Paul's Dependency on Talmudic Writings: A Refutation of the Muslim Claim
In the article, Paul's
Dependency on Talmudic Writings, MENJ (Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi) presents yet
another attack on the Apostle Paul and the authority of the New Testament Scriptures.
He begins his polemic:
Introduction
While Christians would prefer to allude to the notion that Paul, the self-acclaimed
"apostle" of Jesus, was "inspired" when he wrote his epistles,
the evidences we have researched states otherwise. We have seen how Paul had cited
a verse from the 'apocryphal books of Elijah' but claimed that he was citing from the book
of Isaiah. Apparantly this citing of quotations from apocryphal or Rabbinic writings
was not alien to Paul, for in the epistles of Paul, there are abundant signs that he
was extremely familiar with Rabbanic material and constantly refers to them. This is
not surprising since Paul himself had admitted to familiarity with Jewish traditions
under the tutelage of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3).
RESPONSE:
While Muslims would choose to ignore the inspired Apostle of the Lord Jesus for
a self-appointed prophet named Muhammad, we side with the truth and put our hope in
the message that God spoke through his beloved servant Paul. Lord Jesus willing, we
will be producing a response to MENJ’s erroneous assertion that Paul quoted from
the apocalypse of Elijah. Here we want to focus on MENJ’s claim that Paul cited
the rabbinic sources.
The first major problem with MENJ’s thesis is that most of the sources which
he claims Paul borrowed from are actually post-NT writings.
TANHUMA A collection of aggadic midrashim. The Tanhuma contains many midrashim
attributed to 4th century Rabbi Tanhuma bar Abba, but since it contains
anti-Karaite material, the collection cannot be dated before the 9th Century.
It is also known as Yelammedenu. (Lavinia and Dan Cohen-Sherbok, A Popular Dictionary
of Judaism [Curzon Press, 1995], p. 175)
RASHI (Solomon ben Isaac) 1040-1105 AD.
TALMUD The record of the *amoraim on the *Mishnah. The Jerusalem
Talmud was compiled in the late 5th Century CE and the Babylonian
Talmud in the late 6th Century ... The Babylonian Talmud was
recognized as the supreme authority by the 11th century ... Ibid. p. 174
... Genesis Rabbah is generally considered to be the earliest compilation
(completed c. 5th cent. CE); from a slightly later date are Leviticus Rabbah
and the midrashim to the Five Scrolls ... Originating from a later period are
the midrashim to Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which are related
to - and at times identical with - the *Tanhuma’-Yelammedenu collection of midrashim;
these were completely written in Hebrew. Several of the midrashim (those to Exodus,
Numbers, and Esther) are, in their present form, a composite of two works from
different periods. Viewed together, the midrashim in Midrash Rabbah present a
compendium of rabbinic exegesis and lore on the books of the Bible that were most often
read and studied in the synagogue and study hall throughout the Mishnaic, Talmudic, and
late Byzantine periods ... (The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish religion, R.J. Zwi
Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wigoder, editors in chief [Oxford University Press, New York and
Oxford, 1997], p. 464)
TALMUD (... Teaching), name applied to each of two great compilations,
distinguished respectively as the Talmud Yerushalmi (Palestinian Talmud) and the Talmud
Bavli (Babylonian Talmud), in which are collected the teachings of the major Jewish
Scholars (amora’im) who flourished between 200 and 500 CE, the classic period of
rabbinic Judaism.
After the Mishnah was edited in approximately 200 CE... The compilation of the
Talmud Yerushalmi (c. 400 CE) preceded that of the Talmud Bavli by about one hundred
years. As a result, the Yerushalmi often preserves more pristine and accurate versions
of material ... (Ibid., pp. 668-669)
... Many passages are attributed to the homilist R. *Tanhuma’ ben Abba’
who was active during the second half of the fourth century in Palestine.
Earlier scholars made conflicting claims about the date and identity of the
"early" Tanhuma’ or Yelammedenu, which was thought to be the original
source of all the surviving works of this type. Recent research has allowed scholars to
distinguish relatively early traditions and sources within early, middle, and late
redactional strata running through the various works. Tanhuma’-Yelammedenu literature
is best regarded as a particular Midrashim genre that began to crystallize toward the end
of the Byzantine period in Palestine (5-7th cent.) but continued to evolve and
spread throughout the Diaspora well into the Middle Ages. For example, Tanhuma’
(the first printed version was published in Constantinople [1520-522]) seems to have undergone
final redaction in geonic Babylonia ... (Ibid., p. 674)
In one of his responses to a Christian "missionary" MENJ asked a retired
university Professor and observant Jew named JosephG about the dates of the Talmud.
MENJ then published his response in an article on the web:
First, we would need to understand the importance of the Talmud in Jewish belief.
Dr. JosephG explains:
The Talmud represents the first effort in recording
the 'Oral Law' or 'Oral Tradition' of Judaism, and there actually exist two
Talmuds. These are not two versions of the same thing; rather, the Jerusalem Talmud deals
more with agrarian issues of the Law, while the Babylonian Talmud deals with the rest of
the Law. Of the two, the Babylonian Talmud is considered the 'senior statesman', i.e., the
more 'authoritative'.
In general, the Talmud is made up of the
"Mishnah" (~15-20%) and the "Gemara" (~80-85%) - it was started in
the second half of the 2nd century CE and completed in the 6th century CE.
In light of the foregoing it is very difficult to see how Paul could have borrowed from
sources which were not even in existence during his time!!! If one wants to argue
dependency at all, based on chronology one could make a much better case that the Jews
borrowed from Paul’s writings. The burden of proof is upon MENJ to show that
(a) these specific sources were circulating before or during the time of Paul whether
orally or in writing and (b) that he would have been aware of them.
Furthermore, MENJ’s argument seemingly presumes that there is nothing true in
these sources. Otherwise if he doesn’t assume this then why should it be a problem
for Paul, a Pharisee, to appeal to Jewish sources which may contain true anecdotes in
them? MENJ himself alluded to the following citation:
"Then Paul said: ‘I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in
this city. Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers and
was just as zealous for God as any of you are today.’" Acts 22:3 NIV
Other passages bring out this point more clearly:
"Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees,
called out in the Sanhedrin, ‘My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee.
I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead.’ When he said
this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was
divided. (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither
angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)" Acts 23:6-8 NIV
"though I myself have reasons for such confidence. If anyone else thinks he has
reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of
the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law,
a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness,
faultless." Philippians 3:4-6 NIV
In other words, even if Paul were borrowing from Jewish source material in what way
would that refute his apostleship or the inspiration of his writings? Since Paul was
trained as a Pharisee we would expect him to be familiar with sources and stories not
found in the Holy Bible, sources containing accurate information. Paul also quoted pagan
poets and philosophers:
"‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your
own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’" Acts 17:28
"Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’"
1 Corinthians 15:33 NIV
"Even one of their own prophets has said, ‘Cretans are always liars,
evil brutes, lazy gluttons.’" Titus 1:12 NIV
The preceding citations all come from pagan sources. Does this mean that Paul believed
they were inspired just because he quoted from them? Or does this somehow deny Paul’s
legitimacy as Christ’s spokesperson? Of course not, since it doesn’t necessarily
follow that if a pagan said something then it can’t be true. Even pagans can have
something truthful to say. Just as Paul could appeal to truths known by pagans as a way
of illustrating his point, he could also point out truths from uninspired Jewish writings
without making them inspired or vice versa them discrediting the inspiration of
Paul’s writings. More on this below.
MENJ turns his attention to the so-called evidence supposedly supporting his contention
that Paul borrowed from Talmudic writings:
Paul's Dependency on the Talmudic Writings: The Evidence
In 2 Timothy 3:8,
we see that Paul traditionally names two of the Egyptian magicians
who withstood Moses as Jannes and Jambres, respectively. He compares
the both of them with his enemies, as the following verse
records:
"Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so do
these men oppose the truth, corrupt thinkers as they are and
counterfeits so far as faith is concerned."
The names of these
two Egyptian magicians are nowhere to be found in the Old Testament.
The Midrash Rabbah on Exodus, however, makes mention of these two
names as "Yochani" and "Mamre" respectively, and states:
Yochani and Mamre
said to Moshe "Would you carry straw to Afraim?" He [Moses] said to them: "carry herbs to
herb-town."[1]
The
names of these Egyptian magicians also appears in Midrash Tanchuma
(Parshat Ki Tisa) 19:19 as a Commentary on Exodus 32:
Forty thousand people had assembled to leave Egypt with the
Israelites, and among them were two Egyptians named Jannes and
Jambres, who had performed magical feats for
Pharaoh.[2]
Thus it
is clear that these magicians' names came from the Rabbinic
traditions and had no doubt influenced Paul considerably to include
these names in his epistle.
RESPONSE:
Before we respond we first would like to expose MENJ’s inconsistency here.
MENJ’s comments presume that Paul authored the Pastoral Epistles, i.e. Titus
and 1 & 2 Timothy (specifically 2 Timothy). This is not the only time where
MENJ claims that Paul wrote 2 Timothy (cf.
Paul and
The 'Inspiration' of Scripture).
Yet elsewhere on his site he has posted Usman Sheikh’s article where the latter
goes out of his way to deny the Pauline authorship of the Pastoral letters:
Furthermore, Timothy is not recognized as genuine, it is the consensus of modern
scholars that this document is spurious, and from the 2nd century. We read that
A number of considerations lead many exegetes to
the conclusion that the entire letter is pseudepigraphical. Thus we ought not to think
that the passage under consideration (3:10-17) is part of a personal letter from the
apostle to Timothy, his close friend and trusted co-worker.[7]
Archibald Robertson also informs us that
...those (letters) to Timothy and Titus are regarded
even by professional theologians as second-century concoctions.[8]
Finally, we read that
...all scholars except Catholics and
Fundamentalists now agree that they (Timothy and Titus letters) are second century
compositions dealing with a second century situation...these forgers probably drew on
what they knew of Paul's life to lend their work an air of verisimilitude.[9]
Even the Catholics now believe that Timothy is a second century composition, as we have
quoted from Collins above. In a while we will look at highly-respected sources such as
The New Jerome Bible Commentary and others, which categorically admits this.
Certainly, in Paul's time, there was no concept of any Christian "scripture",
let alone a Canon.
Now it seems that MENJ wants to have his cake and eat it too. Either MENJ accepts
Pauline authorship and therefore must reject the claims of Usman Sheikh, or he accepts
Sheikh’s conclusions and thereby forfeits his claim that Paul borrowed from rabbinic
sources since the Apostle didn’t author 2 Timothy. But we do thank MENJ for helping
us refute Usman’s claims since we agree with MENJ that Paul did author 2 Timothy.
Returning to the issue at hand, as we have already noted, apart from the fact that
these sources are later than Paul, MENJ seems to be operating under the assumption
that there is nothing true in these Jewish sources. He seems to operate under an all
or nothing mentality. But this would only provide further evidence for his inconsistency.
In responding to Christian "missionary" Jameel, MENJ asks:
Several questions need to be raised for the missionaries:
Is there 100% material evidence that the Jewish traditions which dealt with issue
ARE JUST MYTHS WITHOUT ANY BASE OR SPACE FOR TRUTH IN THEM, considering that the
authenticity of the Midrash Rabbah is not certain and that the Jews themselves do
treat it as the truth?
Does the non-mention of any event in the Old Testament or New Testament
constitute a fact that it never took place?
So we need to ask MENJ, does the fact that the names of the Egyptian magicians appear
in a non-biblical source ipso facto prove that Paul was quoting from myths? Or is
it possible that these non-biblical Jewish sources do contain factual statements which so
happen to be mixed in with myths and allegories? We will have more to say about this in
the second part of our response.
Interestingly, there is evidence that it is the Quran which has borrowed its
information from the Jannes and Jambre story. Speaking of the similarity between the
Quran’s account and the Jewish stories regarding the Egyptian magicians’ use
of magic and their subsequent conversion, the authors at Freethought Mecca write:
So, if both the Jews and Christians interpreted the meeting of Moses and Pharaoh's
magicians as being an incident where real power met false magic, it is easy to see how
this same story would make its way into the Qur'an. We have already shown that the
Rabbinic commentaries saw the act of turning a stick into a snake as something that any
fool could do in Egypt, the home of sleight of hand, smoke, mirrors and illusion. Now, we
would like to show what some Christians thought. Consider, for example, what Ambrosiaster
(Pseudo-Ambrose) wrote in the fourth century:
Jannes and Jambres were two brothers, magicians and enchanters of the Egyptians, who
through phony magic thought to resist God's mighty acts. But worsted by Moses they
confessed in pain from their sores that God was active in Moses.
[Ambrosiaster on 2 Timothy 3:8, as cited in Albert Pietersma, The Apocryphon of Jannes
and Jambres the Magicians, (E.J. Brill, 1994), p. 30]
So before the advent of Islam, there were Christians and Jews who understood the text
as stating that Pharaoh's magicians worked through fraud. Also note that in the Qur'anic
version Pharaoh's magicians convert to Moses' faith. In the Zohar (which is a
post Islamic compilation of older traditions) Jannes and Jambres become Jews. Midrash
Tanchuma (on Parshat Ki Tissa) states that Jannes and Jambres were among the
mixed multitude that left Israel with the Jews. Shemot Rabbah 42:6 speaks of Moses
accepting Egyptian proselytes into the mixed multitude. All this, combined with
Ambrosiatser's treatment of the magician's recognition of Moses' true power coming from
God, could point to pre-Islamic Christians and Jews being aware of this conversion.
(Pharaoh's Magicians
and the Hadeethu Moosa; bold emphasis ours)
The evidence strongly points in the direction of the Quran borrowing Jewish stories
rather than Paul borrowing from them.
MENJ continues:
Paul also adopted
the current Jewish chronologies in Acts 13:20-21. He alludes to the
notion that the Adam of Genesis 1 is the ideal or spiritual, the
Adam of Gen 2 the concrete and sinful Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47,
also found in Philo, De Opif. Mund i.32). The conception of
the last trumpet (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16) , of
the giving of the Law at Sinai by Angels (Galatians 3:19), of Satan
as the god of this world and the prince of the air (Ephesians 2:2)
and of the celestial and infernal hierarchies (Ephesians 1:21, 3:10;
4:12; Colossians 1:16; 2:15) are all recurrent in Talmudic writings.
RESPONSE:
A careful examination of all these passages shows that there are no parallels with
MENJ’s assumed sources. We begin with Acts:
"he overthrew seven nations in Canaan and gave their land to his
people as their inheritance. All this took about 450 years. After this, God gave them
judges until the time of Samuel the prophet. Then the people asked for a king, and he gave
them Saul son of Kish, of the tribe of Benjamin, who ruled forty years." Acts
13:19-21 NIV
MENJ imagines Paul’s reference to 450 years is something he borrowed from
contemporary Jewish chronologies. MENJ seems to have not realized that the Jews derived
their chronology from a careful reading and analysis of the Hebrew Bible itself. The late
N.T. scholar F.F. Bruce notes:
... The 450 years seem to cover the period of sojourning in Egypt (four hundred
years, according to Gen. 15:13; cf. Acts 7:6), together with the forty years of wandering
in the wilderness and the interval that elapsed between the crossing of the Jordan and the
distribution of the land recorded in Josh. 14:1-5. (The wording of Josh. 14:1-2 has also
left its mark on the language of verse 19.) (F.F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts
(New International Commentary on the New Testament), Revised Edition [William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, Grand Rapids, MI 1988], p. 255)
Paul was therefore being thoroughly biblical in adopting a chronology which was
consistent with the inspired revelation. We need to reiterate the point that not
everything believed by the Jews of Paul’s day was inconsistent with the inspired
revelation. Both the Lord Jesus and the Apostle confirmed many of the beliefs and
practices of the Jews of their day since much of it was based on the inspired scriptures.
Did Paul have to deny everything associated with Judaism in order for MENJ to accept him
as a legitimate representative of Christ? Apparently so.
Turning our attention to 1 Corinthians 15:47, again nothing in the context even
remotely suggests that Paul was borrowing from Jewish sources:
"So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living
being’; the last Adam, a lifegiving spirit. The spiritual did not come
first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of
the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are
of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven.
And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the
likeness of the man from heaven." 1 Corinthians 15:45-49 NIV
Where does Paul contrast the Adam of Genesis 1 with the Adam of Genesis 2? If anything,
Paul’s sequence shows that the Adam of Genesis 1 is the concrete sinful one since
Paul says that the natural, not the spiritual, came first! The contrast here is between
Adam and the Lord Jesus, the man who came down from heaven. A careful reading of the
context points this out:
"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who
have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead
comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong
to him." 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 NIV
The idea of a trumpet sounding to announce the Day of God’s judgment and
visitation isn’t necessarily from rabbinic literature. We find precedence for
this idea within the OT itself:
"Ah, land of whirring wings that is beyond the rivers of Cush, which
sends ambassadors by the sea, in vessels of papyrus on the waters! Go, you
swift messengers, to a nation, tall and smooth, to a people feared near and
far, a nation mighty and conquering, Whose land the rivers divide. All you
inhabitants of the world, you who dwell on the earth, when a signal is raised on the
mountains, look! When a trumpet is blown, hear! For thus the LORD said to me:
‘I will quietly look from my dwelling like clear heat in sunshine, like a cloud of
dew in the heat of harvest.’ For before the harvest, when the blossom is over, and
the flower becomes a ripening grape, he cuts off the shoots with pruning hooks, and the
spreading branches he lops off and clears away. They shall all of them be left to the
birds of prey of the mountains and to the beasts of the earth. And the birds of prey
will summer on them, and all the beasts of the earth will winter on them. At that time
tribute will be brought to the LORD of hosts from a people tall and smooth, from a people
feared near and far, a nation mighty and conquering, whose land the rivers divide,
to Mount Zion, the place of the name of the LORD of hosts." Isaiah 18:1-7 ESV
"In that day the LORD will thresh from the flowing Euphrates to the Wadi of Egypt,
and you, O Israelites, will be gathered up one by one. And in that day a great trumpet
will sound. Those who were perishing in Assyria and those who were exiled in Egypt
will come and worship the LORD on the holy mountain in Jerusalem." Isaiah 27:12-13 NIV
"Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy hill. Let all who
live in the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming. It is close at
hand... Blow the trumpet in Zion, declare a holy fast, call a sacred assembly."
Joel 2:1, 15 NIV
This last one is pertinent to the issue since it directly ties in with the coming
of the Messiah, the Lord Jesus:
"Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See,
your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey. I will take away the chariots from Ephraim and the
war-horses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be broken. He will proclaim peace to
the nations. His rule will extend from sea to sea and from the River to the ends of
the earth. As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you, I will free your
prisoners from the waterless pit. Return to your fortress, O prisoners of hope; even now I
announce that I will restore twice as much to you. I will bend Judah as I bend my bow and
fill it with Ephraim. I will rouse your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Greece, and
make you like a warrior's sword. Then the LORD will appear over them; his arrow will
flash like lightning. The Sovereign LORD will sound the trumpet; he will march in the
storms of the south, and the LORD Almighty will shield them. They will destroy and
overcome with slingstones. They will drink and roar as with wine; they will be full like
a bowl used for sprinkling the corners of the altar. The LORD their God will save them on
that day as the flock of his people. They will sparkle in his land like jewels in a crown.
How attractive and beautiful they will be! Grain will make the young men thrive, and new
wine the young women." Zechariah 9:9-17 NIV
Furthermore, if Paul’s reference of a trumpet sounding on the Day of the Lord
shows borrowing then what does this say about the Quran?
And on that day we shall let some of them surge against others, and the Trumpet
will be blown. Then We shall gather them together in one gathering. On that day we shall
present hell to the disbelievers, plain to view, S. 18:99-100 Pickthall
The Day when the Trumpet will be sounded: that Day, We shall gather the sinful,
blear-eyed (with terror). S. 20:102 Y. Ali
"In order that I may work righteousness in the things I neglected."- "By
no means! It is but a word he says." - Before them is a Partition till the Day they
are raised up. Then when the Trumpet is blown, there will be no more relationships
between them that Day, nor will one ask after another! S. 23:100-101 Y. Ali
We wonder what will MENJ say about the Quran’s reference to the trumpet blowing
on the day of resurrection? Will he be consistent and claim that Muhammad borrowed these
truths from post-biblical Jewish sources as well?
As far as the giving of the law by angels is concerned, we find this stated in
the Hebrew Scriptures:
"He said, ‘The LORD came from Sinai and dawned from Seir upon us;
he shone forth from Mount Paran; he came from the ten thousands of holy
ones, with flaming fire at his right hand." Deuteronomy 33:2 ESV
Note how the LXX renders this passage:
"And he said, The Lord is come from Sina, and has appeared from Seir to us, and
has hasted out the mount of Pharan, with the ten THOUSANDS (muriasi) of
Cades; on his right hand wereANGELS WITH HIM."
Lest MENJ complains about our use of the LXX, we only need to remind him of his own
praise of it:
From the citation above, we can conclude that:
1) Septuagint is a Greek version of the Old Testament.
2) It (Septuagint) has already existed three centuries before Christ was born,
and therefore IT IS AUTHENTIC.
The teaching that Satan is the prince of this world, and that there is a hierarchy of
angelic creatures, comes from both the OT and the Lord Jesus himself:
"At that time I, Daniel, mourned for three weeks. I ate no choice food; no meat or
wine touched my lips; and I used no lotions at all until the three weeks were over. On the
twenty-fourth day of the first month, as I was standing on the bank of the great river,
the Tigris, I looked up and there before me was a man dressed in linen, with a belt of the
finest gold around his waist. His body was like chrysolite, his face like lightning, his
eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and his
voice like the sound of a multitude... Then I heard him speaking, and as I listened to
him, I fell into a deep sleep, my face to the ground. A hand touched me and set me
trembling on my hands and knees. He said, ‘Daniel, you who are highly esteemed,
consider carefully the words I am about to speak to you, and stand up, for I have now been
sent to you.’ And when he said this to me, I stood up trembling. Then he continued,
‘Do not be afraid, Daniel. Since the first day that you set your mind to gain
understanding and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have
come in response to them. But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one
days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained
there with the king of Persia’... So he said, ‘Do you know why I have
come to you? Soon I will return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I go,
the prince of Greece will come; but first I will tell you what is written in the Book
of Truth. (No one supports me against them except Michael, your prince.’"
Daniel 10:2-6, 9-13, 20-21 NIV
"At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will
arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of
nations until then. But at that time your people-everyone whose name is found written in
the book-will be delivered. Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some
to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will
shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like
the stars for ever and ever." Daniel 12:1-3 NIV
"The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the
kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, ‘I will give you all their authority and
splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. So if
you worship me, it will all be yours.’" Luke 4:5-7 NIV
"Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will
be driven out." John 12:31 NIV
"I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming.
He has no hold on me," John 14:30 NIV
"and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands
condemned." John 16:11 NIV
MENJ:
When Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:10 that a women ought to have a veil on her
head because of the angel, as stated in the following:
"The woman,
therefore, ought to have a token of authority on her head,
because of the angels"
he demonstrates a
very high familiarity with the Talmudic writings, as he is
apparently referring to the Rabbinic interpretation of Genesis 6:2
as follows:
THE SONS OF GOD. The sons of princes
and rulers. Another explanation of B'nei Elohim is that
these were princely angels who came as messengers of God, and
they intermingled with the daughters of men. Wherever the word
"elohim" appears in the scriptures, it signifies authority,
thus the following passages: "And you shall be his master
(elohim)" [Exodus 4:16] and "see, I have made you a master
(elohim)." [Exodus 7:1][3]
Paul obviously
believed this Rabbinic tradition which states that angels have
mingled with the daughters of men to have included this in his
epistle. The Targum, as quoted in the epistle of Jude (2 Peter
2:4; Jude 6), clearly ascribe the Fall to the angels to their guilty
love for earthly women.
The Jewish mind - a
notion which is found over and over again in the Talmud, and which
is still prevalent among Oriental Jews, is that they never let their
women to be unveiled in the public lest the shedin, or evil
spirits, should injure them or others. A headdress called khalbi
is worn as a religious duty by Jewish women.
The reason why
Solomon's bed was guarded by sixty valiant men with drawn swords was
because of fear in the night. (Cant iii 7, 8). This is alluded
to the following story in Pesachim 112b:
"Do not go out at
night. Not on Wednesday night or on Sabbath night, because Igrath
(Agrat) the daughter of Mahalath (Machalat) along with 180,000
destroying angels are out, each with permission to cause
destruction independently."[4]
They are called ruchin, shedin, lilin, tiharim.
RESPONSE:
It is amazing that MENJ could assert that Paul was supposedly referring to the fallen
angels of Gen. 6:2,4 and at the same time appeal to 2 Peter 2:4 which refutes his entire
position! Here is what 2 Peter says:
"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,
putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment"
How could Paul be referring to the angels of Gen. 6 when Peter explicitly says
that they are locked away in chains till the judgment?!
Instead of trying to find parallels with the Post-NT Talmudic writings MENJ should
have spent his time combing through the NT since this would have helped him better
understand Paul’s angelology:
"See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you
that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven."
Matthew 18:10
"‘You're out of your mind,’ they told her. When she kept insisting
that it was so, they said, ‘It must be his angel.’" Acts 12:15
"I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to
keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism."
1 Timothy 5:21
"Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit
salvation?" Hebrews 1:14
"To the angel of the church in Ephesus write:" Revelation 2:1, 8, 12, 18;
3:1, 7, 14
The preceding passages show that according to the Lord Jesus and his holy Apostles God
has assigned angels to protect and serve the Church. Paul was telling women that they
needed to have their sign of authority in the presence of these elect angels whom God
assigned to believers. It has nothing to do with fallen angels. Paul could have easily
conveyed the idea that these were fallen angels by referring to them as demons, a word
he uses elsewhere:
"No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and
I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the
Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table
and the table of demons." 1 Corinthians 10:20-21 NIV
"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and
follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons." 1 Timothy 4:1
Keep in mind here that 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy are epistles where Paul uses the
phrase angels, which shows that if he had fallen angels in mind he would have probably
used the term demons to indicate this as the above examples show.
"For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither ANGELS nor DEMONS,
neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything
else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ
Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:38-39 NIV
Notice that Paul distinguishes angels from demons.
Paul could have also indicated that the angels of 1 Cor. 11:10 were demons by adding
some kind of qualifier, i.e. by calling them angels of Satan etc. as he does in the
following citation:
To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations,
there was given me a thorn in my flesh, an angel of Satan, to torment me.
2 Corinthians 12:7
Finally, it is again shocking that MENJ would even bring up such an argument in light
of what the Quran says:
And (also) those who spend their wealth in order to be seen of men, and believe not
in Allah nor the Last Day. Whoso taketh Satan for a comrade (qareenan), a bad
comrade (qareenan) hath he. S. 4:38
Thus have We appointed unto every prophet an adversary - devils of humankind and
jinn who inspire in one another plausible discourse through guile. If thy Lord willed,
they would not do so; so leave them alone with their devising; S. 6:112
Then they will turn to one another and question one another. One of them will say:
"I had an intimate companion (qareenun) (on the earth), Who used
to say: ‘Do you really believe? When we die and become dust and bones, shall we
indeed receive rewards and punishments?’" He said: "Would ye like to look
down?" He looked down and saw him in the midst of the Fire. He said: "By Allah!
Thou wast little short of bringing me to perdition! Had it not been for the Grace of my
Lord, I should certainly have been among those brought (there)!" S. 37:50-57
And We have destined for them intimate companions (quranaa), who made
alluring to them what was before them and behind them; and the sentence among the previous
generations of Jinns and men, who have passed away, is proved against them; for they are
utterly lost. S. 41:25
If anyone withdraws himself from remembrance of the Most Gracious, We appoint for
him a Satan, to be an intimate companion (qareenun) to him. Such (Satans) really
hinder them from the Path, but they think that they are being guided aright! At length,
when (such a one) comes to Us, he says (to his evil companion): "Would that between
me and thee were the distance of East and West!" Ah! evil is the companion (indeed)!
S. 43:36-38
(It will be said:) "Thou wast heedless of this; now have We removed thy veil, and
sharp is thy sight this Day!" And his Companion (qareenuhu) will say:
"Here is (his Record) ready with me!" (The sentence will be:) "Throw, both
of you, into Hell every contumacious Rejecter (of Allah)!- Who forbade what was good,
transgressed all bounds, cast doubts and suspicions; Who set up another god beside Allah:
throw him into a severe chastisement." His Companion (qarina) will say: "Our
Lord! I did not make him transgress, but he was (himself) far astray." He will say:
"Dispute not with each other in My Presence: I had already in advance sent you
Warning. The Word changes not with Me, and I do not the least injustice to My
Servants." The Day We will ask Hell, "Art thou filled to the full?"
It will say, "Are there any more (to come)?" S. 50:22-30
Allah is the one that assigns a qareen (i.e., devil/demon/satan) to believers and
unbelievers, as well as assigning human and spiritual devils to test the prophets.
The Quran even goes so far as to say that Solomon had demons working for him!
And to Solomon (we subjected) the wind blowing stormily, to run on at his
bidding to the land which Ave have blessed, - for all things did we know,-
and some devils (alshshayateen) to dive for him, and to do
other works beside that; and we kept guard over them. S. 21:81-82 Palmer
Using MENJ’s logic, we must therefore conclude that the Talmudic
stories of fallen angels have found its way into the Quranic text since it is indisputably
a post-Talmudic document. [For more details on the qareen, see chapter VI.
of Samuel Zwemer's, The Influence
of Animism on Islam.]
MENJ:
Again, in Romans 4:5-12, Paul evidently accepts the tradition, also referred to by St.
Stephen, that Abraham had been uncircumcised idolater when he first obeyed the call of
God, and that he then received a promise - unknown to the text of the scripture - that he
should be the heir of the world. (Romans 4:13, cf. Joshua 24:15). In Romans 9:9,
whereby it states
"For this is the message of the promise, 'At
about this time next year, I will come, and Sarah will have a son'"
it has been supposed, from the form of his quotation, that he is alluding to
the Rabbinic notion that Isaac was created in the womb by a fiat of God.; In Galatians
4:29, whereby it says
"But just as then the one born in a fleshly
way persecuted the one born in accord with the Spirit, so too at present"
this is in accordance to the Haggadah tradition that Ishmael had not only laughed, but
also jeered, insulted, and mistreated Isaac. Thus we find the following in Sanhedrin 89b:
Rabbi Levi said: These are the words of
Ishmael to Isaac. Ishmael said to Isaac: "I am greater than you in commandments, for
you were circumcised at eight days old, and I when I was thirteen years old." He
[Isaac] said to him: "You tease me over one organ? If the Holy One, blessed be He,
says to me 'sacrifice yourself to me,' I will sacrifice myself." Immediately God
tested Abraham.[5]
RESPONSE:
We invite readers to simply look over the Pauline passages and see if they are at all
similar to what is found in the above Talmudic quote. In regard to Abraham inheriting
the world, Paul was making an inference based on God’s promises to the Patriarch:
"When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, ‘I
am God Almighty; walk before me and be blameless. I will confirm my covenant between me
and you and will greatly increase your numbers.’ Abram fell facedown, and God said to
him, ‘As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many
nations. No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I have made
you a father of many nations. I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of
you, and kings will come from you. I will establish my covenant as an everlasting
covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to
be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you
are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants
after you; and I will be their God.’" Genesis 17:1-8 NIV
"Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on
earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his
children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right
and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him."
Genesis 18:18-19 NIV
"The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said,
‘I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not
withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as
numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will
take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations
on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.’" Genesis 22:15-18 NIV
God promises that Abraham would become the father of many nations and that all the
families of the earth would receive God’s blessings through the Patriarch.
The OT states:
"But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy great peace... the righteous will
inherit the land and dwell in it forever." Psalm 37:11, 29 NIV- cf. Matthew 5:5
According to both the Lord Jesus and the Apostle Paul all who have the faith and
righteousness of Abraham are his descendants:
"‘Abraham is our father,’ they answered. ‘If you were Abraham's
children,’ said Jesus, ‘then you would do the things Abraham did. As it
is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.
Abraham did not do such things.’" John 8:39-40 NIV
"It was not through law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that
he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. For if
those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, because
law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression. Therefore, the
promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's
offspring - not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of
Abraham. He is the father of us all. As it is written: ‘I have made you a
father of many nations.’ He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed
- the God who gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were. Against
all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it
had been said to him, ‘So shall your offspring be.’" Romans 4:13-18 NIV
Therefore, since all the righteous faithful are Abraham’s seed, and since they are
the ones that shall inherit the earth, Paul was completely correct regarding Abraham
inheriting the world.
Astonishingly, MENJ claims that Paul’s statement in Romans 9:9 points to the
rabbinic notion that God created Isaac by his word, EVEN THOUGH THAT PASSAGE ITSELF CITES
GENESIS 18:8 and 10 AND THEREFORE SHOWS THAT PAUL WAS GETTING HIS INFO FROM THE OT
SCRIPTURES!!! In fact, there are several citations from the OT in Romans 9, conclusively
showing that Paul was deriving his understanding from the Hebrew Scriptures.
What is more amazing is that right after saying this MENJ quotes Galatians 4:29,
which says:
"But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him
who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now." ESV
Paul says that Isaac was born by (according to) God’s Spirit, and says absolutely
nothing about God’s word!
Finally, here is the source for Paul’s claim that Ishmael persecuted Isaac:
"The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a
great feast. But Sarah saw that THE SON whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham
WAS MOCKING, and she said to Abraham, ‘Get rid of that slave woman and her son,
for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son
Isaac.’" Genesis 21:8-10
It is quite apparent that MENJ hasn’t even bothered to carefully read the NT
passages he quotes in support of his erroneous claims. If he has, then he is deliberately
being dishonest in asserting that Paul was getting his info from post-NT sources, or
Jewish tradition, as opposed to the OT itself.
MENJ:
In 2 Corinthians 11:14, whereby we read that
"...and no wonder, for Satan himself
masquerades as an angel of light"
Paul adhered to the notion that the angel who wrestled with Jacob was Satan assuming
the semblance of an Angel of Light.
RESPONSE:
Where does Paul even mention Jacob and the angel? NOWHERE. MENJ is simply reading into
the text things nowhere articulated in order to arrive at his erroneous conclusion that
Paul copied from the rabbis!
Furthermore, instead of appealing to post-NT Jewish documents MENJ should have
carefully examined the OT since it easily refutes his assertion that the angel was Satan:
"And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the
day. When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket,
and Jacob's hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. Then he said,
‘Let me go, for the day has broken.’ But Jacob said, ‘I will not let you go
unless you bless me.’ And he said to him, ‘What is your name?’
And he said, ‘Jacob.’ Then he said, ‘Your name shall no longer
be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and have
prevailed.’ Then Jacob asked him, ‘Please tell me your name.’
But he said, ‘Why is it that you ask my name?’ And there he blessed him. So
Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, ‘FOR I HAVE SEEN GOD FACE TO
FACE, and yet my life has been delivered.’" Genesis 32:24-30 ESV
Note Jacob’s words carefully. Jacob claims to have seen and wrestled God, which
MENJ claimed was Satan!!!! Here is what God’s inspired prophet Hosea wrote about this
episode:
"The LORD has a charge to bring against Judah; he will punish Jacob according to
his ways and repay him according to his deeds. In the womb he grasped his brother's heel;
as a man he struggled with God. He struggled with the angel and overcame him; he wept and
begged for his favor. He found him at Bethel and talked with him there- the LORD
God Almighty, the LORD is his name of renown!" Hosea 12:2-5 NIV
The prophet Hosea says that the one wrestling Jacob wasn’t Satan, but the angel of
God who happens to be God himself! How MENJ and the rabbis got Satan out of these passages
is simply beyond us.
MENJ continues:
There is a remarkable resemblance to the smitten rock
in the wilderness, which in 1 Corinthians 10:4 is called
"...a spiritual following rock."
To the Rabbis the rock, from which water flowed, was round and like a swarm of bees,
and rolled itself up and went with them in their journeys. When the Tabernacle was
pitched, the rock came and settled in its vestibule. Then Israel sang the following:
"Spring up, O well; sing ye to it!" (Numbers 21:17)
and it sprang up. Paul's instant addition of the words
"[...] which rock was Christ"
has Haggadistic elements which, in the national consciousness, had got mingled up
with the great story of the wanderings in the Wilderness. Seven such current national
traditions are alluded to in St. Stephen's speech.
RESPONSE:
Did it ever dawn on MENJ that Paul was referring to the OT citations which speak
of God as the Rock that led Israel out of Egypt?
"For I will proclaim the name of the LORD; ascribe greatness to our God!
The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness
and without iniquity, just and upright is he ... But the LORD's portion is his
people, Jacob his allotted heritage. He found him in a desert land, and
in the howling waste of the wilderness; he encircled him, he cared for him, he kept
him as the apple of his eye. Like an eagle that stirs up its nest, that flutters over its
young, spreading out its wings, catching them, bearing them on its pinions, the LORD
alone guided him, no foreign god was with him. He made him ride on the high places of
the land, and he ate the produce of the field, and he suckled him with honey out
of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock. Curds from the herd, and milk from the
flock, with fat of lambs, rams of Bashan and goats, with the very finest of the wheat-and
you drank foaming wine made from the blood of the grape. But Jeshurun grew fat, and
kicked; you grew fat, stout, and sleek; then he forsook God who made him and
scoffed at the Rock of his salvation. They stirred him to jealousy with strange gods; with
abominations they provoked him to anger. They sacrificed to DEMONS that were no gods, to
gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never
dreaded. You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you, and you forgot the God who
gave you birth. The LORD saw it and spurned them, because of the provocation of his
sons and his daughters. And he said, ‘I will hide my face from them; I will see what
their end will be, For they are a perverse generation, children in whom is no
faithfulness. They have made me jealous with what is no god; they have provoked me to
anger with their idols ... If they were wise, they would understand this; they would
discern their latter end! How could one have chased a thousand, and two have put ten
thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had given them up? For
their rock is not as our Rock; our enemies are by themselves ... For the LORD will
vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants, when he sees that their power is
gone and there is none remaining, bond or free. Then he will say, ‘Where are
their gods, the rock in which they took refuge, who ate the fat of their sacrifices and
drank the wine of their drink offering? Let them rise up and help you; let them be
your protection! See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I
kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my
hand.’" Deuteronomy 32:3-4, 9-21, 29-31, 36-39 ESV
To show that Paul was referring to Deuteronomy all we need to do is quote the context
of 1 Corinthians 10:
"I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud,
and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and
in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual
drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock
was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were
overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things took place as examples for us, that
we might not desire evil as they did. Do not be idolaters as some of them were;
AS IT IS WRITTEN, ‘The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.’
We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three
thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ[1] to the test, as some
of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them
did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. Now these things happened to them
as an example, but THEY WERE WRITTEN DOWN FOR OUR INSTRUCTION, on whom the end
of the ages has come ... Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak
as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup of blessing that
we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break,
is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we
who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the
people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? What
do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?
No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to DEMONS and not to God. I do
not want you to be participants with DEMONS. You cannot drink the cup of
the Lord and the cup of DEMONS. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table
of DEMONS. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?"
1 Corinthians 10:1-11, 14-22
Note that after citing the example of Israel in the desert Paul warns Christians to
shun immorality and idolatry, especially fellowship with demons, themes touched on and
alluded to in the Pentateuch (specifically Deuteronomy 34). Paul also refers to that which
was written, which is a fixed NT expression referring to the OT scriptures, not to any
rabbinic literature.
What Paul is basically saying is that the same spiritual rock that fed Israel is the
same One who feeds the Church today, namely the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, Paul
is identifying Jesus as Yahweh God of the OT! Hence, a careful reading of the context
sufficiently puts to rest MENJ’s erroneous assertion that Paul was borrowing from
Jewish speculation on the Rock.
Conclusions
The Rabbinic teachings as recorded in the Talmudic writings was influential for Paul,
and it is with these traditions in his mind that he had based his epistles on. Some of
these stories have no basis in the Tanakh or the Old Testament, but only in the Talmud of
the Jews. This clearly shows that Paul's claim of being an "apostle" of
Jesus and was divinely "inspired" in his writings can certainly be cast
into reasonable doubt. The evidences as shown above clearly shows that Paul had resorted
to heavy borrowing from the Jewish traditions as recorded in the Talmudic writings.
RESPONSE:
The most ironic aspect of all this is that MENJ chides a Christian "missionary"
for assuming that similarities between two accounts somehow prove that one borrowed from
the other:
To be sure, we wonder how the author of the article could even ask this question when
if by applying his "own" methodology to his Bible, it would immediately
fall at the first blow? Essentially, the argument of the Christian missionary is simply
that similarity implies borrowing. Because some of the stories in the Midrash and NT
apocrypha match with the Qur'an; the conclusion is that Muhammad (pbuh) copied these
stories from the above mentioned books into the Bible. In order for the theory of the
missionaries' to work, then the Bible should be free from such "borrowing",
which it is not, as evident in the similarities of the Story of Noah and the Epic of
Gilgamesh, for example. (Source)
Yet MENJ tries to prove that Paul copied from rabbinic sources due to what he
erroneously perceived were similarities between them. In light of the foregoing,
the claim that the post-NT Talmudic stories are similar to Paul is simply erroneous
to say the least.
We agree with MENJ that some superficial similarity does not immediately imply
borrowing. However, while the similarities between the Jewish sources and the Quran are
very strong — and each case has to be discussed on its own merits — the claims
put forward by MENJ in this article suffer many problems: (a) as we have seen above,
the alleged similarities between Paul and the Talmud are very tenuous in most cases.
(b) Paul’s statements are much better explained through reference to passages from
the Old Testament and (c) Paul wrote before the Talmud even was canonized. MENJ
"forgot" to give evidence that the particular Talmudic story he wants to
connect with a statement in Paul’s epistles predates or is at least contemporary
with the time of Paul.
This concludes the first part of our response. In the second part, we will ask the same
question regarding the Quran. Does the Quran exhibit a dependency on talmudic and other sources?
If so, what are the implications for the Muslims who want to be consistent and intellectually
honest in their approach to these two books, the Bible and the Quran? Continue to Part 2:
Sources And Their Implications On the Inspiration Of the Bible and
the Quran.
On January 12, 2004 MENJ posted a response
to my Jesus in The Rabbinic Traditions
paper written by Mahmud Ali Abdal Chabir. The most interesting aspect about this "rebuttal"
is that the author goes out of his way to undermine the veracity of the Talmud due to its
fanciful nature. In the words of the author:
It is not my purpose here to refute the Talmud Jesus(P) stories - THEY
ARE ACTUALLY THERE, though usually given far too much historical credence.
If these "commentators" truly knew the Talmud, they would also know
THAT IT IS NOT TO BE USED AS A COLLECTION OF HISTORICAL FACTS;
the idea that anyone would consider that the Talmud stories about Jesus(P)
are based on eye-witness or first-hand accounts, or even the New Testament,
is ludicrous. Passages which refute the New Testament accounts are glided
over without comment, such as the 40-day period between Jesus'(P) arrest and
execution and the fact that Jesus(P) is stoned to death and only hung after
he has died.[1]
How could the Talmud declare "Mary Megaddala" the mother of Jesus(P)[2]
if the rabbis had even the New Testament before them? Are we to adjust our
knowledge of Mary to include her occupation as a woman's hairdresser on the word
of the Talmud?[3]The Jewish traditions were, before they were set
into writing, oral traditions, and as any student of midrash and haggada knows,
SUBJECT TO GREAT FLIGHTS OF FANCY. THE GROSS ANACHRONISMS in many of the tales
in the Talmud bring them even further from first-hand history.
(underline and capital emphasis ours)
If a Jewish text mentions that Jesus(P) was supposed to be,
or claimed to be God, that information was certainly obtained by Jews via Christians
and Christian traditions and dogma, which had had centuries to develop, and not
directly through any historical events, nor as we have seen, even from the
New Testament, which Jews would certainly not waste their time studying,
unless arming themselves for polemical disputes. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY
NO RELIABLE INDEPENDENT HISTORICAL EVIDENCE TO BE FOUND CONCERNING JESUS
IN JEWISH TRADITION, AS IT IS ALL LATE MATERIAL, set down long after
the Christians themselves had already decided to make Jesus(P)
into their God.
(underline and capital emphasis ours)
Apart from the gross misrepresentation of my purpose of consulting Jewish
sources, it is quite interesting to see how this Muslim proceeds to discredit
the Talmudic references to Jesus based on their late dating, as well as their
"great flights of fancy" and "gross anachronisms." Apparently, MENJ failed
to share his views with this author:
The missionaries however, are clearly quite obsessed with the charge of
Qur'anic "plagiarisation" from the Midrash Rabbah, which they claim is
false, without actually offering the viewpoint of the Jews. Since the
missionaries' claim is based on the belief of the Jews regarding the Midrash
Rabbah, in order to verify this charge against the Qur'an by the missionaries
we would then need to have an understanding regarding its position and
significance in Orthodox Judaism. We would also need to verify whether
the Jews themselves too consider this story to be a total hoax, as
the Christian missionaries would like us to believe, or authoritative to
them, as well as comparing the story of the Midrash Rabbah with that
of the Qur'anic one.
And:
Several questions need to be raised for the missionaries:
1. Is there 100% material evidence that the Jewish traditions which dealt
with issue are just myths without any base or space for truth in them,
MENJ defends the authenticity of the story of Abraham smashing the idols
and so on found in the Talmud and other Jewish writings since they appear in
the Quran, despite the fact that these sources were compiled after the NT.
Yet, Mr. Chabir discredits the Talmudic references to Jesus precisely because
they post-date the NT documents and are not to be reckoned as "collections
of historical facts"!!!! The contradiction between these two positions couldn't
be any more glaring.
If a late dating of the Jewish material shows that the references to Jesus
are not authentic and that they shouldn't be accepted as containers of
historical facts, then the same applies to the Jewish stories regarding
Abraham which have found their way into the Quran. But since MENJ rejects
the assertion that these Jewish sources are not "collections of historical
facts", then why does he publish the work of an author whose methodology
he refuses to apply to the Quran?
The answer is quite obvious. It seems that MENJ is willing to publish
anything, even material that contradict his own views, as long as it serves
his agenda of trying to put to shame those bad Christian "missionaries."
[1] The NET online Bible has a comment regarding the word Christ in 1 Corinthians 10:9:
... Χριστον (Christon, "Christ") is attested
in the majority of mss, including many important witnesses of the Alexandrian
(P46 1739 1881) and Western (D F G) texttypes, and other mss and
versions (Ψ latt sy co). On the other hand, some of the important Alexandrian
witnesses have κυριον (kurion, "Lord"; aliph
B C P 33 104 1175 al). A few mss (A 81 pc) have θεον
(theon, "God"). The nomina sacra for these readings are quite similar
(cMn, kMn,
and qMn respectively), so one might be able
to account for the different readings by way of confusion. On closer examination,
the variants appear to be intentional changes. Alexandrian scribes replaced
the highly specific term "Christ" with the less specific terms "Lord" and "God"
because in the context it seems to be anachronistic to speak of the exodus
generation putting Christ to the test. If the original had been "Lord,"
it seems unlikely that a scribe would have willingly created a difficulty by
substituting the more specific "Christ." Moreover, even if not motivated by
a tendency to overcorrect, a scribe might be likely to assimilate the word "Christ"
to "Lord" in conformity with Deut 6:16 or other passages. The evidence from
the early church regarding the reading of this verse is rather compelling in
favor of "Christ." Marcion, a second-century, anti-Jewish heretic, would naturally
have opposed any reference to Christ in historical involvement with Israel,
because he thought of the Creator God of the OT as inherently evil. In spite of
this strong prejudice, though, {Marcion} read a text with "Christ." Other early
church writers attest to the presence of the word "Christ," including {Clement
of Alexandria} and Origen. What is more, the synod of Antioch in a.d. 268 used
the reading "Christ" as evidence of the preexistence of Christ when it condemned
Paul of Samosata. (See G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles, 126-27;
TCGNT 494; C. D. Osburn, "The Text of 1 Corinthians 10:9," New Testament
Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis, 201-11; contra
A. Robertson and A. Plummer, First Corinthians [ICC], 205-6.) Since "Christ"
is the more difficult reading on all accounts, it is almost certainly original.
In addition, "Christ" is consistent with Paul's style in this passage (cf. 10:4,
a text in which {Marcion} also reads "Christ"). This text is also christologically
significant, since the reading "Christ" makes an explicit claim to the preexistence
of Christ. (The textual critic faces a similar dilemma in Jude 5. In a similar exodus
context, some of the more important Alexandrian mss [A B 33 81 pc] and
the Vulgate read "Jesus" in place of "Lord." Two of those mss [A 81] are the same
mss that have "Christ" instead of "God" in 1 Cor 10:9. See the tc notes on
Jude 5 for more information.) In sum, "Christ" has all the earmarks of authenticity
here and should be considered the original reading.
(Source)
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.
