Friday, 16 September 2016

Knowing God Personally; The Christian Message to the Muslim World, Part I

By John Gilchrist

Introduction: True Faith or Formal Monotheism?

Christians and Muslims have many things in common. They believe in one God, worship in holy sanctuaries (churches and mosques), have similar annual religious calendars (Christmas, Good Friday and Easter for Christians, Eid ul-Fitr, Eid ul-Adha, Laylatu’l Mir’aj and Laylatu’l Qadr for Muslims), and set aside one day a week for a major community worship service (Sunday and Friday respectively). Outwardly both religions can look very similar. Their worship services can be very formal and repetitive. The Muslim salat, in particular, follows the same pattern day after day, year after year, decade after decade without variation. The adhan, the call to prayer, never changes. The hajj pilgrimage perpetuates an exact sequence of religious practices which have been observed unaltered for fourteen centuries. Many Christian churches are no different. Catholic and Orthodox priests chant out the same prescribed prayers week after week just as Muslim imams do.

Some years ago a Muslim woman said to me “Whenever I go to the cemetery I look at all the Muslim graves on the one side and the Christian graves on the other, and I say to myself, ‘What’s the difference?’” Well, if you’re looking for the living among the dead, you’re not likely to find much. Judaism is not very different. All three monotheisms have institutionalised their religious systems, going round in circles as they return annually to the same routines, ceremonies and holy days, all based on outward conformity and formal worship. A Muslim shopkeeper in Jerusalem once said “There are only three big businesses in Jerusalem. One collects money on Fridays, the second on Saturdays, and the third on Sundays.” (The quote is from the Discovery video Jerusalem: City of Heaven).

Formal monotheism. Is this really what God wants? A slavish commitment to repetitive ceremonies for as long as we live? A verse from the Bible shows how monotonous and ultimately meaningless this can be. I will accentuate the key words to emphasise the point: ‘And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins’ (Hebrews 10:11). The irony is obvious when you compare the repetitions with their inability to achieve anything: every – daily – repeatedly – the same – yet never availing!

Islam places a tremendous emphasis on formal, repetitive worship. There is no room for spontaneous prayer or praise while performing each raka’ah. A true Muslim will not only wear a beard but will trim it to a prescribed length to follow the sunnah of Muhammad. A skullcap must be worn while praying in a mosque. Shoes must be removed. The same motions of washing beforehand (wudhu) must always be followed in obedience to the Qur’anic injunction: ‘Wash your faces, and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet up to the ankles’ (Surah 5:6). Each ruku (bowing down) and sajdah (prostration) must be performed in unison with the other worshippers present, in the same way, at the same times, every day. During the qa’dah (the sitting position) the same taslim must be recited as each worshipper passes the greeting to his left and right. No variation of this ceremony is allowed at any time.

Islam claims to simply restate the original religion of submission to God that all the previous prophets followed and imposed. The Qur’an says that it came only as a tasdiq, a ‘confirmation’ of what was before it (Surah 10:37) and not as a new form of religion. If so, the true religion of God must always have focused on formal, repetitive submission, the homage of a servant to a divine Master who can neither be personally known nor loved for who he really is.

The Bible paints a very different picture. It does not see God’s religion as always the same, simply a conformity to exact patterns of worship that have never changed and never will. As it covers the history of God’s relationship with his people, it shows a progression and expansion as God draws ever nearer to his own, and it finishes with a glorious climax when he takes the initiative to redeem his people and invites them to a living, personal relationship with him. Not as servants bound to do his bidding, mind you, but as children born of his Holy Spirit, forgiven of their sins, and booked for eternal glory. Join me on a journey as we discover the Christian message to the Muslim world.

Cain and Abel: The Only Acceptable Sacrifice
We have many religions on earth. They include Judaism founded by Moses, Christianity by Jesus, Islam by Muhammad, Buddhism by Gautama Buddha, and many others like Hinduism without any known originators. Heaven, however, sees only three. The first is Antitheism. It is the worship of anything other than God, the creature rather than the Creator. Whether it is the veneration of pagan idols, ancestral spirits or other beings, it makes no difference. It’s all the same to the angels of heaven – the worship of anything and everything but the true God. The Bible describes antitheists perfectly: ‘for although they knew God they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles’ (Romans 1:21-23). The definition concludes: ‘they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen’ (Romans 1:25).

The only other two religions on earth, as heaven sees them, are the oldest that have ever existed. They were founded on the same day by two brothers and, outwardly, they can look very similar. The brothers were Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve. On the day that the first religious ceremonies were ever performed on earth, Cain and Abel each brought an offering to God. Cain had become a farmer, a tiller of the ground. So he brought a portion of the fruits of his labour and offered it to God. Abel, however, had become a shepherd, so he brought a different present, a sacrifice of his young lambs and their fat portions. There seemed to be no real difference between the two offerings, but the Bible says ‘the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard’ (Genesis 4:4-5). What followed is well-known: Cain was angry and rose up against his brother, killing him in a field.

The Qur’an confirms the story: ‘And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth, when they offered a sacrifice which was accepted from one of them but not accepted from the other. He said: I will certainly kill you’ (Surah 5:27). Neither book states why Cain’s sacrifice was rejected, but the Bible goes on to show why Abel found favour with God. It says ‘By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous, God bearing witness by accepting his gifts; he died, but through his faith he is still speaking’ (Hebrews 11:4). The key words are the first two: by faith Abel won God’s favour.

Abel’s sacrifice tells you what that faith was. He presented the shed blood of his lambs. Abel loved the Lord, but he was painfully aware that he could, at times, be as cold to him as his brother Cain was. He knew he was implicated in his parents’ sin in the Garden of Eden and that he could offer nothing to God from the fruit of his own labours to redeem himself. He also knew, however, that God had warned the serpent in the garden: ‘I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel’ (Genesis 3:15). This clear statement that God would one day raise a Saviour from Eve’s descendants who would suffer severely to achieve human salvation, but would fatally injure the serpent at the same time and deliver her offspring from its power, was Abel’s hope. His sacrifice sent its own message: “I know my sinfulness and that I can by no religious means commend myself to you, but I am offering back to you something that is your own, slain with its shed blood, because I sense my redemption will come at considerable cost to you.” Abel was the first man to offer true faith to God. This is the second religion heaven sees, and it is the only true one. It is the Faith of Abel.

Cain, however, had no true love for God. He did not believe he was implicated in his parents’ sin. He also told God that he did not believe he was his brother’s keeper either (Genesis 4:9). He killed Abel in cold blood. Yet Cain was prepared to acknowledge God as his Creator and so he also brought a present, but his was only a gesture, a token offering from the abundance of his labours. He would have been willing to worship God occasionally, but regarded his life as his own and believed he was free to exploit the earth for his benefit alone.
He would come round every now and again to salute God, perhaps once a week or for a harvest ceremony once a year, but no more. Cain was the founder of formal monotheism, worshipping God without truly loving him. This is the Religion of Cain, the third religion heaven sees, and it regards it as entirely false. It is the largest religion on earth today and embraces every expression of formal monotheism, whether Judaic, Christian or Islamic. God himself summed it up in these words: ‘This people draw near with their mouth and honour me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by rote’ (Isaiah 29:13).

Cain’s anger showed the difference between him and his brother. He might well have retorted: “I would have been willing to come round many times to salute you, once a week if need be. Why did you reject my first offering so completely?” God’s answer to him would have been: “Abel made only a single offering, but it was an all-embracing commitment of his whole life to me, trusting me for his salvation. I will one day, by a single offering of my own, perfect for all time those who are sanctified” (Hebrews 10:14). The Faith of Abel is the only true religion the world has known or ever will know. It is a vibrant, living faith as opposed to dry, outward conformity. It offers God nothing of its own, it trusts God entirely for its salvation. It does not look on the outward appearance and say what am I? A Muslim, Jew or Christian identified by my dress, beard, head-covering, robes, weekly worship attendance, etc, signifying my allegiance to a particular religion? No, it asks the acid question who am I? How deeply within my own soul do I love God and how willing am I to pursue his perfect honesty, purity, love and righteousness? After my religious dress is removed, my beard shaved off, my priest’s robes put away, what is left? What do I have within myself to commend me to God? There is only one true religion on earth – it is human faith responding to God’s faithfulness, a theme we will explore more fully as we press on.

Abraham: The Father of the Faithful
All Muslims honour Ibrahim alayhis-salam. He is regarded as one of the greatest messengers of God. Christians likewise look to him as a prototype of a true believer and the father of the faithful. He followed the true faith, the Faith of Abel, and true Christians are said to be ‘those who share the faith of Abraham for he is the father of us all’ (Romans 4:16). The Qur’an likewise speaks of the millata abikum Ibrahim, the “faith of our father Abraham” (Surah 22:78). But why is Abraham marked out for his faith and not for his religious submission to God?

The Qur’an sees the millah of Abraham as no more than unquestioning submission to the will of Allah. It says that he was one of the musliman, a “submitter” (Surah 3:67) and states that ‘when his Lord said to him Submit!, he said I submit to the Lord of the worlds’ (Surah 2:131). The command for “submit” in the text is Aslim! and his response is aslamtu, “I have submitted.” All three words come from the same root letters as islam and muslim. This is not true faith, however. It is no more than an uncomprehending resignation to God’s will. It does not tax the prophet’s faith in God’s faithfulness.

The Bible shows that God called Abraham to a much deeper relationship with him than mere submission to his will. It begins with a simple promise which God made to him when he complained that he had no heir to his estate: ‘Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them … so shall your descendants be’ (Genesis 15:5). What follows is equally simply stated: ‘And he believed the Lord; and he reckoned it to him as righteousness’ (Genesis 15:6). It seems too easy – Abraham just took the promise at face value and, because he believed God, he was declared righteous in his sight.
He did not have to pray a number of times a day, fast for many months, go on pilgrimages or donate large sums to the poor to obtain God’s approval. He just believed the promise and was immediately placed on an even footing with God.

His faith was to be tested again and again, however. Many years passed without anything happening. His wife Sarah, who had never been able to bear children and was growing older every year, told him to procreate offspring through her maid Hagar (Genesis 16:2). When Ishmael was born, Abraham was convinced that he must be the heir who was promised but, just thirteen years later when Abraham was 99 years old and his wife Sarah already 90 and still barren, God said to him: ‘I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her; I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall come from her’ (Genesis 17:16). At first Abraham laughed at the prospect, but then it dawned on him that Ishmael was obviously not the child of the promise. So he cried out to God ‘O that Ishmael might live in your sight!’ but God answered: ‘No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him’ (Genesis 17:18-19).

When Isaac was finally born, Sarah demanded that Abraham send Hagar and Ishmael away. The patriarch was sore-pressed, but God confirmed her wish, advising Abraham at the same time that he would nevertheless make a great nation out of him. Still, Abraham was severely tested as he realised Ishmael had been rejected by God. At fourteen years of age he was sent away into the wilderness.

Whenever Abraham looked on the new youngster he at least knew for certain that he was the child who had been promised. He looked forward to the day when Isaac would rise up as the fulfilment of God’s promise that he would become the father of many nations. But, when Isaac had reached a similar age as Ishmael’s when he was sent away, God finally spoke to the patriarch again. ‘Abraham!’ he suddenly called out (Genesis 22:1). Abraham responded willingly, expecting to hear God define how his son was now to become a blessing to the generations to come. Instead God said to him: ‘Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering upon one of the mountains of which I shall tell you’ (Genesis 22:2).
(The Qur’an records the incident but does not name or otherwise identify the son who was to be sacrificedSurah 37:102. It does, however, confirm that the line of nubuwwah – prophethood, and kitab – scripture, would follow through Isaac’s line – Surah 29:27.)

This was a far greater test for the patriarch. When Ishmael started turning into a young man, God told Abraham to reject him, but now, as Isaac reached the same budding moment in his life, God told Abraham to slaughter him! It was the supreme test of a man’s love for God – to offer his son to him. If he would not spare his son, surely he would give him all he had (cf. Romans 8:32). It was the best any man could offer to God.

But Abraham was facing a far sterner test. God had promised him he would have descendants like the stars of the sky through his son Isaac. How could this promise possibly be fulfilled if he was to offer him up as a burnt offering? Abraham must have pictured the scene – his son cremated to ashes after being sacrificed and, as the wind came down and blew the ashes away, he would have imagined himself despairing “there goes the promise of God to the wind.”

By this time, however, Abraham had gone far beyond just submitting to God’s will without asking further questions. When God, on another occasion not long before this, had threatened to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah for their wickedness, the patriarch objected: ‘Will you indeed destroy the righteous with the wicked? Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; will you then destroy the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?’ (Genesis 18:23-25)

How could a prophet argue with God’s decrees? This was not humble submission. But God honoured it, eventually promising not to destroy the cities if just ten righteous people could be found in them. (They weren’t, and only Lot and his two daughters were eventually saved from their destruction.)

There’s more to this than meets the eye. Abraham was calling on God to be true to himself. Believing that God is faithful, he placed all his faith in God’s faithfulness. That is why he reacted when he heard something that seemed to deny that faithfulness. ‘Every word of God proves true’ the scripture declares (Proverbs 30:5), and Abraham faced the command to sacrifice his son with the same dilemma.
How could God’s promise be fulfilled if he was to sacrifice Isaac? He could have said to himself “I don’t know but it doesn’t matter. God has commanded me to destroy him, so I will. I’ll just unquestioningly submit to his will. The unfulfilled promise will be his problem, not mine.”

But Abraham didn’t. He knew that his faith, which had earned him a declaration that he was righteous in God’s sight, was merely a reflection of God’s faithfulness. The sun generates light, blazing light. The moon can do no more than feebly reflect it but, as it faces the sun head on, it reflects that light to the full. Take away the moon and the sun’s sparkling light will be totally unaffected, but take away the sun and the moon will not shine at all. So God generates faithfulness as the sun generates light, but Abraham’s faith was like the moon’s light – no more than a reflection of God’s glorious faithfulness.

Yet Abraham held to that faith. Like Abel, he continued to follow the only true religion in the world: true faith, and like Abel he was commended for it: ‘By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son of whom it was said “Through Isaac shall your descendants be named.” He considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead; hence, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.’ (Hebrews 11:17-19)

God honoured Abraham and restored his son to him. He had passed the supreme test. He had been willing to give the greatest blessing in his life back to God, his only true son, and in this he perfected his faith, believing God would yet fulfil his promise to him by raising his son back to life. For this Abraham received a very special title. He was called the friend of God. Jehoshaphat, a righteous king of Judah many centuries later, prayed to God: ‘Did you not, O our God, drive out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel, and give it for ever to the descendants of Abraham your friend?’ (2 Chronicles 20:7) God himself once spoke of the nation of Israel as ‘the offspring of Abraham, my friend’ (Isaiah 41:8). James, an early disciple of Jesus and his blood-brother, also wrote of Abraham’s faith and added ‘he was called the friend of God’ (James 2:23).

The Qur’an confirms the title: ‘For God did take Abraham for a friend’ (Surah 4:125). The Arabic word here is khalilan, “a friend”, and Abraham has consequently always been known in Islam as khalilullah, the Friend of God. The Qur’an gives no explanation for the title, however.

In the Biblical record, however, we can see more and more what true faith really is.
God wants to have a living relationship with his people. He desires this far more than strict obedience to religious routines, observance of ceremonies and a repetitive adherence to prescribed prayers, prayer-times, etc. This will become ever more apparent as we proceed. At present, however, let us mark the symbol of Abraham’s recognition – true faith. God did not forcefully project his righteousness at him, expecting him to respond in perfect righteousness and obedience to his every demand. No matter how religious, pious or devoted any man may be, he cannot match God’s perfect righteousness. His sin will pull him down again and again.

God elected to project his faithfulness to Abraham and was delighted when the prophet responded consistently to it by faith, eventually perfecting it when being commanded to offer his son as a sacrifice. We will have more to say about it when we come to the climax we spoke about earlier. We will see how Abraham’s sacrificial faith was only a shadow of God’s sacrificial love yet to be revealed. For the moment, however, let us press on to the next great patriarch in Israel’s history, Moses, and see how God’s plans and purposes for his people continued to expand and grow.

Moses: The Man who Knew God Face-to-Face
More than four hundred years passed before God moved again to communicate directly with his people. After forty years of prosperity as a prince in Egypt, and a further forty years in the Sinai wilderness as a fugitive from justice, Moses suddenly found himself face-to-face with the God of Israel. God called him to deliver the nation from Pharaoh’s rule and, after a series of plagues which finally broke the back of Egyptian resistance, Moses led the people into the same wilderness on their way to the promised land, Canaan.

The final scene in this famous story needs to be retold here. Pharaoh only relented when an angel from God slew the first-born of every family in Egypt in just one night. Only the Israelites who had obeyed God’s word to sacrifice a passover lamb were exempted. They had been instructed to ‘touch the lintel and the two doorposts’ of their homes ‘with the blood which is in the basin’ (Exodus 12:22) and were further told to ‘observe this rite as an ordinance for you and for your sons for ever’ (Exodus 12:24). The angel of death would then pass over the home. A clear trend was developing as God’s relationship with his people progressed. Abel had offered the blood of his lambs as an atoning sacrifice, shadowing a far greater sacrifice to come. Abraham was willing to offer his son Isaac as a similar token of a greater offering to follow. Now the people of Israel were commanded to place the shed blood of their sacrificial lambs across their doorposts. True faith was beginning to define itself. The hope of all God’s true people, trusting solely in his grace and not their religiousness, was increasingly being focused on the shed blood of the true Lamb of God to follow. True believers discerned this, and placed their faith in God’s redemptive grace yet to be fully revealed.

Not long after their exodus from Egypt, God instructed Moses: ‘Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments, and be ready by the third day; for on the third day the Lord will come down upon Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people’ (Exodus 19:10-11). On the third day the people trembled as God’s presence was manifested on the mountain. There God spoke directly to the nation, giving it the ten commandments that were to become the backbone of Jewish moral law thereafter. It was a unique occasion, one for which God had been preparing for centuries.

Moses was not visited by an angel as a mediator from heaven. God himself drew near to the prophet and the nation, expressing his desire to relate closely to the people of Israel thereafter. To reveal his presence among them, God told Moses to build an ark with a mercy seat above it and said: ‘There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are upon the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you of all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel’ (Exodus 25:22).

The nation had visible proof that God himself was present among them. Whenever Moses entered the holy tent he had constructed as a tabernacle where the ark was placed, a ‘pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the door of the tent, and the Lord would speak with Moses’ (Exodus 33:9). When the people saw the cloud, they would rise up and worship.
The story concludes: ‘Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face as a man speaks to his friend’ (Exodus 33:11). Moses was overwhelmed that God was willing to relate so directly to him and the people as to manifest his presence among them. He said to God: ‘Is it not in your going with us that we are distinct, I and your people, from all other people that are upon the face of the earth?’ (Exodus 33:16)

Very boldly Moses prayed ‘I pray you, show me your glory.’ God responded: ‘I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name, ‘the Lord’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy’ (Exodus 33:18-19).

With respect, even at this stage God’s revealed presence and favour go far beyond anything comparable in Islam. Far greater intimacy, fellowship, grace and favour between God and his own were to follow, but even at this stage the relationship between God and his people had far exceeded the highest of Muslim expectations. God himself was visibly present among them. The cloud, which was a special manifestation of his presence, hovered over the mercy seat by day and shone at night. When it moved, the nation knew it had to follow and stay close to God as he dwelt among his people.

When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with two tablets containing the ten commandments, inscribed by God himself, ‘Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God’ (Exodus 34:29). Whenever he came out from speaking to the Lord, ‘the people of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone’ (Exodus 34:35). The Qur’an confirms the unique, direct relationship between God and Moses: ‘And to Moses Allah spoke directly’ (Surah 4:164). It says nothing further, but confirms the special relationship between them. The story of Moses in the Bible concludes with these words: ‘And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face’ (Deuteronomy 34:10).

Abraham was called the friend of God. Moses spoke to God face to face as a man speaks to his friend. We see here the growing supreme purpose of God steadily being revealed. God’s presence was so closely manifested that Moses’ face shone when he spoke to him. God was going far beyond religious observances. His ultimate desire that his people should relate personally to him and know him directly was being increasingly revealed as time went on.

Unfortunately God’s immediate presence brought constant tensions and conflict between him and the people of Israel. Time and again they distrusted and rebelled against him. Right from the start, when God called the nation to hear his word and receive his ten commandments, the people said to Moses ‘You speak to us and we will hear, but let not God speak to us, lest we die’ (Exodus 20:19). When Moses went up the mountain to converse with God over forty days, the people rose up and tried to shake off his presence and power over them. They made a golden calf and worshiped it, promptly proceeding to break every commandment they could to tell him precisely what they thought of him.

God’s anger grew deep within him. Time and again he threatened to destroy them. ‘I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people; now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them’, God declared (Exodus 32:9-10).
A benevolent but righteous God among an unholy and malevolent people – conflict was inevitable. The nation did not want to draw near to God. For their unbelief he kept them wandering with minimal food and water for forty years in the wilderness. Despite all his favours towards them, the people just would not draw near to him. Living so closely among them, their sinfulness and hard-heartedness inevitably ground sharply against his righteousness and holiness.
 
‘And now, Israel,’ Moses declared, ‘what does the Lord your God require of you, but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments and statutes of the Lord which I command you this day for your good?’
(Deuteronomy 10:12-13). In this Moses revealed God’s ultimate aim – a deep mutual relationship based on reciprocated love and obedience towards him. Even though he regulated various forms of religious ceremonies and observances to constantly draw out at least a formal worship towards him, they turned against him. From the depths of their hearts they did not want to draw near to him in purity, honesty, faithfulness and love. Quite simply, they would have preferred to turn back to their former slavery in Egypt than live by faith in his faithfulness and allow his Spirit to examine the depths of their hearts and souls.

At one point, after tiring of the manna God sent them from above every day to eat, some of the ‘rabble that was among them had a strong craving; and the people of Israel also wept again, and said: “O that we had meat to eat! We remember the fish we ate in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic, but now our strength is dried up, and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at”’ (Numbers 11:4-6). Later generations honoured the manna with religious devotion as bread from heaven itself, but the Israelites at the time simply complained to Moses ‘we loathe this worthless food’ (Numbers 21:5).

Once they had entered the land of Canaan, the visible cloud above the mercy-seat faded away. The manna sent to feed them daily ceased. God could see that they could not match or reflect his righteousness and could only be exposed to wrath and judgment if he continued to manifest his presence so obviously to them. So he let go of the nation, still living among his people, but withdrawing his visible presence to avoid further face-to-face conflict. Patiently God watched and waited as the following generations came and went. Some centuries later God again began to make his presence felt among the people of Israel. Another man arose with a burning love for God, a strong man who could unite the nation, and God moved to relate to him as it appeared his hopes for the nation might yet begin to materialise.

Continuing on Part II

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/gilchrist/knowing_god.html

IHS

Friday, 19 August 2016

New York subway jihad plotter quotes Qur'an verse justifying suicide bombing

The last part of this, Ahmedzay's rant against "Zionist Jews," not reproduced below, was reported yesterday. This report is extraordinary for the fact that it shows Ahmedzay quoting Qur'an 9:111 to justify suicide bombing. This is a common tactic of suicide bombing recruiters, but to point it out in teh West usually brings one a charge of "Islamophobia." I guess Ahmedzay must be an "Islamophobe." "Zarein Ahmedzay's statement when he pleaded guilty to terrorist charges," from the New York Post, April 23 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

"Your Honor, I would like to quote from the Qur'an."

"Quote, Verily, Allah has purchased of the believers their lives and their wealth for the price of Paradise, to fight in the way of Allah, to kill and get killed. It is a promise binding on the truth in the Torah, the Gospel and the Qur'an, end of quote."

That's Qur'an 9:111, the justification for suicide attacks. The only guarantee of Paradise in the Qur'an is this verse, which guarantees it to those who kill and are killed for Allah. This once again underscores the jihadist contention that they represent Islamic authenticity -- a charge never yet refuted by Muslim "moderates" in any way that has proven effective to change jihadists' minds.

Sources. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/04/new-york-subway-jihad-plotter-quotes-quran-verse-justifying-suicide-bombing.html

IHS

Question to the Man of this Site

Mr Who ever you are I am 100% sure that your claims of being an EXmuslim is not true actually you are a Zionist who is creating a hate among different Faiths. On the other hand Why do you HATE Islam even if you left? I mean why dont you stay away for Islam for those who Love and will die A Muslims like me. All your claims contradict and there must be an agenda for this Site. I dont care what is the point of this site but it still shows that Islam is a Universal religion, Islam has enemies, and Islam is not the way you see and showing? Your are contributing to More people Embrace Islam because of knowing Islam and seeing your FAKE and FALSE claims tell the TRUTh. I think you sometimes call your self mr sina of Zina (the Arabic word of adultery). Is that What i said is true?
Fuaad

Hi Fuaad,
Don’t be so sure. If you read my articles you’ll see I speak the truth. I am not the only person who left Islam and is against it. We are many and we are growing in number fast.
As for being a Zionist, yes I have said it many times that I am a Zionist. Zionist means someone who believes Jews have a right to have a homeland to stay safe from discrimination and genocide. I happen to agree with that idea and therefore I am a Zionist. Do I have any transaction or dealings with Jews? No! I don’t receive a dime from them. I simply think they are human beings and entitled to have the same protection that all humans have. Any decent person must be a Zionist.
If you are not a Zionist you are a hatemonger racist. One who does not feel the suffering of others is less than a human.
You don’t have to be a Jew or have anything to do with Jews to be a Zionist, just as you don’t have to be a woman to be a feminist and believe that women should have equal rights. or a person of color to be against racism.
Why I hate Islam? It’s because I hate all ideologies that divide mankind. I hate Nazism, fascism, communism, racism and Islam equally. They are all the same filth. They are all evil and they must all be crushed and dumped in the toilet, where they belong.
My cl
aims do not contradict. Where is the contradiction?
I have no hidden agenda. I want to expose Islam and get the world rid of this lie that is causing so much hate and destruction. This is my stated mission, not a hidden agenda.
The fact that Muslims love to die for Islam does not make this evil cult a true religion. Muslims are brainwashed.That is why they love to die and love to kill others.
The fact that some people love to die for a doctrine does not make that doctrine true, but rather dangerous. Good teachings promote life and happiness. It is evil doctrines that encourage death and glorify martyrdom. Islam is a cult of death.
My goal is to show the truth, save Muslims and save their victims. I am saving lives and saving the world. This is a mighty work and I am proud of it. As of today, I have saved thousands of people and if only a fraction of them follow my footsteps together we will save millions and the whole world. Many famous apostates have said that they owe their enlightenment to me. Many of them are doing a lot more than me. They have surpassed me, as I had predicted long time ago when I was a lone voice in the wilderness of the Internet. I am proud of my achievements. I am filled with joy any time I see them on TV. Why should I stop?
I did not amass whealth in this life and have had my share of setbacks and vicissitudes. Life has not been kind to me, but I don’t consider my life a waste. Despite all the backstabbings, betrayals and injustices that I endured and despite all the hardships, I have set in motion a movement that will end the most evil doctrine ever created by man. How many people can make that claim? Even if I die today, this movement will continue and nothing will stop it.
Please do not misinterpret me. I am not claiming that this huge fire that is burning the filth of Islam is because of me. I have no streak of megalomania and narcissism in me to make outlandish claims like that. But I am proud to say that I was one of the first who started that fire. I am one of the first who exposed the dirty secrets of Islam through the Internet and showed to the world that this cult is evil and its founder was a psychopath.
When everyone was shadowboxing against the “radical Islam” and the “political Islam,” I was the one who said it is all about Islam itself. Unlike most so called pundits who try to save Muhammad from blemish and put all the blames on the Wahhabis I said that this tree is rotten from its root. The problem with Islam is not with its wrong interpretation, but with its correct application. It is with the psychopath that Muslims follow as their prophet and the demon that they worship as their god.
I was amongst the very few who knew where is the source of the problem. Still the majority of “experts” are lost. They have been receiving all the attention while misleading the public. Some of them have good intentions, but good intentions are not enough. A myth is still a myth with good intention or not. They are deceptive, but politically correct. I am ignored by the media because my message is revolutionary and who wants to rock the boat. But truth is more powerful than lies and if given equal chance it will always prevail. I was not given equal chance. I sent my articles to various mainstream media. They ignore them. Nonetheless, my message is winning. People are waking up and they are realizing the problem with Islam is deeper than what their pundits, the media and the politicians tell them.
If you think I am contributing to more people embracing Islam then why are you asking me to stop
? Please promote my faithfreedom.org so everyone can see my “falshood” and convert to Islam.
`Sina` (SEE-NAH) is a Persian name. `Sina` comes from a Hebrew word meaning: `explorer of knowledge`, the Arabic form of the word is `Bagher`. It is a popular name in Iran. http://www.encyclo.co.uk/define/SINA
Zina means adultery. Muslim apologists call me Zina. This shows the level of their intellectualism and how they respond to my criticism of Islam.
Islam has always had its critics, but it has crushed them with brute force.
I am not one of those idealists who think truth will always prevail. It is force that always prevails. This is the only reason behind the success of Islam. Truth can win only when it is allowed to compete with lies on equal footing. The light will win darkness only if it is allowed to enter the room. The proponents of lies cannot tolerate the truth. But the new millennium and the Internet have changed the rules of the game. Now, Muslims can no longer silence the truth and truth is winning over Islam.

Ali Sina

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=8808

IHS

Questions regarding “The Challenge”‎

Dear Ali Sina, In regrads to your challenge on faithfreedom.org

Because some of your views are very akin to my own, I thought I would share with you where I am in my quest for the truth. I am trying to ponder and make sure what i am doing is truly what I believe. Although it would be easy for me to become a moral atheist, something inside me denies me from becoming that. The world has its ills, yes, but it is too ordered and structured not to have a controlling force behind it. There is no question the Quran and hadith have many problems but maybe the “uncorrupted” state we were taught was never true. Or it all has to do with interpretation of the original arabic. This seems quite likely to me. You question Muhammad’s prophethood by some of his actions, but like you said youself, Joshua did far worse in the bible. However please answer me these regarding his character:

1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
2) He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
3) Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
4) If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
5) Why does he validate Moses and Jesus so much. He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets wer on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldnt he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
6)He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
7) When he was victorious and return to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader you are talking about?
8 ) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
9) He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?

Now, I am not saying this proves his prophethood to you. But if I was sitting in a jury box, in modern day america, it adds enough reasonable doubt that I cannot deny that he could have been.

So maybe I dont get the $50,000 reward, but if you cannot explain away these questions with logic, you’ll have to send me a check for at least $25 grand.
Be well and take care, SS AKA “the challenge winner”

Dear SS the self adjudicated challenge winner,
Yes indeed the universe has its order. That is why Einstein said, God does not play dice. Of course Einstein was talking about God in an allegorical way. What he meant was that universe is governed by laws. This is agreed by all scientists. However, what is not agreed by everyone is whether there is a lawmaker.
We can envision that natural laws can exist on their own, but it when we talk about a law maker, the question that arises is who made this lawmaker.
However, this is not my argument and in no ways I want to convince people in becoming atheists. I have said it time and again that atheism does not make humans better. Atheists also have committed horrendous crimes and have shown they can be evil.
What can elevate people is consciousness not beliefs.
Consciousness comes with maturity and it has nothing to do with beliefs. So if you wish to believe in a creator, I will respect your choice. Believers or unbelievers are the same to me. I have no preference. I pick my friends from among those who have evolved enough to know not to harm others. This is often the question of psychological health and not religion.
Yes I said Joshua committed heinous crimes. But did I say that I believe he was a prophet of God? I actually believe that Moses, Joshua and many ancient personages of the Old Testament were myths. Jews made up these stories in captivity to make their youths feel better and endure the tyranny of their captors. This is not just a mere opinion. There is plenty of evidence that prove this claim.
Assuming Joshua was real, he would have been a war criminal no better than Genghis Khan. By the same token Muhammad was also a criminal. It makes no sense to follow one criminal because another group holds another criminal as a prophet.
Furthermore, Jews do not follow Joshua. He is a historic figure, like Omar or Abu Bakr and not someone to foll
ow. Muslims follow Muhammad to the tee. There lies the problem.

Now let me answer your questions.
1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
Who said Muhammad was offered any of these things? This claim was made only by him and he was a pathological liar.
People of Mecca laughed at him and thought he is a mad man. Why would they want to lavish a mad man with so much gifts? Has it ever happened anywhere that someone claims to be a prophet and people who think he is crazy offer him wealth and women? Come on please. Why is it so hard for Muslims to be rational? No one offered Muhammad any wealth. He lied, just as he lied about being persecuted and the Meccans plotting to kill him. Please read my book and see how I have debunked all these claims.

2)
He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
Obviously you have not read Muhammad’s biographies. Please read the books of Tabari, Ibn Sa’d and al Moghazi of Waqidi. Muhammad never fought personally in any battle. He ordered 74 or 78 raids (depending which historian you believe) in 27 of those raids he himself participated, but he stood behind his men, wearing two coats of mail that made him so heavy that he could not walk. All he did was gather dust from the ground and throw it in the direction of his enemies while cursing them. In Ohod he did not have enough men, so he sent everyone to the front leaving no one to protect him. Someone came and found him hiding between two rocks. He hit him with his sword but his heavy armors protected him. He shouted for help and his men arrived and the Quraishi escaped. There he lost a tooth. Courage is not a quality that distinguished Muhammad at no moment in his life. Even in the war of Sacrilege, when he was twenty years old, all he did was collect the arrows during the cease fires and hand them to his uncles. That coward never put his life in danger. Not even once. But he gave fiery speeches promises his followers all sorts of rewards if they die in the battle field.

3)
Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
Muhammad had a hallucination at the age forty. He thought he was demon possessed. His co-depended wife convinced him that he had become a prophet. I have explained the psychological state of Muhammad and what let him to believe in his hallucinations in my book. Countless people write to challenge me. I ask them to read my book first. Those of them who agree and read it either don’t write back or write to say they have left Islam.

4)
If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
Muhammad’s wives were all teenagers or in their early twenties. The oldest one was Sauda. No mention of her age is made. But Ibn Sa’d in Tabaqat V.8 says she died during the rule of Muaviyah in the year 54 Hijra. We know that Muhammad married Sauda about 40 days after the death of Khadijah, i.e. three years before Hijra. So Sauda died 57 years after she married Muhammad.
What is the normal age of a person? Sauda was a big fat woman. Often overweigh people don’t live long. But let us say she died at the age of eighty. 80-57=23 So Sauda was 23 years old when she married Muhammad who was 50 years old at that time. If Sauda died at the age of 90, which is unlikely, she must have been 33 years old when she married the 50 year old Muhammad.
Now let me quote a hadith reported by Ibn Sa’d to debunk the claim that Muhammad married old women for their protection.
Barra narrated that the prophet sent message to Sauda that I have divorced you.  When Sauda heard the news, she went and sat in the way of the Prophet to Aisha’s house. When she saw the prophet she told him. I swear thee by the one who has sent you the Quran and has exalted you over all the creation to tell my why did you divorce me. Have I done something wrong that has offended you? The Prophet said no! Sauda said, I then beg you for the sake of the same God to not divorce me. I am getting old I don’t need to be with a man. You can use my turn to stay with Aisha, but I wish that in the day of resurrection to be counted amongst your wives. The Prophet agreed and Sauda said that since then the Prophet spent the nights there were her turn with his favorite wife Aisha.” [Tabaqat V. 8 p. 53-54 Persian translation]

Sauda was not old for Muhammad. She was half his age. However, she was much older than his other wives who were 40 to 44 years younger than him.
Sauda was a big woman and not very attractive. So Muhammad wanted to get rid of her to spend more time with his petite younger wives.
How could Sauda survive on her own in that society? She thought that as long as she remains nominally a wife of Muhammad her material needs will be taken care of – and in fact they were. The same historian tells us that the share of Sauda from the loot of the Khaibar was 80 camel load of dates and 20 camel loads of barley or wheat.
From every loot the wives of Muhammad received their share of goods and slaves. Omar, during his caliphate Sauda a sack filled with Dirhams (Probably the proceeds of the loot from Persia or Egypt). Sauda asked, what is this? They said it is Dirhams. She said Subhanallah, they send me money in a sack of dates?”
[Tabaqat V. 8 p. 55]
I can write a book about the sexual life of Muhammad.
This man had no respect for women. He used them like an object and disposed of them when they no longer satisfied his animalistic needs. Muslims are so ignorant of the truth about their prophet that is appalling.

5)
Why did he validate Moses and Jesus so much? He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets were on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldn’t he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
Muhammad started his prophetic career in the footsteps of biblical prophets. He thought this would attract the Christians and the Jews. Once his dream was dashed he turned against the Jews, banished some and massacred others. However, he could not change his so called revelation of 13 years and start beating a different drum. He had to stick with Jesus and Moses. After he came to Medina and faced the rejection of the people of the Book, there is very little talk about Jesus and Moses in the Quran. Instead there is an unbounded vitriol against their followers.
Muhammad changed his qibla and started prying towards temple filled with idols. He called the Jews and Christians all sorts of names, but it was too late for him to change his story about being another prophet in the same line of biblical prophets.

6)
He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
You must definitely read my book. All your questions are answered there. Muhammad suffered from Acromegaly. This disease deforms the bones and cartilages. In the later years of his life he looked like a monster. Muhammad was a narcissist and his image meant a lot to him. He did not want people to draw his picture when he was so ugly and deformed. The prohibition of drawing his picture is not out of modesty but out of his fear of leaving an ugly image of himself for the posterity.

7)
When he was victorious and returned to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader  you are talking about?
This was part of the deal for the Meccans to surrender with no fight. Abu Sufian accepted the deal to avoid bloodshed. Muhammad also knew that the Arab tribes that had accompanied him would not stay long if the fight gets bloody.
Despite his promises to not to kill anyone he sought ten Meccans who had mocked him many years ago, among them two dancing girls and killed them.

8) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
These are myths that have held Muslims hoodwinked. I have demystified the mystique of Muhammad in my book. Once you read it you’ll have answer to all these questions. Muhammad was a narcissist. Narcissists are master manipulators and when they put a show of piety or humility they do it in exaggeration. Please refer to my book for detailed explanation of Muhammad’s show of humility and his psychological make up.

9)
He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?
Muhammad’s words and deeds were different. The narcissist has all the good advices for others but they consider themselves about those advices. Muhammad was not good to his wives. He beat even Aisha who was the youngest and most favorite of his wives. He divorced anyone who was not satisfying his sexual needs and threatened to divorce all of them when they were upset of him for sleeping with a maid, Maryah.
What they feed you as the history of Muhammad is all lies.
You need to read the original books of history of Islam or read my book that is based on those stories to get the facts. So you don’t get $50,000, not $25,000 and not even one dollar. But if you ask for it, I will send you my book for free. After you read it and leave Islam, you may want to finance its translation to any language spoken by Muslims. It will only cost a few hundreds, but you’d be saving millions.

Cheers
Ali Sina

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=8816

IHS

The Muslim Misuse of Hebrews 5:7‎

Does this verse teach that Jesus never died?      

Keith Thompson

Around 30 A.D. Jesus Christ was crucified on the cross. He died for our sin appeasing the wrath of God and taking it upon himself. He lived a perfect sinless life of obedience to the Father; a life that we could not live. Because of that as well as the fact that Jesus is God in the flesh; Jesus’ crucifixion was of infinite value or worth. God has infinite value and worth. Since Jesus is God, Jesus’ crucifixion is of infinite value and worth and thus his atoning death as a sacrifice is sufficient to pay for the sins of humanity. This is the good news (gospel) that has come down from heaven for humanity. This is what the first-century scriptures teach. This is the earliest view of Christians. There are early secular sources outside of the Bible that speak about the crucifixion of Christ as a historical event which gives validity to Christian belief.1

However, 600 years after Jesus died on the cross for our sins a false prophet named Muhammad started receiving revelations or messages from a being that he believed to be the angel Gabriel. Many theologians recognize that this was a demonic encounter, perhaps even Satan himself appearing as an angel to Muhammad to deceive him so that he will create a false religion which denies the real truth about Jesus and Christianity – including Jesus’ death on the cross for our sins.
Muhammad received a message about Jesus’ crucifixion which was put into the Islamic (un) holy book – the Quran. It states:

because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain (Quran 4:157, Pickthall Translation)

It is because of this one verse in the Quran that was written 600 years after Jesus was alive, in another language and culture that Muslims deny that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Contrary to the testimony of first-century scriptures, early first-century extra-biblical Christian testimony from Polycarp, 1 Clement, and Ignatius,2 as well as the early non-biblical secular attestation, we are led to believe that this one verse in the Quran is enough to overthrow this evidence. To the outsider looking at this from a purely historical perspective it’s clear that the Muslim proposition is obviously absurd. Even critical atheist, agnostic and liberal scholars agree that Jesus’ death on the cross is a historical fact.3

Because of this dilemma Muslims will try to prove that the Bible doesn’t actually teach that Jesus died on the cross for our sins but instead was raised up by God prior to the event and that someone else (Judas?) was put in his place to go on the cross and made to look like Jesus. Therefore according to Islam there is no atonement for our sin on the cross at all because Jesus never died for us. The Muslim apologist will isolate certain biblical texts that, when removed of their immediate context, may appear give the impression that Jesus didn’t actually die. One such abused text is Hebrews 5:7 and this is what we will be examining to see if it teaches that Jesus never died for our sin, as various Muslims contend, or if these Muslims are guilty of misusing this text. Hebrews 5:7 states:

In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. (Hebrews 5:7, ESV)

When Muslims look at this verse many of them incorrectly understand the words “him who was able to save him from death” as affirming the Islamic position that Jesus was raised into heaven before the crucifixion could take place and that someone else was put on the cross to look like Jesus. One can find hundreds of Muslim articles on the web that appeal to this verse as evidence that Jesus was not crucified. But is this what the author of the book of Hebrews is telling us? This verse can be understood in two ways. 1.) Jesus was saved from dying – thus he never died at all. 2.) Jesus did die and was saved from death by being raised from the dead – the resurrection from the dead. When one reads the book of Hebrews cover to cover they will see that this author held the position of interpretation 2. If we can demonstrate that the context of the book of Hebrews is that Jesus died for our sins as a sacrifice then we have to understand Hebrews 5:7 as Jesus dying and then being saved from death by rising from the dead – the way Christians have always believed.

So does the book of Hebrews teach that Jesus died for our sins?
All throughout this book it either indicates crucifixion for the propitiation of sin or explicitly makes reference to Jesus’ death on the cross. For example, right in the first chapter we read:

After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high … (Hebrews 1:3)

Christians hold that Jesus made purification for sins by dying on the cross as a sacrifice so that whoever believes in Jesus will be regenerated by God and will be saved. Moving further, we read in Hebrews 2:

But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.” “Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:9-10, 14-17)

Then, in Hebrews 6 we receive a warning passage about those who learn the truth but live in sin with no fruit:

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
(Hebrews 6:4-6, ESV)

Notice the phrase “they are crucifying once again the Son of God.” This necessitates Jesus already having died for our sin the past. The only way he can be crucified again is if he was already crucified once. This proves that the author believed that Jesus died on the cross. In Hebrews chapter 7 Jesus’ priestly role is discussed as being final and absolute in that his own sacrifice perfectly atones for our sin as opposed to the previous priestly sacrifices to God for the sins of the people of Israel being temporary sacrifices. It was always the high priest who first offered a sacrifice for his own sin and then one for the people so as to pay for their sin. However, Jesus is the high priest for all of humanity as well as the sacrifice itself. This sacrifice would atone for all sin forever.

For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. (Hebrews 7:26-27, ESV)

Notice this verse affirms that he offered himself up as a sacrifice for our sin. How did he achieve this? He achieved this by being crucified on our behalf. In Hebrews chapter 9 we see more passages which support the crucifixion of Jesus:

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves butby means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant … But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. (Hebrews 9:11-15, 25-28, ESV)

In the next chapter we read:

And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God … Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water …For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:10-12, 19-22, 26-29, ESV)

In chapter 12 we read:

looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:2, ESV)

And finally the last chapter of Hebrews states:

So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. (Hebrews 13:12, ESV)

Notice in the next verse it states that the Father brought Jesus from the dead:

Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20-21, ESV)

The book of Hebrews clearly teaches that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. We see this before and after Hebrews 5:7, the verse in question. We also see in Hebrews 13:20 that God brought Jesus from the dead. Therefore when deciding between interpretation 1 (that Jesus was saved from dying and thus didn’t die), and interpretation 2 (that Jesus was saved from death after dying by resurrecting from the dead), we must go with interpretation 2. In light of the context of the book of Hebrews we should understand the words “Him who was able to save him from death” in Hebrews 5:7 as a reference to the Father raising Jesus from the dead after he was crucified on our behalf as the worthy and willing substitute.

Christ has risen, He is Lord, Amen.

Footnotes
1 Early non-Christian non-biblical sources for Jesus’ crucifixion include Stoic philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote: “What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished.” (Mara Bar-Serapion, cited from F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1981], p. 114). In his historical work Annals XV.44 written around 117 A.D. the early second-century Roman historian Tacitus wrote: “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.” The second-century satirist Lucian of Samosata wrote: “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account … You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11–13 inThe Works of Lucian of Samosata, translated by H. W. Fowler (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949) vol. 4). The Babylonian Talmud reports: “It is taught: On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu and the crier went forth for forty days beforehand declaring that "[Yeshu] is going to be stoned for practicing witchcraft, for enticing and leading Israel astray. Anyone who knows something to clear him should come forth and exonerate him." But no one had anything exonerating for him and they hung him on the eve of Passover.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a. 70-200 A.D.).
2 Early non-biblical Christian testimony of the crucifixion includes 1 Clement: “On account of the love He bore us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave His blood for us by the will of God; His flesh for our flesh, and His soul for our souls.” (1 Clement, Letter to the Corinthians, Ch. 49, 95-97 A.D.) Ignatius of Antioch in his epistle to Smyrna states: “I glorify Jesus Christ as God, who has made you so wise. For I have observed that you are perfected in an immoveable faith, just as if you were nailed on the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ, both in the flesh and in the spirit, and are established in love in the blood of Christ, being fully persuaded unto our Lord that he was truly from the seed of David according to the flesh, son of God according to the will and power, truly born from a virgin, baptized by John in order that all justice might be fulfilled by him.” (Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 1.1, 107 A.D.). Student of the Apostle John, Polycarp of Smyrna wrote: “For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist; and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil …” (Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Ch. 7, 110-135 A.D.)
3 Atheist, Agnostic and liberal scholars who affirm that Jesus died on the cross include Gert Lüdemann who stated: “The fact of the death of Jesus as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable, despite hypotheses of a pseudo-death or a deception which are sometimes put forward.” (Gert Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus: A Historical Approach to the Resurrection, p. 17). Agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman states: “In any event, Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate.”
(Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Oxford University Press, 2000], p. 197). Liberal scholar John Dominic Crossan states: “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.” (John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, p. 145).

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/hebrews5_7.html

IHS