“Borrowing”- the hidden Christian story in Islam

Introduction

One of the odd features of the Qur’an is that it contains several terms and concepts essentially alien to and superfluous in Islam, mere theological esotericisms to Muslim readers unfamiliar with the Bible, but strikingly familiar and even central to Christian and even in many cases even Jewish readers. Stitched together, these essentially yield the Christian story, a religion-within -a -religion, hidden in plain sight within the pages of the Qur’an. That these are present simultaneous with a handful of direct refutations of Christianity, also present in the Qur’an is one of the central contradictions and puzzles in Islam. This incredible feature is the theme of this article.

What could be the reason for this feature? We can only speculate today, but the Christian reader of the Qur’an will immediately get a sense of the discordance and the definite sense of a “pathwork gospel”, something that is not uncommon for apocryphal gospels of antiquity. Such gospels, typically put together to serve a specific agenda betray such theological inconsistencies since the writing is not primarily spiritual. With the Qur’an specifically, we will see that there is a definite sense in which the author is not really aware of the meaning of the terms being used, rather they are being employed rather as spiritual embellishments upon an otherwise rather dry textual backdrop. It is also quite likely that the meaning of these terms and concepts were simply not available to the author at the time in Arabia, given the mode fo transmission of the material which would likely have been some of of oral recitation and recounting at the time and the author’s own educational background given it is likely he was either entirely illiterate or only partly literate in any case.

Iblis is Greek for the Fallen Angel

Muslims believe in civilizations of invisible beings called “jinn”- living, breathing, eating, marrying, believing, disbelieving, warring, praying, and dying among us. The only one name is “Iblis”, cast in the role of the Biblical Satan or Devil. I-B-L-S is the consonantal form of the Greek Dia-B-L-S minus the “D”. “Dia-bolos” itself is a Greek compound word, “dia” (through) and “ballo” (to throw); signifying something like throwing apart, or dividing, and usually signifying accusing “the accuser”. It occurs 38 times in the New Testament (NT), for example in the accounts of Jesus’ Temptation, the parables etc. That devil is none other than the fallen angel, Satan: 

“And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the DEVIL AND SATAN, the deceiver of the whole world – he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him” (Rev.12:9, also 20:2).

Luke does not use Diabolos in the parallel passage:

“He said to them, “I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning” (Lk. 10:8)

In the Old Testament the references to Satan or the devil are sparse. From Isaiah we get the Latinization “Lucifer”: bearer of light.

(Is. 14:12) “How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (also Job 1:6),

The Hebrew noun “ha- satan” in the OT is derived from the verb meaning “to obstruct” or “to oppose.” to mean the “adversary” or “accuser.”  In occurs only used nine times, and in five of those uses, is used for a human being who is a military, political or legal enemy of Israel.

The only time that satan appears without the definite article ha is 1 Chron.21. In the Book of Job, ha-satan is a heavenly being that questions the faith of Job before God. In the Book of Numbers, when Balaam goes to curse the Israelites, he is stopped by ha-satan, which is an oddity. In Zechariah 3 we see ha-satan in an accusatory role before the Throne of God.

In summary, the Quran takes a descriptive Greek word “the Divider”, “Diabolos” and Arabicizes it into a proper noun “Iblis”. This “Iblis” is then relegated to the species of “jinni”, pre-Islamic spirit-beings from Arabian folk-lore. The Biblical “Satan” becomes a generic term for evil jinni akin to the Biblical demons, as though there were also good jinni, nor do these have a separate name of their own. In doing so, the Qur’an christens a creature with a name that is only understood in the Greek language. That itself is incredible and if anything betrays the authors lack of knowledge of the word’s origin. But this article is full of instances which betray the author’s lack of knowledge of the original Biblical languages.

Iblis is destined to become the only jinn to be named in the only major world religion that has Arabiam jinni, and his name has meaning in the Greek language. Diabolos is not even in the Jewish Scriptures, it is a Greek Christianism of the Hebrew Satan.

On top of that, the entire story of Iblis which is made to parallel the Biblical story of the Fall ends up being a hotch-potch narrative and we have discussed this elsewhere.

Adam’s Banishment- Original Sin

There is so much wrong with the Garden story that it deserves its own article. See there please.

Injil– Allah is OK with Greek Gospel

“Injil” is the Arabicized “euangelion”- Good News or in other words, Go-spel, the latter term is from the German. Modern Muslim trend is to assert the corruption of the Bible, yet Allah refers to them in Greek, which would confirm at the very least that an authentic Greek existed at some time.

The Jewish Story ends with the arrival of al-Masih, Eisa

Jesus is referred to as in the Qur’an :”(4:171, also 3:45, 4:157, 5:17, 5:72,75 and 9:30-31, denials of Jesus’ divinity in last 3). However, there’s not a single person who gets “anointed” in Quran. “Messiah” from the Hebrew masyach means “anointed”, and the literal meaning is simply to apply oil. Applying oil is done as a sign in Hebrew culture, and the Judaic religion is pregnant with expectation of a certain anointed one (messiah) who is to save Israel. In Islam, Muhammed who is supposedly the last person to come is not called Messiah! No one else is called Messiah in all Islam. “Masyach” is not even an Arabic word, it does not exist in any Islamic or pre-Islamic writings. Yet Jesus is referred to as al-Masih six times, a Hebrew word in an Arabic book. This necessitates the Islamic acceptance of Jesus’ fulfilment of the promises of the Jewish Scriptures. in making this endorsement of Jesus as the fulfilment of the Jewish scriptures, and yet it could not possibly be that that fulfilment was militaristic, since Muslims are aware Jesus had no military success. Further if this fulfilment, one that is not simply a local military victory were true, rather it is a spiritual fulfilment, then Muhammed? Do Muslims really believe that God’s authentic Torahic Messiah failed in his purpose? That’s an amazing entailment of the Qur’an’s admission of Jesus’ unique Messiahship. Its hardly surprising that we then get statements like “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be against them a witness.” (4:159) That cryptic verse if anything, is written by an author that believes in Jesus’ lordship, most likely a gnostic practitioner.

If every human being is destined in their last moments to acknowledge Christ, that is yet another admission of Jesus’ universal messiahship at the very least- clearly no other prophet engenders universal belief. And if the verse is to presuppose the hadithic tradition of Jesus coming back and then dying, and if “before his death” then refers to Jesus’ death we still have the same situation- he would be unique in accomplishing universal belief in his lifetime, universal messiahship again. All this aligns with that other cryptic verse that seems to be alluding to the same crucifixion event, yet with subtle differences. 3:55 states: “when Allah said, “O Jesus! I will take you (lit. cause you to die) and raise you up to Myself. I will deliver you from those who disbelieve, and elevate your followers above the disbelievers until the Day of Judgment. Then to Me you will return, and I will settle all your disputes.”. Again, belief in tthe universal Messiah is upheld in the ultimate analysis.

Mark Durie’s very excellent The Qur’an and its Biblical Reflexes has a chapter-length study of Messiahship in all three religions. But this is what he has to say about Messiah as related to the Qur’anic usage:

“There is nothing in the text of the Qur’an which could assist the reader to discern whether al-Masih has a meaning apart from being the title of Isa, or what its theological significance might be….nothing suggests that the epithet of al-masih has implications of kingship of divine favour for the Qur’an: it is simply presented as part of Isa’s full name, without any further meaning…it is widely accepted that al-masih was borrowed from the Syriac mesih (see Jeffries 1938,265), which is a regular Syriac participle of the root m-s-h “anoint”. (p.161)

“The difficulty of analyzing Arabic masīḥ opened the door to much speculation by Muslim exegetes about its interpretation. Lane’s entry for masīḥ states that the major lexicographer al-Fīrūzaba¯dī reported that 50 different meanings had been proposed.9 The Tanwīr al-Miqba¯s min Tafsīr Ibn ʿAbba¯s, 10 an influential commentary, suggests the meanings “because he travels from one country to another,” or “the king,” or “he has standing and position amidst people in the life of this world” (Guezzou 2008, 58, commentary on Q3:45). The interpretation of “one who travels” reflects an attempt to assign an etymology to the word on the basis of the root s-y-ḥ “run across the surface of the earth” (of water) or “journey through the land” (of people).11 Ibn Kathīr proposed to explain al-masīḥ with reference to the Arabic root m-s-ḥ “touch”: “His name will be Al-Masīḥ, ʿĪsa¯, the son of Maryam” and he will be known by this name in this life, especially by the believers. ʿĪsa¯ was called “Al-Masīḥ” (the Messiah) because when he touched (Masḥ) those afflicted with an illness, they would be healed by Alla¯h’s leave. (Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr—Ibn Kathīr 2003, 2.160) A fatwa¯ by Ibn Ba¯z, former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, considered the question “Why is ʿIsa, the son of Maryam, called al-Masih?” His answer suggests several variations on the idea of “touching,” but his final comment is telling. He rules that the meaning of al-Masīḥ is irrelevant for Islamic faith and practice, since there is “minimal” benefit in such knowledge” (p.162)

“This contrasts with both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, in which the concept of “Christ” indexes a rich theological and liturgical tradition, including the textual history of the Davidic kingdom and Messianic psalms, in which the use of the title implied a claim about Jesus’ identity as the promised Messiah foretold by the prophets. All this meaning was stripped away when the bare title, a sequence of sounds, made its way into the Qurʾan as a title for the Qurʾanic Jesus. Al-Masīḥ of the Qurʾan is to mashiaḥ of the Hebrew Bible and christós of the New Testament what “juggernaut” is to Hindi Jaganna¯tha. Al-Masīḥ sits in the Qurʾan like a piece of flotsam washed up and isolated from its original context, meaningless, morphologically unanalyzable, and decontextualized. It is uninterpretable, except for what the Qurʾan affords to it. While it is true that reference to the Bible and Biblical Theology can help us explain the phonological form of masīḥ, any such explanation is an exercise in textual paleontology. There is no Christological “subtext” in the Qurʾan’s allusive use of the name al-masīḥ to refer to ʿĪsa¯, for the Qurʾan has a “Christ” without a Christology.12 What theology it does have for the Qurʾanic “Christ” is in fact its Rasulology, into which the material pertaining to ʿĪsa¯ is fitted. Passages which reference ʿĪsa¯ in the Qurʾan are devoted to exploring Rasulological themes. For example, when ʿĪsa¯ is repeatedly referred to as “only a messenger” (Q3:144; Q4:171; Q5:75), this functions to reinforce the status of the Messenger, in some cases using the very same formula which the Qurʾan uses for the Messenger” (p.163)

read alsohttps://onchristianity.net/2021/12/28/messianic-expectation-in-second-temple-judaism/

Were God ever to be Born, his Mother and He would be Pure & she a Virgin

Jesus and Mary are “pure” in Islam. Why is this so, when such terminology is not even used for Muhammad? Christianity has the meta-narrative, that Jesus is pure because he is God, and Mary because she is his Mother, and the same reason that she is preserved Virgin, because there is something truly miraculous and unprecedented about the birth. So also is Jesus’ reason for being born without earthly father, while in the Qur’an there is the attempt to rationalize this miracle by the particular explanatory ayahs that state that Jesus’ creation was “just like Adam, Allah said “Be!” and he was”, without a meta-narrative for why this should be so.

Protestant Christians might not agree about the purity of Mary, but my point is that irrespective of that, there is at least the possibility of an explanation in Christianity, and something that is in fact central to it, whereas in Islam it is just one more curious artefact with no context.

Jesus changes the Law, Qur’an too changes the Sabbath (along with the Creation story too)?

“…And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.” (Q 3:50)

Qur’an does not have the concept of God “resting from the work of creation” on the seventh Day, which is the reason for the Sabbath, even though the Qur’anic creation account is 6 days, the same duration as in the Bible. The Qur’an has verses which berate persons, presumably Jews, for violating the Sabbath:

“And well you know there were those among you that transgressed the Sabbath, and We said to them, ‘Be you apes, miserably slinking!’” (Q 2:65, this is also repeated in 4:47, 4:154)

and again:

“And ask them about the town that was by the sea – when they transgressed in [the matter of] the sabbath – when their fish came to them openly on their sabbath day, and the day they had no sabbath they did not come to them. Thus did We give them trial because they were defiantly disobedient. (Q 7:153)

The word in Islam is also the same root word for “rest” سُبَاتًا as is seen in (25:47, 78:9). This means that the “rest” is appointed for certain people only, even though this “rest” refers to the day of rest in the Biblical creation account. In a different verse, the Qur’an seemingly “abrogates” the Sabbath itself, stating it is no more applicable. Effectively it is stating that the “rest”, the seventh day, which is the meaning of the term, is no longer to be a day of observance and to be kept holy. Not that the Qur’anic author betrays any understanding of this implication.

“The sabbath was only appointed for those who differed over it. And indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.” (Q 16:124)

Christians move their day to the Sunday only because it is the Day of the Resurrection. Muslims replace the Sabbath with a seemingly random choice of a Friday instead. The traditions regarding this have Muhammed stating that he merely wanted it to be different from the Jews and the Christians. This is a typical example of loss of context in the Qur’an, like all the rest.

God Can Really Dwell with Us- the Voice of Allah from the Bush

In Islam, it is generally considered anathema for Allah to be on the Earth. When Moses merely asks to see him, a mountain is reduced to dust and he is knocked unconscious. But here the same Moses can hear Allah’s voice speaking “from the bush”. Is this ventriloquism? a taped recording? Or is this “borrowing” again?

(Q 28:30) ”When he came to it, a voice cried from the right of the watercourse, in the sacred hollow, coming from the tree: ‘Moses, I am God, the Lord of all Being.’”

“Covenant”

We see numerous instance of the use of ahda (root ع ه د) translated usually as “covenant”. The Hebrew word seems completely unrelated berith בְּרִית, but overall it seems reasonable from the tone of the verses that some kind of promise is made to the people in return for their obedience.

(eg.: believe and obey Allah and his Messenger and obtain Allah’s favours) However in Judeo-Christianity “covenant” has rich connotation- for Judaism that God will “dwell with his people”, and for Christianity that this is fulfilled in Jesus. Importantly, there is no place in the Qur’an where Allah, in sharp contrast to what it is in the Bible, says “This is the covenant/promise I make with you today…” In Islam there is no promise, a promise cannot work in a pre-determined religion wherein no one is certain of their ultimate outcome, including Muhammed in his own words (Q 46:9, Bukhari 1243 “although I am Allah’s apostle I do not know what Allah will do with me”)

Allah’s “Ransom”?

This passage relates the Biblical story of Abraham being tested by God by the demand that he sacrifice his son:

(Q 37:101, 107) “Then We gave him the good tidings of a prudent boy; and when he had reached the age of running with him, he said, ‘My son, I see in a dream that I shall sacrifice thee; consider, what thinkest thou?’ He said, ‘My father, do as thou art bidden; thou shalt find me, God willing, one of the steadfast. When they had surrendered, and he flung him upon his brow, We called unto him, ‘Abraham. You have fulfilled the vision.” Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. This is indeed the manifest trial.‘ And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice”

“And We ransomed him (wafadaynāhu) with a great (ʿaẓīmin) sacrifice (bidhib’ḥin)” (Q 37:107) the Arabic words in brackets are used with exactly the same meaning in every other Qur’anic occurrence.

Allah “ransoms (Abraham’s child) with a great sacrifice” (37:107).

Everytime the dhāl bā ḥā (ذ ب ح) root is used it as a verb (7 times) it’s “slaughter”. This is the only verse in the Quran where it’s used as a noun.  Ransom (Fadaynahu وَفَدَيْنَاهُ) fa-da-ya root is “padah” in Hebrew פָדָה Strong’s 6299. The first born of the Israelites is “redeemed” with a sacrifice. The whole concept of “redeeming” through sacrifice is very much Judaic and is not found anywhere in Islam.

8It raises questions that are only answered in Christ:

1. How is Allah ransoming the life of a man by giving himself a goat? is it not allegorical?

2. Why is Allah calling a goat “great” If he’s not referring allegorically to the Lamb of God, Jesus?

3. How can a goat be greater than Isaac.

The ransom for a man cannot be a goat, that makes no sense. A human can only be ransomed for another human.

-“Ransom” is to pay something.

-“Sacrifice” is the payment.

-“Him” is the one for whom the price is paid.

Further The verse makes no sense in Islam because the firm teaching is that no one can bear a another’s sins.

Summary: Allah tests Abraham by commanding a human sacrifice. And to pass the test Allah gave to Abraham a sacrifice from himself to himself. This is the exact analogy of Jesus’ atoning Sacrifice present in both Islam and Christianity.

Muslims affirm the tradition on the annual memorial of this same sacrifice the Eid of Slaughter (Eid-ul-adha عيد الأضحى), their second greatest festival (The words أضحى (aḍḥā) and قربان (qurbān) are synonymous in meaning ‘sacrifice’ (animal sacrifice), ‘offering’ or ‘oblation’. The first word comes from the triliteral root ضحى (ḍaḥḥā) with associated meanings of “immolate ; offer up ; sacrifice ; victimize”. No occurrence of this root with a meaning related to sacrifice occurs in the Qur’an^[9] but in the Hadith literature).

The New Pascha is the Qur’an’s Last and only Eid!

This is the “Table” verse. Its seems to be the only time that there is a “festival” or Eid in the Quran, “from the first to the last of us”. It is the festival where Jesus gave the disciples food from Heaven? Is this referring to the “Bread of Life” discourse in John 6: “This (referring to Jesus) is the true Bread that came down from Heaven”? Or is it equally aknowledging Paul’s teaching on this, and the Synoptic Last Supper accounts in tying them in to the Jewish Passover Sacrifice, hence a “Festival” or “Eid”.

The only festival or “Eid” the Qur’an refers to, is a Jewish-Christian practise, nothing to do with Islam, in the context of “Allah” speaking directly to Jesus, something that even Mohammed does not experience, and then he is told this festival is “the first and last of us”, and a sign for thee and that “whoso of you hereafter disbelieves, verily I shall chastise him with a chastisement wherewith I chastise no other being” :

“…For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival…” (1Cor.5:7b-8a)

“And when the Apostles said, ‘O Jesus son of Mary, is thy Lord able to send down on us a Table out of heaven?’ He said, ‘Fear you God, if you are believers. They said, ‘We desire that we should eat of it and our hearts be at rest; and that we may know that thou hast spoken true to us, and that we may be among its witnesses.’ Said Jesus son of Mary, ‘O God, our Lord, send down upon us a Table out of heaven, that shall be for us a festival, the first and last of us, and a sign from Thee. And provide for us; Thou art the best of providers.’ God said, ‘Verily I do send it down on you; whoso of you hereafter disbelieves, verily I shall chastise him with a chastisement wherewith I chastise no other being.’” (Q 5:112-115)

“Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever, and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” (John 6:49-51)

the Food that Jesus gave his disciples to eat is his Flesh (even if Protestants interpret it figuratively, it still means the same thing from 1Cor.5:7.8: The new Paschal festival is Christ himself.

And it is hard to see what else the Quran is referring to, a festival, the most important of the Christian year, which is celebrated “from the first to the last of us”.

Christ’s Divinity and Return to Judge

Read this amazing Qur’anic inclusion Eisa is “Word” and God- the Divinity of Christ in the Qur’an.

Jesus’ Resurrection and Second Coming?

One of the most he well-known verses of the Qur’an, 4:157 has Allah telling the reader that he saved Jesus crucifixion and instead miraculously “took him to ourselves”. This verse is literally the only scriptural basis for Muslims’ dogmatic belief in the Second Coming of Jesus. But such an instance of being “taken to God” without dying is completely alien to anything else in the Islamic narrative. Every other man, bar none, goes into the cold ground and stays there dutifully until the final judgement. The Qur’an says so itself, that “every creature dies”, however clearly Eisa does not. This is an incredible parallelism between the two religions where Jesus has the same transcendent journey to Golgotha and thence to Heaven in some way ahead of every other human being in history and the differences are only in how this comes about, not that it comes about. The Qur’an resorts to the Gnostic version of that journey of the Christ attested to in some of Iranaeus’ letters that predate Islam by several centuries. On top of that, the Qur’an does not seem to have a real concern about this uniqueness of Christ. When right after the incident it states “there is no man but will believe in him before his death”, there is no clear indication whether it is to mean that every individual will believe in Jesus at the time of their dying, which is the surface reading of the text or whether the Qur’an, as some, and certainly not all Muslims might hold is taking into account in this very place of the tradition about Eisa’s second sortee on Earth, because the Qur’an has no indication of such a second innings leave alone for Christ but for any individual. What then happens to Muslims after death and prior to the Day of Judgement? Islamic belief regarding this is rather obscure, it is (rather unimaginatively) named “Life of the Grave” something akin to Catholic Purgatory but lacking its theological signification, merely using it in a locative sense. I have heard Muslims console themselves hopefully using other Biblical verses like that a 1000 years seem like only moment for Muhammed (Psalm 90:4). It doesn’t end there, of course. Althought the Qur’an clearly doesn’t speak directly of the Second Coming of Christ, it speaks of the coming of God himself using the Gospel phrases that decribe the coming of Christ in Final Judgement of all Mankind. This is a truly unique and unmatched sequence if religious parallelism.

Shekinah and Ark?

Both the Shekinah and the ark are mentioned in Q 2:248, and the shekinah by itself specifically in 48:4:

“And their Prophet (Samuel is not named here) said to them, ‘The sign of his kingship (of Saul) is that the Ark (l-tābūtu- تابوت single occ.) will come to you, in it a Shechina from your Lord, and a remnant of what the folk of Moses and Aaron’s folk left behind, the angels bearing it. Surely in that shall be a sign for you, if you are believers.’ (Q 2:248)

“It is He who sent down the Shechina into the hearts of the believers, that they might add faith to their faith — to God belong the hosts of the heavens and the earth; God is All-knowing, All-wise” (Q 48:4)

During the 40 years that the Israelites wandered in the desert, the Temple was a portable sanctuary of cloth covering over a frame. When God says that He will dwell in the midst of the Israelites the Hebrew text uses  the verb form: שָׁכַן shakan or shekinah. The Hebrew word for the actual sanctuary tent is “mishkan“, which is the participial form (with “mi” prefix) of the same (In the NT when Peter offers to build three tents, the Greek uses σκηνή skene, which has the same s-k-n Hebrew root (Mt 17:4, Lk9:33, Hb 8:2,5)

Muslim commentators would not admit that “shekinah” in the Qur’anic usage represents the real Presence of God, rather using the translation of “tranquility” i.e. that God sends a certain peace or tranquility to the people by this, even the though the use exactly parallels the Biblical one “in it a shekinah”, plus it is associated with “what the folk of Moses and Aaron left behind” which can only be an obvious reference to the other well-known articles contained in the Ark, plus the angels bearing it referring to the carved cherubim. There are several usages of this root in the Qur’an, but a whole 12 of these are translatable as “dwelling” when it takes “wa” or “ma” prefix, and 6 as “tranquillity”. The translators get into all sorts of twists and most do everything they can to avoid the use of the Hebrew terms.

In summary, the Qur’anic author shows no awareness that the Ark is that “where God dwells between the Cherubim” and to say that the Shekinah came into someone’s heart is to say that God dwells in a person. A Jew would spot that immediately.

Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity too?

In Q 4:171 the Word of God and Spirit of God are personified, and they are Jesus. Ive detailed analyses of these themes here: Trinitarian language in Qur’an, Tanakh- “Distinction with Common Predication” and here Ruh is Allah, the Holy Spirit is God and here Eisa is “Word” and God.

Israelites will inherit the Land

Q 21:105 states: “For We have written in the Psalms, after the Remembrance, ‘The earth shall be the inheritance of My righteous servants.’ The verse form the Psalms that most closely overlaps this is probably 37: 29: ‘The righteous will inherit the land, and dwell in it forever” which is only one of several Biblical references to the Israelites inheriting the land of Palestine. The 5th Surah is much more detailed:

And (remember) when Moses said unto his people: O my people! Remember Allah’s favour unto you, how He placed among you prophets, and He made you kings, and gave you that (which) He gave not to any (other) of (His) creatures. O my people! Go into the holy land which Allah hath ordained for you. Turn not in flight, for surely ye turn back as losers: They said: O Moses! Lo! a giant people (dwell) therein and lo! we go not in till they go forth from thence. When they go forth from thence, then we will enter (not till then). Then out spake two of those who feared (their Lord, men) unto whom Allah had been gracious: Enter in upon them by the gate, for if ye enter by it, lo! ye will be victorious. So put your trust (in Allah) if ye are indeed believers. They said: O Moses! We will never enter (the land) while they are in it. So go thou and thy Lord and fight! We will sit here. He said: My Lord! I have control of none but myself and my brother, so distinguish between us and the wrong-doing folk. (Their Lord) said: For this the land will surely be forbidden them for forty years that they will wander in the earth, bewildered. So grieve not over the wrongdoing folk.” (Q 5:20-26)

The direct Biblical parallel here is Num.13:1-3, 17-33.

The Name of God

There are multiple names in the Qur’an that bear the theophoric usage of Yahweh, the God of Israel. Clearly “Allah” of the Qur’an is using the theophoric names of Hebrew prophets without any qualms.

This is the case in at least three prophets he is commending – Zakariyya, Yahya and Ilyas, and either unaware, or affirmatory of it. :

“That is Our argument, which We bestowed upon Abraham as against his people. We raise up in degrees whom We will; surely thy Lord is All-wise, All-knowing.. And We gave to him Isaac and Jacob — each one We guided, And Noah We guided before; and of his seed David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Moses and Aaron — even so We recompense the good-doers —Zakariyya and Yahya, Eisa and Ilyas; each was of the righteous” (Q 6:83-85)

“and indeed (wa-inna) Ilyas too was surely (lamina- emphatic prefix) one of the Messengers (l-mur’salina)” (Q 37:123), the passage continues as: “When he said to his people, “Will you not fear God ? Do you call upon Ba’l and leave the best of creators. God, your Lord, and the Lord of your fathers, the ancients?’ And they denied him, so indeed, they will be brought [for punishment]. xcept for God’s sincere servants; And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: “Peace upon Elias.” Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good.” (37:124-130)

Ilyas is from the Syriac-Aramaic Elias for the Hebrew Elijah (YHWH is my God).

Jesus himself is from Yehoshua, which is the Hebrew for Joshua. So the book of Joshua in the Hebrew Bible even today is Yehoshua like here https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15785/jewish/Chapter-1.htm. Translatedm this is “Yahweh saves”. It is possible that if contracted to “Yeshua” it can be taken to mean simply “he saves”. However to anyone even with a contracted name, were this the case, it would be obvious that it were a contraction of Yehoshua, or that “he saves” could harly refer to the individual, rather to individuals being saved by God. In a religious society full of theophoric names, this would be pretty obvious.

In the Qur’an, an Angel says:

“O Zakari-ya (YHWH Remembers), indeed we give you good tidings of a boy whose name is Yahi-ya (YHWH is Life)” (Q 19:7)

Thus we have a case of an angel bearing a message from God, taking the name of a servant of God that literally means “I remember Yahweh”, and bringing a prophecy of a son who will be a great prophet and it is God’s will that he be called a name that in the Qur’anic Hebrew (Yahya has no Arabic referents) is translated as “Yahweh is life”. The child of the Biblical Zechariah is called (in the Greek of Luke and of John) as Ἰωάννης (Ioannes or Yohannes, Gk. not have an initial “h” nor a “y”). In the Hebrew it is either יוֹחָנָן (Yochanan 2Kings 25:23, 1 Chron 3;15 etc.) or the longer form יְהוֹחָנָן (Yehochanan 1 Chron. 12:5,13 etc.) both to mean “the Lord is gracious”, or יְהוֹנָתָן (Yehonathan) which is “Yahweh has given” eg. 1 Sam.14:6. Whether the Qur’anic Yahya is the same as the NT Yohannes or Yohannan, is besides the point: Yahya is not Arabic, and both names refer to the same son of Zechariah who is to be a great prophet.

Further “el-Hayy” is used as a title for God in the Bible (Psalm 84:2, Strong’s 4216, 503 occ.), just as “al-hayy” is one of the names of Allah that Muslims use, though it is not mentioned specifically as such in the Qur’an (in Islam “al” is used as definite article, while in the Bible “El” is used for God himself). Also see other instances for “the living God” in Deut.5:6, Joshua 3:10, 1Sam.17:36, 2 Kings19:4,16; Psalm 42:2; 84:2; Isaiah 37:4,17; Jer.10:10.

Whether the Qur’anic Yahya is the same as the NT Yohannes or Yohannan, is besides the point: Yahya is not Arabic, and both names refer to the same son of Zechariah who is to be a great prophet.

The significance of Yahweh

Yahweh is the all-important name of the Biblical God of the Jews, so important that in some sects of Jews it became forbidden even to pronounce it. But the text bears out the witness:

“YHWH is my name” (Exodus15:3)

“God said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites “YHWH, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the god of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is the Name for generation to generation to use to call upon me” (Exodus 3:15)

“Praise the name of YHWH” (Psalms 135:1)

And from the all important Shema:

“YHWH our God, YHWH is one” (Deut.6:4)

Elijah in 1 Kings 18 “you have abandoned the commandments of YHWH and followed those of Baal”

“YHWH the god of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant”

“God spoke further to moss and said to him: “I am YHWH; and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty, but by my Name YHWH I did not make myself known to them” (Exodus 6:2-3)

“I am YHWH, that is my Name; I will not give my glory to another, not my praise to idols” (Isaiah 42:8)

The name appears in praise repeatedly “alleluia”, as we see in the Psalms.

The issue is that it looks like the author of the Quran does not know that his own name is is it. Were this not the case, (if we’re saying that the Qur’anic author knows the Name is there) why would he not require Muslims to call him by that name of Yahweh. if Allah knew his name was Yahweh then why would he not require Muslims to call him that?? To me the shows that the author of Quran is unaware of this fact.

If Zakariya is a Muslim prophet (as Muslims claim), then Yah stands for his God, short for Yahweh. Because he is Hebrew speaking, not an Arab speaker.

I don’t think “Howa” is the right usage in Arabic. Huwa and Hiya is just pronouns. Even then Muslims don’t call God “ya howah”. Show me one place where this is written?. This sounds like Jehovah.

If God revealed his name to one people, maybe I can agree that he did not reveal the same name to another people because they were not worthy. Were the Muslims not worthy to receive the name of God.

But God does not reveal any name in the Qur’an to Muslims whatsoever. There is no verse saying “my name is Allah” The only name of Allah in the Quran is the Hebrew name, which as we said, seems hidden even to the author.

Names don’t change their meaning in a different language. If I settle in Saudi, my name will still be Sean with same meaning- it’s “John” which is Yohannanan. In the Hebrew it is either יוֹחָנָן (Yochanan 2Kings 25:23, 1 Chron 3;15 etc.) or the longer form יְהוֹחָנָן (Yehochanan 1 Chron. 12:5,13 etc.) both to mean “the Lord is gracious”, or יְהוֹנָתָן (Yehonathan) which is “Yahweh has given” eg. 1 Sam.14:6.

Summary: How the Christian story lies hidden in the Quran

Underlying the main narrative of the Qur’an is a second narrative that lies only just beneath the surface, the Christian story, which can be almost entirely reconstructed at least in outline from the Quranic verses themselves. I have already been through the details in the foregoing:

That God is a Trinity of Persons and his Name is Yahweh

God has a personified word and spirit in the Quran (Q 4:171), and they are both Jesus. The Qur’an has numerous theophoric names containing Yahweh that bear secret testimony to this, which we have seen above.

Read my other articles Ruh is Allah, the Holy Spirit is God and The Qur’an’s “Word of God” is God and Jesus in relation to this.

Original Sin

There is Original Sin, represented by the expulsion of “prophet Adam” from paradise even though he repents. And prophets are sinless in Islam, yet “prophet Adam” is not readmitted. Something remains, and it is a direct analogy to Christian Original Sin. All this complex theology of sin and redemption is quite alien to Islam. In Islam you repent and say sorry, and that’s about it.

Requiring a Sacrifice of Redemption

Mirroring Jesus’ Atoning Sacrifice, Allah admits that he can ransoms with a “Great Sacrifice” (Q37:107). As above, there is no Islamic reason why Allah might require a “great sacrifice” in order to save someone from his own wrath. Whether you agree with the theology or not, that’s Christianity 101.

God’s speaks directly to his prophets rather than through an intermediary angel:
This is seen in the incident of him speaking to Moses “from the bush” and also speaking directly to certain pre-Islamic figures as also mentioned in the Qur’an.

Geographically, God’s Covenantal focus is Israel
The word “covenant” gets used in the Qur’an without any description of what the covenant is. It is as though the Qur’anic author is not aware of the content of the Covenant, because when that very content actually does get mentioned, there is no simultaneous mention of any covenant.

That content related to the Biblical covenant is the promise that God will bring the Israelites to the Promised Land, which we know to be Palestine. This we seen in Q 5:20-26.

Spiritually, God’s Covenant is that he will Dwell “with his people”, “in his Temple” (Shekinah and Ark):

Islam rejects any notion of God “in a Temple” , “with people”. However the Qur’an alludes to both of these Biblical terms “Shekinah” and “Ark”. which denote just that. This is the whole spiritual meaning of the Covenant in Judaism: “I will be with them and I will dwell with them and I will be their God and they will be my people”.

God’s Way is one of Signs and Wonders

The Qur’an attests to the previous great public miracles and signs performed by God for the Israelites and Jesus’ own miracles, in sharp contrast to its own hearers who are told there are no miracles for them.

Jesus was born of a Virgin

Being born of  virgin might not make divinity necessary, however one might well think it necessary that were the Eternal Son to be truly born as human, that the birth might be miraculous.

Jesus is the Jewish Messiah.

The Jews are actually expecting a Messiah or “anointed one” to save them. Muslims are not, they’ve got Muhammed, of whom no “anointing” is claimed. Both the word, and its connotation are entirely alien to Islam and Arabic, and yet its there in the Quran, only with relation to Jesus.

Jesus changed the Law

That the Advent of Jesus brought with it changes to the ancient Law of Moses is a Christian position, opposed by Jews. The Qur’an seems to support Christianity here against Judaism, at least with regards to the concept of change. However it would not support the specific changes that come into practise in the Christian religion, which Jesus does not specify, only alludes to in the Gospels.

 the Sabbath is the Holy Day:

the Qur’an does not have any instruction to omit the Sabbath observance, on the contrary, it recounts the manner in which the Jews were punished for not doing so. And yet Muslims themselves do not observe the Sabbath.

Jesus is the New Passover

see the relevant section.

The Word of God is documented in the Greek language

Allah is describing his “Good News” by using Koine Greek since eternity. We could infer that he is intentionally naming in the manner that he knows the Greek-speaking Jews will. From this single fact we can reasonably infer that Allah is at the very least endorsing some Greek version of the Gospel of Jesus.

Non-Violence

Non-violence is commanded of the “Children of Israel” (Q ), which is precisely the Christian doctrine. The commandments directed at the Muslims, we shall say for the sake of brevity, are a “mixed bag”.

Jesus is raised up to the Father

God raised Jesus “to himself” alive prior to his death (4:157). This is completely un-Islamic, Allah tells Muhammed in Q 21:34 that the death of all humans, including him is certain. Muslims therefore are forced to believe that Jesus will come back to Earth again so that he can also have a human end and validate this surah. The entire narrative of Christianity is present in the Qur’an, and all of it runs contrary to Islam’s own narrative.

Hadith- Adam created in the nature of God

This hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Abu Huraira and in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Ibn Hatim Allah’s Apostle (ﷺ) is reported to have said: When any one of you fights with his brother, he should avoid his face for Allah created Adam in His own image.” (Muslim 2612e)

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created Adam in His image with His length of sixty cubits, and as He created him He told him to greet that group, and that was a party of angels sitting there, and listen to the response that they give him, for it would form his greeting and that of his offspring. He then went away and said: Peace be upon you! They (the angels) said: May there be peace upon you and the Mercy of Allah, and they made an addition of” Mercy of Allah”. So he who would get into Paradise would get in the form of Adam, his length being sixty cubits, then the people who followed him continued to diminish in size up to this day. (Muslim 2841)