Ali Ataie – The Qur’an is a Divine Corrective of the Biblical Narrative
AI: Summary ©
The title of the Bible is often said incorrectly, with the title of the Exodus being said incorrectly as well. The title of the Bible is also said incorrectly, and the title of the Bible is also said incorrectly. The title of the Bible is also said incorrectly, and the Exodus is a paraphrasal of the Bible. There is confusion over historical events and the title being a paraphrasal of the Bible.
AI: Summary ©
It is a fact that the sacred narratives
described in the Quran
such as the story of the flood at
the time of Nuh alaihis salam, The story
of Joseph, Yusuf alaihis salam.
The story of the Exodus,
from Egypt, the Hijra of Musa alaihis salam
with the Bani Israel. The Qur'anic versions of
these narratives
make much more historical sense
than their biblical counterparts. In other words, the
flood and the exodus as described in the
bible
are basically historically impossible
or at least highly implausible.
Somehow the Quran avoided
many of the problematic historical claims
of the biblical authors. And this is from
the Dalai'il and Naguwa.
This is one of the proofs of prophecy.
This is a proof that the prophet Muhammad
salallahu alaihi wa sallam was a true nabi,
a true prophet. For example, I'll give you
an example. The bible says that 600,000 men
of fighting age made exodus
from Egypt with Musa alaihis salam. This means
about 3,000,000 people made exodus
from Egypt. If we count the women, the
children, the elderly not to mention animals,
3,000,000 people plus livestock.
Historically, this is
almost falsifiable.
This would mean that basically a third of
the entire population of Egypt made hijra. This
would have been noticed by other civilizations in
that region yet no one recorded
it. 3,000,000 people for 40 years would have
left a major footprint
in the Sinai desert.
There is none.
If 3,000,000 people were marching, just to give
you a visual or to conceptualize this a
little bit, if 3,000,000 people were marching, 10
men across
when the first row reached Mount Sinai, the
last row would have still been in Egypt.
What does Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala say in
the Quran?
The exodus is confirmed in its general sense
in the Quran but there are changes
that that Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala makes to
the narrative that are extremely important
and often overlooked by even scholars let alone
average readers. Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala says, we
reveal to Musa alayhi salam,
journey under the cover of night with my
servants. Indeed you will be pursued. So they
all left in one night.
And and and Pharaoh sent summoners to the
cities,
saying these people are a small remnant.
A small remnant according to the Quran, a
small group of believers
in Allah and his messenger Musa alaihis salam
made Hijra, made the Exodus. Khamenei Sahaba made
Hijra from Mecca to Medina during the time
of the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasalam. It was
a small group.
The biblical version of the Exodus cannot be
true historically.
While the Quranic version is very plausible,
if the prophet Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa sallam
plagiarized the bible, which is the standard quranic,
the standard akhwan, the standard orientalist trope that
he plagiarized the bible in the Quran.
And they say this even to this day.
Why didn't he copy these problems?
How did he know to make this adjustment
to the narrative?
How did the prophet salallahu alaihi wasalam in
quotes know that the rulers of Egypt at
the time of Yusuf alaihi wasalam were called
mulk. They were called kings not pharaohs.
The ruler at the time of Musa alayhis
salam was called Firaun, was called pharaoh. The
Quran is correct historically. The book of Genesis
gets it wrong.
Why didn't the prophet salallahu alaihi wasallam call
the ruler? Why didn't the prophet again in
quotes, call the ruler of Egypt at the
time of Yusuf alaihi wasallam a pharaoh
like the bible did?
How did he know to make this adjustment
to the narrative?
How did he know to avoid this,
this anachronism? It's called an anachronism.
There are linguistic subtleties in the Quran
that the prophet shalallahu alaihi wa sallam could
not have known.
Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala says,
The name is Zakaria in Hebrew
means the mention of the Lord.
This is what it his name Zakaria in
Hebrew means the mention of the Lord. So
this verse is a play on words.
The mention of the mercy of your lord
to his servant, the mention of the lord.
This is there's this beautiful subtle symmetry
in this one ayah.
The author of this ayah, new Hebrew. There's
no doubt about it. If a Jew living
in the Hejaz heard this verse, his ears
would perk up. He would notice the subtlety.
Another example, Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala says,
That the wife of Ibrahim alaihis salam,
she laughed and then we gave her glad
tidings of Isaac. Isaac means laughter.
And
then
it
says,
woman
woman
woman
woman
is.
And then following Isaac,
Jacob. The name Isaac means laughter in Hebrew.
The name Jacob means to follow or to
come after.
This is a type of word play that
adds to the eloquence
and brilliance of the Quran.
Whoever composed this verse knew Hebrew. Of course
we know this is a revelation from Allah
subhanahu wa ta'ala.
I'll give you another example, there's hundreds and
hundreds if not thousands of these types of
examples.
Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala says about Yahi alayhi
salam.
Now Yahya is John, John the Baptist peace
be upon him most probably.
The Quran calls him Yahya, meaning he lives
because he was martyred.
And the martyrs are alive.
They're alive with their Lord, receiving sustenance
from their Lord. But the Hebrew name of
John is Yohanan,
which is related to Hananan.
Wahanaanamildunwazakatawakana
taqiyya. This is the only occurrence of this
word in the entire Quran
and it's describing Yahya alayhi salam because it
actually relates to his historical name.
These are subtleties that go over the head
of 99%
of the Quran's readers. The author of the
Quran is playing with these languages in a
masterful way.
Now we also believe in miracles, Mu'aajizat.
Musa alayhi salam performed many miracles. The Ibnillah
and secular historians do not consider miracles when
determining what happened in history.
That's part of our iman bil ghayb.
Right? Because the past is ghayb. We don't
have access to it. We can't reproduce these
things. Our belief in miracles is not irrational
nor is it falsifiable.
It is based upon our belief in Allah
Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala. And we can argue rationally
that this universe had a designer and a
creator and that this creator is personal. This
is why there is something rather than nothing.
This is a big philosophical conundrum
for these philosophers. Why is there something rather
than nothing?
This creator who brought this universe into existence
from nothing has power over every atom in
the universe.
Miracles are easy for him but this is
a philosophical argument. This is a theological argument.
But from a standpoint of history, the Quran's
narratives avoid
the historical pitfalls
of the biblical narratives. And I would say
this is also true of the teachings of
Jesus, peace be upon him, our master Isa
alaihis salam.
When the Quran's Christology,
its statements about Christ even though so so
so the Quran's Christology make more historical sense
than what the new testament even teaches about
Jesus, peace be upon him. Even though the
Quran came 500 years after the new testament.
This is amazing.
Most historians today do not believe that the
historical Jesus, peace be upon him, claimed to
be divine.
They say he claimed to be a prophet
and a healer
who taught a more relaxed interpretation
of the Torah,
and that he spoke of someone to come
after him, who would bring the kingdom of
God on earth.
And when it comes to the crucifixion,
so here the Christian will point, will point
out to the Muslim and say, look here
the historian says, Isa alaihi salam was crucified
but the Quran denies it. But here I
would say
that historians have highly overemphasized
the historicity
of the crucifixion. I think if they look
closely at the evidence again,
many of them will affirm at least the
historical
plausibility
that Isa Alaihi Salam was not crucified.
What does the Quran say? It says those
who differed about it, meaning the crucifixion,
were in doubt, in check concerning it. They
did not have certain knowledge.
They did not have realm except that they
followed the dun conjecture.
In other words, none of the evidence
that Jews and Christians marshaled to support Jesus's
crucifixion,
none of it was written by an eyewitness
of this alleged historical event.
Every epistle, every gospel, every statement in Christian,
Jewish and Roman sources, without exception,
came much later
and were authored by people who were not
there. Paul was the first person in recorded
history to claim that Jesus was crucified. This
was 20 years later after after the alleged
event and he wasn't even there. Paul never
met the historical Jesus. He was not a
disciple.
So these sources are conjectural.
They are.
Today we know that this is true. The
Quran is correct.
But back when the prophet salallahu alayhi wasalam
first ordered the uttered these words, Christians and
historians believed that the 4 gospels, that 2
of them were written by 2 disciples of
Jesus and the other 2 were written by
disciples of disciples. No historian really believes that
anymore.
The Quran is correct,
yet most historians continue to drag their feet
on this issue.
There's
a among even secular historians. Don't think these
people are objective. Put put put 50 quote
unquote,
objective secular historians in a room and and
give them a topic, you have 50 different
responses, 50 different opinions.
So allow me to paraphrase an point made
by doctor Louay Faturhi. It is what he
says. It's a paraphrase. He says, if the
prophet Muhammad salallahu alaihi wasalam is the real
author of the Quran, and he desperately hoped
to convert Jews and Christians to Islam and
to become his followers, then why in the
world did he deny the crucifixion of Jesus
when both Jews and Christians maintained that he
was crucified? Why would he invent an uncrucified
Jesus? Why would he create an unnecessary barrier
to to,
conversion?
The answer seems to be that the Quran
is stating an actual fact
since it has direct access to history
as a divine revelation.
It is simply a fact that Jesus of
Nazareth, the son of Mary, peace be upon
them was not crucified.
So here's the main point. The Quran's version
of the flood, the Exodus, the story of
Joseph, the teachings of Jesus are more historically
accurate than what the bible says.