Mohammad Elshinawy – Proof of Prophethood #29 – The Qurans Incredible Historical Accuracy

			The Quran is also remarkably accurate about historical events that would have been absolutely
impossible for the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wasallam to have known. One such example is
the fact that Pharaoh's body will survive. Yes, the Bible also states that the pharaoh of Moses
drown. But the Quran very particularly asserts that God promised to save his corpse as an example
and sign a lesson for later oppressors from being lost at sea.
		

			The preservation of mummies is actually something quite rare. And the fact that the Prophet Muhammad
peace and blessings be upon him new and stated, asserting that this particular corpse is the one
that survived. Considering the knowledge of his day makes this photonic assertion simply mind
boggling. And the Quran mentions many nations that were ultimately punished by God for their
rebellion. And yet it never states that their bodies would be saved as an example for later
generations to come. The sole exception in the Quran is Pharaoh's corpse, which happens to be the
one that remains available until this very day in the Egyptian Museum of Cairo for several centuries
		

			before the Prophet Muhammad and for nearly 1200 years after him, knowledge regarding ancient
Egyptian civilization was scarce at best. It wasn't until the invasions of Napoleon Bonaparte and
subsequently, the discovery of a tablet known as the Rosetta Stone in 1799. Did the discipline of
Egyptology emerge and the hieroglyphics were deciphered, and now we finally had access to reliable
source material on Ancient Egyptian civilizations, France had sent a team of researchers to explore
these newfound tombs, among which was the famous Dr. Maurice boo chi. He then presented his findings
in 1976, to the French Institute of Forensic Medicine, and received multiple national awards for his
		

			groundbreaking work in this regard. Another example from ancient Egypt is the fact that Joseph peace
be upon him is king, the king of his story was not a pharaoh. The Quran identifies the ruler of
ancient Egypt as Pharaoh 65 times, but they all are in the story of Moses peace and blessings be
upon him. Not a single time is Egypt's earlier king in the time of Joseph peace be upon him, called
a pharaoh in the Quran. This differs from the Old Testament, for example, which uses that term
Pharaoh for both rulers, and even for earlier kings such as the one in the time of Prophet Abraham
himself, peace and blessings be upon them all. However, it since been established that that term
		

			Pharaoh has only been coined in the reign of Thutmose the third, about 1500 years BC during the 18th
dynasty of ancient Egypt. Historians have further discovered that during the era of Joseph peace be
upon him, the 15th to 17th dynasties of ancient Egypt, or actually those of an invading force from
Palestine, and hence they were called the heat source dynasties, which meant literally foreign
kings. What does all of this mean? Since the term Pharaoh means literally great house or elites
bloodline, and since the Hyksos, in the time of Joseph peace be upon him, or occupiers and not
indigenous rulers, it would have been incorrect to call them Pharaohs had that term even existed.
		

			Circling back to that very careful usage of the honorific title Pharaoh, Dr. Maurice wu chi says, I
must confess that when the Quran was first being conveyed to people, the ancient Egyptian language
had been lost from the collective memory of humanity, he says, For two centuries, and remained that
way up until the recent 19th century. Therefore, he says, it would be impossible for us to know that
the kings of Egypt should be called anything other than what they were called in the Bible, Pharaoh.
And yet the subtle word choice of the Quran on this matter, he says, is thought provoking. It's
important to note though, that the historical accuracy of the Quran is not just some recent
		

			discovery resultant of archaeological excavation. This was something
		

			That was confirmed by the Jews and Christians during the prophets time, and it astonished them. The
fact that Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam could simply speak of personalities across cultures,
like Abraham and Joseph and Jesus and Moses, and those are Nain and others like them with such
detail was inexplicable, it was a mystery. This is why scores of Jews in Medina can seat it and
profess that Mohammed must be a true prophet, even if some of them thereafter still resisted his
message under the claim that it only applied to the Arabs. This was due to their inability to
contest its divine origins. They knew all too well that it was impossible for there to be any
		

			semblance of this history in the Arabic language whatsoever. You know, an uninformed person could
argue that none of this history is remarkable at all. And it could simply be that Muhammad
sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was spoon fed from some Bible scholar or some lost manuscript. This
accusation actually existed during the prophets life sallallahu alayhi wasallam. But it quickly
disappeared, and most serious horror and critics would refuse to cite it today, due to it being such
a weak possibility that it makes them look desperate. How so? Number one, it is contrary to the
historically indisputable integrity of Muhammad character. Number two, the bulk and veracity of what
		

			the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam brought could only be attained over decades of apprenticeship
that would be impossible for him to hide. To this point, the Quran actually says say to them, oh,
Muhammad, Had Allah not Well, I would never have been capable of reciting such words to you, for I
have lived in your midst for a lifetime. Will you not then Reason number three, as we sampled
earlier, the Quran avoided and stepped around the historical inaccuracies found in the Bible. So are
we saying that the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam plagiarized from an earlier
scripture, and the only accurate version from the 1000s of conflicting manuscripts? And did this
		

			version exist in seventh century Arabia of all places, and in a foreign language that Muhammad
sallallahu alayhi wasallam secretly learned and then was lost forever without a trace? Finally, even
if this bizarre hypothetical were true, it would still only account for the source of this
information and choose to ignore the miraculousness of the end product. The Quran itself responds to
this accusation about this historical precision being spoon fed from elsewhere. Allah says, and we
certainly know all Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam that some of them are saying, he got it from
another human being, say to them, oh Mohamed, this source that you accuse him of taking from is a
		

			foreign source. It is a different language. And yet this Quran is one that is clear and pure in its
Arabic