or “pollution of Satan”) is metaphorically ambiguous. Classical commentators such as Ibn Kathir and Al-Jalalayn have attempted to interpret this expression as referring to spiritual impurity or fear instilled by Satan. However, the literal reading of the text, which links rainwater to the removal of Satanic impurity, presents significant theological inconsistencies.

If rain literally removes “the pollution of Satan,” then one must ask:

  1. What is the nature of this pollution? Is it physical, moral, or spiritual?

  2. How can a physical element (rain) remove a metaphysical impurity (Satanic corruption)?

  3. What are the implications for regions with little or no rainfall, such as the Arabian Desert? Does the absence of rain imply continued pollution by Satan?


Contextual and Logical Implications

From a logical standpoint, such a claim conflates natural processes with supernatural deliverance. While rain indeed has physical cleansing properties, the assertion that it removes the defilement of Satan introduces a metaphysical contradiction. This raises an ironic theological concern for Muslim regions such as Saudi Arabia, where rain is rare and the environment is predominantly arid.

If the Qur’anic verse is to be understood literally, Muslims living in desert regions would, by implication, remain “uncleansed” from the pollution of Satan due to the scarcity of rainfall. This leads to a theological absurdity — linking one’s spiritual purity to the frequency of rain in a geographical location.


Conclusion

The Qur’anic claim in Al-Anfal 8:11 that rain removes “the pollution of Satan” reflects an anthropomorphic understanding of spiritual purification. Unlike the Christian theological framework, where cleansing from sin is through the blood of Christ (1 John 1:7) and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, the Qur’anic concept seems to externalize spiritual cleansing through natural phenomena.

Such a concept diminishes the transcendence of spiritual renewal and instead anchors it in material elements. This analysis underscores the need for critical examination of theological claims within Islamic scripture and their implications for doctrinal coherence.


Bibliography

  1. The Qur’an, Surah Al-Anfal (8:11).

  2. Abdul Haleem, M. A. S. (2004). The Qur’an: A New Translation. Oxford University Press.

  3. Ibn Kathir. (1999). Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Azim. Riyadh: Darussalam.

  4. Al-Jalalayn. (2007). Tafsir al-Jalalayn. Amman: Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought.

  5. The Holy Bible. (New King James Version). 1 John 1:7; Titus 3:5.

  6. Shimba, M. (2022). Critical Reflections on Islamic Doctrinal Claims. Shimba Theological Institute.


Shalom,
Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Max Shimba Ministries



Religious Freedom and Persecution in Uganda: Converts Facing Deadly Violence

Shimba Theological Institute Newsletter
Religious Freedom and Persecution in Uganda: Converts Facing Deadly Violence

Uganda, August 2021 – Reports of Lethal Attacks on Christian Converts

Recent incidents in Uganda highlight the ongoing persecution faced by Christian converts, particularly those transitioning from Islam to Christianity in the eastern regions of the country. Despite constitutional guarantees of religious freedom, including the right to propagate one’s faith and convert from one religion to another, Christians—especially converts—continue to face harassment, threats, and even lethal violence.

On 19 August 2021, Morning Star News reported the killing of a 20-year-old Christian convert in Kibuku District. The victim’s father, a Muslim, allegedly murdered him for refusing to renounce his new faith. Disturbingly, the father was not charged with murder, reportedly acting in the name of Islam.

Just one week later, on 26 August 2021, Morning Star News reported another brutal case in Kabula village, near Iganga town. A former Islamic teacher who had converted to Christianity in 2015 was buried alive by hired assailants at the instigation of his Muslim relatives. His wife, present at the time of the attack, was told that her husband should have heeded prior warnings and returned to Islam.

Commenting on these incidents, Yonas Dembele, World Watch Research analyst, noted: “The majority of the Ugandan population is Christian, and the constitution and other laws provide for religious freedom, including the right to propagate one’s faith and convert from one faith to another. This notwithstanding, the persecution and harassment of Christians, especially converts from Islam to Christianity in eastern areas of the country, is very common. The government remains silent about these incidents, and there is no indication that it will intervene with any serious intention of protecting Christians facing such violence. It would be prudent for the government to implement measures addressing violations of religious freedom, and to deal firmly with those responsible for harming Christians. Such action would serve as a deterrent and uphold the principles of justice and religious liberty.”

These cases underscore a critical tension between constitutional protections and the realities on the ground. The Shimba Theological Institute calls upon Ugandan authorities, civil society, and religious leaders to ensure the protection of all citizens’ religious freedoms, particularly those who courageously choose to follow a faith different from their familial or community background.

References:

  • Morning Star News. (19 August 2021). Young Christian Convert Killed by Muslim Father in Kibuku District.

  • Morning Star News. (26 August 2021). Former Islamic Teacher Buried Alive in Kabula Village.

  • World Watch Research. Dembele, Y. (2021). Analysis on Religious Persecution in Uganda.



The Falsehood of the Islamic Religion

The Falsehood of the Islamic Religion

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute, Orlando, Florida


Abstract

This article critically examines the theological inconsistencies, historical contradictions, and spiritual fallacies within the Islamic religion from a biblical perspective. It compares the doctrinal claims of Islam with the revealed truth of Christianity, emphasizing the incompatibility between Allah, as described in the Qur’an, and Jehovah, the living God revealed in the Bible. Through textual analysis, comparative theology, and historical references, this work demonstrates that Islam, while presenting itself as monotheistic, diverges fundamentally from divine revelation and biblical truth. The study further evaluates the moral, spiritual, and salvific implications of following Islamic doctrines in contrast to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Ultimately, the paper argues that Islam represents a theological system built upon human innovation, false prophecy, and distortion of divine revelation, leading humanity away from the truth of God’s Word.


Introduction

Religion occupies a profound place in the life of humanity, shaping beliefs, ethics, and worldviews. However, not all religions originate from divine revelation. The Bible clearly reveals that there exists both true and false worship (John 4:23–24). True religion emanates from the living God—Jehovah—who revealed Himself through His Word and His Son, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1–2). False religion, conversely, originates from human invention or demonic deception, designed to distort the truth and mislead souls (2 Corinthians 11:13–15).

Islam, which arose in the 7th century under Muhammad in Arabia, claims to continue the Abrahamic faith and to worship the same God as the Jews and Christians. Yet, a closer theological and historical examination reveals significant contradictions between the Islamic concept of Allah and the biblical revelation of God. These inconsistencies expose Islam as a faith system detached from divine inspiration and founded instead on cultural, political, and spiritual distortions.

This paper aims to unveil the theological falsehood of Islam by examining key doctrines, the identity of Allah, the claims of Muhammad, and the relationship between the Qur’an and the Bible. Through this analysis, we will demonstrate that the God of the Bible—Jehovah—is not the Allah of Islam, and that the message of Jesus Christ stands in absolute contrast to the teachings of the Qur’an.


Section I: The Nature of Religion and the Church

Religion, in its essence, refers to humanity’s relationship with the divine. The word itself is derived from the Latin religare, meaning “to bind again.” In biblical theology, religion is not merely a system of beliefs or rituals, but a covenant relationship between God and His people, grounded in revelation, obedience, and worship. Christianity, therefore, is not a humanly invented religion but a divine relationship established by God through Jesus Christ (John 14:6; Ephesians 2:8–9).

Islam, by contrast, defines religion (dīn) primarily as submission or surrender (islām) to the will of Allah. However, the concept of surrender in Islam lacks the relational and redemptive dimensions found in Christianity. In the Bible, submission is not forced obedience under fear, but a loving response to God’s grace (Romans 12:1–2). Islam’s notion of faith is legalistic, built upon works and ritual observance, whereas biblical faith is relational, founded upon divine grace through Christ’s atonement.

The church (ekklesia) in Christian theology represents the body of believers who are called out from the world to live in covenant relationship with God. It is not a political or national institution, but a spiritual community of the redeemed (1 Peter 2:9–10). In contrast, Islam establishes a religious-political community (ummah) that merges faith with state authority, blurring the distinction between spiritual devotion and political governance. This fusion of religion and politics in Islam has historically produced systems of coercion rather than spiritual transformation.

Thus, while Christianity builds a kingdom within hearts through faith and love, Islam seeks to build a kingdom on earth through law and submission. This distinction marks the fundamental difference between the church of Christ and the Islamic ummah: one is born of the Spirit (John 3:5–6), the other of the flesh and human institution.


Section II: The Question of One God

Both Christianity and Islam profess belief in one God. However, the nature of that God differs fundamentally. The Bible reveals one God who exists eternally in three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). This Trinitarian revelation is not polytheism, as Muslims claim, but the fullness of divine unity expressed in relational plurality. God is love (1 John 4:8), and love requires relationship, even within His own being.

Islam vehemently denies the Trinity, asserting the absolute oneness (tawḥīd) of Allah (Qur’an 112:1–4). However, this concept of God is solitary, impersonal, and unknowable. Allah is not portrayed as a relational being but as a distant sovereign who demands submission. The Qur’an explicitly rejects the sonship of Jesus (Qur’an 4:171; 5:72–73), thereby rejecting God’s revelation of Himself as Father. This denial is not merely a difference of terminology—it is a denial of God’s essential nature.

The God of the Bible reveals Himself personally to humanity. He walks with Adam (Genesis 3:8), speaks to Moses face to face (Exodus 33:11), and dwells among His people through Christ (John 1:14). Allah, on the other hand, is described as transcendent and unknowable—beyond human relationship. The Qur’an repeatedly emphasizes that “nothing is like unto Him” (Qur’an 42:11), thereby placing Allah beyond all personal encounter.

Consequently, while Islam claims to worship the same God as the Jews and Christians, its understanding of God’s nature is fundamentally incompatible with the biblical revelation of Jehovah. Christianity teaches that God’s oneness is relational and redemptive; Islam teaches that Allah’s oneness is solitary and authoritarian. This distinction alone is enough to show that Allah is not the God of the Bible.


Section III: Theological Differences Between Allah and Jehovah

A critical examination of Allah and Jehovah reveals fundamental theological contradictions that expose Islam as a false religious system. While both claim monotheism, their attributes, purposes, and relationship with humanity differ dramatically.

1. Jehovah: Personal, Relational, and Loving
The God of the Bible, Jehovah, is a personal and relational being. He reveals Himself through covenant promises and manifests His character through justice, mercy, and love (Exodus 34:6–7; Psalm 86:15). Jehovah desires a relationship with His creation and communicates His will through prophets, the Scriptures, and ultimately through Jesus Christ, His Son (Hebrews 1:1–2). Love, justice, and holiness are inseparable in Jehovah’s nature, guiding His actions toward humanity (1 John 4:8; Isaiah 61:8).

2. Allah: Distant, Authoritarian, and Arbitrary
In contrast, Allah is portrayed in the Qur’an as distant, unpredictable, and often arbitrary. He commands obedience but rarely provides relational context. Islamic texts emphasize punishment for disbelief and reward for submission, yet the moral reasoning behind these decrees is often ambiguous. Allah’s mercy is conditional, and his wrath is repeatedly stressed (Qur’an 4:56; 5:33). Unlike Jehovah, Allah does not invite humanity into relational intimacy, nor does he reveal his essence in a way that allows trust based on character.

3. The Problem of Truthfulness
The Bible declares God to be wholly truthful and faithful (Numbers 23:19; Titus 1:2). Allah, however, is described in ways that allow deceit for divine purpose (Qur’an 3:54, 8:30). These passages have led scholars to question the moral and ethical coherence of Allah as a divine being, since divine truthfulness is a foundational requirement for any genuine deity.

4. Implications for Salvation
Jehovah’s relational nature culminates in the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ (John 3:16; Romans 5:8). Salvation is not earned by works but received through faith. Islam, by contrast, presents salvation as earned through law and ritual obedience (Qur’an 2:82; 5:9). This legalistic system lacks the redemptive power necessary to restore humanity to God, leaving adherents in perpetual uncertainty regarding their ultimate fate.


Section IV: The Character and Oaths of God

The character of God serves as the ultimate standard for determining true religion. Jehovah consistently demonstrates unchanging righteousness, love, and faithfulness. Biblical oaths underscore God’s unbreakable promises (Hebrews 6:18). Every covenant in Scripture—from Noah to Abraham, and from Moses to Christ—reveals a God who is trustworthy and whose word is absolute.

In contrast, Allah’s character, as portrayed in Islamic texts, fluctuates based on interpretation. Instances in the Qur’an depict Allah instructing deception, commanding contradictory acts, and instituting laws that shift between chapters and verses (Qur’an 2:106). Such inconsistencies call into question the reliability of Allah as a moral authority. Whereas Jehovah binds Himself to eternal truth, Allah appears bound only by the strategic needs of Muhammad’s revelations. This discrepancy undermines the claim of Islam to originate from a perfect and moral God.


Section V: The Question of Truth and Falsehood

The question of truth in religion is inseparable from the nature of God. Truth is defined as conformity to reality and faithfulness to God’s character. The Bible affirms that God is truth itself (John 17:17; Psalm 119:160). Any system that contradicts God’s revelation or distorts His message is, by definition, false.

Islam presents numerous claims that conflict with both historical evidence and biblical revelation:

  1. The Prophethood of Muhammad – Muhammad’s claims of receiving divine revelation lack corroboration outside the Qur’an. Historical scrutiny exposes contradictions in his narrative, especially regarding moral, military, and spiritual conduct.

  2. The Integrity of Scripture – The Qur’an claims to confirm the Torah and the Gospel (Qur’an 5:46; 10:94), yet its content distorts fundamental biblical truths. Jesus’ divinity, crucifixion, and resurrection—central to salvation—are denied or misrepresented (Qur’an 4:157).

  3. Law and Grace – Islamic law relies on ritualistic obedience, whereas biblical truth emphasizes grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9). Any religion emphasizing works over grace fails to align with God’s salvific plan.

These contradictions reveal that Islam cannot originate from Jehovah, the God of truth. By definition, a false religion misguides humanity and obscures access to genuine divine salvation.


Section VI: Historical Examination of Muhammad

Muhammad (570–632 CE) is central to Islamic belief. Islamic tradition venerates him as the Seal of the Prophets. However, historical analysis raises critical questions regarding his moral and spiritual authority:

  1. Unverified Revelations – Muhammad’s revelations, compiled into the Qur’an, emerged orally decades before being codified. Early Islamic historians note inconsistencies and redactions.

  2. Moral Contradictions – Biographical accounts describe actions by Muhammad—such as violence against non-Muslims, political expediency, and personal conduct—that contradict the moral perfection expected of a divine messenger (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah).

  3. Claims of Exclusivity – Muhammad asserted that previous prophets were corrupted or false (Qur’an 2:79), directly contradicting the biblical record of God’s faithfulness and consistency.

These historical considerations demonstrate that Muhammad’s prophetic claims lack the credibility, moral integrity, and divine corroboration necessary to establish a true religion.


Next Sections to Include in Part Three (for completion of 12–15 pages)

  • Section VII: Islamic Moral and Social Teachings vs. Biblical Ethics

  • Section VIII: Comparative Analysis of Salvation, Judgment, and Eternal Life

  • Section IX: Theological and Spiritual Implications for Followers

  • Section X: Conclusion and Call to Biblical Truth

  • References and Bibliography


Section VII: Islamic Moral and Social Teachings vs. Biblical Ethics

Islamic moral and social teachings, as prescribed in the Qur’an and Hadith, present a framework that superficially resembles ethical conduct but, upon close examination, diverges significantly from biblical ethics.

1. Justice and Mercy
The Bible establishes justice and mercy as inseparable attributes of God (Micah 6:8; James 2:13). Jehovah’s justice is grounded in fairness and truth, while mercy tempers judgment with compassion. Islamic texts, however, often present justice as punitive and mercy as conditional, granted only to those who submit to specific ritual and legal obligations (Qur’an 4:92; 5:38). The focus on obedience rather than relational morality leads to a legalistic approach, undermining true ethical formation.

2. Treatment of Non-Muslims
Islamic texts frequently prescribe discriminatory measures toward non-Muslims, including forced submission, subjugation, or punitive action (Qur’an 9:29; 48:29). In contrast, biblical ethics call for love of neighbor, even extending to enemies (Matthew 5:44; Romans 12:20). The ethical contrast reveals Islam’s moral system to be coercive rather than transformative.

3. Role of Women and Family Life
Islamic teachings often enforce gender inequality and patriarchal dominance, limiting women’s agency and rights (Qur’an 4:34). Biblical teachings, while culturally situated, consistently affirm the dignity and worth of both men and women (Genesis 1:27; Galatians 3:28). Christianity’s relational ethic promotes mutual respect, love, and equality within family and society.


Section VIII: Comparative Analysis of Salvation, Judgment, and Eternal Life

The divergence between Christianity and Islam is most evident in doctrines of salvation, judgment, and eternal destiny.

1. Salvation
Christianity teaches that salvation is a gift of God through faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:8–9). Works are the fruit of faith, not the basis of salvation. Islam, in contrast, emphasizes works, ritual compliance, and legalistic obedience as prerequisites for salvation (Qur’an 2:82; 5:9). This system leaves adherents in perpetual uncertainty and fails to address humanity’s ultimate need for redemption.

2. Judgment
Biblical judgment is rooted in God’s perfect knowledge, justice, and mercy (Romans 14:12; Revelation 20:12). Every individual will be judged according to truth and righteousness. Islamic judgment, however, is tied to ritualistic adherence and interpretation of law, making divine justice appear arbitrary and dependent on external conformity rather than inner transformation (Qur’an 101:6–9).

3. Eternal Life
Eternal life in Christianity is relational, entering into God’s presence through grace (John 17:3; 1 John 5:11–13). In Islam, eternal life is often described in physical terms (gardens, rivers, palaces) with unclear spiritual substance, emphasizing reward and punishment rather than a genuine relationship with God (Qur’an 76:12–22). This contrasts sharply with the biblical promise of spiritual intimacy and eternal fellowship with Jehovah.


Section IX: Theological and Spiritual Implications for Followers

The theological divergences between Islam and Christianity produce profound spiritual consequences. Followers of Islam, relying on ritual and works, remain disconnected from the personal and loving God revealed in Scripture. Their hope is contingent on external performance rather than faith in divine grace.

Conversely, Christianity fosters an intimate relationship with God through Christ. Believers experience forgiveness, transformation, and assurance of salvation, grounded in the unchanging nature of Jehovah (2 Corinthians 5:17; Romans 8:38–39). Spiritual life in Islam remains legalistic, ritualistic, and uncertain, whereas biblical faith provides both certainty and transformative power.


Section X: Conclusion and Call to Biblical Truth

The examination of Islamic theology, ethics, salvation, and history reveals inherent falsehoods when measured against the Bible’s standard of truth. Key conclusions include:

  1. Theological Contradictions – Allah’s characteristics and instructions contrast sharply with Jehovah’s revealed nature.

  2. Moral and Ethical Divergence – Islamic law and ethics emphasize coercion and conditional mercy, whereas biblical ethics emphasize love, justice, and mercy.

  3. Salvation and Eternal Destiny – Islam’s legalistic approach cannot reconcile humanity with God, whereas Christianity provides relational salvation through Jesus Christ.

  4. Historical and Prophetic Concerns – Muhammad’s life and claims, when critically examined, lack divine consistency and moral authority.

Call to Action: Individuals seeking truth must examine religious claims critically, guided by the Word of God. Christianity alone provides a coherent, relational, and redemptive pathway to God. Islam, by contrast, presents a system of ritual, fear, and uncertainty that fails to deliver true salvation or moral certainty.


References and Bibliography

Primary Sources

  • The Holy Bible, King James Version. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987.

  • Qur’an, translated by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

  • Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources. Translated by A. Guillaume. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Secondary Sources

  • Brown, Daniel W. A New Introduction to Islam. Oxford: Blackwell, 2017.

  • Esposito, John L. Islam: The Straight Path. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

  • McDowell, Josh. Islam: The Ultimate Challenge. San Bernardino: Here’s Life Publishers, 1991.

  • Peters, F. E. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994.

  • Shimba, Maxwell. Comparative Theology: Christianity and Islam. Orlando: Shimba Theological Institute, 2024.



The long-debated Two-State Solution between Israel and Palestine

 Shimba Theological Institute

Theological and Geopolitical Reflections Series
Vol. 7, Issue 4 (October 2025)


The Illusion of Peace: A Theological Reflection on the Two-State Solution

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute


The long-debated Two-State Solution between Israel and Palestine continues to dominate international discourse as the supposed path toward peace in the Middle East. Yet, beneath the veneer of diplomacy lies a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of peace itself—both politically and theologically. The idea of dividing the land of Israel, granting half to a people whose leadership has repeatedly chosen violence over coexistence, reveals not a step toward harmony but a deep moral and spiritual blindness.

To grant political legitimacy to entities that glorify terrorism and reject Israel’s right to exist is tantamount to “inviting a snake to share one’s pillow and then acting shocked when it bites.” The events of October 7th serve as a chilling reminder of this truth. Efforts to negotiate peace with those who harbor ideological hatred only embolden further acts of violence. What the world applauds as “progress” is, in reality, the staging ground for another tragedy—a repetition of bloodshed, grief, and shattered lives.

This global obsession with a superficial “peace” has been prophetically addressed in Scripture. Jeremiah lamented, “They have also healed the hurt of My people slightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace!’ When there is no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14, NKJV). Likewise, the Apostle Paul warned, “For when they say, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden destruction comes upon them.” (1 Thessalonians 5:3, NKJV). These verses expose the futility of political solutions that ignore the root cause of human conflict—the unregenerate heart estranged from God.

True peace cannot emerge from diplomatic treaties signed in the absence of spiritual transformation. The heart of the Middle East crisis is not territorial but theological. It is a conflict of worldviews—between the message of Christ, which offers forgiveness and reconciliation, and the ideology of Islam, which perpetuates division and vengeance. Real peace will only come when hearts are changed, not merely when borders are redrawn.

To our Palestinian brothers and sisters, this message is not one of condemnation but of liberation. The world’s political powers and many within the Muslim world have exploited your suffering for their own agendas. While they march in anger and chant slogans, it is often Christian organizations that build hospitals, send aid, and pray for your restoration. Freedom will not come through endless hostility or allegiance to ideologies of hatred, but through the redemptive truth of Jesus Christ—who alone offers peace that surpasses all understanding (Philippians 4:7).

Therefore, let it be clearly stated: the solution to the Middle East crisis is not found in the Two-State Solution but in the One Savior Solution. Only through faith in Christ can enmity be transformed into reconciliation, and only through His lordship can nations experience lasting peace. As Scripture declares, “He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation.” (Ephesians 2:14, NKJV).


References

  • The Holy Bible, New King James Version (NKJV).

  • Jeremiah 6:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:3; Ephesians 2:14; Philippians 4:7.

  • Shimba, M. (2025). Theology and Conflict: Biblical Insights on Peace in the Middle East. Shimba Theological Institute.

  • Lewis, B. (2002). The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror. Random House.

  • Pipes, D. (2014). Militant Islam Reaches America. W.W. Norton & Company.



TRENDING NOW