Reza Aslan helps Christians prove the death and resurrection of Jesus

Although Aslan has a lot of mistakes and problems, many times he has enough good material that helps Christian apologetics. For here in this short video, David Wood and Mike Licona discuss how what Reza writes in his book Zealot, pages 175-176, helps us with the death and resurrection of Christ.

Reza Aslan affirm’s scholar’s knowledge that the apostle Paul’s tradition he is quoting in 1 Corinthians 15:1-9 is based on the preaching of the other apostles (Peter, John, James, and the rest) in Jerusalem (Acts 1-8) – that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead, according to the Scriptures, etc.

Mike Licona makes a great point about 1 Corinthians 15:11-14 – “whether then it was I or they . . . ” (whether I preach this gospel message or the other apostles (verses 5-8 of 1 Cor. 15 where he mentions Peter (Cephas), “the 12”, the rest of the apostles, James, the Lord’s brother, and Jesus’ appearance to 500 brothers at once. This word preached ( “proclaimed” – “preaching” = kerugma (verse 14), from karruso, κηρυσσω – verbal form, preaching, proclaiming, verses 11 and 12. This all points back to the early preaching of the gospel right after Jesus was raised from the dead and ascended to heaven. (Acts chapters 1-8)

Aslan wrote: “Paul may have written those words in 50 C.E., but he is repeating what is likely a much older formula, one that may be traced to the early forties. This means belief in the resurrection of Jesus was among the community’s first attestations of faith – earlier than the passion narratives, earlier even than the story of the virgin birth.” ( Reza Aslan, Zealot, page 175, my embolding)

Advertisements

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, Gospel Truth, Islam, Muslims, Reza Aslan, The Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Reza Aslan helps Christians prove the death and resurrection of Jesus

  1. θ says:

    Paul never witnessed the death of Jesus, so at most what he sees is one blinding event on the road of Damascus where he assumed to hear what nobody else heard.

    Resurrection is no big deal in Gospels: From daughter of Jairus, to a man in the bier, even Lasarus, they all are reported to be alive again under the witness of so many Jews. Further, Elijah and Moses got resurrected bodily and they were seen by at least three witnesses, but it doesn’t make them gods, right? Even Matthew says many ancient saints revived and walked around in the city.

    All stories of resurrection happened before certain Christians saw an apparition which they assumed as Jesus. Having a selective appearance to certain Christians is a proof that it is just a work of bewitchment.

  2. θ says:

    One reason why the apparition of Jesus is not a resurrection is that a topic of the absence of Mary to have witnessed it. Even when Paul mentioned to whom Jesus appeared, interestingly Mary is not listed.

    1 Cor 15
    4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

    Jesus did not appear to his mother as there’s overwhelming fact of the silence of the early Catholic theologians until the time of Anselm forward (12th century), it is enough to at least give the indication that Mary wasn’t visited by the apparition.

  3. Sam Shamoun says:

    Brother Ken, here is a comment I left at William’s blog which will be of interest you since it concerns Isaiah 42:

    The fact you think that KGETSSMACKEDDOWN made an excellent point shows how dishonest you truly are, since you would never tolerate such nonsense if it were leveled against your profit. I guess its better than what your profit did, namely shaping the lives of the prophets to resemble in order to deceive his pawns to think he was a true prophet who experienced the same things that other prophets experienced: http://www.answeringislam.net/Quran/Sources/allprophets.html

    Now let’s see how the Jews interpreted Isaiah 42, Jews who had every reason to deny the messianic significance of Isaiah 42 in light of the Christians’ use of this text to prove the Messiahship of Jesus:

    Midrash on Psalms, Psalm 2:9

    In the decree of the Prophets it is written Behold My servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high (Isa. 52:13), and it is also written Behold My servant, whom I uphold; Mine elect, in whom My soul delighteth (Isa. 42:1). In the decree of the Writings it is written, The Lord said unto my lord: “Sit thou at My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Ps. 110:1), and it is also written I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of days, and he was brought before Him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him (Dan. 7:13, 14).

    In another comment, the verse is read I will tell of the decree: The Lord said unto me: Thou art My son … Ask of Me, and I will give the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession (Ps. 2:7, 8). R. Yudan said: All these goodly promises are in the decree of the King, the King of kings, who will fulfill them for the Lord MESSIAH (The Midrash on Psalms, William G. Braude, Translator (New Haven: Yale, 959), Yale Judaica Series, Volume XIII, Leon Nemoy, Editor, Book One, Psalm 2:9)

    Here the rabbis applied Psalm 2:7-8, 110:1, Isaiah 42:1, 52:113 and Daniel 7:13-14 to the Messiah!

    Midrash on Psalms, Psalm 42/43.5

    For from what didst Thou redeem our fathers in Egypt? Was it not from the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppressed them, of which God said: Moreover, I have seen the oppression (Ex. 3:9)? For me, too, life is nothing but oppression by an enemy. Then Why must I go about myself mourning under oppression of the enemy? Didst Thou not send redemption at the hand of two redeemers to that generation, as is said He sent Moses His servant, and Aaron whom He had chosen (Ps. 105:26)? Send tow redeemers like them to this generation. O send out Thy light and Thy truth; let them lead me (Ps. 43:3), Thy light being the prophet Elijah of the house of Aaron, of which it is written “The seven lamps shall give light in front of the candlestick” (Num. 8:2); and Thy truth being the Messiah, son of David, as it is written “The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David; He will not turn from it: of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne” (Ps. 132:11). Likewise Scripture says, Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet (Mal. 3:23) who is one redeemer, and speaks of the second redeemer in the verse Behold My servant whom I uphold (Isa. 42:1) (Ibid., Psalm 42/43.5, p. 445).

    Targum Jonathan

    Behold, My servant, THE MESSIAH, whom I bring near, My chosen one, in whom MY MEMRA [Sam- Aramaic for Word] takes delight; I will place My holy spirit upon him, and he shall reveal My law to the nations, He shall not cry, nor shout, nor raise his voice on the outside. The humble, who are like the bruised reed, he shall not break, and the poor of My people, who are like candles, he shall not extinguish; he shall truly bring forth justice. He shall not faint and he shall not tire until he establishes justice in the earth; and the isles shall wait for his Torah. Thus says the God of the universe, the Lord, who created the heavens and suspended them, who established the earth and its inhabitants, who gives life to the people who are upon it and spirit to those who walk in it. “I, the Lord, have anointed you in righteousness, and have firmly taken you by the hand, and established you, and I have given you as a covenant of the people, as a light of the nations. To open the eyes of the house of Israel, who have been blind to the Torah; to bring back their Dispersions from among the nations, they, who are like prisoners; and to deliver them, who are imprisoned like prisoners in darkness, from the servitude of the empires. I am the Lord, that is My name, and My glory, which I have revealed unto you, I will not give to any other people, nor My praise to those who worship idols. The former things, behold, they have come to pass, and new things I declare; even before they occur I announce them to you” (The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation, Samson H. Levy (New York: Hebrew Union College, 1974), pp. 59-60).

    These quotes show that the rabbis had no problem identifying the servant as the Messiah even though reference is made to Kedar!

    Here is what the rabbis said about the title Branch, along with their interpretation of the passages from Jeremiah and Zechariah:

    Targum Jonathan

    … Behold the days are coming,’ says the Lord, ‘when I will raise up for David a righteous Messiah, and he shall reign as king, and prosper, and shall enact a righteous and Meritorious law in the land. In his days they of the house of Judah shall be delivered, and Israel shall live in security. And this is the name which they call him: “May vindication be accomplished for us by the Lord in his day.”’ (The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation, Samson H. Levy)

    Targum Jonathan

    Say unto him: Thus says the Lord of Hosts saying: ‘Be hold the man whose name is “The Messiah.” He is destined to be revealed and to be anointed, and he shall build the Temple of the Lord. He shall build the Temple of the Lord, and he will bear the radiance, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and there shall be a high priest on his throne, and there be a counsel of peace between the two of them.’ (Ibid.)

    Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations

    BECAUSE THE COMFORTER IS FAR FROM ME, EVEN HE THAT SHOULD REFRESH MY SOUL. What is the name of King Messiah? R. Abba b. Kahana said: His name is ‘the Lord’; as it is stated And this is the name whereby he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness (Jer. XXIII, 6). For R. Levi said: It is good for a province when its name is identical with that of its king, and the name of its king identical with that of its God. ‘It is good for a province when its name is identical with that of its king,’ as it is written, And the name of the city from that day shall be the Lord is there (Ezek. XLVIII, 35). ‘And the name of its king is identical with that of its God’ as it is stated, And this is the name whereby he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness: R. Joshua b. Levi said: His name is ‘Shoot’, as it is stated, Behold, a man whose name is Shoot, and who shall shoot up out of his place, and build the temple of the Lord (Zech. VI, 12). R. Judan said in the name of R. Aibu: His name is ‘Comforter’, as it is said, THE COMFORTER IS FAR FROM ME. R. Hanina said: They do not really differ, because the numerical value of the names is the same, so that ‘Comforter’ is identical with ‘Shoot’ (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations (London: Soncino Press), I.16, 51, pp. 135-136).

    Midrash on Psalms, Psalm 2:2

    God will call the king Messiah after His own name, for it is said of the king Messiah This is his name whereby he shall be called: The Lord our righteousness (Jer. 23:6). (The Midrash on Psalms, William G. Braude, Book One, Psalm 2.2).

    (The preceding were taken from pp. 200-201, 205-206 of William Webster’s superb book, “Behold Your King: Prophetic Proofs That Jesus Is the Messiah”.)

    Now here is my challenge to all of you. CITE JUST ONE SINGLE NON-CHRISTIAN JEWISH SOURCE THAT INTERPRETED ISAIAH 42 AS A PROPHECY OF A PROPHET COMING OUT OF ARABIA, SPECIFICALLY FROM THE VILLAGES OF KEDAR.

    I won’t be holding my breath.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Correction:

      “… namely shaping the lives of the prophets to resemble in order to deceive his pawns to think…” = “… namely shaping the lives of the prophets to resemble his own, in order to deceive his pawns into thinking…”

  4. Sam Shamoun says:

    Brother Ken, I also posted this on William’s blog and will be of great help to you to contrast Jesus’ encounter with Satan and Muhammad’s possession by demons. Enjoy!

    Brother D, what makes the appeal to Jesus’ temptation so hilarious is that a careful reading of the texts show that it wasn’t Satan looking for Jesus, but Jesus looking for Satan at his weakest physical moment of his earthly life up until that time in order to prove that, even at his physically weakest, he was still too powerful and too much for Satan to handle:

    “IMMEDIATELY THE SPIRIT DROVE HIM OUT INTO THE WILDERNESS. He was there in the wilderness forty days tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals; and the angels were serving him.” Mark 1:12-13

    “Then Jesus WAS LED UP BY THE SPIRIT INTO THE WILDERNESS TO BE TEMPTED BY THE DEVIL. When he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was hungry afterward. The tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.’ But he answered, “It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.”‘ Then the devil took him into the holy city. He set him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, ‘He will put his angels in charge of you.’ and, “On their hands they will bear you up, so that you don’t dash your foot against a stone.”‘ Jesus said to him, ‘Again, it is written, “You shall not test the Lord, your God.”‘ Again, the devil took him to an exceedingly high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory. He said to him, ‘I will give you all of these things, if you will fall down and worship me.’ Then Jesus said to him, ‘Get behind me, Satan! For it is written, “You shall worship the Lord your God, and you shall serve him only.”‘ Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and served him.” Matthew 4:1-11

    “Jesus, FULL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, returned from the Jordan, AND WAS LED BY THE SPIRIT into the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil. HE ATE NOTHING IN THOSE DAYS. Afterward, when they were completed, HE WAS HUNGRY. The devil said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread.’ Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”‘” Luke 4:1-4

    And yet you have Muhammad who was physically manhandled by a demon and who later came under the magical power of a demon who then made him hallucinate that he was having sex with his 9 wives, even though he never touched them!

    Narrated Aisha:

    Once the Prophet was bewitched so that he began to imagine that he had done a thing which in fact he had not done. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 400)

    Narrated ‘Aisha:

    Magic was worked on the Prophet so that he began to fancy that he was doing a thing which he was not actually doing. One day he invoked (Allah) for a long period and then said, “I feel that Allah has inspired me as how to cure myself. Two persons came to me (in my dream) and sat, one by my head and the other by my feet. One of them asked the other, “What is the ailment of this man?” The other replied, ‘He has been bewitched” The first asked, ‘Who has bewitched him?’ The other replied, ‘Lubaid bin Al-A’sam.’ The first one asked, ‘What material has he used?’ The other replied, ‘A comb, the hair gathered on it, and the outer skin of the pollen of the male date-palm.’ The first asked, ‘Where is that?’ The other replied, ‘It is in the well of Dharwan.’ ” So, the Prophet went out towards the well and then returned and said to me on his return, “Its date-palms (the date-palms near the well) are like the heads of the devils.” I asked, “Did you take out those things with which the magic was worked?” He said, “No, for I have been cured by Allah and I am afraid that this action may spread evil amongst the people.” Later on the well was filled up with earth. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 490)

    Narrated ‘Aisha:

    Magic was worked on Allah’s Apostle so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an effect)… (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660)

    To make matters worse the Islamic sources say that Muhammad’s condition lasted for at least six months or even nearly a year!

    (Say: I seek refuge in the Lord of mankind…) [114:1-6]. The commentators of the Qur’an said: “The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, had a Jewish servant boy. The Jews approached him and kept after him until he gave them some fallen hair from the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, as well as a few teeth from his comb. The Jews used these to cast a spell of black magic on him. The person who was behind this was the Jew Labid ibn al-A‘sam. He then put the hair in a well belonging to Banu Zurayq called Dharwan. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, fell ill for a period of six month, during which the hair of his head fell off; he imagined that he slept with his wives when he did not, and was withering away without knowing the reason. As he was one day sleeping, he saw two angels coming to him. One of them sat at his head and the other at his feet. The angel who sat at his head asked: ‘What is wrong with the man?’ The second angel responded: ‘A spell of black magic was cast on him’. The first one asked: ‘And who is responsible for this sorcery?’ The second angel answered: ‘It is Labid ibn al-A‘sam, the Jew’. The first angel asked again: ‘What did he use to cast black magic on him?’ The second angel said: ‘He used a comb and fallen hair’. The first angel asked: ‘Where is it now?’ The second angel said: ‘It is inside the spadix of a palm tree beneath the stepping stone which is inside the well of Dharwan’, at which point the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, woke up. He said: ‘O ‘A’ishah, do you not think that this is from Allah to inform me of the cause of my illness?’ He then sent ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib], al-Zubayr [ibn al-‘Awwam] and ‘Ammar [ibn Yasir] who drained the water of that well as one would drain the dust of henna. They lifted the stone and got the spadix out and found therein some of the hair of the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, as well a few teeth from his comb. (‘Ali ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul, Q. 113-114)

    From B. Zurayq: Labid b. A’sam who bewitched the apostle of God so that he could not come at his wives.1 (The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Karachi Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth Impression 1995), p. 240)

    1 In commenting on this Suhayli asserts that the tradition is sound and is accepted by the traditionists. He found in the Jami’ of Mu‘ammar b. Rashad (a work which I cannot find mentioned by Brockelmann) the statement THAT THE SPELL LASTED FOR A YEAR. He adds that the Mu‘tazila and Modernists rejected the tradition ON THE GROUND THAT PROPHETS COULD NOT BE BEWITCHED OTHERWISE THEY WOULD COMMIT SIN and that would be contrary to the word of God ‘And God will protect thee from men’ (5.71). He finds the tradition unassailable. It is properly attested and intellectually acceptable. The prophets were not preserved from bodily afflictions in which category sorcery falls. (Ibid.)

    Unfortunately for the Sunni Muslims here, the Mutazilites and modernists are right that no true prophet of God could ever come under the bewitchment of Satan.

    And these Muhammadans have the audacity to the shame and demonization of their profit with Christ’s glorious victory the evil one where he sent him fleeing like a coward!

    With the foregoing in perspective here are some questions for these followers of Muhammad to answer:

    Why didn’t Allah prevent Muhammad from being controlled by magic if the Quran is correct that Satan will not affect those that are righteous before Allah?

    Moreover, what was Muhammad actually doing during the entire year that he thought he was sleeping with his wives? After all, for him to believe he was really having sex implies that he was pleasuring himself in some manner otherwise how could he think that he was actually engaging in intercourse? Isn’t this rather humiliating?

    And why would Allah humiliate his prophet in such a way, allowing him to think he was having sex when he really wasn’t, thereby shaming him in front of the Muslims and unbelievers?

    Moreover, why would Allah allow Muhammad’s wives to go on without having sex with their husband for nearly a year? What kind of god is this that would actually permit a man to neglect his marital duties with his spouses when he could have simply healed him from the very start?

    Do Muslims really want non-Muslims to believe that for an entire year Muhammad wasn’t receiving “revelations” when he was under this state? Can any Muslim provide a conclusive statement from the Islamic texts which say that he wasn’t being inspired during this period of time that Satan had him under his control?

    Wouldn’t this imply that Satan is more powerful than Allah seeing that he was able to bewitch Muhammad for nearly a year even though the Quran says that he wouldn’t be able to harm Allah’s righteous servants?

    Or should we assume that Muhammad wasn’t righteous enough and was in fact a deviator, which explains why Allah would allow him to be so humiliated by the devil?

    We will let Muhammad’s devotees sort out this mess.

  5. Sam Shamoun says:

    Here is another golden nugget for you. Hope these prove helpful to you:

    Brother D,

    Just to further confirm your point against fail, had the Quran wanted to make sure to Christians that it was attacking the Trinity then it would have needed to use words such as, jawhar wahid (“one substance”), thalatha aqanim (“three hypostases”). Moreover, it would need to have used the following expression, Al-Aqanim-Al-Thalatha (lit. “the Hypostases the Three”), since this is what Christians used to describe the Trinity.

    Therefore, the Quran would have needed to say,

    “They are unbelievers who say that Allah is one substance (awhar wahi) in three hypostases (thalatha aqanim).”

    Or,

    “They are unbelievers who say that Allah is three hypostases (thalatha aqanim).”

    Or,

    “They are unbelievers who believe in the three hypostases (Al-Aqanim-Al-Thalatha).”

    Or,

    “Say not Three Hypostases (Al-Aqanim-Al-Thalatha, or thalatha aqanim).”

    Too bad for Fail that it doesn’t say any of these things, since the Quran is not attacking the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Correction:

      “They are unbelievers who say that Allah is one substance (awhar wahi) in three hypostases (thalatha aqanim).”=

      “They are unbelievers who say that Allah is one substance (jawhar wahid) in three hypostases (thalatha aqanim).”

      • Ken Temple says:

        We have (almost) those Arabic phrases in Farsi also: (pronounced a little differently)

        جوهر واحد
        (Jowhar wahid)

        ثلاثه اقانیم
        (thalatha aqanim)

        well, we don’t use thalatha for three, but the singular for aqanim = oqnoom اقنوم

        But nobody knows what that word is ( oqnoom اقنوم ), since it derived from Greek γνωμη gnome = will, consciousness, mind, opinion, thought, judgment, then it was transliterated into Syriac, then transliterated into Arabic. I doubt any Muslim would even know what that word is.

        Iranians don’t know the word, except for the pastors in the ancient churches, such as the Assyrian Church, as the word came from their ancient language Syriac, then into Arabic, after they got it from Greek.

  6. θ says:

    “Sam Shamoun says: Now here is my challenge to all of you. Cite Just one single Non-Christian Jewish Source that interpreted Isaiah 42”

    Long time (about 700 years) before the rise of Islam, two Tanach interpreters Rabbi Ishamel (90-135 CE) and bar Yohai (d.170 CE) under a dictation of Metatron have prophesied the coming of a Jehovah’s Prophet (Prophet Muhammad) from Qedar (in Isaiah 42:11) whose glory with chariot of camels is seen by Isaiah (in Isa.21:7), as well as four Caliphs as his successors.

    The Secrets of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai
    ….Immediately Metatron the prince of the Presence answered him and said: ‘He shall raise up over them a Prophet in accordance with His will, and He will subdue the land for them; and they shall come and restore it’….Warriors of the children of Qedar shall rise up against him and kill him, and bring to power another king whose name is Mry’w. They shall take him from following flocks and mule-herds and elevate him to the kingship. There shall arise from him ‘four arms’ who will make repairs on the Temple.

    Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha (90-135 CE) & Shimeon bar Yahchai (d.170 CE) have prophesied the coming of Arabian Prophet and Arabian king who shall repair Mount Moriah. Their prediction is one of reasons why Jews migrated to Medinah.
    (i) Prophet whose glory is with chariot of camels.
    (ii) The 2nd king of Ishmael shall be good to Israel, that is the king Himyarite (such as Dhu Nuwas) who converted to Judaism, and defeated Christians (Edomites) in Arabia.
    (ii) There will be a great King whose title is Mry’w, that is Prophet Muhammad.
    The name may be Ma’or in Hebrew which means “Light”.
    (iii) After the great king, there will be four arms to restore Moriah.

    //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ya%27rub
    Ya’rub is an ancient Arabic personal name. Arab and Islamic genealogies identify Ya’rub as the grandson of Hud (biblical Eber), being the son of Qahtan (biblical Joktan) and the ancestor of the Himyarite kings of Yemen.[1][2] A similar account places Ya’rub as Qahtan’s grandson (Ya’rub bin Yashjub bin Qahtan) and holds that he is the forefather of al-‘Arab al-‘Ariba (“the arab arabs” or “pure arabs”), who are generally identified with the Qahtanites and its two main tribes, the Himyar and the Kahlan.[3] Some legendary accounts relate that Ya’rub was the first to speak Arabic and that the language was named for him.[2][4] Shams-i Qais Razi, writing in the 12-13th century CE, traced the origins of Arabic poetry to Ya’rub and he is also credited with having invented the Kufic script.[5][6]
    Ya’rub was said to be one of greatest Arab kings; he was the first to rule the entire lands of Yemen (southwestern Arabia). He expelled or destroyed the Adites, consolidated the empire of Yemen, and gave to his brothers Oman and Hadhrarmaut. His son was the king Saba or Sheba, the founder of Saba or Sheba kingdom, mentioned in the Qur’an.
    Descendant of the Prophet Ishmael, Son of Abraham
    The lineage of the Islamic prophet Muhammad was traced by some Arab and Islamic genealogists back to Adam through Ya’rub, who in these accounts is designated the grandson of Nabit, who was the son of Ishmael. For example, Ibn Kathir quoting Mohammed Ibn Ishak in As-Seerah An-Nabawiyyah denotes the part of the lineage of Mohammad from Adnan through to Abraham;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himyarite_Kingdom
    A coup d’état ensued, with Dhu Nuwas, who had attempted to overthrow the dynasty several years earlier, assuming authority after killing the Aksumite garrison in Zafār. He then proceeded to engage the Ethiopian guards, and their Christian allies in the Tihāma coastal lowlands facing Abyssinia. After taking the port of Mukhawān, where he burnt down the local church, and advanced south as far as the fortress of Maddabān overlooking the Bab-el-Mandeb, where he expected Kaleb Ella Aṣbeḥa to land his fleet.[5] The campaign eventually killed between 11,500 and 14,000, and took a similar number of prisoners.[12]
    Inscriptions in the Sabean language, and sometimes Hebrew, called this deity Rahman (the Merciful), “Lord of the Heavens and Earth,” the “God of Israel” and “Lord of the Jews.” Prayers invoking Rahman’s blessings on the “people of Israel” often ended with the Hebrew words shalom and amen. [13]

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Let’s try this again. Cite one single JEWISH source that asserts what you claim, not a Muslim source that deceitfully and dishonestly butchers what Jewish sources supposedly claim. How convenient of you not to provide the actually names of the supposed Jewish books which contain this supposed prophecy.

      Moreover, you obviously don’t care to read carefully, since one of the things stated proves that Muhammad is a false prophet and your Quran a book containing lies and deceit:

      And:

      (ii) There will be a great King whose title is Mry’w, that is Prophet Muhammad.
      The name may be Ma’or in Hebrew which means “Light”.

      Since Mry’w is Aramaic for Maryah, the Aramaic word for Lord that is often used for God. Therefore, by insisting that Muhammad is the Lord you show that he is a false prophet who disobeyed the command of his own god in S. 3:80 who emphatically states that he would never allow for ANY prophet to be taken as Lord.

      More importantly, NOWHERE does your quotation cite Isaiah 42 and apply it to an Ishmaelite or Arab.

      Now to further expose the gross lies and misinformation of your post, here is what Ibn Kathir and others stated concerning Muhammad’s genealogy. The following is taken from my article:

      The following traditions demonstrate that even Muslims were unable to link Muhammad’s lineage to Ishmael, going so far as to say that anyone claiming to be able to do so was a liar. This casts great doubt upon whether Muhammad was truly of the seed of Ishmael.

      We begin with the statements of Ibn Kathir:

      There is no question of ‘Adnan being of the line of Ishmael, son of Abraham, upon both of whom be peace. What dispute there is relates to the number of forebears there were from ‘Adnan to Ishmael according to the various sources.

      At one end of the spectrum, there is the extreme view that considers there to have been FORTY; this is the view of Christians and Jews who adopted it from the writings of Rakhiya, the clerk of Armiya (Jeremy) b. Halqiya, as we will relate.

      Some authorities maintain there THIRTY, others TWENTY, yet more FIFTEEN, TEN, NINE, or SEVEN.

      It has been said that the lowest estimate given is for FOUR, according to the account given by Musa b. Ya‘qub, on the authority of ‘Abd Allah b. Wahb b. Zum’a al-Zuma‘i from his aunt, and then from Umm Salama who stated that the Prophet (SAAS) said that the line was: “Ma‘ad b. ‘Adnan b. Adab b. Zand b. al-Tara b. A‘raq al-Thara”.

      According to Umm Salam this Zanad was al-Hamaysa‘, al-Yara was Nabit, while A‘raq al-Thara was Ishmael. This was implied because he was Abraham’s son; for Abraham was not consumed by hell-fire, since fire does not consume moist earth, the meaning of al-thara.

      Al-Daraqatni stated that he knew of no “Zand” except the one in this tradition, and Zand b. al-Jawn, who was Abu Dalama the poet.

      Abu al-Qasim al-Suhayli and other Imams stated that the time lapse between ‘Adnan and Ishmael was too great for there to have been only FOUR, TEN, or even TWENTY generations between them. That, they said, was because the age of Ma‘ad son of ‘Adnan was twelve at the time of Bukhtunassar (Nebuchadnezzar).

      Abu Ja‘far al-Tabari and others related that Almighty God sent a revelation at that time to Armiya’ b. Halqiya telling him to go to Bukhtunassar to inform him that God had given him rule over the Arabs. And God commanded to Armiya’ to carry Ma‘ad b. Adnan on the horse al-Buraq so that they would not bear him any rancour saying, “For I shall draw forth from his loins a noble Prophet by whom I shall seal the prophets.”

      ‘Armiya did that, bearing Ma‘ad on al-Buraq to the land of Syria where he grew up among the Jews who remained there following the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. There he married a woman named Ma‘ana, daughter of Jawshin unrest had quietened [sic] down and accord prevailed in the Arabian peninsula. Rakhiya, Armiya’s scribe, wrote his master’s genealogy down in a document he had there which was to go into Armiya’s library; and he similarly preserved the genealogy of Ma‘ad. But God knows best.

      And this is why Malik, God bless him, DID NOT ENTHUSE OVER THE ATTEMPT AT TRACING GENEALOGY BACK TO BEFORE ‘ADNAN.

      Al-Suhayli commented further, “We have merely discussed tracing back these lines to accord with the school of thought of those scholars who favour and do not disapprove of it, men such as Ibn Ishaq, al-Bukhari, al-Zubayr b. Bakkar, al-Tabari, and others.”

      As for Malik, God have mercy on him, he expressed disapproval when asked about someone tracing his descent back to Adam and commented: “WHENCE COMES TO HIM KNOWLEDGE OF THAT?” When he was asked about tracing back to Ishmael, he expressed similar disapproval, asking, “WHO COULD PROVIDE SUCH AN INFORMATION?” Malik also disliked tracing the genealogy of the prophets, such as saying, “Abraham son of so-and-so”. Al-Mu‘ayti stated this in his book.

      \Al-Suhayli commented also that Malik’s viewpoint was analogous to what was related of ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr who is reported to have said, “WE HAVE FOUND NO ONE WHO KNOWS THE LINE BETWEEN ‘ADNAN AND ISHMAEL.”

      It is reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Between ‘Adnan and Ishmael there were 30 ancestors WHO ARE UNKNOWN.”

      Ibn ‘Abbas is also reputed to have said when he traced back lines of descent as far as ‘Adnan: “The genealogists have LIED. TWICE OR THRICE.” And that (scepticism) is even more characteristic of Ibn Mas‘ud, whose (attitude) was like that of Ibn ‘Abbas.

      ‘Umar b. al-Khattab stated, “We carry back the genealogy ONLY AS FAR AS ‘ADNAN.”

      Abu ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-Barr stated in his book Al-Anba’ fi Ma‘rifat Qaba’il al-Ruwah (Facts Concerning Knowledge of the Tribes of the Transmitters) that Ibn Lahi‘a related from Abu al-Aswad that he heard ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr say, “WE NEVER FOUND ANYONE WHO KNEW [sic] GENEALOGY BACK PAST ‘ADNAN, NOR PAST QAHTAN, UNLESS THEY WERE USING CONJECTURE. ”

      Abu al-Aswad stated that he had heard Abu Bakr Sulayman b. Abu Khaytham, one of the very most knowledgeable men of the poetry and the genealogy of Quraysh, say, “WE NEVER KNEW ANYONE WITH INFORMATION GOING BACK BEYOND MA‘AD B. ‘ADNAN, whether relating poetry or other knowledge.”

      Abu ‘Umar said that there was a group of the predecessors including ‘Abd Allah b. Mas‘ud, ‘Amr b. Maymun al-Azdi, and Muhammad b. Ka‘b al-Quradhi who, when they recited the verse from the Qur’an “and those after them who no one but God knows” (surat Ibrahim, XIV, v. 9) would comment, “THE GENEALOGISTS LIED.”

      Abu ‘Umar, God have mercy on him, stated, “We hold the meaning of this to differ from their interpretation. What is implied is that regarding those who claim to enumerate Adam’s descendants, no one knows them except God who created them. But as for the lines of descent of the Arabs, the scholars conversant with their history and genealogy were aware of and learned by heart about the people and the major tribes, DIFFERING IN SOME DETAILS OF THAT.” (The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume I, translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, 1998], pp. 50-52; capital emphasis ours)

      The next section comes from Ibn Sa‘d:

      … he on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas; he said: Verily the Prophet (may peace be upon him), WHENEVER he related his genealogy, DID NOT GO BEYOND MA‘ADD IBN ‘ADNAN IBN UDAD, then he kept quiet and said: The narrators of genealogy ARE LIARS, since Allah says: “There passed many generations between them.”

      Ibn ‘Abbas says: The Prophet would have been informed of the genealogy (prior to Adnan by Allah) if he (Prophet) had so wished.

      … he on the authority of ‘Abd Allah. Verily he recited “(The tribes of) ‘Ad and Thamud and those after them; NONE SAVETH ALLAH KNOWETH THEM.” The genealogists ARE LIARS.

      … between Ma‘add and Isma‘il there were more than THIRTY GENERATIONS; but he did not give their names, nor described their genealogy, probably he did not mention it because he might have heard the Hadith of Abu Salih on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas who narrated about the Prophet (may Allah bless them) THAT HE KEPT QUIET AFTER MENTIONING MA‘ADD IBN ‘ADNAN.

      Hisham said: A narrator informed me on the authority of my father, but I had not heard it from him, that he related the genealogy thus, Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan Ibn Udad Ibn al-Hamaysa’ Ibn Salaman Ibn ‘Aws Ibn Yuz Ibn Qamwal Ibn Ubayyi Ibn al-‘Awwam, Ibn Nashid Ibn Haza Ibn Buldas Ibn Tudlaf Ibn Tabikh Ibn Jahim Ibn Nahish Ibn Makha Ibn ‘Ayfa Ibn ‘Abqar Ibn ‘Ubayd Ibn al-Du‘a Ibn Hamdan Ibn Sanbar Ibn Yathriba Ibn Nahzan Ibn Yalhan Ibn Ir‘awa Ibn ‘Ayfa Ibn Dayshan Ibn ‘Isar Ibn Iqnad Ibn Ibham Ibn Muqsi Ibn Nahith Ibn Zarih Ibn Shumayyi Ibn Mazzi Ibn ‘Aws Ibn ‘Arram IBN QAYDHAR Ibn Isma‘il Ibn Ibrahim (my Allah bless them both).

      … There was a Tadmurite whose patronymic was Abu Ya‘qub; he was one … of the Israelite Muslims, and had read Israelite literature and acquired proficiency in it; he mentioned that Burakh Ibn Nariyya the scribe of Irmiya (Jeremiah) drew the genealogy of Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan and wrote it in his books. This is known to the Israelite scholars and learned men. The names (mentioned here) resemble them, and if there is any difference it is because of the language since they have been translated from Hebrew.

      … I heard a person saying: Ma‘add was contemporary with ‘Isa Ibn Maryam (Jesus son of Mary) and his genealogy is this: Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan Ibn Udad Ibn Zayd Ibn Yaqdur Ibn Yaqdum Ibn Amin Ibn Manhar Ibn Sabuh Ibn al-Hamaysa‘ Ibn Yashjub Ibn Ya‘rub, Ibn al-‘Awwam Ibn Nabit Ibn Salman Ibn Haml Ibn QAYDHAR Ibn Isma‘il Ibn Ibrahim.

      He (Ibn Sa‘d) said: Some one has named al-‘Awwal BEFORE al-Hamaysa‘ thus showing (al-‘Awwam) as his son.

      … Verily the genealogy of Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan HAS BEEN TRACED DIFFERENTLY. In some narrations it is Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan Ibn Muqawwam, Ibn Nahur Ibn Tirah Ibn Ya‘rub Ibn Yashjub IBN NABIT Ibn Isma ‘il.

      He (Ibn Sa‘d) said: And some say: Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan Ibn Udad ’Itahab Ibn Ayyub IBN QAYDHAR Ibn Isma‘il Ibrahim.

      Muhammad Ibn Ishaq said: Qusayyi Ibn Kilab traced his genealogy to Qaydhar Ibn Isma‘il in some of his verses. Muhammad Ibn al-Sa‘ib al-Kalbi recited this couplet on the authority of his father ascribing it to Qusayyi:

      “I have nothing to do with nursing if the children of Qaydhar and Nabit did not establish relationship with the same.”

      Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad Ibn Sa‘d said: I do not find much difference between them. Verily, Ma‘add was descended from Qaydhar Ibn Isma‘il; and this DIFFERENCE in his genealogy shows that the same WAS NOT CORRECTLY REMEMBERED and it was borrowed from the people of the scriptures (ahl al-Kitab) and translated, so they made differences. If it had been correct the Apostle of Allah must have known it. The best course with us is to trace the genealogy to Ma‘add Ibn ‘Adnan THEN TO KEEP QUIET UP TO ISMA‘IL IBN IBRAHIM.

      … he on the authority of ‘Urwah; he said: WE DID NOT FIND ANY ONE TRACING THE GENEALOGY ABOVE MA‘ADD IBN ‘ADNAN.

      … I heard Abu Bakr Ibn Sulayman Ibn Abu Hathamah saying… WE DID NOT FIND CERTAINTY IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF A SCHOLAR NOR IN THE VERSES OF A POET (ABOUT GENERATIONS) ABOVE MA‘ADD IBN ‘ADNAN…

      He (Ibn Sa‘d) said: Hsiham Ibn Muhammad Ibn al-Sa‘ib informed us on the authority of his father that Ma‘add was with Bukht Nassar (Banu Ched Nader) when he fought in the forts of Yaman. (Ibn Sa’ad’s Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir Volume I, parts I & II, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002 India], pp. 50-53; capital emphasis ours)

      We conclude with Al-Tabari. Much of what he says is material found above in Ibn Sa‘d:

      “… I heard the Messenger of God say, ‘Ma‘add ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Zand b. Yara b. A‘raq al-Thara.’ Umm Salamah: Zand is al-Hamaysa‘, Yara is NABT and A‘raq al-Thara is Ishmael, son of Abraham.

      … ‘Adnan, AS SOME GENEALOGISTS ASSERT, was the son of Udad b. Muqawwam b. Nahur b. Tayrah b. Ya ‘rub b. NABIT b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham), WHILE OTHERS SAY: ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Aytahab b. Ayyub b. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham). Qusayy b. Kilab traces his descent back to QAYDHAR in his poetry. YET OTHER GENEALOGISTS SAY: ‘Adnan b. Mayda‘ b. Mani‘ b. Udad b. Ka‘b b. Yashjub b. Ya‘rub b. al-Hamaysa‘ b. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham). THESE DIFFERENCES arise because it is an old science, taken from the people of the first Book (the Old Testament).

      … Muhammad b. al-Sa‘ib al-Kalbi, although I did not hear this from him myself, that he traced the descent as follows; Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. al-Hamaysa‘ b. Salaman b. ‘Aws b. Buz b. Qamwal b. Ubayy b. al-‘Awwam b. Nashid b. Haza b. Bildas b. Yidlaf b. Tabakh b. Jaham b. Tahash b. Makha b. ‘Ayfa b. Abqar b. ‘Ubayd b. al-Da‘a b. Hamdan b. Sanbar b. Yathribi b. Yahzan b. Yalhan b. Ar‘awa b. ‘Ayfa b. Dayshan b. ‘Isar b. Aqnad b. Ayham b. Muqsir b. Nahath b. Rizah b. Shamma b. Mizza b. ‘Aws b. ‘Arram b. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) Ibrahim (Abraham).

      … There was a man from Tadmur whose patronymic (kunyah) was Abu Ya‘qub. He was one of the children of Israel who had become a Muslim, who had read in their books and become deeply learned. He said that Barukh b. Nariyya, a scribe from Urmiya, had established the lineage of Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan with him and had set it in his writings. It was well known among the learned men of the People of the Book and set down in their books. It was close to the names given above, and perhaps the difference between them was owing to the language, since these names had been transliterated from Hebrew.

      Al-Harith- Muhammad b. Sa‘d: Hisham (al-Kalbi) recited to me the following line of verse, which was related to him by his father:

      I belong to no tribe which brought me up but that in which the descendants of Qaydhar and al-Nabit took root.

      By al-Nabit, he meant Nabt b. Isma‘il (Ishmael).

      … Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. al-Hamaysa‘ b. Ashub b. NABT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael).

      OTHERS RELATE: Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Umayn b. Shajab b. Tha‘alabah b. ‘Atr b. Yarbah b. Muhallam b. al-‘Awwam b. Muhtamil b. Ra‘imah b. al-‘Ayqan b. ‘Allah b. al-Shahdud b. al-Zarib b. ‘Abqar b. Ibrahim (Abraham) b. Isma‘il b. Yazan b. A‘waj b. al-Mut‘im b. al-Tamh b. al-Qasur b. ‘Anud b. Da‘da‘ b. Mahmud b. al-Za‘id b. Nadwan b. Atamah b. Daws b. Hisn b. al-Nizal b. al-Qumayr b. al-Mushajjir b. Mu‘damir b. Sayfi b. NABT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham), the Friend of the Compassionate.

      STILL OTHERS: Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Zayd b. Yaqdir b. Yaqdum b. Hamaysa‘ b. NABT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham).

      OTHERS: Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Hamaysa‘ b. Nabt b. Salman, who is Salaman, b. Hamal b. NABT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham).

      OTHERS: Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. al-Muqawwam b. Nahur b. M Mishrah b. Yashjub b. Malik b. Ayman b. AL-NABIT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham).

      OTHERS: Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udd b. Udad b. al-Hamaysa‘ b. Ashub b. Sa‘d b. Yarbah b. Nadir b. Humayl b. Munahhim b. Lafath b. al-Sabuh b. Kinanah b. al-‘Awwam b. NABT B. QAYDHAR b. Isma‘il (Ishmael).

      A certain genealogist told me that he had found that some Arab scholars had memorized FORTY ANCESTORS OF MA‘ADD AS FAR AS ISMA‘IL (Ishmael) in Arabic, quoting Arabic verses as evidence for this, and that he had collated the names they gave with what the People of the Book say and had found that the number agreed BUT THAT THE ACTUAL NAMES DIFFERED. He dictated these names to me and I wrote them down. They are as follows; Ma‘add b. ‘Adnan b. Udad b. Hamaysa‘ (Hamaysa‘ is Salman, who is Umayn) b. Hamayta‘ (who is Hamayda‘, who is al-Shajab) b. Salamn (who is Munjir Nabit, so called, he calimed, because he fed Arabs on milk and flour anjara, as the people lived well in his time …)

      Nabit b. ‘Aws (he is Tha‘labah, to whom the Tha‘labis descent is traced back) b. Bura (who is Buz, who is ‘Atr al-‘Ata‘ir, the first person to institute the custom of the ‘atirah for the Arabs) b. Shuha (who is Sa‘d Rajab, the first person to institute the custom of the rajabiyyah for the Arabs) b. Ya‘mana (who is Qamwal, who is Yarbah al-Nasib, who lived in the time of Sulayman b. Dawud the prophet) b. Kasdana (who is Muhallam Dhu al-‘Ayn) b. Hazana (who is al-‘Awwam) b. Bildasa (who is al-Muhtamil) b. Badlana (who is Yidlaf, who is Ra‘imah) b. Tahba (who is Tahab who is al-‘Ayqan) b. Jahma (who is Jaham, who is ‘Allah) b. Mahsha (who is Tahash. who is al-Shahdud) b. Ma‘jala (who is Makha, who is al-Zarib Khatim al-Nar b. ‘Aqara (who is ‘Afa, who is ‘Abqar, THE FATHER OF THE JINN, TO WHOM THE GARDEN ABQAR IS ASCRIBED) b. ‘Aqara (who is ‘Aqir, who is Ibrahim Jami ‘al-Shaml. He was called Jami‘ al-Shaml (settler of affairs) because every fearful person felt safe in his reign; he returned every outcast, and he attempted to make peace between all men) b. Banda‘a (who is Da‘a, who is Isma‘il Dhu al-Matabikh (master of kitchens), who was so called because during his reign he established a house for guests in every town of Arabs) b. Abda‘i (who is ‘Ubayd, who is Yazan al-Ta‘‘an, the first man to fight with lances, which are ascribed to him) b. Hamada (who is Hamdan, who is Isma‘il Dhu al-A‘waj; al-A‘waj was his horse, and the A‘waji breed of horses is ascribed to him) b. Bashmani (who is Yashbin, who is al-Mut‘im fi al-Mahl) b. Bathrani (who is Bathram, who is al-Tamh) b. Bahrani (who is Yahzan, who is al-Qasur) b. Yalhani (who is Yalhan, who is al-‘Anud) b. Ra‘wani (who is Ra‘wa, who is al-Da‘da‘) b. ‘Aqara (who is ‘Aqir) b. Dasan (who is al-Za‘id) b. ‘Asar (who is ‘Asir, who is al-Naydawan Dhu al-Andiyah…) b. Qanadi (who is Qanar, who is Ayyamah) b. Thamar (who is Bahami, who is Daws al-‘Itq…) b. Muqsir (who is Maqasiri, who is Hisn; he is also called Nahath, who is al-Nizal) b. Zarih (who is Qumayr) b. Sammi who is Samma, who is al-Mujashshir…
      b. Marza- or, some say, Marhar- b. Sanfa (who is al-Samr, who is al-Safi …)

      b. Ja‘tham (who is ‘Uram, who is al-Nabit, who is Qaydhar, the interpretation of Qaydhar, he said, is ‘ruler’, for he was the first of the descendants of Isma‘il to be king) b. Isma‘il (Ishmael), who was faithful to his promise, b. Ibrahim (Abraham), the Friend of the Compassionate b. Tarih (who is Azar) b. Nahur b. Saru‘ b. Arghawa b. Baligh (the interpretation of Baligh is ‘the divider’ as in Syriac; this is because it was he who divided the lands between the descendants of Adam, and he is Falij) b. ‘Abar b. Sha;ikh b. Arfakhshad b. Sam (Shem) b. Nuh (Noah) b. Lamk b. Mattushalakh b. Akhnukh (he is the prophet Idris) b. Yard (he is Yarid, in whose time idols were made) b. Mahla‘il b. Qaynan b. Anush b. Shithth (who is Hibatallah) b. Adam. Shith (Seth) was the successor of his father after Habil (Abel) was killed; his father said, ‘A gift of God (Hibatallah)’ in exchange for Habil,’ and his name was derived this.

      We have mentioned earlier in this work in a concise and abridged form a part what we have been able to discover of the accounts of Isma‘il (Ishmael) b. Ibrahim (Abraham) and his ancestors, male and female, back to Adam, and of the events of every age during this period of time, and we shall not repeat them here. Hisham b. Muhammad: The Arabs used to say, ‘The flea has bitten since our father Anush was born, and sin has been forbidden since our father Shithth was born.’ The Syriac name for Shithth is Shith.” (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VI, Muhammad At Mecca, translated and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt and M.V. McDonald [State University of New York Press, Albany, 1988], pp. 38-43; capital emphasis ours)

      Do notice the inherent contradictions of these traditions. First, none of the genealogical lists are uniform. Contradictions in the precise names and order of the names appear throughout these lists. Second, according to some traditions Ma‘add was a contemporary of the Lord Jesus. Yet, other traditions state that Ma‘add was a contemporary of Jeremiah and Nebuchadnezzar, the King of Babylon, men who lived six centuries before Christ was even born!

      Third, as we had already noted in our original paper, these lists trace Muhammad to different sons of Ishmael. Some lists trace him to Kedar (Qaydhar), the son of Ishmael. Others trace it back to Nebaioth (Nabit), not Kedar. Fourth, much confusion exists regarding the exact number of generations from Ishmael and Adnan.

      Finally, the very candid and open admission by the writers that no one was able to definitely trace Muhammad’s genealogy beyond Adnan serves to undermine the Muslim claim that Muhammad was an ACTUAL descendent of Ishmael.

      • θ says:

        “Sam Shamoun says: How convenient of you not to provide the actually names of the supposed Jewish books which contain this supposed prophecy.”

        //clas-pages.uncc.edu/john-reeves/research-projects/trajectories-in-near-eastern-apocalyptic/nistarot-secrets-of-r-shimon-b-yohai-2/

        The Secrets of R. Šim‘on ben Yohai were first published in Salonika in 1743 within the same anthology of midrashic texts that contains Sefer Elijah. This version of the text was reprinted by Adolph Jellinek, ed., Bet ha-Midrasch: Sammlung kleiner Midraschim und vermischter Abhandlungen aus der jüdischen Literatur (6 vols.; Leipzig, 1853-77; repr., Jerusalem: Bamberger & Wahrmann, 1938), 3:78-82. Jellinek’s text was subsequently reproduced by Yehudah Even-Shemuel, Midreshey Ge’ullah (2d ed.; Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1954), 401-403; using the various extant versions of this midrash, the same scholar also generated a suggested Vorlage for the Secrets (pp. 187-98) and also reproduced the variant recension (‘Atidot R. Šim‘on b. Yohai) contained within a larger eschatological work concerning the ‘Ten Kings’ which was first published by H. M. Horowitz in 1891. A. Z. Aescoly provides an abridged version of Jellinek’s text along with a brief commentary in his important anthology of Jewish messianic literature (Messianic Movements in Israel, Volume One: From the Bar-Kokhba Revolt until the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain [ed. Yehudah Even-Shmuel; 2d ed.; Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1987], 133-38.). A Cairo Genizah fragment of the opening section of the Secrets was published by S. A. Wertheimer, Batey Midrashot (2 vols.; repr., Jerusalem: Ktav wa-Sefer, 1980), 2:25-26; see also 2:506-507. A fifteenth-century manuscript version of Secrets is available in Munich Ms. Hebr. 222, a work which also features important editions of Pirqe Mašiah and Sefer Elijah. Unpublished manuscript fragments include Oxford Ms. Heb. f. 27 (2642) fols. 42-43 and Oxford Ms. Heb. d. 46 (2643) fols. 72-73. The present translation is based on the text reproduced by Jellinek.

        “Sam Shamoun says: Since Mry’w is Aramaic for Maryah, the Aramaic word for Lord that is often used for God. ”

        The Aramaic word MaroYah can also mean “Lord his Yah,” that underlines the servile status of Prophet Muhammad under Jehovah. Moreover, Moslems believe he is praised in the Tanach with the honorific titles of the Holy One (Haqodesh) from the mount of Paran in Hab.3:3, as well as the mortal Lord (Adoni) in Malachi 3:1.

        “Sam Shamoun says: these lists trace Muhammad to different sons of Ishmael. Some lists trace him to Kedar (Qaydhar), the son of Ishmael. Others trace it back to Nebaioth (Nabit), not Kedar. Fourth, much confusion exists regarding the exact number of generations from Ishmael and Adnan.”

        Metatron’s prophesy should not be necessarily deemed as giving a new lineage information that Prophet Muhammad’s bloodline is of Qedar the son of Ishmael. More Moslem’s historians inclined to accept that his bloodline is of Nebaijoth the son of Ishmael. Metatron just hinted a unique way how Prophet Muhammad shall be known as a herder of flocks and mule, but he shall be supported further by Qedarites who are known as the camel herders, to be his kingship warriors.
        Metatron just says that :
        “…Warriors of the children of Qedar..bring to power another king whose name is Mry’w. They shall take him from following flocks and mule-herds and elevate him to the kingship. There shall arise from him ‘four arms’ who will make repairs on the Temple.”

        Moreover, the term “four arms” refer to four early Caliphs of Islam.

  7. θ says:

    “Sam Shamoun says: “Say not Three Hypostases (Al-Aqanim-Al-Thalatha, or thalatha aqanim).” ”

    Hypostasis itself is not a big deal of problem, but associating a hypostasis of mortals (Jesus’ and Spirit’s) to God (Ilaha) or to divinity (ilahiyya) is something that goes wrong. Trinitarians believe their hypostases are divine.

    • Ken Temple says:

      θ –
      Do you know Arabic?
      Does the average Arabic speaker know what اُقنوم (Oqnoom) (singular for hypostasis, which came from Syriac and the Greek, γνωμη (gnome) and اقانیم (Aqanim) (plural for hypostasis) is?

      How do you translate that, since only someone familiar with Greek and early church history and historical theology would even know what “hypostasis” is?

      • θ says:

        Uqnum is a later invention in Arabic, starting from 8th century onward. During the time of Prophet Muhammad, nobody of Arabic speaking people knows what Uqnum is. At most, the nearest Arabic word for “Person” is Nafs, that is a self.

  8. θ says:

    Satan daringly has controlled Jesus when he is wakeful for 40 days, whereas Satan can’t influence Prophet Muhammad a bit except so cowardly in his sleep, and it just lasted one night only.

    A magic that works in a form of bad dream in the sleep can’t make a person “possessed.” What invalidates a Prophethood is not the bad dream, but the possession of demons, known as “Mashura” in Arabic (such as Q.17, v.47; Q.17, v.101).

    Muslim Book 26, Hadith 5428
    A’isha reported: that a Jew from among the Jews of Banu Zuraiq who was called Labid b. al-A’sam cast a spell upon Allah’s Messenger with the result that he (under the influence of the spell) felt that he had been doing something whereas in fact he had not been doing that. (This state of affairs lasted) until one day or during one night, (أَوْ ذَاتَ لَيْلَةٍ)

    Bukhari, Book 54, Hadith 513
    The Prophet said, A good dream is from Allah, and a bad or evil dream is from Satan; so if anyone of you has a bad dream of which he gets afraid, he should spit on his left side and should seek Refuge with Allah from its evil, for then it will not harm him.
    Bukhari, Book 71, Hadith 643
    I heard the Prophet saying, A good dream is from Allah, and a bad dream is from Satan. So if anyone of you sees (in a dream) something he dislikes, when he gets up he should blow thrice (on his left side) and seek refuge with Allah from its evil for then it will not harm him.
    Bukhari, Book 87, Hadith 124.
    The Prophet said, A good dream is from Allah, and a bad dream is from Satan. So whoever has seen (in a dream) something he dislike, then he should spit without saliva, thrice on his left and seek refuge with Allah from Satan, for it will not harm him, and Satan cannot appear in my shape.

  9. Sam Shamoun says:

    Your friend has gone off the deep end and is officially an apostate and heretic in my book: http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2010/03/bible-prophecy-is-rise-muhammad-andor.html

    • Ken Temple says:

      Did you see our discussion over Todd Lawson’s view of Surah 4:157 ? how he interprets in light of Surah 3:169 – “do not think those that were killed in Allah’s cause as dead. They are living . . .

      http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2011/12/dr-todd-lawsons-stimulating-lecture.html

      http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2009/11/does-quran-deny-crucifixion-and.html

      • θ says:

        It is funny to know how Trinitarians do some desperate acrobatics to deny the warlike person of Isaiah 63 by misinterpreting him as angel of Rev.14, even the Father.
        How can the warrior of Bozrah be angels since they don’t have a garment to wear, or how could he be the Father since that person hoped for salvation by uttering a salvific passage “mine own arm bought salvation unto me”? Does the Father need to be saved?
        Isa 63:5
        And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me.

        In Islam, the armed struggle in the holy war is a way of person sin atonement, even for the victors as well, per Q.3, v.195.

    • Ken Temple says:

      Also, see my disagreement with David in the com-boxes there.

      David can correct any of this that is inaccurate. From what I understand, David Waltz grew up in a Jehovah’s Witnesses family; came out of JWs to the Protestant faith, later went to a Bible Church/ dispensational church sometime, and was a member of an OPC Presbyterian Church for a while, then converted to Roman Catholicism, but a few years ago left the RCC (which I am glad), but as far as I can tell, is still Trinitarian, and said he is going to a church, but would not say which one; but he does have some strange ideas about Islam and Bahai-ism, which I have argued with him about.

      He knows a lot about the early church fathers, etc. and is interesting to interact with. I have learned a lot from his blog on church history and the early church fathers and how to find materials. (when a person does not have time to just read through the whole 38 volumes of the early church fathers all the way from Clement of Rome in 96 AD to John of Damascus in the 600s, he is a helpful resource. I appreciate his good demeanor, even when disagreeing, and he answers my questions honestly.

      • Ken Temple says:

        See my disagreement with David Waltz on the Isaiah 63 passage:

        http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2010/03/bible-prophecy-is-rise-muhammad-andor.html?showComment=1268755898449#c1192657598346955940

        Ken said…
        Isaiah 63:1 —
        “It is I who speak in righteousness, mighty to save.”

        Hard to see this as Muhammad; -he did not speak in righteousness and he did not save.

        Although he was from the North Arabian tribes;
        (that information is good information; but it doesn’t mean that “the one coming from Bozrah” is someone born there.

        “coming from Bozrah” in Isaiah 63:1 could mean, he is coming after having judged his enemies there. It doesn’t necessarily mean “someone who was born there”

        MARCH 16, 2010 AT 9:11 AM
        Ken said…
        Context folks!

        Isaiah 62:11
        Savior
        His reward is with him
        and his recompense accompanies him

        There was originally no chapter break of 63

        Flows from 60 and 61, which are about the Messiah.

        63 seems to be about the future judgment when the Messiah will judge all His enemies.

        Rev. 19:11-15

        MARCH 16, 2010 AT 9:19 AM

  10. Sam Shamoun says:

    Here is my latest article, which is a supplement to a rebuttal I wrote on Isaiah 42, showing how the Servant of Isaiah is not Muhammad since Muhammad was a false prophet: http://www.reformedapologeticsministries.com/2016/05/revisiting-prophecy-of-isaiah-42.html

  11. θ says:

    “Sam Shamoun says: Here is my latest article, which is a supplement to a rebuttal I wrote on Isaiah 42, showing how the Servant of Isaiah”

    Paul and Barnabas under a Spirit’s dictation open a loose or wider interpretation of Isaiah 42 by making such a plural identities of the servant of Jehovah in Isaiah 42, by claiming themselves as two servants of the mentioned, for the Gentiles.
    Acts 13:47
    For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

    • Ken Temple says:

      That quote in Acts 13:47 is not from Isaiah 42, but rather from Isaiah 49:6. It is a command to Israel to be a light to the nations. But Isaiah 42 is about the Messiah Jesus.

      • θ says:

        Isaiah 42 and Isaiah 49 are in the same exact theme and context: To be a light of the Gentiles. But the New Covenant is only for the house of Judah and Israel per Jer 31:31.

        Isa 42:6
        I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
        Isa 49:5
        And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength.6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Sometimes the Servant is the believing remnant of Israel that will be a light to the nations; and from that nation, there will come one individual who would be the light of the nations, the Messiah, the Suffering Servant. Isaiah has both in chapters 40-66.

        Just as Jesus said “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12), He also makes us “the light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-16) as we are also called to serve and be a light in witnessing the truth to other people and nations. But Jesus the Messiah, through the indwelling and power of the Holy Spirit, is the source of our power, holiness, and light; (John 15), apart from Him, we can do nothing.

  12. Ken Temple says:

    Uqnum is a later invention in Arabic, starting from 8th century onward. During the time of Prophet Muhammad, nobody of Arabic speaking people knows what Uqnum is. At most, the nearest Arabic word for “Person” is Nafs, that is a self.

    Yes, it came from Syriac, which transliterated the word from Greek, gnome / γνωμη .

    I thought the nearest Arabic word for “person” is shakhs شخص
    We have this is Farsi, and this is the word people understand as the equivalent for hypostasis / uqnum.

  13. Ken Temple says:

    “Nafs” نفس is “the self”, but it also means “the soul” and can mean “flesh” (sinful desires of the flesh) and with another word, means the “sinful or selfish nature inside of us” – Nafs Amareh نفس اماره

  14. θ says:

    “Ken Temple says: “Nafs” نفس is “the self”, but it also means “the soul” and can mean “flesh” (sinful desires of the flesh) and with another word, means the “sinful or selfish nature inside of us” – Nafs Amareh نفس اماره”

    Precisely. Paul was inspired by the Spirit to equate Nafs Amarah with a self-divinity too.
    Phil 3:19
    Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly,

    • Ken Temple says:

      “Precisely” – thanks for confirmation of the Arabic concepts/words.

      Are you an a native Arabic speaker? or just learned Arabic?
      Were you born a Muslim or are you a westerner who converted to Islam?

      You never answer those questions.

      Your name by which you go by Theta θ makes you very mysterious.

  15. Ken Temple says:

    θ – I am not able to read everything you write; some of it we already covered and you just keep repeating the same arguments; and some of it is just too hard to understand what exactly you are trying to say. But when I see something that I comprehend what you are saying, and I have the time the answer, I will comment. But some of your stuff is mysterious, like your name. 😉

  16. θ says:

    “Ken Temple says: Just as Jesus said “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12), He also makes us “the light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-16) as we are also called to serve and be a light in witnessing the truth to other people and nations. But Jesus the Messiah, through the indwelling and power of the Holy Spirit, is the source of our power, holiness, and light; (John 15), apart from Him, we can do nothing.”

    I think you may misinterpret the Bible.
    Jesus was a temporal light as long as he was in the world only.
    Jn 9:5
    As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.

    But the Captivity (beside being a punishment) of Judeans since the time of Isaiah has also been intended by Jehovah to produce a hidden merit of making the Jews of the exile a light of Gentiles, that is to make known Jehovah abroad, as mentioned by the pre-exilic verses such as Isaiah 49, as well as the post-exilic verses such as Isaiah 66.
    Isa 49:22
    Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.
    Isa 66:19
    And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.

    • Ken Temple says:

      No; John 9:5 does not say “only”

      • θ says:

        “Ken Temple says: No; John 9:5 does not say “only” ”

        Jesus indicates his temporal illumination to Gentiles and Jews elsewhere till termination of his mission:
        Jn 12:35
        Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

Comments are closed.