WikiIslam

Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature (view source)

Revision as of 05:43, 26 May 2021

314 bytes added ,  26 May 2021
→‎Muslim Objections
[checked revision][checked revision]
Line 328: Line 328:
'''1 - The heretical Christian sect of the Collyridians may have existed in Muhammad’s time and the Quran was specifically addressing their understanding of the Trinity.'''
'''1 - The heretical Christian sect of the Collyridians may have existed in Muhammad’s time and the Quran was specifically addressing their understanding of the Trinity.'''


The Collyridians are known chiefly through the work of 4th-century Christian arch-heresy hunter and defender of Christian orthodoxy Epiphanius of Salamis (a saint in both the Nicean Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church). This is what he has to say about them:  
The Collyridians are known chiefly through the work of 4th-century Christian arch-heresy hunter and defender of Christian orthodoxy Epiphanius of Salamis (a saint in both the Nicaean Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church). This is what he has to say about them:  


{{Quote|{{citation|title=(Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies, 79) Frank Williams - The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III|ISBN=978-90-04-23312-6 (e-book)|year=2013|publisher=Brill|author1=Epiphanius of Salamis (d. 320)|editor=Frank Williams|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Panarion_of_Epiphanius_of_Salamis/tKtzRNP0Z70C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=The+Panarion+of+Epiphanius+of+Salamis+Books+II+and+III.+De+Fide&printsec=frontcover|page=637-645}}|1,1 < Another > sect has come to public notice after this, and I have already mentioned a few things about it in the Sect preceding, in the letter about Mary which I wrote to Arabia. (2) This one, again, was also brought to Arabia from Thrace and upper Scythia, and word of it has reached me; it too is ridiculous and, in the opinion of the wise, wholly absurd...For as, long ago, those who, from an insolent attitude towards Mary, have seen fit to suspect these things were sowing damaging suspicions in people’s minds, so these persons who lean in the other direction are guilty of doing the worst sort of harm. In them too the maxim of certain pagan philosophers, “Extremes are equal,” will be exemplified. (5) For the harm done by both of these sects is equal, since one belittles the holy Virgin while the other, in its turn, glorifies her to excess. For certain women decorate a barber’s chair or a square seat, spread a cloth on it, set out bread and offer it in Mary’s name on a certain day of the year, and all partake of the bread–as I partially discussed in my same letter to Arabia. Now, however, I shall speak plainly of it and, with prayer to God, give the best refutations of it that I can, so as to grub out the roots of this idolatrous sect and with God’s help, be able to cure certain people of this madness...As Maker and Master of the thing [to be made] he formed himself from a virgin as though from earth—God come from heaven, the Word who had assumed flesh from a holy Virgin. But certainly not from a virgin who is worshiped, or to make her God, or to have us make offerings in her name, or, again, to make women priestesses after so many generations. (3) It was not God’s pleasure that this be done with Salome, or with Mary herself. He did not permit her to administer baptism or bless disciples, or tell her to rule on earth, but only to be a sacred shrine and be deemed worthy of his kingdom. (4) He did not order the woman called the mother of Rufus to advance < to* > this rank22 or the women who followed Christ from Galilee, or Martha the sister of Lazarus and [her sister] Mary, or any of the holy women who were privileged to be saved by his advent < and > who assisted him with their own possessions—or the woman of Canaan, or the woman who was healed of the issue of blood, or any woman on earth.}}  
{{Quote|{{citation|title=(Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies, 79) Frank Williams - The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III|ISBN=978-90-04-23312-6 (e-book)|year=2013|publisher=Brill|author1=Epiphanius of Salamis (d. 320)|editor=Frank Williams|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Panarion_of_Epiphanius_of_Salamis/tKtzRNP0Z70C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=The+Panarion+of+Epiphanius+of+Salamis+Books+II+and+III.+De+Fide&printsec=frontcover|page=637-645}}|1,1 < Another > sect has come to public notice after this, and I have already mentioned a few things about it in the Sect preceding, in the letter about Mary which I wrote to Arabia. (2) This one, again, was also brought to Arabia from Thrace and upper Scythia, and word of it has reached me; it too is ridiculous and, in the opinion of the wise, wholly absurd...For as, long ago, those who, from an insolent attitude towards Mary, have seen fit to suspect these things were sowing damaging suspicions in people’s minds, so these persons who lean in the other direction are guilty of doing the worst sort of harm. In them too the maxim of certain pagan philosophers, “Extremes are equal,” will be exemplified. (5) For the harm done by both of these sects is equal, since one belittles the holy Virgin while the other, in its turn, glorifies her to excess. For certain women decorate a barber’s chair or a square seat, spread a cloth on it, set out bread and offer it in Mary’s name on a certain day of the year, and all partake of the bread–as I partially discussed in my same letter to Arabia. Now, however, I shall speak plainly of it and, with prayer to God, give the best refutations of it that I can, so as to grub out the roots of this idolatrous sect and with God’s help, be able to cure certain people of this madness...As Maker and Master of the thing [to be made] he formed himself from a virgin as though from earth—God come from heaven, the Word who had assumed flesh from a holy Virgin. But certainly not from a virgin who is worshiped, or to make her God, or to have us make offerings in her name, or, again, to make women priestesses after so many generations. (3) It was not God’s pleasure that this be done with Salome, or with Mary herself. He did not permit her to administer baptism or bless disciples, or tell her to rule on earth, but only to be a sacred shrine and be deemed worthy of his kingdom. (4) He did not order the woman called the mother of Rufus to advance < to* > this rank22 or the women who followed Christ from Galilee, or Martha the sister of Lazarus and [her sister] Mary, or any of the holy women who were privileged to be saved by his advent < and > who assisted him with their own possessions—or the woman of Canaan, or the woman who was healed of the issue of blood, or any woman on earth.}}  


According to Epiphanius, the Collyridians seem to merge pagan goddess-worship with Christian Mariolatry. They have female priests and, interestingly for our purposes, seem to have been found in Arabia. It's important to remember that this is one of dozens of heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, and this is the only mention extant of them. Epiphanius doesn't give any indication of how many people actually followed this heresy, and it's not possible to know how long after his time they lasted exactly. Edward Gibbon in 'the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' [Chapter 50] states that they were still in existence in the seventh century (without providing any corroborating evidence). One explanation is that Gibbon's simply took the clear parallelism of verse 5:116 with Collyridianism to mean they were present during Muhammad’s day.  
According to Epiphanius, the Collyridians seem to merge pagan goddess-worship with Christian Mariolatry. They have female priests and, interestingly for our purposes, seem to have been found in Arabia. It's important to remember that this is one of dozens of heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, and this is the only mention extant of them. Epiphanius doesn't give any indication of how many people actually followed this heresy, and it's not possible to know how long after his time they lasted exactly. It's also not possible for us to know how accurately this section actually describes their beliefs, since we have no extant writings from them; it is possible that Epiphanius is exaggerating here and they did not actually worship Mary as a god.
 
Edward Gibbon in 'the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' [Chapter 50] states that they were still in existence in the seventh century (without providing any corroborating evidence). One explanation is that Gibbon's simply took the clear parallelism of verse 5:116 with Collyridianism to mean they were present during Muhammad’s day.  


Thus, there is clear parallelism between the Qur'an’s version of the Trinity and the Collyridian belief.  
Thus, there is clear parallelism between the Qur'an’s version of the Trinity and the Collyridian belief.  


As previously stated, Muslims claim that this verse was alluding to the belief of some Christians at the time of Muhammad. This is clearly false, as it specifically states that the belief occurred during the time of Jesus. Remember, Allah asked Jesus whether he had told the people to worship him and Mary besides Allah. Since the Collyridians are post-Jesus (probably originating in the late fourth century, as reported by Epiphanius) the parallelism with the Collyridians is anachronistic. Hence, the Qur'an could not have been alluding to the Collyridians at all, unless of course, Jesus was a Collyridian.  
As previously stated, Muslim apologists often claim that this verse was alluding to the belief of some Christians at the time of Muhammad. This is not how the Qur'an presents the material, though; the Qur'an here seems to state that the belief was around during Jesus' own time and he personally refuted it. Since the Collyridians are post-Jesus (probably originating in the late fourth century, as reported by Epiphanius) the parallelism with the Collyridians is anachronistic, as with many of the polemics put by the Qur'an into the mouths of biblical prophets.  


What was the purpose of verse 5:116? The most plausible explanation is Muhammad’s need to explain to his followers the Christian concept of the Trinity in relation to the strict monotheism of Islam. As he claimed Jesus a prophet of Islam, and Allah being the same god to the Christians as the Muslims, and thus Christianity as a predecessor religion to Islam, this perceived inconsistency would have required explanation. So this verse has Jesus denying the concept of the Trinity – implying that the Christians had corrupted his teaching. In doing so, Muhammad had unwittingly exposed his lack of understanding of what the Trinity means. He probably thought Jesus had taught this doctrine, as he thought the Trinity comprised of God, Jesus and Mary.  
As to the purpose of verse 5:116, the most plausible explanation is clearly that it was a polemic against real or imagined Christian belief in the trinity. Whether or not the Collyridians still existed at Muhammad's time or before is not knowable from the extant evidence, but either by mistak or over-generalization the Qur'an does seem to apply this polemic to all Christians as a whole, whereas at most this belief was marginal within Chrisitanity.


'''2 - Some Muslims such as Dr Saifullah of Islamic-awareness claim that it is unreasonable to point out the clear parallelism with Collyridianism as something erroneous as early Christians did not believe in the Trinity.'''
'''2 - Some Muslims such as Dr Saifullah of Islamic-awareness claim that it is unreasonable to point out the clear parallelism with Collyridianism as something erroneous as early Christians did not believe in the Trinity.'''
Line 344: Line 346:
{{Quote||“…there is no point calling the modern day Trinitarian Christianity as 'true' Christianity and all others as 'false' since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late. The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures. Moreover the Jesus(P) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it. Would then the modern day 'true' Christianity brand them as heretics?”<ref>Mustafa Ahmed & M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/marytrin.html Mary(P) & Tri-unity] Islamic Awareness</ref>}}  
{{Quote||“…there is no point calling the modern day Trinitarian Christianity as 'true' Christianity and all others as 'false' since the evolution of this doctrine itself is very late. The early Christianity had bizarre beliefs about their doctrine as well as their Scriptures. Moreover the Jesus(P) and early Church Fathers were utterly unaware of this doctrine and they never practiced it. Would then the modern day 'true' Christianity brand them as heretics?”<ref>Mustafa Ahmed & M S M Saifullah - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/marytrin.html Mary(P) & Tri-unity] Islamic Awareness</ref>}}  


This is a pseudo-defense. The issue is not if modern Christians view the Collyridians as heretics, but whether the Quranic version of the Trinity has any basis. After all, Allah should know what the Trinity is. But apparently he thought the Collyridian version of the Trinity was the prevailing one during the time of Jesus Christ.  
While Dr Saifullah is on good grounds when he remarks that delineating "true" Trinitarian Christianity from "false" Trinitarian Christianity is not the place of the scholar, it must be remarked that in presenting this version of the Trinity the Qur'an is presenting a highly inaccurate view of the beliefs of Christians and at the very least should be called "inaccurate" for this claim. Moreover, the interesting point to the scholar is the possibility that (A) the author of this verse was for some reason very familiar with the Collyridian heresy which otherwise escaped remark for 3 centuries,  to the point of assuming that all Christian follow it, or (B) that the author just has a skewed and inaccurate view of Christian theology, which is noteworthy in and of itself.


'''3 - Modern Christians also believe Mary as the Mother of God and prayers are sent to her.'''
'''3 - Modern Christians also believe Mary as the Mother of God and prayers are sent to her.'''


This is a subtle point and one that Muslims fail to address: Neither in the New Testament nor the Qur'an does Jesus claim Mary to be a co-divinity with God. In fact, the Qur'an is specific in Jesus’ denial of this charge. So where does this charge against Jesus come from? Orthodox Christians such as the Catholics do venerate Mary as a saint and the Mother of Jesus, but are very clear in not ascribing divinity to her.  
Neither in the New Testament nor the Qur'an does Jesus claim Mary to be a co-divinity with God. Meanwhile, the Qur'an is specific in Jesus’ denial of this charge. Orthodox Christians such as the Catholics do venerate Mary as a saint and the Mother of Jesus, but are very clear in not ascribing divinity to her.  


Praying to saints is an Orthodox/Catholic practice. It does not mean that the object of prayer is divine. Catholics do not solely pray to Mary, but to all manners of saints who have passed-away without ascribing divine status on any of them. Thus, it is nonsense to suggest that prayers to Mary absolves the Qur'an from its error about her divinity.
Praying to saints is an Orthodox/Catholic practice. It does not mean that the object of prayer is divine. Catholics do not solely pray to Mary, but to all manners of saints who have passed-away without ascribing divine status on any of them. Thus, it is nonsense to suggest that prayers to Mary absolves the Qur'an from its error about her divinity.
Line 384: Line 386:
{{Quote|[http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/infancy2.htm The Second Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ: Chapter 1]|1. “I, Thomas, an Israelite, judged it necessary to make known to our brethren among the Gentiles, the actions and miracles of Christ in his childhood, which our Lord and God Jesus Christ wrought after his birth in Bethlehem in our country, at which I myself was astonished; the beginning of which was as follows. 2. When the child Jesus was five years of age and there had been a shower of rain that was now over, Jesus was playing with other Hebrew boys by a running stream, and the waters ran over the banks and stood in little lakes; 3. But the water instantly became clear and useful again; they readily obeyed him after he touched them only by his word. 4. Then he took from the bank of the stream some soft clay and formed out of it twelve sparrows; and there were other boys playing with him. 5. But a certain Jew seeing the things which he was doing, namely, his forming clay into the figures of sparrows on the Sabbath day, went presently away and told his father Joseph, 6. Behold, your boy is playing by the river side, and has taken clay and formed it into twelve sparrows, and profanes the Sabbath. 7. Then Joseph came to the place where he was, and when he saw him, called to him, and said, Why do you that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day? 8. Then Jesus clapping together the palms of his hands, called to the sparrows, and said to them: Go, fly away; and while you live remember me. 9. So the sparrows fled away, making a noise. 10. The Jews seeing this, were astonished and went away and told their chief persons what a strange miracle they had seen wrought by Jesus.”}}
{{Quote|[http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/infancy2.htm The Second Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ: Chapter 1]|1. “I, Thomas, an Israelite, judged it necessary to make known to our brethren among the Gentiles, the actions and miracles of Christ in his childhood, which our Lord and God Jesus Christ wrought after his birth in Bethlehem in our country, at which I myself was astonished; the beginning of which was as follows. 2. When the child Jesus was five years of age and there had been a shower of rain that was now over, Jesus was playing with other Hebrew boys by a running stream, and the waters ran over the banks and stood in little lakes; 3. But the water instantly became clear and useful again; they readily obeyed him after he touched them only by his word. 4. Then he took from the bank of the stream some soft clay and formed out of it twelve sparrows; and there were other boys playing with him. 5. But a certain Jew seeing the things which he was doing, namely, his forming clay into the figures of sparrows on the Sabbath day, went presently away and told his father Joseph, 6. Behold, your boy is playing by the river side, and has taken clay and formed it into twelve sparrows, and profanes the Sabbath. 7. Then Joseph came to the place where he was, and when he saw him, called to him, and said, Why do you that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day? 8. Then Jesus clapping together the palms of his hands, called to the sparrows, and said to them: Go, fly away; and while you live remember me. 9. So the sparrows fled away, making a noise. 10. The Jews seeing this, were astonished and went away and told their chief persons what a strange miracle they had seen wrought by Jesus.”}}


===Muslim Objection===
===Muslim Apologetics===


This parallelism has never been explained by Muslims except to use it to perversely claim that the Bible is corrupted. They argue that the original Bible contained the apocryphal story of Jesus making and animating clay birds, and that the Qur'an was merely correcting a wrongful exclusion of these apocrypha from the canon.<ref>M S M Saifullah & Hesham Azmy - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html Is The Bible In Our Hands The Same As During The Time Of Muhammad(P)?] Islamic Awareness</ref>
This parallelism has never been explained by Muslim apologists except to use it to perversely claim that the Bible is corrupted. They argue that the original Bible contained the apocryphal story of Jesus making and animating clay birds, and that the Qur'an was merely correcting a wrongful exclusion of these apocrypha from the canon.<ref>M S M Saifullah & Hesham Azmy - [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html Is The Bible In Our Hands The Same As During The Time Of Muhammad(P)?] Islamic Awareness</ref>


This is erroneous as the sira tells how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness have kindly provided the following evidence [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here].
This is erroneous as the sirah itself tells how Muhammad, far from receiving these stories from Allah (via the angel Jibreel/Gabriel), heard it from three Christians. Saifullah & Azmy of Islamic-awareness write more on this [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html here].


{{Quote|Abu Muhammad `Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Ma`afiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), p 181-182.|“[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn `Alqama, Al-`Aqib `Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Sa`id.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three [i.e., part of Trinity] and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).  
{{Quote|Abu Muhammad `Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Ma`afiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), p 181-182.|“[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn `Alqama, Al-`Aqib `Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Sa`id.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three [i.e., part of Trinity] and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).  
Line 396: Line 398:
{{Quote|A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998, Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), p 271-272.|“The names of the fourteen principal men among the sixty riders were: `Abdul-Masih the `Aqib, al-Ayham the Sayyid; Abu Haritha b. `Alqama brother of B. Bakr b. Wa`il; Aus; al-Harith; Zayd; Qays; Yazid; Nubayh; Khuwaylid; `Amr; Khalid; `Abdullah; Johannes; of these the first three named above spoke to the Apostle. They were Christians according to the Byzantine rite, though they differed among themselves in some points, saying He is God; and He is the son of God; and He is the third person of the Trinity, which is the doctrine of Christianity. They argue that he is God because he used to raise the dead, and heal the sick, and declare the unseen; and make clay birds and then breathe into them so that they flew away; and all this was by the command of God Almighty, 'We will make him a sign to men.' They argue that he is the son of God in that they say he had no known father; and he spoke in the cradle and this is something that no child of Adam has ever done. They argue that he is the third of the three in that God says: We have done, We have commanded, We have created and We have decreed, and they say, If He were one he would have said I have done, I have created, and soon, but He is He and Jesus and Mary. Concerning all these assertions the Qur'an came down.” }}  
{{Quote|A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998, Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), p 271-272.|“The names of the fourteen principal men among the sixty riders were: `Abdul-Masih the `Aqib, al-Ayham the Sayyid; Abu Haritha b. `Alqama brother of B. Bakr b. Wa`il; Aus; al-Harith; Zayd; Qays; Yazid; Nubayh; Khuwaylid; `Amr; Khalid; `Abdullah; Johannes; of these the first three named above spoke to the Apostle. They were Christians according to the Byzantine rite, though they differed among themselves in some points, saying He is God; and He is the son of God; and He is the third person of the Trinity, which is the doctrine of Christianity. They argue that he is God because he used to raise the dead, and heal the sick, and declare the unseen; and make clay birds and then breathe into them so that they flew away; and all this was by the command of God Almighty, 'We will make him a sign to men.' They argue that he is the son of God in that they say he had no known father; and he spoke in the cradle and this is something that no child of Adam has ever done. They argue that he is the third of the three in that God says: We have done, We have commanded, We have created and We have decreed, and they say, If He were one he would have said I have done, I have created, and soon, but He is He and Jesus and Mary. Concerning all these assertions the Qur'an came down.” }}  
   
   
The parallelism between the Qur'an’s ‘Jesus animating clay birds’ verses and the apocryphal infancy gospels is strong, suggesting that Allah was not the author of the Qur'an, nor is he the God of the Christians. There are various reasons why these apocryphal gospels are not included in the canon; the First Gospel of the Infancy is a comparatively late work while the Second Gospel of the Infancy (actually a fragment of the Gospel of Thomas) is a famous forgery. Both these apocrypha contain verses that contradict the canonical Gospels.  
The parallelism between the Qur'an’s ‘Jesus animating clay birds’ verses and the apocryphal infancy gospels is strong, suggesting a very mundane and earthly source of the Qur'an's revelation here. As to the reliability of these documents themselves, there are various reasons why these apocryphal gospels are not included in the canon; the First Gospel of the Infancy is a comparatively late work while the Second Gospel of the Infancy (actually a fragment of the Gospel of Thomas) is a famous forgery. Both these apocrypha contain verses that contradict the canonical Gospels and their late date reveals itself both in style and substance.  


According to the sira, the purported sources of the story are three Christians who spoke to Muhammad. These Christians were either heretics or they were unsure of doctrine as their errancies were then repeated in the Qur'an. These errancies include Jesus animating clay birds, the talking baby Jesus, and the Trinity comprising God, Jesus and Mary (Father, Son and Mother).
According to the sira, the purported sources of the story are three Christians who spoke to Muhammad. These Christians were either heretics or they were unsure of doctrine as their errancies were then repeated in the Qur'an. These errancies include Jesus animating clay birds, the talking baby Jesus, and the Trinity comprising God, Jesus and Mary (Father, Son and Mother).
===Mary and Zechariah===
===Mary and Zechariah===


===Qur'anic Account===
===Qur'anic Account===


The Bible, unlike the Qur'an,  is silent on Mary’s birth, upbringing and relationship with Zachariah. The following is what we find in the Qur'an:
The Bible, unlike the Qur'an,  is silent on Mary’s birth, upbringing and relationship with Zachariah. The following is what one finds in the Qur'an:


{{Quote| {{Quran|3|35-44}}| When a woman of Amran said: My Lord, I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service), so accept (it) from me; surely Thou, only Thou, art the Hearing, the Knowing.  
{{Quote| {{Quran|3|35-44}}| When a woman of Amran said: My Lord, I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service), so accept (it) from me; surely Thou, only Thou, art the Hearing, the Knowing.  
Line 566: Line 566:


“And when the head of the lower order saw that greatness had been given to Adam, he envied him thenceforth, refused to worship him and said to his powers: ‘Worship him not and praise him not with the angels. It befits him to worship me, not me to worship dust, formed out of a grain of dust.’ Such things the rebel had uttered and was disobedient and by his own free will became separated from God. And he was felled and he fell, he and his whole band. On the sixth day in the second hour, he fell from heaven, and they were stripped of the robes of their glory, and his name was called Satana, because he had turned away from God, and Sheda, because he had been cast down, and Daiva, because he had lost the robe of his glory. And look, from that same day and until today, he and all his armies are stripped and naked and ugly to look on. And after Satan had been cast from Heaven, Adam was exalted so that he ascended to Paradise.”}}
“And when the head of the lower order saw that greatness had been given to Adam, he envied him thenceforth, refused to worship him and said to his powers: ‘Worship him not and praise him not with the angels. It befits him to worship me, not me to worship dust, formed out of a grain of dust.’ Such things the rebel had uttered and was disobedient and by his own free will became separated from God. And he was felled and he fell, he and his whole band. On the sixth day in the second hour, he fell from heaven, and they were stripped of the robes of their glory, and his name was called Satana, because he had turned away from God, and Sheda, because he had been cast down, and Daiva, because he had lost the robe of his glory. And look, from that same day and until today, he and all his armies are stripped and naked and ugly to look on. And after Satan had been cast from Heaven, Adam was exalted so that he ascended to Paradise.”}}
===Conclusion===
   
   
The Qur'anic story of Satan refusing to worship or prostate before Adam seems to have distinct antecedents in pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian sources. It is possible that this is merely coincidence. For more than fifteen centuries after God revealed Genesis to Moses he was content to leave this story untold. Then around the first century CE Jewish story tellers, independent of divine revelation, invented this story. After another six hundred years or so, Allah decided it was high time this story was properly told to humanity, thus he chose to reveal it to Muhammad in a form almost identical to that told by the non-divine Jewish writers.  
The Qur'anic story of Satan refusing to worship or prostate before Adam seems to have distinct antecedents in pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian sources. It is possible that this is merely coincidence. For more than fifteen centuries after God revealed Genesis to Moses he was content to leave this story untold. Then around the first century CE Jewish story tellers, independent of divine revelation, invented this story. After another six hundred years or so, Allah decided it was high time this story was properly told to humanity, thus he chose to reveal it to Muhammad in a form almost identical to that told by the non-divine Jewish writers.  
Asmith
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
4,640

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/132308"