NAZORAI:
Bob (Perazziman), this is for you...(sorry in advance if the formatting makes it difficult to read). Also I just want to mention that no offense is meant to Jews. I am merely recording the Islamic view of things here.
In the first centuries after Muhammad, the Bible was often studied alongside the Qur'an. Because of certain confusions which arose in the mind of the average believer, this practice fell into a disfavor from which it has never fully recovered. The idea arose that the Bible had been tampered with and distorted from the original. But does the Qur'an back up this assertion?
The Qur'an has much to say about the Bible. The Qur'an uses the same word, al-Kitab ("the Book"), to refer to both itself and the Bible. It maintains that the Book was revealed by God to the previous Prophets and Messengers (3:81/ 3:184), especially Moses (2:54/6:91) and Jesus (3:48/5:110) and that the previous Scriptures form a portion of the entire Book revealed by God (3:23; 4:44; 4:51; 5:44). God instructs Muslims to believe in the previous Scriptures He revealed just as they believe the Qur'an:
Believers, have faith in God and His apostle, in the Book He has revealed to His apostle, and in the Scriptures He formerly revealed. (4:136)
Thus God instructs Muslims to believe in the former Scriptures, not merely to believe that they existed at one time but are now irretrievably lost or distorted. In verses 2:113 and 2:121, it is mentioned that the People of the Book recite the Book and should recite it truthfully. Yet how could they do so if they did not have an accurate book in their possession? How would they know which portions were accurate and which were not? The Qur'an itself poses the question to the Children of Israel, "Can you believe in one part of the Scriptures and deny another? (2:85) The Book given to Moses is called "a perfect code for the righteous with precepts about all things, a guide and a mercy" (6:154). How then could it be unreliable?
The Qur'an tells us that it was sent to confirm and explain the Scriptures that preceded it. It is but another witness to the Truth of God:
He has revealed to you the Book with the Truth, confirming the Scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel for the guidance of mankind, and the distinction between right and wrong (3:3-4)
And to you We have revealed the Book with the truth. It confirms the Scriptures which came before it and stands as a guardian over them. (5:48)
It confirms what was revealed before it and fully explains the Scriptures. It is beyond doubt from the Lord of the Universe. (10:38)
We must ask the question, how could the Qur'an be a confirmation of what came before if the original revelations had been lost or distorted? According to Yusuf Ali, the Arabic word used in verse 5:48 and translated "guardian" is muhaymin, which can be translated as "one who safeguards, watches over, stands witness, preserves, and upholds" (The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an, note 759, pg. 263). How could the Qur'an do all these things if the Bible was unreliable?
The following Qur'anic verse has been used to justify the view that the Scriptures of the People of the Book have been distorted:
Woe to those that write the scriptures with their own hands and then declare: `This is from God,' in order to gain some paltry end. (2:79)
However we must consider the verse immediately preceding 2:79 which seems to be linked with it:
There are illiterate men among them who, ignorant of the Scriptures, know of nothing but wishful fancies and vague conjecture (2:78)
This seems to indicate that "those who write the scriptures with their own hands" are those who do not know the actual books but are merely guessing as to their contents, and thus does not refer to the actual Scriptures themselves. In the time of Muhammad, there were few copies of the Bible in circulation and those that were probably not written in the Arabic tongue. Thus it would be common for people to distort what they believed was written in that book if they had not actually read it.
Many early Islamic scholars did not hold to the current prevalent view that the previous Scriptures have been corrupted. According to the "Dictionary of Islam", the scholar al-Bokhari reported that Ibn Abbas said that "`the word tahrif (corruption) signifies to change a thing from its original nature; and that there is no man who could corrupt a single word of what proceeded from God, so that the Jews and Christians could corrupt only by misrepresenting the meaning of the words of God.' Ibn Mazar and Ibn Hatim state, in the commentary known as the Tafsir Durr-i-Mansur, that they have it on the authority of Ibn Muniyah that the Torah and the Gospel are in the same state of purity in which they were sent down from heaven, and that no alterations have been made in them, but that the Jews were wont to deceive the people by unsound arguments and by wresting the sense of Scripture" (DOI, article "Corruption of the Scriptures, pgs. 61-62).
Thus while the previous Scriptures themselves may be generally accurate this does not mean that they are always interpreted correctly. This is confirmed by another Qur'anic passage mentions that some of the People of the Book deliberately distort the message of the Scriptures:
And there are some among them who twist their tongues when quoting the Scriptures, so that you may think that what they say is from the Scriptures, whereas it is not from the Scriptures. They say: `This is from God,' whereas it is not from God. Thus they knowingly ascribe a falsehood to God. (3:78)
Some other relevant Qur'anic passages which speak of the Bible:
We have revealed the Torah, in which there is guidance and light. By it the prophets who surrendered themselves judged the Jews, and so did the rabbis and the divines, according to God's Book which had been committed to their keeping and to which they themselves were witnesses. (5:44)
To David we gave the Psalms. (17:55)
After them We sent forth Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming the Torah already revealed, and gave him the Gospel, in which there is guidance and light, corroborating what was revealed before it in the Torah, a guide and admonition to the righteous. (5:46)
We gave Moses the Scriptures and knowledge of right and wrong, so that you might be rightly guided. (2:53) We gave the Book to Moses as a clear sign, a guide and a blessing for mankind, so that they might give thought. (28:43)
What the Qur'an says about the Gospel:
1) Like the Torah, it is a scripture that was revealed by God for the guidance of humanity (3:3)
2) In his message to Mary, the angel tells her that God will instruct Jesus in the Scriptures, in the Torah and the Gospel (3:48)
3) Jesus was given the Gospel that contains guidance and light and confirms the Torah which preceded it (5:46, 5:110, 57:27)
4) Those who follow the Gospel should judge by what is contained within it (5:47)
5) The People of the Book should observe the Gospel (5:66, 5:68)
6) The Gospel is compared with other books that contain the promises of God (9:111)
The Qur'an has much to say about the Bible. The Qur'an uses the same word, al-Kitab ("the Book"), to refer to both itself and the Bible. It maintains that the Book was revealed by God to the previous Prophets and Messengers (3:81/ 3:184), especially Moses (2:54/6:91) and Jesus (3:48/5:110) and that the previous Scriptures form a portion of the entire Book revealed by God (3:23; 4:44; 4:51; 5:44). God instructs Muslims to believe in the previous Scriptures He revealed just as they believe the Qur'an:
Believers, have faith in God and His apostle, in the Book He has revealed to His apostle, and in the Scriptures He formerly revealed. (4:136)
Thus God instructs Muslims to believe in the former Scriptures, not merely to believe that they existed at one time but are now irretrievably lost or distorted. In verses 2:113 and 2:121, it is mentioned that the People of the Book recite the Book and should recite it truthfully. Yet how could they do so if they did not have an accurate book in their possession? How would they know which portions were accurate and which were not? The Qur'an itself poses the question to the Children of Israel, "Can you believe in one part of the Scriptures and deny another? (2:85) The Book given to Moses is called "a perfect code for the righteous with precepts about all things, a guide and a mercy" (6:154). How then could it be unreliable?
The Qur'an tells us that it was sent to confirm and explain the Scriptures that preceded it. It is but another witness to the Truth of God:
He has revealed to you the Book with the Truth, confirming the Scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel for the guidance of mankind, and the distinction between right and wrong (3:3-4)
And to you We have revealed the Book with the truth. It confirms the Scriptures which came before it and stands as a guardian over them. (5:48)
It confirms what was revealed before it and fully explains the Scriptures. It is beyond doubt from the Lord of the Universe. (10:38)
We must ask the question, how could the Qur'an be a confirmation of what came before if the original revelations had been lost or distorted? According to Yusuf Ali, the Arabic word used in verse 5:48 and translated "guardian" is muhaymin, which can be translated as "one who safeguards, watches over, stands witness, preserves, and upholds" (The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an, note 759, pg. 263). How could the Qur'an do all these things if the Bible was unreliable?
The following Qur'anic verse has been used to justify the view that the Scriptures of the People of the Book have been distorted:
Woe to those that write the scriptures with their own hands and then declare: `This is from God,' in order to gain some paltry end. (2:79)
However we must consider the verse immediately preceding 2:79 which seems to be linked with it:
There are illiterate men among them who, ignorant of the Scriptures, know of nothing but wishful fancies and vague conjecture (2:78)
This seems to indicate that "those who write the scriptures with their own hands" are those who do not know the actual books but are merely guessing as to their contents, and thus does not refer to the actual Scriptures themselves. In the time of Muhammad, there were few copies of the Bible in circulation and those that were probably not written in the Arabic tongue. Thus it would be common for people to distort what they believed was written in that book if they had not actually read it.
Many early Islamic scholars did not hold to the current prevalent view that the previous Scriptures have been corrupted. According to the "Dictionary of Islam", the scholar al-Bokhari reported that Ibn Abbas said that "`the word tahrif (corruption) signifies to change a thing from its original nature; and that there is no man who could corrupt a single word of what proceeded from God, so that the Jews and Christians could corrupt only by misrepresenting the meaning of the words of God.' Ibn Mazar and Ibn Hatim state, in the commentary known as the Tafsir Durr-i-Mansur, that they have it on the authority of Ibn Muniyah that the Torah and the Gospel are in the same state of purity in which they were sent down from heaven, and that no alterations have been made in them, but that the Jews were wont to deceive the people by unsound arguments and by wresting the sense of Scripture" (DOI, article "Corruption of the Scriptures, pgs. 61-62).
Thus while the previous Scriptures themselves may be generally accurate this does not mean that they are always interpreted correctly. This is confirmed by another Qur'anic passage mentions that some of the People of the Book deliberately distort the message of the Scriptures:
And there are some among them who twist their tongues when quoting the Scriptures, so that you may think that what they say is from the Scriptures, whereas it is not from the Scriptures. They say: `This is from God,' whereas it is not from God. Thus they knowingly ascribe a falsehood to God. (3:78)
Some other relevant Qur'anic passages which speak of the Bible:
We have revealed the Torah, in which there is guidance and light. By it the prophets who surrendered themselves judged the Jews, and so did the rabbis and the divines, according to God's Book which had been committed to their keeping and to which they themselves were witnesses. (5:44)
To David we gave the Psalms. (17:55)
After them We sent forth Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming the Torah already revealed, and gave him the Gospel, in which there is guidance and light, corroborating what was revealed before it in the Torah, a guide and admonition to the righteous. (5:46)
We gave Moses the Scriptures and knowledge of right and wrong, so that you might be rightly guided. (2:53) We gave the Book to Moses as a clear sign, a guide and a blessing for mankind, so that they might give thought. (28:43)
What the Qur'an says about the Gospel:
1) Like the Torah, it is a scripture that was revealed by God for the guidance of humanity (3:3)
2) In his message to Mary, the angel tells her that God will instruct Jesus in the Scriptures, in the Torah and the Gospel (3:48)
3) Jesus was given the Gospel that contains guidance and light and confirms the Torah which preceded it (5:46, 5:110, 57:27)
4) Those who follow the Gospel should judge by what is contained within it (5:47)
5) The People of the Book should observe the Gospel (5:66, 5:68)
6) The Gospel is compared with other books that contain the promises of God (9:111)
BOB:
It is an uncommon view in the Islamic world, just as unitarianism is in Christianity/ Christian world. Some of the brightest (Sir Syed) and in other cases, earliest writers (Imam Bukhari) in Islam advocated this position.
It is difficult to ignore the Gospel and the LXX after the Quran says:
[Al-Imran 3:199.8] And lo! of the People of the Scripture there are some who believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto you and that which was revealed unto them, humbling themselves before Allah. They purchase not a trifling gain at the price of the revelations of Allah. Verily their reward is with their Lord. Lo! Allah is swift to take account.
The above verse seems to suggest that early followers of Islam believed in both the early scripture (Bible) and the scripture revealed to Muhammad (Quran). The following verse may describe the danger of the Bible as scripture:
[Saba' 34:31] And those who disbelieve say: We believe not in this Qur'an nor in that which was before it; but oh, if thou couldst see, when the wrong-doers are brought up before their Lord, how they cast the blame one to another; how those who were despised (in the earth) say unto those who were proud: But for you, we should have been believers.
It would also be hard to imagine how the Christians and Jews (those to whom Allah gave the scripture) were meant to recognize the Quran/ Muhammad if they didnt have a scripture that described the coming of the Quran and Muhammad to them:
[al-Baqarah 2:146] Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (Bible) recognise (this revelation Quran) as they recognise their sons. But lo! a party of them knowingly conceal the truth.
[al-A`raf 7:157] Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither
read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which
are) with them. ... Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and
follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.
read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which
are) with them. ... Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and
follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.
If the above is true, then how can the Torah and Injil, with the description of Muhammad not have existed at the time the Quran was revealed?
umm e zaid said: I have no idea what you are talking about. The Taurah and Injil exist today; it therefore follows that they existed in his time (sallalahu aleyhi wa salaam).
bob: Thanks for agreeing (umm e zaid) that Allah expects the jews and christians to use the Torah and Injil that are with them, to find the description of Muhammad as an ummi prophet mentioned in those texts and believe, follow and support him because he is described in them.
In that case, can I assume you also agree that the Quran suggests Muhammad fulfilled such Clear Signs told by Prophet Jesus about the Praised One, that it made them think Muhammad was a sorcerer?
And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of God (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Apostle to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!" S. 61:6 Y. Ali
Yes, all this is true. However, I think an important question is, how does believing that the bible is scripture further an Islamist's faith in the existence of God? In defense of the Islamist, the Quran says that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible, so if the Bible hasn't changed, where is Muhammad in it? What was he suppose to do according to it? How difficult was it to do these things? Did he do them? When was he suppose to do them? Did he? These are questions the type of things followers of Islam must have been looking for. It must have been terribly hard for early Arabs (without understanding the Greek and Hebrew languages themselves) to believe the bible was unchanged, when Jews and Christians were telling them that Muhammad wasnt mentioned in their scripture. Even today, Jews and Christians will tell me that Muhammad has nothing to do with the Bible.
DELIAPEARL
Wow (in response to NAZORAI'S POST). As a Christian, I have always felt that the Jewish and Islamic faiths were "cousins" with Christianity. I am familiar with the Torah/Bible, but have always wondered what the Qur'an was about. Maybe I'll get around to reading it myself.
Well written post.
BOB:
The Quran is written in rythms and cadences, ups and downs, ebbs and flows, plays on words etc in a perfect Arabic. However, like a record album, sequencing is based on these things, which are lost in the translations. So the non Arabic reader misses these clues to why certain verses are following others. You can get a glimpse of what draws the Arab to it in the book 'Approaching the Qur'an, The Early Revelations' by Michael Sells, published by White Cloud Press, Ashland, Oregon pg 1-2:
The Quran is written in rythms and cadences, ups and downs, ebbs and flows, plays on words etc in a perfect Arabic. However, like a record album, sequencing is based on these things, which are lost in the translations. So the non Arabic reader misses these clues to why certain verses are following others. You can get a glimpse of what draws the Arab to it in the book 'Approaching the Qur'an, The Early Revelations' by Michael Sells, published by White Cloud Press, Ashland, Oregon pg 1-2:
"One afternoon in Cairo, I found myself in an unusual situation. The streets of this noisy, bustling city were suddenly strangely quiet, yet the cafes were crowded with people clustered around televisions. For special events- the death of a great figure, an important soccer game - one might expect to find people in cafes following the event on television. What had drawn people from the streets into the cafes today was the appearance of one of Egypt's popular Quran reciters. When I returned to my hotel, the lobby was filled with men, some of them Egyptian Christians, watching and listening to the televised recitation with intense interest.
Such appreciation for the recited Quran stimulates a diversity of explanations. To devout Muslims, the recited Quran is the word of God revealed to the prophet Muhammad; its divine origin accounts for its hold over the listener. Some anti-Islamic missionaries attribute the extraordinary power and beauty of the Quran to a Jinni or even Satan. A Marxist revolutionary from an Islamic background, who was highly critical of all religion, insisted that the genius of the Quran resulted from Muhammd's alleged madness and resultant close contact with the unconscious. In the Middle Eastern societies, what unites these opinions and seems beyond dispute is the fact that the recited Quran is a distinctively compelling example of verbal expression."
NAZORAI:
I have read the arguments in favor of the idea of Muhammad in the Bible and remain unconvinced. ... But if a Muslim accepts the Qur'an as a revelation from God, and if that book requires him to accept the previous Scriptures as accurate revelations, then I think he should do so.
BOB:
Please share them (unconvincing arguments in favor of the idea of Muhammad in the Bible). Is there any evidence that Muhammad established a school for reading the Bible or asked anyone to learn Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin and develop an understanding of the source texts of the Bible etc during his minstry?
Are you sure they exist? Its been a few days.
NAZORAI:
Sorry I did not get back to this, Bob.
There is the argument that Muhammad is foretold in the prophecy concerning God raising up a prophet like Moses. The problem I see with this is that the prophecy clearly says the prophet will come from Moses' brethren.
There is also an attempt to connect the Paraclete mentioned in John's gospel with Muhammad. This seems based on confusion of the word paraclete with the word periklutos ("celebrated") and in turn connected to one of Muhammad's names in the Qur'an, Ahmad, ("praised one"). But I think it is quite clear in John's gospel that a spirit not a man is meant.
BOB:
I have seen those verses too, (and agree) they are very vague. How does it help knowing whether God exists or not by knowing whether Muhammad was or not a descendant of Moses?
By the way, did you know that dna studies suggest that most Arabs and (descendants of Muhammad's tribe such as myself) are more closely related to Jews and Cohens than most Jews and Cohens are related to each other? I am speaking closely in terms of sharing a more recent common male ancestor. (Please see my story page) There are two ways of understanding this scientific fact, i.e. most Arabs are Israelites or most Jews and Cohens are Ishmaelites. In light of this scientific fact, where does the Quran suggest Muhammad was not a descendant of (brethren) of Moses? Also, how was Amram related to Moses?
NAZORAI:
Good question (Where does the Quran say Muhammad was not a descendant). I don't know the answer. I have seen genealogies which trace his ancestry back to Ishmael though. Amram?
BOB:
Muhammad's genealogy is not found in the Quran. The ancestry to Ishmael is only a tradition. ... The Quran seems to suggest we look at the Bible and figure out the identity of Muhammad. (People of the Book recognize ...) . Leaving the door open to the idea (of the People of the Book) knowing. The Quran does hint. For it is quite surprizing how the Quran pays so much respect to this family (Alay Imran/ Amram). There is an entire chapter in the Quran named the family of Amram. Allah claims Amram's family is above all families. Muhammad compares his minstry to Moses and Aaron. In addition, notice how the Quran claims Muhammad visits the masjid el Aqsa (Jerusalem temple) where Muhammad is shown the tokens of Allah. However, we know from the LXX that only the high priest and Moses were permitted access to them. In addition, Muhammad received tithe and established sacrifices. Again rites and rituals, in a biblical context, one would expect of a priest.
Also notice how Muhammad compares his ministry with Moses and Aaron:
"Narrated Sad: Allah's Apostle set out for Tabuk. appointing 'Ali as his deputy (in Medina). 'Ali said, 'Do you want to leave me with the children and women?' The Prophet said, 'Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 59, Military Expeditions led by the Prophet (peace be upon him) (Al-Maghaazi), Volume 5, Number 700)"
"Narrated Ubaida: Ali said (to the people of 'Iraq), "Judge as you used to judge, for I hate differences (and I do my best ) till the people unite as one group, or I die as my companions have died." And narrated Sad that the Prophet said to 'Ali, 'Will you not be pleased from this that you are to me like Aaron was to Moses?' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 57, Companions of the Prophet, Volume 5, Number 56)"
"Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) left 'Ali b. Abi Talib behind him (as he proceeded) to the expedition of Tabuk, whereupon he ('Ali) said: Allah's Messenger, are you leaving me behind amongst women 4nd children? Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there would be no prophet after me. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 31, The Book Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions (Allah Be Pleased With Them) of the Holy Prophet (May Peace Be Upon Him) (Kitab Al-Fada'il Al-Sahabah), Number 5914)"
"Sa'd reported Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying to 'Ali: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses? (Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 31, The Book Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions (Allah Be Pleased With Them) of the Holy Prophet (May Peace Be Upon Him) (Kitab Al-Fada'il Al-Sahabah), Number 5916)"
The idea of a biblical prophet rising from the family of Amram becomes plausible after the discovery of Aaronite and Davidic messiahs in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Ps 110 also speaks about a tithe receiving ruler, priest like Melchizedek, the one praised by David as his adony and mentioned by Jesus as not the son of David. However, once again none of this proves that Muhammad actually was a descendant of Aaron or that God could actually tell the future in any great detail.
THE EVIDENCE OF MUHAMMAD'S MIRACLE IN THE BIBLE:
EARLY ISLAMIC CONQUESTS:
bob: how do you explain the victory of 10s of thousands of poorly equipped desert Arabs conquering 10s of millions of Byzantines and Persians defended by world class armies? Many historical records suggest that the Byzantine emperor Heracleus was also a military general that commanded a seasoned, battle hardened, military force that had defeated the Persians a few years earlier and was rich with spoils looted from the great Persian temples/ Empire. What factors do you attribute this total Islamic conquest (resulting in the wholesale conversion of nearly the entire population of the Byzantine and Persian Empire? Can you cite any other examples of this happening in modern history?
>>>
naz: I don't really know, Bob. It is nothing short of a miracle how Muhammad was able to unite the disparate factions of warring Arab tribes into an efficent fighting force that conquered a good part of the globe. What I find fascinating though is that it seems to be an exact fulfillment of the prophecy in Genesis about the future of Ishmael.
>>>
bob: There are prophecies about Ishmaelites in Genesis becoming a great nation. We also find Ishmaelites mentioned in Isaiah 60: 6-7 "Caravans of camels shall fill you, dromedaries from Midian and Ephah; All from Sheba shall come bearing gold and frankincense, and proclaiming the praises of the LORD. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered for you the rams of Nebaioth shall be your sacrifices. They will be acceptable offerings on my altar, and I will enhance the splendor of my house.
For the late seventh century Pseudo- Methodius, it was a very pessimistic vision:
The path of their advance will be from sea to sea, [and from the East to the West] and from the North to the desert of Yathrib. It will be a path to calamities; old men and women, rich and poor, will travel on it, while they hunger and thirst, and suffer with heavy chains to the point that they will bless the dead. For this is the chastisement of which the Apostle spoke ... Men will be persecuted ; wild animals and cattle will die; the trees of the forest will be cut; the most beautiful plants of the mountains will be destroyed; opulent cities will be laid waste, and they will capture places because there is no one passing through them. The land will be defiled with blood and its produce will be taken away from it.
In similar fashion, John Bar Penkaye in the late seventh century interpreted the Muslim military achievements as reflections of divine wrath:
We should not think of the advent (of the children of Hagar) as something ordinary, but as due to divine working. Before calling them, God had prepared them beforehand to hold Christians in honour' thus they also had a special commandment from God concerning our monastic station, that they should hold it in honour. Now when these people came, at Gods command, and took over as it were both kingdoms, not with any war or battle, but in a menial fashion, such as when a brand is rescued out of the fire, not using weapons of war or human means, God put victory into their hand in such a way that the words written them might be fulfilled, namely, " One man chased a thousand and two routed ten thousand." How otherwise, could naked men, riding without armor or shield, have been able to win, apart from divine aid, God having called them from the ends of the earth so as to destroy, by them a "sinful kingdom" and to bring low, through them, the proud spirit of the Persians.
-Byzantium and the early Islamic conquests by Walter E. Kaegi, Professor of history, Univesity of Chicago, Cambridge University Press.
As far as uniting Arabs into an efficent fighting force is concerned, I believe that an invading army must have numerical advantage (3 times) or a technological superiority over a defending force to be successful. In the case of the Islamic conquest the Arabs seem to have had neither. The Arabs were outnumbered possibly, 100 to 1 against. ... Also, in the above account, the Arabs dont exactly sound like a well organized, razor sharp fighting machine. Knowing what we do about the inhospitable climate of the desert, the number of bedouins that lived in it, couldnt have matched Egypt, Israel, Syria, Near East, Babylon and Persia that were defended by Roman troops. So I ask what other factors were at play? You said a miracle. So I ask, what was that miracle? The Arabs tell us that Muhammad didnt perform any miracles. I would offer that we go back to the LXX (Old Testament/ Torah) and the Gospels and try to figure out what else may have happened. For example,
Habakkuk 3 mentions pestilence and plague in v. 5, wrath against streams and seas v. 8 and dark sun and moon in v.10, 11. Matt 24 speaks of a great tribulation/ pestilence (v. 21), famines and earthquakes (v.7), sun darkened, stars falling, moon not giving light (v. 29), two men in the field one will be taken (v. 40), two women, one will be taken. Verse 22 suggests that unless these days are stopped by God no one would be left alive. Anguish and darkness are also mentioned in Isaiah 13:10. Darkness is mentioned in Isaiah 14:21,22 too. In Isaiah 19 we find that at the time of the coming of the Egyptian messiah (Isaiah 19:19-20) when Arabs are united ( v. 21-25), the Egyptian wateways will become sick and dry (v. 5,6 -11).
In my opinion, it was possibly a catastrophe such as that mentioned above (recorded by Christian monks and historians) that occurred in the days of Muhamamd that devastated the population of Byzantium and scared the Jewish and Christian populations into accepting Islam and making it easy for the Arabs to conquer these lands. This, I believe, is also why the Quran is full of such soulful imagery, it's solemn mood, which some people associate with Judgment day/ Hell. In my opinion, Muhammad was the quintessential "brand is rescued out of the fire" described by John Penkaye above, but also perhaps the "brand snatched from the buring fire", the high priest, described in Zechariah 3: 2. Here are some of the reasons I believe that a natual catastrophe was responsible for making the invasion and conversion possible:
Dark sun evidence:
1. Historians
In describing the climate in that year, Procopius wrote that "the sun gave forth its light without brightness like the moon during this whole year." Other accounts of the event say that the sun became "dim" or "dark" for upto eighteen months. Its light shone "like a feeble shadow", and people were terrified that the sun would never shine properly again. Procopius, referring to the darkened sun, later wrote that "from the time this thing happened, men were not free from war, nor pestilence nor anything leading to death."
"There was a sign from the sun, the like of which had never been seen and reported before, the sun became dark and its darkness lasted for 18 months. Each day, it shone for about four hours, and still this light was only a feeble shadow.Everyone declared that the sun would never recover its full light again. " A sixth century historian and prominent church leader, John of Ephesus, wrote these words describing the app[arent fate of our planet's star in the year 535 and 536.
2. Scientific evidence for unusually cold weather and drought during this time:
The most accurate records of climate change are those hidden inside the trunks of trees. The growth rings of many species preserve an indeliable annual record of climatic history. Tree ring specialsts (dendrochronologists) can attempt to reconstruct past climate by studying two telltale sets of data. One is the width of each annual growth ring, which reveals the exact amount of growth in a given year ( indeed in a given grwoing season, usually spring and summer). A drought or unseasonable frost that restricts growth will therefore produce narrow rings. The second, the density of each ring in confers in cool climates, yields information about temperature. The colder the weather the less dense was the timber grwoing at that time.
Continious tree ring chronologies, going back to the sixth century AD and beyond now exisgt for Finland, Sweden, the British Isles, central Europe, the Aegean, Siberia, North America, Chile, Argentina, and Tasmania. In a substantial percentage of all the tree ring chronologies covering the sixth century that have been constructed so far, the period 535-550 (and sometimes even till 560 and beyond) stands out as a time of unusually low tree ring growth. In several key chronologies, that twenty five to thirty five year period contains many of the narrowest ring sequences known for the past 2,000 years. ... But from 538 or in many places 540 there was an almost universal massive decline lasting between two and eight years. This was particularly marked in the southern hemisphere where, in Chile and Tasmania, for example, full recovery was not achieved until 580s and the 570s respectively.
-Catastrophe, an investigation into the origins of the modern world by David Keys, Ballantine Books, 1999.
The Plague that accompanied the erratic/ dark sun:
Evagrius
The church historian Evagrius lived through four great plague epidemics and lost most of his family to them. In the year 593 at the age of fifty eight, he wrote down his memories in a very personal lamentation.
"I believe no part of the human race to have been unafflicted by the disease," for it occurred in some cities "to such an extent that they were rendered empty of almost all their inhabitants." Evagrius regarded it as his responsibility to describe these events, as he was present at the beginning of the spread of the bubonic plague and was struck by it while still a schoolboy.
"And during the course of the various visitations, I lost to the disease many of my children and my wife and much of the rest of my kin ... For now, as I write this, I am 58 years old and it is not quite two years since the fourth outbreak of plague struck Antioch and I lost my daughter and the son born to her in addition to those I lost earlier. ..."
Evagrius
The church historian Evagrius lived through four great plague epidemics and lost most of his family to them. In the year 593 at the age of fifty eight, he wrote down his memories in a very personal lamentation.
"I believe no part of the human race to have been unafflicted by the disease," for it occurred in some cities "to such an extent that they were rendered empty of almost all their inhabitants." Evagrius regarded it as his responsibility to describe these events, as he was present at the beginning of the spread of the bubonic plague and was struck by it while still a schoolboy.
"And during the course of the various visitations, I lost to the disease many of my children and my wife and much of the rest of my kin ... For now, as I write this, I am 58 years old and it is not quite two years since the fourth outbreak of plague struck Antioch and I lost my daughter and the son born to her in addition to those I lost earlier. ..."
The first area of the empire to be hit by plague was Egypt. The town where it first appeared was the Mediterranean port Pelusium- traditionally the point of entry for Egypt's enemies for over a thousand years. Persians, Syrians, Romans, and Greeks- even Alexander the Great himself- had invaded Egypt through it. But this time the enemy was not proudly clad in armor. It was invisible, carried ashore on the backs of scuttling rats. It had arrived in Pelusium from the south via the Red Sea and the Roman equivalent of the Suez Canal- a waterway built by the emperor Trajan more than four centuries earlier to help link the Indian Ocean with the Mediterranean. After devastating Pelusium, the disease quickly spread to Alexandria then on to Constantinople and the empire as a whole. Up to a third of the empire's population died in the first massive outbreak, and in the capital, more than 50 percent of the inhabitants are thought to have perished.
John Ephesus
"God's wrath turned into, as it were, a wine-press and pitilessly trampled and squeezed the inhabitants [of many cities] like fine grapes," wrote another eyewitness of the catastrophe, the hagiographer and historian John Ephesus, in a moving and vivid account of the horror unleashed by the epidemic.
There were "homes large and small, beautiful and desirable, which suddenly became tombs for the inhabitants and in which servants and masters at the same time suddenly fell [dead], mingling their rottenness together in their bedrooms".
Everywhere one looked were "corpses which split open and rotted on the streets with nobody to bury [them]." There were those "who perished falling in the streets to become a terrible and shocking spectacle for those who saw them, as their bellies were swollen and their mouths wide open, throwing up pus like torrents, their eyes inflamed and their hands stretched out upward, and [over] the corpses, rotting and lying in corners and streets and in the porches of courtyard and in the churches." There were "ships in the midst of the sea whose sailors were suddenly attacked by [God's] wrath and [the ships] became tombs adrift on the waves."
John tried to flee from the plague, but no matter where he went, the epidemic caught up with him. In the end, there was nowhere else to run to. On his journeys, after trying in vain to find a safe haven, he witnessed the ferocity with which the plague devastated the countryside just as much as the cities.
Everywhere one looked were "corpses which split open and rotted on the streets with nobody to bury [them]." There were those "who perished falling in the streets to become a terrible and shocking spectacle for those who saw them, as their bellies were swollen and their mouths wide open, throwing up pus like torrents, their eyes inflamed and their hands stretched out upward, and [over] the corpses, rotting and lying in corners and streets and in the porches of courtyard and in the churches." There were "ships in the midst of the sea whose sailors were suddenly attacked by [God's] wrath and [the ships] became tombs adrift on the waves."
John tried to flee from the plague, but no matter where he went, the epidemic caught up with him. In the end, there was nowhere else to run to. On his journeys, after trying in vain to find a safe haven, he witnessed the ferocity with which the plague devastated the countryside just as much as the cities.
On the journey "we saw desolate and groaning villages and corpses spread out on the earth; staging posts on the roads full of darkness and solitude filling with fright everyone who happened to enter and leave them." And "cattle abandoned and roaming scattered over the mountains with nobody to gather them."
He saw fields, "abundant in grain which was becoming white and stood erect" yet had no one "to reap or gather it in." And he observed "flocks of sheep, goats, oxen and pigs which had become like wild animals, having forgotten [life in] cultivated land and the human voice which used to lead them."
In Constantinople, John recorded in considerable detail the scale of the catastrophe, "When the scourge weighed heavy upon this city, first it eagerly began [to assault] the class of the poor, who lay in the streets. It happened that 5,000 and 7,000 or even 12,000 and as many as 16,000 of them departed [this world] in a single day. Since thus far it was only the beginning, men were standing by the harbours, at the cross-roads and at the city gates counting the dead.
In Constantinople, John recorded in considerable detail the scale of the catastrophe, "When the scourge weighed heavy upon this city, first it eagerly began [to assault] the class of the poor, who lay in the streets. It happened that 5,000 and 7,000 or even 12,000 and as many as 16,000 of them departed [this world] in a single day. Since thus far it was only the beginning, men were standing by the harbours, at the cross-roads and at the city gates counting the dead.
"Thus the people of Constantinople reached the point of disappearing, only a few remaining, whereas, of those only who had died on the streets- if anybody wants us to name their number, for in fact they were counted- over 300,000 were taken off the streets. Those officials who counted having reached the number of 230,000 and seeing that the dead were innumerable, gave up reckoning and from then on the corpses were brought out without being counted." ....
At first, when burial space ran out, the dead were buried at sea. Vast numbers of corpses were taken to the seashore. "There, boats were filled with them and during each sailing they were thrown overboard and the ships returned to take others corpses."
At first, when burial space ran out, the dead were buried at sea. Vast numbers of corpses were taken to the seashore. "There, boats were filled with them and during each sailing they were thrown overboard and the ships returned to take others corpses."
" ....Others carried the corpses on boards and carrying poles, bringing and piling them up one up on another. For other corpses, since they had rotted and putrefied, matting was sewn together. People bore them on carrying poles and coming to the shore threw them down with pus running out of them." ...
"...Thus, when I [John of Ephesus], a wretch, wanted to include these matters in a record of history, my thoughts were seized many times by stupor, and for many reasons I planned to omit it, firstly because all mouths and tongues are insufficient to relate it, and moreover, because even if there could be found such that would record at least a little from among the multitude of matters, what use would it be, when the entire world was tottering and reaching its dissolution and the length of generations was cut short? And for who would he who wrote be writing?"
"But then I thought that it was right that, through our writings, we should inform our successors and transmit to them at least a little from among the multitude of matters concerning God's chastisement of us. Perhaps during the remainder of the world history which will come after us, they will fear and shake because of the terrible scourge with which we were lashed through our transgressions and become wiser through the chastisement of us wretches and be saved from God's wrath here in this world and from future torment."
John was describing the epidemic of 541-543 the first visitation of the plague. But the full social and political impact of the disease lay in its remorseless habit of returning to claim the lives of those it had previously spared. -Catastrophe, an investigation into the origins of the modern world by David keys, Ballantine Books, 1999.
In my opinion, since the circumstances (dim sun, plague killing half the population of the world, Egyptian rivers and sea stinking, a man spewing scripture and uniting the Arabs under the God of Abraham and ending the Roman occupation of the middle east) matched descriptions in the Bible well enough for many, if not most Jews and Christians that survived those times, feeling Muhammad was the great one described in the scriptures and accepting Islam.
