❞ كتاب Jesus amp the Bible ❝ ⏤ رشاد عبدالمهيمن

 Introduction...................................................................Page 4
Jesus-Son of Whom? .........................................................Page 5
Trinity in the Bible............................................................Page 8
Did Jesus Bring a New Law? ................................................Page 9
Prophet or God? .............................................................Page 12
The Role of Paul..............................................................Page 13
Jesus in Islam..................................................................Page 15
Conclusion.....................................................................Page 18
Bibliography..................................................................Page 20

Indeed, All Praise belongs to Allah. We praise Allah, we seek his assistance and we beg his
forgiveness. We seek refuge with Allah from the evil of our own selves and from the evil of
our deeds. Whomsoever Allah guides, no one can mislead and whomsoever Allah allows to
go astray, none can guide. I bare witness and give open testimony that there is nothing
worthy of worship except Allah, who has no associates and I bare witness that Muhammad
is his servant and his messenger. To proceed:
It is my intention to present a small, concise examination of some key elements from the
core beliefs of Christianity from within the Christian texts themselves as well as shed some
light on the Islamic perspective of the purpose and message of Jesus (upon him be peace).
The goal is to engage the reader in logical analysis of the fundamental creed of Christianity as
it is taught and practiced by contrasting these beliefs against the alleged words of Jesus
himself as recorded in the four gospels. For the potential Christian reader, it is important to
remember that in order to remain open to different ideas; one must approach this topic from
an intellectual standpoint as opposed to an emotional one. If one has an emotional
commitment to something that cannot be substantiated with reason, especially after clear
proof has been given, then one has succumb to what is known as ‘blind faith’. It is the
emotional equivalent of being passionately in love with someone who causes one nothing
but harm and grief. It is only when a belief system has been held up to scrutiny and has been
authenticated that it becomes worthy of an emotional commitment. If it is determined that
the foundation of that system stands up to reason and is consistent in all of its sources, then
we are obligated to acknowledge it as truth and adhere to it completely. Any creed that does
not live up to this standard does not deserve our devotion.
This meager effort is by no means a thorough examination but it is a simple discussion of
some very basic concepts of Christianity and how they diverge from the simple message of
Jesus. Many works have been authored by many great scholars who have gone into great
detail explaining the origins of Christian belief, the Bible, etc. This insha’Allah, (God willing)
will serve as an introduction into these issues and I encourage the reader to investigate
further. I must point out that from the out-set, it may seem difficult for the non-Muslim
reader to take in these concepts from a Muslim perspective (as would a Muslim be hesitant
to accept an analysis of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) from the Christian
perspective). However, one must note that the Islamic position confirms Jesus’ mission from
God and seeks to exonerate him from the misconceptions that have arisen concerning him.
The 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet Earth unquestionably believe in Jesus and
acknowledge him as the Messiah and it would take one out of the fold of Islam to not
believe in him, his mission, his birth, his miracles and his return. An analysis of the Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him) from the Christian’s perspective is all together different in
that the Christian does not hesitate to revile and discredit his mission as well as hurl very
personal and derogatory accusations at his person. To confirm the Prophet Muhammad
(PBUH) is to reject the church formulated doctrines of Christianity. If one is honest in
his/her analysis of statements attributed to Jesus in the Bible, it becomes clear that at face
value, the message of Jesus was the same as all of the other Messengers of God, including

Muhammad (PBUH) and that is to worship God, The Creator, alone without any rivals and
to submit to his will. This in and of itself confirms the mission of Prophet Muhammad
(Peace be upon him) because one who submits to God, in Arabic, is called Muslim. May
Allah guide us all to his truth, make us firm upon it and forgive us for our mistakes. Ameen.

The task of writing about Jesus and the Bible from a logical perspective is, as I have
come to find out, an incredible undertaking. There is so much information that has to be
processed that it seems impossible to include every piece of historical and scriptural
information in the study. Therefore, I will narrow down the scope of this endeavor by
simply focusing on a few key issues using the Bible as my main source of reference. This will

consist of the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) with a few cross-
references to select verses in the Old Testament. The only other major source of

information concerning the person and message of Jesus Christ is The Qur’an. There are
those who would say that only a Muslim would use the Qur’an as a source of information
about Jesus. The same argument however, can be used concerning Christians and the Bible.
Indeed, this is the reason such a study should be done. For it is the inconsistency of
The Bible itself that renders its information suspect and therefore it is a poor source of
reference to use against the Muslim and The Qur’an. The Qur’an, the book of Islam,
describes in a much more consistent manner the life and message of Jesus. One element that
adds to the consistency of the information about Jesus in The Qur’an is that it is told in one
voice. That is to say, there are no ‘alternative perspectives’ included in the Qur’an. The New
Testament contains the four canonical Gospels, which all supposedly tell much of the same
story. When we read the Gospels however, we find that not only do these four different
versions come to us from different sources, but they stand in complete contradiction to one
another in some key areas. In addition to this, there are even contradictions within the
individual Gospels themselves. The Qur’an is free of those elements. Hence, we must
include The Qur’an as reference if we are to remain logical in our approach. The key is logic.
In an American court of law, evidence is presented to make a case. Witnesses are called to
corroborate the evidence. However, if the witness’ testimony is proven inconsistent under
cross-examination, the case has been severely weakened. If the foundation of the ‘case’ of
present day Christianity is the Bible and the Bible is shown to be inconsistent in it’s
‘testimony’ , then those who preach the Bible and read the Bible must seriously reconsider
their source of information concerning their faith. This is not an attack on Christianity or
those who call themselves Christians. Nor is it an attack on scripture from God. It is a study
of logic and reason concerning Jesus and his mission. Many of the sayings we find in the
Bible attributed to Jesus are consistent with that found in The Qur’an. In fact, it is the
sayings and sermons attributed to Jesus in the Bible that form the biggest argument against
the way Christianity is practiced today. We intend to examine those briefly, God willing. The
reason it is necessary to point out some inconsistencies in the Bible itself is to prove that; 1.)
The present day versions of the Bible are flawed and do not warrant the notion of
infallibility; 2.) It becomes necessary to look for other sources of information and be open to
them; 3.) Prove that if man can add and delete or revise divine scripture, it will naturally lose
some of its authenticity.

There are actually some other sources of information concerning Jesus that are probably
unknown to the average Bible reader such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and the large amount of
collected and authenticated Hadeeth (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H) available
for anyone to read. For the purpose of this study, we will mostly deal with the Bible and
Qur’an. Lastly, the entire objective is to properly understand and appreciate Jesus in the
manner which is most appropriate. We want to use the Bible to prove that Jesus is not and
did not claim to be Divine. Nor did Jesus claim to be the literal son of God. Jesus never
spoke of the Trinity. We intend to use the Bible to prove this. The book of Christianity will
prove this. The problem lies with the fact that most Christians follow those that came after
Jesus and in the name of Jesus rather than actually following the teaching and guidance of
Jesus. The self-appointed Apostle Paul has influenced the teachings of Christianity more
than Jesus himself. There are more books in the entire Bible written by Paul than anyone
else. This includes Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah, AND Jesus. All of these were messengers
from God, yet Paul has more writings in the Bible than the Prophets! Paul was neither a
prophet nor a messenger from God. All the prophets brought essentially the same message.
Paul’s writings were radically different from the messages the Prophets brought. This,
however, is a different study unto itself. It is quite peculiar that Jesus is the only major figure
in the Bible who does not have one book attributed to him. There is no ‘Gospel of Jesus’ or
‘Book of Jesus’. There are only books written by someone other than Jesus attempting to
convey something of what Jesus spoke.

JESUS – SON OF WHOM?

The first major hurdle we will address is the parentage or alleged parentage of Jesus. The
fundamental belief in present day Christianity is that Jesus is the literal begotten son of God
and is second in the Divine Trinity of God’s being. If this is somehow disturbed, then as this
is the foundation of the Christian belief, Christianity itself collapses. If the foundation is
solid and the ‘testimony’ is consistent, the Christian religion has in fact proven its case
beyond a reasonable doubt. Before I begin quoting from the Bible I would like to point out
that these verses from the Bible are written in English. The Gospels themselves were first
written down in Greek and not in Jesus’ tongue of Aramaic. This is generally known

amongst Bible scholars. There are no original Aramaic or Hebrew texts that exist to cross-
reference the Greek and English translations with. As anyone who studies languages will tell

you, a language can either lose or gain many meanings in a translation. This is critical when it
comes to scripture. The word ‘son’ may have a totally different connotative meaning when
translated from Aramaic to Greek to English. It is quite difficult to convey the meanings of
Eastern languages to English without losing something or gaining something that is not
intended. The same goes for the word ‘lord’.
The verse most quoted amongst Christians to support the notion of Jesus being the
literal divine son of God is of course John 3:16 in which it is written...
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish, but have everlasting life.”(John 3:16) KJV.

Now this is a straight forward verse that is clear in its meaning and what in what it is
trying to convey. The first thing that should be noted, however, is that this verse is not
attributed to Jesus nor is it a quote from Jesus. This is a verse written by someone else. The
verse is attributed to a man named John. John was the last of the Gospels to be written and
no one is sure of exactly which John this is supposed to be. The Gospel of John was written
around 100 C.E. at Ephesus. That is approximately seventy years after the time of Jesus. As
Adolf Harnack points out in his book, What is Christianity?:
“the fourth Gospel does not emanate or profess to emanate from the apostle John, who cannot be taken as an
historical authority...the author of the fourth Gospel acted with sovereign freedom, trans-posed events and put
them in a strange light. “
The Gospel of John is considered to be the most beautifully written of the Gospels.
According to Acts 4:13, however, Peter and John were both ignorant and unlearned men.
The Gospel of John is written as a drama of sorts, unfolding layers of measured resolution
and emotion. Not something unlearned men are known to produce. ‘He was divinely
inspired by God...’ can be heard as an argument. ‘Look at your Qur’an and its masterly
prose. Muslims claim Muhammad was unlearned yet look at the Qur’an...’. The problem
with that argument is that Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) is a fully realized and documented historical
figure. History recognizes Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) as a man who definitely lived, taught, and
revolutionized his society. His sayings have been documented to the letter. The Qur’an was
memorized by not only by the Prophet himself but also by his followers. Even the most
secular historians must admit this. The personality and person of John, however, cannot be
substantiated with historical documented evidence. Bible historians debate over whether or
not John the Apostle was the same John who is credited with writing this Gospel. According
to Blacks Bible Dictionary, John was beheaded before 70 C.E., and a connection to the first
manuscript of ‘the Gospel of John’ at Ephesus around 100 C.E. would be difficult to
establish. So let us revisit the passage.
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish, but have everlasting life.”(John 3:16) KJV.
The real test of the verse is in its consistency with the rest of the Bible whom the
Christians claim to accept as a whole. As you can see, it reads “...only begotten son...” but
when we look at Psalms 2:7 David says, “...the Lord said unto me, Thou art my son; this day have I
begotten thee.” This is a serious discrepancy for the sincere Bible reader. Who is telling the
truth, David or the mystery John? Can we rely on the Psalms for the truth or ‘The Gospel of
John’? Is the Gospel the literal and the Psalms the figurative or vice versa? Jesus is given
many ‘fathers’ in the N.T. The first line in the New Testament reads, “ The book of the
generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matt. 1:1). Are we to accept the
literal meaning of this or the figurative? And if we are to assume that the verse only means
that he was a spiritual son of David, then why can’t we assume the same thing is meant when
Jesus refers to God the “Father”? For according to the N.T. statements attributed to Jesus
he says, “...Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect (Matt. 5:48). As
well as, “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father...”(Matt 6:9). And to confirm the
spiritual connection of the righteous, “For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in
heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother (Matt 12:50). This verse uses the word ‘Father’

but Mark 3:35 reads, “ For whosoever does the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and
mother.” How many times in the N.T. is the word ‘Father’ used to describe God? If ‘Father’
has substituted the word ‘God’ in this verse, how many other verses have been tweaked?
That this is not a literal relationship is plain to see and comprehend. Another verse is
describing David as being Jesus’ father, “...And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his
father David (Luke 1:32). Now if God was Jesus’ literal physical father, wouldn’t it have made
sense to distinguish the difference in this verse which presents Jesus along with David as his
father? Let’s assume that Jesus is understood to be God’s son in this verse and rewrite the
verse stating that idea. It would read, “...And his father, the Lord God shall give unto him the throne
of his father David...”. This makes absolutely no sense at all and the authors knew this. The
author of this verse knew that in order for it to make any sense, only one could be
connected to Jesus as a ‘Father’. And since the legitimacy of Jesus’ mission must come
through David, according to the Bible, it was more prudent to connect Jesus as an heir to
David than to infuse the verse with ‘son of God’ dogma. The curious thing is that in
Matthew and Luke, the genealogy of Jesus is traced through Joseph as if Joseph had some
blood relation to Jesus. Jesus is supposed to have been divinely conceived within Mary
without the husbandly help of Joseph. How then can Jesus’ genealogy be logically traced
back to David through Joseph? In Luke 2:41 it reads, “Now his parents went to Jerusalem every
year at the feast of the Passover.” His parents being Mary and Joseph? The only person that
anyone can be sure of about Jesus’ parentage is Mary yet no where is Jesus explicitly called
son of Mary in the Bible. The Qur’an is consistent and clear on this matter. Jesus is referred
to as Al-Maseeh ‘Isa ibn Maryam or The Messiah (Christ) Jesus, son of Mary.

(Remember) when the angels said: "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you
the glad tidings of a Word ["Be!" - and he was! i.e. 'Isa (Jesus) the son of Maryam
(Mary)] from Him, his name will be the Messiah 'Isa (Jesus), the son of Maryam
(Mary), held in honor in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those
who are near to Allah." (3:45)
According to the Bible God had even more sons. The Book of Job 2:1 reads, “Again there
was a day when sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord...”. This is yet another
contradiction of the “...only begotten son...” notion of John 3:16. But wait, there is more. In
Luke, after tracing the so-called genealogy of Jesus all the way back to Adam it reads,
“...Which was the son of Enos, Which was the son of Seth, Which was the son of Adam, Which was the
son of God”(Luke 3:38).

So will real the real father of Jesus and the real sons of God please stand up! This is
confusing as well it should be for the average Bible reader. The problem lies in the
interpretation of lost manuscripts that have been roughly translated or mistranslated through
the ages. There is an allegorical message in these books that has been interpreted and taught
as literal. There have also been concessions made by the Early Pauline Church to make the
simple teachings of Jesus palatable to the pagans of Europe and western Asia. Throughout
ancient forms of worship there have been religions of divine offspring of a great god. These
areas of Syria, Greece, and Rome were practicing pagans who worshipped human beings
whom they thought were god incarnates. The ancient rites of Mithraism, Attis, Adonis,
Diana, Dionysus and many more all were practiced in the so called gentile lands that the
Pauline church longed to bring into their fold. These pagan religions all contained elements
of what now compose Christianity. That, however, is another topic.

Concise examination of the Christian texts as well as the Islamic perspective of the purpose and message of Jesus