Jalal Abualrub sent me an article attacking the genealogies of the Lord Jesus,
calling into question the integrity of the Canonical Gospels. Anticipating that
this article will appear on his website, we have decided to address his points in advance.
He begins his article by attacking the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity:
Introduction: The Old Testament never spoke of
Trinity in worship, never stated that the Holy Ghost is God or that he is the Creator,
never mentioned Jesus by name as being the eternal son of the Creator or as being a part
of a trio of creators that should be worshipped. Biblical Prophets never mentioned
Trinity in worship either by name or by hint. Biblical Prophets never worshipped the
Holy Ghost or Jesus, and they never stated that the Creator has or will have a son.
While walking on this earth, Jesus never preached Trinity, never worshipped the Holy Ghost
or himself and never declared this, "I, Jesus, created you; worship me; Trinity is
your faith; I am equal to God." The Bible does not contain a single reference
to Trinity by name, nor does it ever call itself The Bible.
ANSWER:
First, Abualrub is incorrect regarding the teaching of the Hebrew Bible
since it does teach that the true God, Yahweh Elohim, is a triune Being. In fact, the
Hebrew Scriptures establish the following truths which the Quran vehemently denies:
The Fatherhood of God.
God appearing in the form of a man.
The Deity and Personhood of the Holy Spirit, that the Spirit is
personally distinct from Yahweh while being God at the same time.
The Deity of the Messenger/Angel of Yahweh, that there is a specific
Messenger sent by God who also happens to be God.
There are only three Persons whom the Hebrew Bible presents as the
one true God, i.e. Yahweh, His Messenger, and His Holy Spirit are the only Ones having all
the essential attributes of Deity.
The Deity of the Messiah.
The Messiah and the Angel of God being one and the same Entity.
The necessity of blood atonement, the need for vicarious sacrifices
for the forgiveness of sin.
In order to prevent this rebuttal from being too lengthy we will not delve into all
these points here. Instead, we will now present specific links so that the readers can
see for themselves how the OT Scriptures establish these specific truths:
Second, regarding the teaching of Christ and the claim that he never
said he was God or demanded worship etc., these issues have been dealt with in the
following articles:
Therefore, we will only briefly address the issues of God having a Son
and the Messiahs Deity, providing just a few OT examples supporting these points:
Why do the nations rageand the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the
LORD and against his anointed [Messiah, Christ], saying, Let us burst
their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us I will tell of the decree: The
LORD said to me, You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession. You
shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth. Serve the LORD
with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son,lest he be angry,
and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all
who take refuge in him." Psalm 2:1-3, 7-12
This Psalm refers to the Anointed King of the Lord as Gods Son,
and finds its ultimate fulfillment in the Lord Jesus:
"When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief
priests and the elders had said to them. And when they heard it, they lifted their voices
together to God and said, Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the
sea and everything in them, who through the mouth of our father David, your servant,
said by the Holy Spirit, "Why did the Gentiles rage,and the peoples
plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered
together,against the Lord and against his Anointed"-- for truly in this
city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed,
both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do
whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place." Acts 4:23-28
"And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has
fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second
Psalm, You are my Son, today I have begotten you." Acts 13:32-33
"Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the
generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid
themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and
rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and
from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can
stand?" Revelation 6:15-17
Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in
heaven, saying, The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and
of his Christ [Anointed, Messiah], and he shall reign forever and ever."
Revelation 11:15
"She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the
nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,
And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, Now the salvation and the power
and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ [Anointed, Messiah]
have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them
day and night before our God." Revelation 12:5, 10
Here is another OT text that mentions Gods Son:
"Who has ascended to heaven and come down?Who has gathered the wind in his fists?
Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his son's name? Surely you know!"
Proverbs 30:4
The writer knows that God has a Son who shares in his Fathers
sovereignty.
Finally, the prophet Isaiah refers to the Davidic King as Deity:
"For to us a child is born,to us a son is
given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder,and his name shall
be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of
Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peacethere will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,to establish it and to uphold it with
justice and with righteousnessfrom this time forth and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this." Isaiah 9:6-7
Isaiah foresees a child who will be born that is the Mighty God ruling
over Davids throne forever. According to both the NT and rabbinic tradition this
child is the Messiah, whom Christians and Muslims both agree is Jesus!
Abualrub will obviously try to deny that Isaiah 9 refers to the
Messiah, or that the king is literally the Mighty God. He may wish to contend that these
names are nothing more than honorific titles, names which are not intended to be taken as
literal descriptions but in an exaggerated or hyperbolic fashion in order to highlight the
kings exalted status before God. Even conceding for arguments sake that this
was a correct understanding of the passage, which it isnt, this would only prove
that the OT contradicts the Quran. The Quran does not allow for anyone to be addressed as
the Mighty God, even if it is nothing more than an exaggerated form of speech praising the
exalted position of a king or prophet.{1}
Third, Abualrub is in blatant error regarding the Holy Bible never calling itself the Bible.
The Holy Bible, in several places, refers to inspired Books as the Bible. For more on this
issue, please consult the following article:
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/inspired.htm.
Fourthly, since Abualrub is complaining that the exact word "Trinity" isnt
found in the Holy Bible, we challenge him to show us the following words from the Quran.
The most important message of Islam to Muslims such as Abualrub is "Tauhid"
or monotheism. And because it is so central we challenge him to produce from the Quran
verses where the actual word "Tauhid" ever appears.
We further challenge him to show us from the Quran the following exact terms which
Muslims claim to be the subset of Islamic Tauhid: tauhid al-rububiyyah, tauhid
al-uluhiyya/ibaadah, tauhid al-asma wa sifat.
Abualrub continues:
Suddenly and miraculously, though, the New Testament, which
Jesus never wrote or authorized, which was not even written during his lifetime, started
advocating a totally different religion that destroyed not only the Monotheism advocated
in the Old Testament, but also altered and abrogated all of the Biblical Law.
Suddenly, the one and only God worshipped by all the Prophets, including Jesus, was
replaced by a fantastic polytheistic dogma advocating concepts never spoken of before in
the Old Testament: Trinity, Original Sin, Crucifixion, God having a son and they
mean it literally, the Holy Ghost being God and, of course, that famous formula 1+1+1=1.
ANSWER:
It is quite inconsistent for Abularub to undermine the NT documents
when he just tried to appeal to these very same texts in his argument above regarding
Jesus never teaching the doctrine of the Trinity, his Deity etc. If Abualrub doesnt
consider the NT books authoritative because they were not written during Jesus
lifetime, how can he then use them to show what Jesus taught or did not teach? He even
says that the Bible doesnt teach the Trinity, but now admits that the NT does teach
the Trinity, and other essential Christian doctrines, which is part of the Holy Bible!
Abualrub may be basing his claim that Jesus didnt teach truths
such as the Trinity on the basis of what his book, the Quran, claims. In other words, he
is basing his claim not on what the NT teaches, but on what the Quran says the prophets
taught. Yet the Quran wasnt written during Jesus lifetime either, but over six
centuries after Christs ascension, and contradicts most of the key essential truths
of the Holy Bible!
Here is a list which gives a rough timeline for the dates of the NT
books:
45-48 A.D.:
The book of James is written. Most non-Catholic Bible scholars agree that James was one
of the half-brothers of Jesus (Catholics disagree because they believe that Jesus' mother
had no other children) and the one who presided over the "Jerusalem Conference" in Acts 15:1-30
(48-50 A.D.). There are several other men named James in the New Testament (including two
apostles), but there are strong reasons for eliminating them as the author of the book of James
(see for example
People's New Testament).
48-50 A.D.:
The apostle Paul is in Antioch and he writes his first letter, which we call the book of Galatians.
This is during the time period of Acts 15:25-35.
50 A.D.:
The Gospel of Matthew is believed to have been written in this year by the apostle Matthew.
50-54 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 1 and 2 Thessalonians from Corinth (Silas and Timothy are listed as
co-authors of these books. See 1 Thessalonians 1:1 and 2 Thessalonians 1:1). This is during
the time period of Acts 18:1-11.
54-55 A.D.:
The apostle Paul spends roughly 3 years in Ephesus (from 53 to 55 A.D.), where he writes his
second letter to the church at Corinth (his first letter to them has been lost). We call this
second letter the book of 1 Corinthians (Sosthenes is listed as a co-author of this book.
See 1 Corinthians 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 19:1-41.
56-57 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes his fourth letter to the church at Corinth from Macedonia (his third
letter to them has been lost). We call this fourth letter the book of 2 Corinthians (Timothy
is listed as a co-author of this book. See 2 Corinthians 1:1). This is during the time period
of Acts 20:1-2.
Late winter/early spring of 57-58 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes his letter to the Romans (Tertius is listed as the one who actually
wrote this letter, so he was probably taking dictation from Paul. See Romans 16:22. Other
passages indicate that Paul may have frequently dictated his letters to someone else, and that
he preferred to write the concluding remarks himself. See 1 Corinthians 16:21, Galatians 6:11,
Colossians 4:18, 2 Thessalonians 3:17, and Philemon 1:19, for example). This is during the time
period of Acts 20:2-6.
57-59 A.D.:
The Gospel of Mark is believed to have been written during this time period. The early church
fathers believed that this Gospel was written by Mark, an associate of the apostle Peter and
the one who is referred to as "John, also called Mark" in Acts 12:12.
58-60 A.D.:
The Gospel of Luke is believed to have been written during this time period. Luke was a physician
who sometimes traveled with the apostle Paul, and he is also the author of the book of Acts.
60-63 A.D.:
The apostle Paul is under house arrest in Rome for four years. He writes the book of Ephesians
around 60 A.D., Colossians around 60-61 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book.
See Colossians 1:1), Philippians around 61-62 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book.
See Philippians 1:1), and Philemon around the summer of 62 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author
of this book. See Philemon 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 28:14-31.
60-62 A.D.:
The book of Acts is written by Dr. Luke (see Colossians 4:14), Paul's part-time traveling companion
and the author of the Gospel of Luke.
60-65 A.D.:
The apostle John writes the books of 1, 2, and 3 John.
63-66 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 1 Timothy and Titus from Macedonia.
64 A.D.:
The apostle Peter writes the book of 1 Peter.
64-68 A.D.:
The apostle Peter writes the book of 2 Peter. This is the last New Testament book that
Peter will write. He is believed to have been martyred in late 67 or early 68 A.D.
67 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 2 Timothy while imprisoned in Rome. This is the last New Testament
book that Paul will write. He is believed to have been martyred in 68 A.D.
68-69 A.D.:
An unknown person writes the book of Hebrews. Some scholars believe that the apostle Paul
wrote Hebrews, but the evidence that he did not write this book is very strong (for example,
notice that all of the books written by Paul
say
that they were written by Paul, yet Hebrews is anonymous). Many other scholars believe
that there is strong evidence that Barnabas wrote Hebrews. Barnabas (who is mentioned
a number of times in Acts chapter 11 through chapter 15) was the apostle Paul's traveling
companion, so he would have picked up many of Paul's phrases and expressions from hearing
Paul preach so much. This may be why Hebrews sounds similar to Paul's writings, even though
it does not say that it was written by Paul (Paul's letters all say that they were written
by him) and it does not have Paul's usual greeting.
It is interesting to note that the human authors of other books and portions of Scripture
are unknown as well, such as the Old Testament books of 1 and 2 Kings, Job, Esther, and
1 and 2 Chronicles.
67-80 A.D.:
Jude writes his letter. He calls himself a brother of James. There are several men named
Jude in the New Testament, but for a number of reasons many scholars believe that Jude was
one of the half-brothers of Jesus.
85-95 A.D.:
The Gospel of John is believed to have been written during this time period by the apostle John.
95-96 A.D.:
The apostle John writes the book of Revelation while in exile on the island of Patmos.
This is the last New Testament book that John will write. At this point he is the last
surviving member of the twelve apostles and perhaps the only apostle to have died a natural
death. The other ten of the original twelve apostles were martyred (not counting Judas
Iscariot, who hung himself):
Andrew: Crucified.
Bartholomew: Crucified.
James, son of Alphaeus: Crucified.
James, son of Zebedee: Death by the sword.
Matthew: Death by the sword.
Peter: Crucified upside-down at his own request
(he did not feel worthy to be crucified in the same manner as the Lord).
Philip: Crucified.
Simon the Zealot: Crucified.
Thaddaeus: Death by arrows.
Thomas: Death by a spear thrust.
140 A.D.:
The first formal list of the books of the New Testament is generally believed to have
been published in 140 A.D. by Marcion (The History of Christianity, Dr. Tim Dowley, p.106).
(Source)
Since the above list may be too conservative for Abualrubs tastes, seeing that he
has a fascination with liberal-critical scholarly views of the Holy Bible, here is another
list which is less conservative:
Interpreter's One Volume Commentary of the Bible
1 Thessalonians - 50 (p. 1275).
Philippian, Colossians, Philemon - 55 or 60 (Ibid.).
1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians - 56 (Ibid.)
Romans - 57 (Ibid.).
1 Peter - 60 or 96 (Ibid.).
2 Thessalonians - 75-90 (Ibid.)
Mark - 64 to ca. 75 (p. 644), 70 (p. 609), 75 (p. 1275).
Matthew - 80-85 (p. 609), 85 (p. 1275).
Luke - 85-95 (p. 673), 90 (p. 1275).
Acts - 90-100 (p. 729), 100 (p. 1275).
Hebrews, Revelation - 95 (p. 1275).
Ephesians - 95 (p. 835).
John, James - 100 (Ibid.).
John's Epistles - 110 (Ibid.)
Jude - 125 (Ibid.).
Pastoral Epistles - 130 (Ibid.).
2 Peter - 150 (Ibid.).
Even if we accept the above liberal dating of the NT books, we are
still left with most of the books, specifically the Pauline epistles and the Synoptic
Gospels, being written within the first generation of the eye and ear witnesses of the
Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, if the NT is unreliable because it wasnt supposedly
written during Jesus lifetime, then the Quran is even more unreliable since it
didnt even come into existence until over 600 years after Christ walked this earth!
More on this below.
Finally, Abualrub thinks of the Trinity in terms of mathematical
equations, mockingly implying that the Trinity is equivalent to saying that 1+1+1 = 1.
Abualrub needs to pursue further studies in math, especially formal logic, since he
erroneously assumes that three things cannot still be one in some sense. We will help him
advance in his understanding of math by having him meditate on the following equations and
formulas:
1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
1 divided by 1 divided 1 = 1.
13, or 1 to the third power = 1.
Infinity + infinity + infinity = infinity.
Infinity infinity infinity = infinity.
Abualrub has some questions to ask of us:
Three Questions
There is no denying that Christianity is mostly built around Jesus
being the son of God, as the Christians falsely claim. They also believe that
the Bible was inspired by God Himself and that the Old and the New Testaments constitute
The Literal Word of God. Thus, I, Jalal Abualrub, would like to humbly
ask these three questions of the Christians.
Why would the claimed son of God who, only according to
Christians descended from God Himself, need a genealogy?
If Jesus needed a genealogy, then why would two divinely
inspired Gospels contained in the Bible narrate genealogies that list sons of Adam
as ancestors for Jesus, a man who has no genealogy since only according to Christians, he
descended from God Himself?
If the Bible is The Literal Word of God as Christians
claim, then why would two divinely inspired Gospels contained in the Bible
list two different genealogies for Jesus, a man who has no genealogy since
only according to Christians, he descended from God Himself?
Abualrub also places the two genealogies side by side for comparative
purposes and then says:
Solving Biblical Errors by Conjecture
Ever since the four Gospels, written by Authors
Anonymous, appeared many years after Jesus departed this earthly life without being
crucified, Christians tried in vain to explain the dramatic discrepancies between these
two genealogies in the number of generations and in the names. They give various
explanations for the discrepancies, always based on conjecture, but avoid answering this
crucial question:
Why did the writes [sic] of these Gospels, whoever they were,
write a genealogy for Jesus to begin with?
One more time:
Even if the Two Genealogies of Jesus Were Perfectly Identical,
Why Would They Appear in the Bible to Begin With?
The problem is not only in the discrepancies between the two
genealogies of Jesus found in Matthew and Luke, but also in the fact that each one of
these two Gospels listed a detailed genealogy for a man Christians falsely claim to be the
son of God. Thus, even if Christians were ever able to solve this clear error by
whatever suggestion they may give, how can they answer the question of why these writers
would bring names of groups of men in the genealogy of Jesus, men who are not the paternal
ancestors of Jesus at all? The Fact that these genealogies appear in the New
Testament proves that the Bible is not the Literal Word of God, but the
corrupted version of what was once the word of God before it was edited, changed,
translated, retranslated, amended and then changed again until Christians can no longer
differentiate between what is true and what is false in their Holy Book. I am amazed
at how Christian scholars avoid answering this crucial question and instead insist on
spending tremendous time and effort in trying to reconcile the truly enormous and apparent
differences found in the Bible with regards to the genealogy of Jesus.
ANSWER:
It is normal to wonder about the differences in the genealogies found in Matthew and Luke
and these differences have been discussed by Christians long before the advent of Islam
but for Abualrub to question why Jesus would have any genealogy at all is somewhat new.
The question is not whether Jesus "needs" a genealogy but since Jesus was born from
a human mother, he obviously inherits her genealogy. Abualrub tried to be particularly clever
and blundered greatly.
In fact, Abualrub grossly distorts the Christian view and is simply attacking straw man
arguments at this point. We will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he does
so in ignorance, that he really has no clue what the Bible and Christians truly believe.
Therefore, we humbly provide the answers to his questions:
1) The reason why Christ has a genealogy is because Jesus became a true human being
when he became flesh:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through
him, and without him was not any thing made that was made He was in the world, and
the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him And the Word BECAME
FLESH and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the
Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:1-3, 10, 14
The way that Christ became flesh was by being born from the virgin Mary
by the power of the Holy Spirit:
"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was
born, who is called Christ Now the birth of Jesus Christ took
place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came
together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her
husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce
her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to
him in a dream, saying, Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife,
for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit."
Matthew 1:16, 18-20
"In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named
Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of
the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to
her and said, Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you! But she was
greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be.
And the angel said to her, Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with
God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and
you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most
High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will
reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end. And
Mary said to the angel, How will this be, since I am a virgin?
And the angel answered her, The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the
Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called
holy--the Son of God." Luke 1:26-35
"On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the
mother of Jesus was there. Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his
disciples. When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him,
They have no wine. And Jesus said to her, Woman, what does this have to
do with me? My hour has not yet come. His mother said to the
servants, Do whatever he tells you. After this he went down to
Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and
they stayed there for a few days." John 2:1-5, 12
"but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's
sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his
mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his
mother, Woman, behold, your son! Then he said to the disciple,
Behold, your mother! And from that hour the disciple took her to his own
home." John 19:25-27
Abualrubs question erroneously presumes that we Christians deny
the real humanity of the Lord Jesus, thinking that we believe that Jesus had only one
nature, that of Deity. On the contrary, we believe in the testimony of the Holy Bible that
the one person of Christ had two distinct natures, Deity and humanity, which were united
perfectly together, not mixed or fused into each other:
"For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" Colossians 2:9
2) Common sense indicates that every human being [with the exception of Adam and Eve
of course] has multiple genealogies, two from the mothers side and two from
the fathers side. For instance, a person has a genealogy from his/her paternal
grandfather and another from his/her paternal grandmother. The same is the case with
ones mothers side, i.e. one receives another set of genealogies from the
maternal grandfather and grandmother.
In the case of the Lord Jesus, he receives multiple genealogies from both his biological
mother and his adoptive father. This also addresses his third point.
3) Abualrub erroneously assumes that one can only trace his/her genealogy through
the paternal side. Abualrub isnt simply contradicting what the Holy Bible says
at this point, he is also falsifying the Quran:
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
-- Zachariah and John, Jesus and Elias; each was of the righteous; S. 6:83-85
Jesus is listed as being of the seed of Noah. Ibn Kathir wrote regarding the above:
Mentioning `Isa in the offspring of Ibrahim, or Nuh as we stated above, is proof
that the grandchildren from a man's daughter's side are included among his offspring.
`Isa is included among Ibrahim's progeny through his mother, although `Isa did not have a
father. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Abu Harb bin Abi Al-Aswad said, "Al-Hajjaj sent
to Yahya bin Ya`mar, saying, `I was told that you claim that Al-Hasan and Al-Husayn are
from the offspring of the Prophet, did you find it in the Book of Allah I read the Qur'an
from beginning to end and did not find it?' Yahya said, `Do you not read in Surat
Al-An`am,
<and Yahya and `Isa>
Al-Hajjaj said, `Yes.' Yahya said, `Is not `Isa from the offspring of Ibrahim,
although he did not have a father' Al-Hajjaj said, `You have said the truth."
For example, when a man leaves behind a legacy, a trust, or gift to his "offspring''
then the children of his daughters are included. But if a man gives something to his
"sons'', or he leaves a trust behind for them, then that would be particular to his
male children and their male children ...
(Source;
underline emphasis ours)
In fact, Ibn Kathir even stated that Mary was from David's line!
<And mention in the Book, Maryam,> She was Maryam bint `Imran from
the family lineage of Dawud. She was from a good and wholesome family of
the Children of Israel. Allah mentioned the story of her mother's pregnancy with her
in Surah Al `Imran, and that she (Maryam's mother) dedicated her freely for the service
of Allah. This meant that she dedicated the child (Maryam) to the service of the Masjid
of the Sacred House (in Jerusalem). Thus, they (Zakariyya, Maryam's mother and Maryam)
were similar in that aspect. (Source;
bold and underline emphasis ours)
Thus, Islam concurs that a person can trace his genealogy through his mothers side.
Abualrub writes:
Further, why would Matthew (1:1) say this, "The book of the
generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham",
when this statement contradicts the foundation of Christianity, that is, Jesus being the
son of God? Why would Luke (3:38) say this, "Adam, which was the son
of God", when according to Christians, it was Jesus who was the son of
God not Adam?
ANSWER:
Abularub is again attacking a straw man. How can any Christian claim
that Adam is not the son of God when their own Scriptures say he was?! Abualrub is
committing another fallacy, namely the fallacy of equivocation since he assumes that Jesus
is Gods Son in the same sense that Adam was. Again, instead of demonstrating here
why this claim is erroneous, for the sake of brevity we will simple defer the discussion
to the following papers:
More importantly, Abualrub apparently doesnt want to see how this
passage from Luke refutes the Quran. It shows that both the Old and New Testaments
perfectly agree that God is a Father to his people, having many sons and daughters in
a purely spiritual sense, which disagrees with the Quran that says that Allah is
nobodys father!
This concludes this section. Our examination of Abualrub's arguments continues in
Part 2.
Endnotes
{1} There are several places where the OT applies the noun Elohim,
or God, to humans who function as Gods representatives:
"He shall speak for you to the people, and he shall be your mouth,
and you shall be as God to him." Exodus 4:16
"And the LORD said to Moses, See, I have made you like God
to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet." Exodus 7:1
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.The scepter of your
kingdom is a scepter of uprightness; you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness.
Therefore God, your God, has anointed youwith the oil of gladness beyond your
companions;" Psalm 45:6-7
Moses and the King of Israel werent called God because they were divinities, nor
are these passages using the word God in an exaggerated, hyperbolic manner. These
individuals were called God in a functional, representational sense, i.e. since they were
Gods representatives they functioned in the role of God to the people.
However, the child in Isaiah 9 isnt simply called Elohim, but is given titles
that go far beyond a functional sense. For instance, the child is given a title, Mighty
God, which elsewhere is attributed only to Yahweh God:
"For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty,
and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe." Deuteronomy 10:17
"Now, therefore, our God, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who
keeps covenant and steadfast love, let not all the hardship seem little to you that has
come upon us, upon our kings, our princes, our priests, our prophets, our fathers, and all
your people, since the time of the kings of Assyria until this day." Nehemiah 9:32
"In that day the remnant of Israel and the survivors of the house of Jacob will no
more lean on him who struck them, but will lean on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in
truth. A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God." Isaiah
10:20-21
"You show steadfast love to thousands, but you repay the guilt of fathers to their
children after them, O great and mighty God, whose name is the LORD of hosts," Jeremiah 32:18
Hence, Moses and the King were merely types pointing to the reality embodied in the
Messiah, i.e. they were God solely in a functional sense pointing to the One who was God
in an actual sense.
Again, the fact that the OT can call Gods spokespersons God, as
well as address the Davidic King as the Mighty God, proves that the OT is not in line with
the Quran. The OT is perfectly in line with the theology and teaching of the NT
scriptures.
In this post I will share some of the biblical evidences, which led the first Christians to the conclusion that the one true God is Triune by nature.
One True God
The Bible is clear that there is only one uncreated God who created and sustains all creation. The name
”Accepting James White’s Challenge to Provide an Exegesis of 1 John 5:1"
The following is Dr. David W. Allen's refutation to internet reformed apologist James R. White's butchering of 1 John 5:1 for the purpose of forcing his calvinistic misreading into it.