In this section (https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/06/02/the-prophecy-that-exposed-muhammad-as-a-fraud-pt-2/) I am going to show that even if we take the traditional interpretation of Q. 30:1-5 that this is a prediction of the Romans defeating the Persians, this still ends up being a false prophecy exposing Muhammad as a fraud and charlatan.
According to Muslim scholarship Q. 30:1-5 was supposedly “sent
down” approximately around 615 AD and refers to the defeat of the Romans at the
hands of the Persians. This means that the Quran predicted that the Romans
would become victorious anywhere between 618-624 AD since, as we saw in the
previous sections, the Muslim sources stated that the Arabic word bidi in v. 4
signifies a time period of 3-9 years. However, when we consult the
encyclopedias and other sources we discover that the Roman victory didn’t occur
until 13 years later, not the 3-9 years stipulated by the Quran.
The Encyclopedia Americana, 2000 Edition, Volume 4, p. 115 under
the heading of Heraclius, states:
Heraclius found the empire in domestic turmoil. The Slavs
threatened in the Balkans, the Persians and Visigoths in Asia Minor; in 615 the
Persians reached the Bosporous, and in 619 they conquered Egypt. At first,
Heraclius concentrated on internal reorganization of the empire. Then, in 622,
he left Constantinople to begin a counterattack against the Persians. His
military reforms bore fruit WHEN
HE DESTROYED THE PERSIAN ARMY AT NINEVAH IN 627. (Bold and
capital emphasis mine)
On p. 421, under Khosrow II, the Americana writes:
… In
614 Khosrow’s army entered Jerusalem, sacked the Holy
Sepulchre, and carried off the “True Cross” to the Sassanian capital at
Ctesiphon. In 617 the Persians took Chalcedon, opposite Constantinople. Not
until the forces of Emperor Heraclius crossed the Black Sea and took the
offensive in the east were the armies of Khosrow and his chief general,
Shahrbaraz, defeated in a series of brilliant campaigns (622-625).
In 626, Khosrow’s army, now rallied under his
general Shahin, besieged Constantinople. But Heraclius again invaded Persian by
way of Armenia and marched on the royal residence of Dastagird, from which Khosrow
fled. A dynastic revolution led to Khosrow’s execution in 628-an end, as poets
sang, that was the more ignominious for the glory lost. (Bold and capital
emphasis mine)
Under Heraclius, Encyclopedia Britannica writes:
In 614 the Persians conquered Syria and Palestine, taking
Jerusalem and what was believed to be Christ’s Cross, and in 619
occupied Egypt and Libya…
In 622, clad as a penitent and bearing a sacred image of the
Virgin, he left Constantinople, as prayers rose from its many sanctuaries for victory
over the Persian Zoroastrians, the
recovery of the Cross, and the reconquest of Jerusalem…
The next two years he devoted to campaigns in Armenia, the
manpower of which was vital to the empire, and to a devastating invasion of
Persia. In 625 Heraclius retired to Anatolia. He had encamped on the west bank
of the Sarus River when the Persian forces appeared on the opposite bank. Many
of his men rushed impetuously across the bridge and were ambushed and
annihilated by the enemy.
Emerging from his tent, Heraclius saw the triumphant Persians
crossing the bridge. The fate of the Empire hung in the balance. Seizing his
sword, he ran to the bridge and struck down the Persian leader Persians conquered Syria and
Palestine, taking Jerusalem and what was believed to be
Christ’s Cross, and in 619 occupied Egypt and Libya…
In 622, clad as a penitent and bearing a sacred image of the
Virgin, he left Constantinople, as prayers rose from its many sanctuaries for
victory over the Persian Zoroastrians, the recovery of the Cross, and the reconquest of
Jerusalem…
The next two years he devoted to campaigns in Armenia, the
manpower of which was vital to the empire, and to a devastating invasion of
Persia. In 625 Heraclius retired to Anatolia. He had encamped. His soldiers closed
rank behind him and beat back the foe.
In 626 the Persians advanced to the
Bosporus, hoping to join the Avars in an assault on the land walls of
Constantinople. But the Romans sank the primitive Avar fleet that was to
transport Persian units across Bosporus and repelled the unsupported Avar
assault. Heraclius again invaded Persia and in December 627, after a march
across the Armenian highlands into the Tigris plain, met the Persians near the ruins of
Nineveh. There,
astride his renowned war-horse, he killed three Persian generals in single
combat, charged into enemy ranks at the head of his troops, killed the Persian
commander, and scattered the Persian host.
A month later, Heraclius entered Dastagird with its stupendous
treasure. Khosrow was overthrown by his son, with whom Heraclius made
peace, DEMANDING
ONLY THE RETURN OF THE CROSS, the captives, AND CONQUERED ROMAN TERRITORY.
Returning to Constantinople in triumph, he was hailed as a Moses, an Alexander,
a Scipio. IN
630 HE PERSONALLY RESTORED THE CROSS TO THE CHURCH OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE IN
JERUSALEM. (Bold and capital emphasis mine)
Another scholarly source concurs that the complete defeat of the
Persians took place around 628 AD:
“The threatening attitude of the Avar Khan made it essential for
the Emperor to return to Constantinople. The tribute paid to the Avars was then
raised and near relatives of the Emperor were sent to the Khan as hostages, so
that Heraclius was able to resume the war with Persia by March 623. In spite of
the defeat of the previous year, Chosroes
II REFUSED TO CONSIDER A TRUCE, and he sent the Emperor a letter full of the
most insulting expressions and blasphemous utterances against the Christian
faith. Passing through Cappadocia, Heraclius again moved
towards Armenia. Dvin was taken by storm and razed to the ground, and many
other cities suffered the same fate. The Emperor then made a drive towards the
south and marched on Ganzak, the capital of the first Sassanid Ardasir and an
important religious centre for Persia. Chosroes was forced to fly from the
city, which fell into the hands of the Byzantines, and the great Persian
sanctuary, the fire-temple of Zoroaster, was destroyed in revenge for the
plundering of Jerusalem. Heraclius then retired with countless prisoners to
winter behind Araxes. Here he got into touch with the Christian Caucasian
tribes and was able to reinforce his army with Lazi, Abasgi and Iberians. The
position, however, was difficult, and he spent the following year on Armenian
territory in an
exhausting struggle against the attacking Persians. He did not succeed in the attempt
to break through to Persia. In 625 he tried to reach enemy soil
by means of a detour through Cilicia, but again without any DECISIVE result, and IN SPITE
OF SOME VICTORIES he withdrew through Sebastea to the
region of Pontus as winter approached.
“The
Persians were now able to take the offensive again, and in 626
Constantinople had to face the terrible danger of a two-faced attack from the
Persians and Avars. It
was this which Heraclius had always feared and had tried
to avert by buying off the Avars with humiliating concessions…
“At the time when his capital was in deadly peril, Heraclius and
his army had been in distant Lazica. He now negotiated an alliance with the
Khazars, as he had earlier done with the Caucasian peoples, and the resulting
Byzantino-Khazar understanding became from now onwards one of the main features
of imperial eastern diplomacy. As allies of the imperial troops the Khazars
fought the Persians on Caucasian and Armenian soil. In the autumn OF 627 the Emperor
began his great advance south into the heart of the enemy’s territory.
Here he had to rely on his own resources, since the Khazars could not stand up
to the rigours of the campaign and return home. In spite of this, AT THE BEGINNING OF DECEMBER
Heraclius stood before Nineveh. IT WAS HERE THAT THE DEADLY BATTLE WAS FOUGHT
WHICH REALLY DECIDED THE OUTCOME OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE PERSIANS AND
BYZANTINES. THE PERSIAN ARMY WAS PRACTICALLY WIPED OUT AND BYZANTINE HAD WON
THE WAR. Heraclius CONTINUED HIS VICTORIOUS ADVANCE AND AT THE BEGINNING OF 628 he occupied Dastagerd, the Persian
king’s favourite residence from which he had had to beat a hasty retreat. IN
THE SPRING OF 628 events occurred in Persia WHICH MADE ANY FURTHER FIGHTING
UNNECESSARY. Chosroes was deposed and murdered and his son Kavadh-Siroe, who
succeeded him, immediately
came to terms with the Byzantine Emperor. As a result of their
own successes and the total collapse of the Persians, the Byzantines secured
the return of all the territory which had formerly belonged to them, and
Armenia, Roman Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Egypt were restored. A few
months later Siroe on his death-bed named the Byzantine Emperor as his son’s
guardian: Chosroes
II had once called the Emperor his slave, BUT THE POSITION WAS NOW REVERSED,
and Siroe declared his son and heir to be the slave of the Byzantine Emperor.1
“After six years’ absence Heraclius returned to his capital. His
son Constantine, the Patriarch Sergius, the clergy, the senate and the people
received him on the coast of Asia Minor with olive branches and lighted
candles, with hymns and acclamations of joy. While the Roman provinces were
being cleared of Persians, Heraclius
went to Jerusalem IN THE SPRING OF 630. Here on 21 March amid
great rejoicing he once more set up the Holy Cross won back from the
Persians, and
by this solemn act SYMBOLIZED THE VICTORIOUS CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST GREAT HOLY
WAR OF CHRISTENDOM. The foes before whom Byzantium had once trembled now lay
prostrate. THE STRUGGLE AT NINEVAH HAD CRUSHED THE PERSIAN MIGHT,
and the battle of Constantinople had brought the pride of the Avars to the
dust…” (George Ostrogorsky, History
of the Byzantine State [Rutgers University Press, Revised
Edition 1969], pp. 101-104 https://books.google.com/books?id=PjMts15kLz0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false;
bold and capital emphasis ours)
1 According to Nicephorus 20 f. he wrote
to Heraclius: ‘In the same way as you say that your God was presented to the
old man Symeon, so I present your slave, my son, into your hands’. (Ibid., p.
103)
Ironically, even the Muslim scholars agree with the secular
dating of the victory of the Romans over the Persians. The late Muslim
translator A. Yusuf Ali in an appendix to his English translation stated:
16. In these desperate circumstances Heraclius conceived a
brilliant plan. He knew that the Persians were weak in sea power. He used his
sea power to attack them in the rear. In 622 (the year of the Hijra) he
transported his army by sea through the AEgeanSea
to the bay just south of the Taurus Mountains. He fought a decisive battle with
the Persians at Issus, in the same plain in which Alexander the Great had
defeated the Persians of his day in his famous march to Syria and Egypt. The
Persians were taken by surprise and routed. BUT THEY HAD STILL A LARGE FORCE
IN ASIA MINOR, which they could have brought into play against
the Romans if Heraclius had not made ANOTHER and equally unexpected dash by sea
from the north. He returned to Constantinople by sea, made a treaty with the
Avars, and with this help kept the Persians at bay round the capital. Then he led THREE CAMPAIGNS, IN
623, 624 AND 625, along the southern shore of the Black
Sea and took
the Persians again in the rear in the region round Trebizond and Kars.
Through Armenia he penetrated into Persia and got into Mesopotamia. He was now in a position to strike
AT THE VERY HEART OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. A DECISIVE BATTLE WAS FOUGHT ON THE
TIGRIS NEAR THE CITY OF MOSUL IN DECEMBER 627. Before this
battle, however, he had taken care to get the alliance of the Turks and with
their help to relieve Constantinople IN 626 against the Persians and
the treacherous Avars who had then joined the Persians.
17. Heraclius CELEBRATED
HIS TRIUMPH IN CONSTANTINOPLE IN MARCH 628. PEACE WAS THEN MADE BETWEEN THE TWO
EMPIRES ON THE BASIS OF THE STATUS QUO ANTE. Heraclius,
in pursuance of a vow he had made, went south in the autumn to Emessa (Hims)
and from there marched on foot to Jerusalem TO CELEBRATE HIS VICTORIES, AND
RESTORE TO ITS PLACE THE HOLY CROSS WHICH HAD BEEN CARRIED AWAY BY THE PERSIANS
AND WAS RETURNED TO THE EMPEROR AS A CONDITION OF PEACE.
Heraclius’s route was strewn with costly carpets, AND HE THOUGHT THAT THE FINAL
DELIVERANCE HAD COME FOR HIS PEOPLE AND HIS EMPIRE… (Ali,
appendix X, pp. 1073-1074; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ali’s claim leaves us with a time period after 628 AD for the
Roman victory, making this a false prophecy. Muhammad is, therefore, a false
prophet. The late Muslim scholar and Quran translator Muhammad Asad agree with
Ali:
2 Lit., “before and after”. The defeats and victories spoken of
above relate to the last phases of the centuries-long struggle between the
Byzantine and Persian Empires. During the early years of the seventh century
the Persians conquered parts of Syria and Anatolia, “the lands close-by”, i.e.,
near the heartland of the Byzantine Empire; in 613 they took Damascus, and in
614, Jerusalem; Egypt fell to them in 615-16, and at the same time they laid
siege to Constantinople itself. At the time of the revelation of this surah –
about the seventh year before the hijrah, corresponding to 615 or 616 of the
Christian era – the total destruction of the Byzantine Empire seemed imminent.
The few Muslims around the Prophet were despondent on hearing the news of the
utter discomfiture of the Byzantines, who were Christians and, as such, believed
in the One God. The pagan Quraysh, on the other hand, sympathized with Persians
who, they thought, would vindicate their own opposition to the One-God idea.
When Muhammad enunciated the above Qur’an-verses predicting a Byzantine victory
“within a few years”, this prophecy was received with derision by the Quraysh.
Now the term bid’ (commonly rendered as “a few”) denotes any number between
three and ten; and, as
it happened, in 622 – i.e., six or seven years after the Qur’anic prediction –
the tide turned in favour of the Byzantines. In that year,
Emperor Heraclius succeeded in defeating the Persians at Issus, south of the
Taurus Mountains, and subsequently drove them out of Asia Minor. By 624, he
carried the war into Persian territory and thus put the enemy on the
defensive; and
IN THE BEGINNING OF DECEMBER 626, the Persian armies were COMPLETELY ROUTED by
the Byzantines. (Asad, The
Message of the Qur’an, p. 841 http://www.muhammad-asad.com/Message-of-Quran.pdf;
Bold and capital emphasis ours)
Hence, both secular and
Islamic sources expose Muhammad as a false prophet since they demonstrate that
the alleged prophecy of Q. 30:1-5 that the Romans would be victorious within
the 3-9 years as stipulated by the Arabic term bidi in Q. 30:4, did not take place
within that time frame. Rather, it took the Romans over 13 years to vanquish
the Persians.
Therefore, no matter from
what angle one chooses to analyze this so-called prediction, the result is the
same, namely, Muhammad was a false prophet and the Quran is not the word of the
true God of the Holy Bible.
IHS
