Did Jesus Pray or Didn’t He?

Muslim polemicists such as Shabir Ally argue that the Jesus portrayed by John is a person who has supreme control even over his impending death, unlike the Jesus of Mark who is depicted as a frail and more human.

One example cited by Ally to prove this claim is the case of Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane. In Mark, Jesus prays for the cup to pass from him, that God would spare him from death (cf. Mark 14:33-38). In John, however, Jesus refuses to pray such a prayer (cf. John 12:27). And on that basis, Muhammadans such as Shabir conclude that the portrait of Jesus has evolved from one Gospel to the other.

A careful analysis of the texts in question will show that this happens to be another time where these polemicists have not understood what they are reading. The Muhammadan fascination with liberal critical scholarship have hindered their ability to carefully analyze the texts in question so as to see how they are easily harmonized, as we will now show.

We begin with John and work our way backwards to Mark. Here’s the text in question.

“Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour.” John 12:27 ESV

Jesus says that the very purpose of his coming was to die, “hour” being a reference to his upcoming crucifixion. And pay close attention to the fact that even here in John, Jesus admits to being troubled in his soul regarding his impending death.

Mark agrees that Jesus’ mission was to come and die as a ransom for sinners:

“And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them. And they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, saying, ‘See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.’… ‘For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.’” Mark 10:32-34, 45

Once again, pay careful attention to what Jesus actually says. In John, Christ states that he will not pray that the Father save him from the hour, the emphasis being on making a demand to God to act on his behalf to prevent his crucifixion. According to John, whatever Jesus asks or demands he receives since he always does what pleases God:

“So when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary remained seated in the house. Martha said to Jesus, ‘Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that WHATEVER YOU ASK from God, God will give you.’” John 11:20-22 ESV

“So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, ‘Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you ALWAYS hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.’ When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lazarus, come out.’ The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, ‘Unbind him, and let him go.’” John 11:41-44 ESV

This fact is even brought out by the very context of John 12 itself:

“‘Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? “Father, save me from this hour”? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. Father, glorify your name.’ Then a voice came from heaven: ‘I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.’ The crowd that stood there and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, ‘An angel has spoken to him.’ Jesus answered, ‘This voice has come for your sake, not mine.’” John 12:27-30 ESV

It is rather obvious that the immediate answer to Jesus’ prayer was designed to show that whatever the Divine Son asks he receives. This is a crucial point as we shall shortly see.

With the foregoing in mind, we now turn to Mark’s Gospel:

“And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said to his disciples, ‘Sit here while I pray.’ And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled. And he said to them, ‘My soul is very sorrowful, even to death. Remain here and watch.’ And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, IF IT WERE POSSIBLE, the hour might pass from him. And he said, ‘Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. YET NOT WHAT I WILL, BUT WHAT YOU WILL.’ And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, ‘Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.’ And again he went away and prayed, saying the same words. And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were very heavy, and they did not know what to answer him. And he came the third time and said to them, ‘Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? It is enough; the hour has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand.’” Mark 14:32-42 ESV

A careful reader will immediately see that Jesus didn’t pray in the manner stated by John 12:27. We cite both these prayers side by side so as to allow the readers to see this point:

“Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.’” John 12:27 NIV

“And He was saying, ‘Abba! Father! All things are possible for You; remove this cup from Me; YET NOT WHAT I WILL, BUT WHAT YOU WILL.’” Mark 14:36 NASB

The Matthaean parallel brings the contrast out even more clearly:

“And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, ‘My Father, IF IT IS POSSIBLE, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, BUT AS YOU WILL.’” Matthew 26:39 NASB

In John, Jesus says he won’t pray and demand that he be spared from death. In both Mark and Matthew, however, Jesus makes no such demand, but asks that if it is within the will of the Father for the cup to be taken away then may God spare the Son from having to drink from it. In other words, even though Jesus was troubled regarding his having to take on God’s wrath upon himself, he doesn’t pray that God save him from the Cross. He instead prays that only if it is possible for God to take away the judgment that would befall him, if it were within the Father’s will that the Son should be spared, then let the impending death pass from him.

Putting it another way, one is a prayer that something should happen as demanded, the other is a request asking whether it is within God’s will for that same thing not to happen, a huge difference. The Divine answer was that it was God’s will for the Son to drink from the cup with Jesus’ response then being:

“He went away again a second time and prayed, saying, ‘My Father, if this cannot pass away unless I drink it, Your will be done.’” Matthew 26:42 NASB

After all, didn’t Jesus say that he came not to do his will but the will of the One who sent him?

“Jesus said to them, ‘My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me and to accomplish His work.’” John 4:34 NASB

“I can do nothing on My own initiative As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.” John 5:30 NASB

“For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.” John 6:38 NASB

It isn’t coincidental that these statements are all found in John’s Gospel.

If Jesus in his prayer demanded that he be spared from death then God would be obliged to answer, which would result in there being no salvation for lost sinners. And if Jesus did pray that way and had the Father not answered such a demand then this would mean that the Divine Persons of the Godhead are not in perfect union and accord. This would show that one Divine Person could pray a prayer that the other Divine Person does not answer, which would therefore mean that there is disharmony and discord within the Triune Godhead. But since no such discord exists, Jesus doesn’t pray that kind of prayer. Being God’s perfect Son, and the perfect servant, Jesus prays the perfect prayer which seeks to be in perfect union with the Father’s will, not seeking to impose his own will upon God.

Even if Ally and his fellow Muhammadans are correct about these two statements, and looking at this from a purely human perspective, leaving out all reference to Jesus being God, but seeing how humans react when they face dangerous situations, their objections would only confirm that Jesus was truly human.

In John, the crucifixion is still five days away (Cf. John 12:1, 12-27) and Jesus admits that he is troubled at the thought of the separation that he was to experience on the Cross, but knowing that this is the purpose for which he came, how can he then ask God to spare him from this tribulation? SHOULD he pray to be spared from the wrath to come? The implied answer is NO. Jesus does not actually pray, he only says that it would not be the right thing to do. His response reflects his conviction or principle.

In Mark, the arrest and torture and crucifixion are immediate. As it is part of human nature, human makeup, that when the danger is closer it is much harder to be courageous than when the question how to react is still only a “hypothetical discussion” of something that is some distance away. Who would want to fault Jesus for being fearful of experiencing the broken fellowship and loss of intimate communion with his Father, as well as being the object of the Divine wrath as a result of being our sin-bearer, our substitute who takes upon him what we deserve, namely death and separation from God? Yes, seeing that this dreadful experience is coming so close, Jesus would rather not have it.

Since these statements were made at different times. Therefore, it would only be a contradiction if at the same time X Jesus said A according to Mark, and B according to John. However, the two texts are clearly different in that Jesus said A at time X according to Mark and B at time Y according to John, and both are quite natural for a human Jesus to say since this is the way most human beings react. Therefore, even though it is an entirely human response, it is not even a contradiction on formal grounds since these two statements were made in different situations.

Moreover, as shown above, Jesus’ statements are not a contradiction as far as the contents of his statements are concerned. Those were two different statements, one an actual prayer which was said, and the other only a hypothetical prayer that was commented upon.

In light of our analysis we come to the conclusion that there is no contradiction between John’s and Mark’s portrait of Jesus, but rather a very consistent and harmonious picture that emerges from reading them in light of each other.

As I indicated earlier, the purpose of these Muhammadans such as Ally in citing this example is to show that the picture of Jesus has evolved from one Gospel to the other. According to Ally and others, as time went on the Christian writings tended to make Jesus more divine and less human. In light of this assertion, I now post the links to the articles I wrote refuting Shabir Ally for making this specific argument:

Is there an Evolution in NT Christology? (www.answeringislam.net/Shamoun/christology_evolution1.htm), Pt. 2 (www.answeringislam.net/Shamoun/christology_evolution2.htm).

The readers can also consult the following article which deals exclusively with the Markan evidence for the Deity of the Lord Jesus:

Is Jesus Omniscient? Omnipotent? (www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Shabir-Ally/omnipotent.htm).

In the above rebuttals I establish that even the earliest Gospel account, i.e. Mark, Jesus is portrayed as God in the flesh, being the very unique, Divine Son of God, and not simply a miracle-working prophet.

All of these materials conclusively prove that both Mark and John portray Jesus as the God-Man, the Son of God who is also the Son of man, one Divine Person who has two distinct natures. Moreover, both Gospel accounts depict the Lord Jesus as a real flesh and blood human being, having all the limitations and weaknesses of humanity with the exception of sin.

As such, there is no evolution in the Gospels’ portrayal of Christ, but rather a consistent and coherent picture of the Person and work of the Lord Jesus, one that contradicts the Quran and which exposes Muhammad as a false prophet.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/26/did-jesus-pray-or-didnt-he/

IHS

A Contradiction In Luke?

Muslims think that the following Lukan text is in error and even proves that Jesus wasn’t killed:

“Nevertheless I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next day; for it cannot be that a prophet would perish outside of Jerusalem.” Luke 13:33

These polemicists assume that the foregoing text clearly contradicts the fact that Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem. As we shall see, the problem doesn’t lie with Luke but with this gross misreading of Luke by these Muhammadans.

In the first place, Jesus clearly says that he will be killed outside of Jerusalem:

“And he began to tell the people this parable: ‘A man planted a vineyard, and let it out to tenants, and went into another country for a long while. When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, that they should give him some of the fruit of the vineyard; but the tenants beat him, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant; him also they beat and treated shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent yet a third; this one they wounded and cast out. Then the owner of the vineyard said, “What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; it may be they will respect him.” But when the tenants saw him, they said to themselves, “This is the heir; let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.” And they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy those tenants, and give the vineyard to others.’ When they heard this, they said, ‘God forbid!’” Luke 20:9-16

The tenants refer to the Jewish leaders and the vineyard refers to Jerusalem. In this parable, Jesus says that he, as the beloved Son, will be thrown out of the vineyard and then be killed. To put it another way, Jesus was saying that the Jewish leaders would have him killed outside of Jerusalem.

Now we anticipate that the Muslims will say that this doesn’t resolve the problem and will wish to say that this only contradicts what Jesus said in Luke 13:33. Does it? Let us read the immediate context and see:

“Just at that time some Pharisees approached, saying to Him, “Go away, leave here, for Herod wants to kill You.’ And He said to them, ‘Go and tell that fox, “Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I reach My goal.” Nevertheless I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next day; for it cannot be that a prophet would perish outside of Jerusalem. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it! Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me until the time comes when you say, “BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!”’” Luke 13:31-35

We can glean from the immediate context that Jesus was addressing the Jews who warned him about Herod’s threat. Jesus responds by basically saying that Herod can’t do anything against him since he has a goal to reach Jerusalem, and once there he will die.

Now from this context we can see that Jerusalem stands for the Jewish leaders, in contrast to Herod, who will kill Jesus just as they killed the other prophets. Obviously, Jerusalem didn’t literally kill the prophets but its leaders and people did. This serves to affirm that Jesus’ point was that Herod wouldn’t be the one to condemn him to death, but the members of the Sanhedrin who were in Jerusalem. This is reiterated in the Matthaean parallel:

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous, saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom YOU will kill and crucify, and some YOU will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, so that ON YOU may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom YOU murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! See, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” Matthew 23:29-39

What Jesus was basically saying is that he could not be condemned to death by anyone other than the Jewish leaders. Jesus was obviously using Jerusalem as a metaphor for its leaders, personifying the city and blaming it for the bloodshed caused by its people, since the city is being identified with its people, specifically the Sanhedrin. As noted Bible expositor John Gill stated:

for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem;
because the great sanhedrim only sat at Jerusalem, to whom it belonged to try and judge a prophet; and if found false, to condemn him, and put him to death; the rule is this;

“they do not judge, neither a tribe, nor a false prophet, nor an high priest, but by the sanhedrim of seventy and one.”

Not but that prophets sometimes perished elsewhere, as John the Baptist in Galilee; but not according to a judicial process, in which way Christ the prophet was to be cut off, nor was it common; instances of this kind were rare, and always in a violent way; and even such as were sentenced to death by the lesser sanhedrim, were brought to Jerusalem, and publicly executed there, whose crimes were of another sort; for so runs the canon;

“they do not put any one to death by the sanhedrim, which is in his city, nor by the sanhedrim in Jabneh; but they bring him to the great, sanhedrim in Jerusalem, and keep him till the feast, and put him to death on a feast day, as it is said (Deuteronomy 17:13) “and all the people shall hear and fear.””

And since Jerusalem was the place where the prophets were usually put to death, …

FOOTNOTES:

F5 Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 1. sect. 5. & T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 18. 2.
F6 Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 10. sect. 4. (John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/luke-13/)

Jesus’ comments regarding a prophet not perishing outside of Jerusalem refers to the judiciary process which was necessary for an execution to be carried out lawfully. Christ was simply reiterating a known fact that those invested with authority are to make decisions regarding the death penalty, that there must be a judicial decision on the part of Jerusalem’s leaders before one can be rightly condemned. The reference to Herod proves this point. Since Jesus was in Herod’s district the latter had the judicial authority to kill Jesus. Now obviously, the Jerusalem council wrongly condemned Jesus to death, even though they thought that they were correct to kill him on the basis that they viewed him as a blasphemer. Jesus’ resurrection vindicated him of these charges and supernaturally confirmed that he was no blasphemer, but actually was who he claimed to be – the divine, unique Son of God.

Jesus essentially affirmed this very fact, namely, that the Sanhedrin would condemn him to death, elsewhere in Luke’s Gospel:

“But He warned them and instructed them not to tell this to anyone, saying, ‘The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.’” Luke 9:21-22

“Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, ‘Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. For He will be HANDED OVER TO the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again.’” Luke 18:31-33

The Sanhedrin handed Jesus over to the Gentile rulers who then mocked, mistreated, spat, scourged and killed him by crucifixion. Note the process that takes place. The Sanhedrin condemned Jesus as worthy of death, but since they couldn’t kill him themselves they proceeded to hand him over to those who had the authority to do so.

It is therefore obvious from the preceding that there is no contradiction in the words of Jesus, but only the Muslim gross misunderstanding of what Jesus meant when he referred to not perishing outside of Jerusalem. Jesus wasn’t using Jerusalem to refer to the city, but to its people, specifically to its leaders who condemned him to die.

But even if we were to assume that Jesus was referring to the city, and not to its leadership, these Muhammadans would still have no case. As we noted, Jesus’ statements are made in a particular context, standing in Galilee, being informed by others about Herod’s intention of killing him, and says he must first go to Jerusalem. That is his purpose, and not even Herod will keep him from getting to Jerusalem and being put on trial there. Jesus isn’t talking about his exact execution place. From the perspective of standing in Galilee, in a different province, several days journey away from Jerusalem, just outside the city wall was still Jerusalem. Moreover, every city always has some land around it that belongs to the city. The walls are for protection of the people and their houses, but they still would have land for agriculture that belonged to the city, but which would be outside the walls themselves.

Finally, that a text such as Luke 13:33 remains intact within the Holy Bible is an argument for the Scriptures’ veracity. It shows that Christian scribes, for the most part, tried to preserve the Scriptures as best as they could, no matter what difficulties a text may have posed to their theology and understanding.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/26/a-contradiction-in-luke/ 

IHS

Does the Bible Really Command Dashing Babies Against the Rocks?

Muslim polemicists often cite Psalm 137:9 to prove that Holy Bible is cruel and barbaric since this specific Psalm condones, and even blesses, anyone who brutally murders infants. Let us quote the Psalm in context to see what in fact the Psalmist meant:

“By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion. There on the poplars we hung our harps, for there our captors asked us for songs, our tormentors demanded songs of joy; they said, ‘Sing us one of the songs of Zion! How can we sing the songs of the LORD while in a foreign land? If I forget you, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget [its skill]. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you, if I do not consider Jerusalem my highest joy. Remember, O LORD, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. ‘Tear it down,’ they cried, ‘tear it down to its foundations!’ O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, HAPPY IS HE WHO REPAYS YOU FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE TO US – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” Psalm 137:1-9

When the Psalm is read in context, we discover that the Psalmist actually desired that justice be carried out upon the Babylonians for their inhumane crimes against the Israelites. The Psalmist was echoing the following Mosaic injunctions where the punishment of a criminal must match the crime that s/he committed, no more no less:

“Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution – life for life. If anyone injures his neighbor, whatever he has done must be done to him: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has injured the other, so he is to be injured. Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a man must be put to death.” Leviticus 24:18-21

“Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” Deuteronomy 19:21

It was a common practice for invading armies to kill and dash children and women to their deaths, as the following OT citations show:

“Hazael went to meet Elisha, taking with him as a gift forty camel-loads of all the finest wares of Damascus. He went in and stood before him, and said, ‘Your son Ben-Hadad king of Aram has sent me to ask, “Will I recover from this illness?”‘ Elisha answered, ‘Go and say to him, “You will certainly recover”; but the LORD has revealed to me that he will in fact die.’ He stared at him with a fixed gaze until Hazael felt ashamed. Then the man of God began to weep. ‘Why is my lord weeping?’ asked Hazael. ‘Because I know the harm you will do to the Israelites,’ he answered. ‘You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women.’ Hazael said, ‘How could your servant, a mere dog, accomplish such a feat?’ ‘The LORD has shown me that you will become king of Aram,” answered Elisha.'” 2 Kings 8:9-13

“But you have planted wickedness, you have reaped evil, you have eaten the fruit of deception. Because you have depended on your own strength and on your many warriors, the roar of battle will rise against your people, so that all your fortresses will be devastated – as Shalman devastated Beth Arbel on the day of battle, when mothers were dashed to the ground with their children. Thus will it happen to you, O Bethel, because your wickedness is great. When that day dawns, the king of Israel will be completely destroyed.” Hosea 10:13-15

“Yet she was taken captive and went into exile. Her infants were dashed to pieces at the head of every street. Lots were cast for her nobles, and all her great men were put in chains.” Nahum 3:10

Interestingly, Isaiah even predicted that Babylon would also be ravaged and have their children dashed to pieces in the same way they had done to others:

“Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives ravished. See, I will stir up against them the Medes, who do not care for silver and have no delight in gold. Their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants nor will they look with compassion on children. Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the glory of the Babylonians’ pride, will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah. She will never be inhabited or lived in through all generations; no Arab will pitch his tent there, no shepherd will rest his flocks there. But desert creatures will lie there, jackals will fill her houses; there the owls will dwell, and there the wild goats will leap about. Hyenas will howl in her strongholds, jackals in her luxurious palaces. Her time is at hand, and her days will not be prolonged.” Isaiah 13:15-22

Hence, the Psalmist was not being cruel in his request but was demanding what God’s Law required, e.g., “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” etc. This is something that the Quran completely agrees with:

“Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light, by which the prophets who surrendered (unto Allah) judged the Jews, and the rabbis and the priests (judged) by such of Allah’s Scripture as they were bidden to observe, and thereunto were they witnesses. So fear not mankind, but fear Me. And My revelations for a little gain. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are d isbelievers. And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are wrong-doers.” S. 5:44-45

“The forbidden month for the forbidden month, and forbidden things in retaliation. And one who attacketh you, attack him in like manner as he attacked you. Observe your duty to Allah, and know that Allah is with those who ward off (evil).” S. 2:194

“If ye punish, then punish with the like of that wherewith ye were afflicted. But if ye endure patiently, verily it is better for the patient.” S. 16:126

This brings me to my next point, namely, the Psalmist is not literally requesting the brutal deaths of children, but is asking that justice be served in a poetic manner, can be easily seen from the phrase, “dashing them against the rocks (stones).” As anyone familiar with Babylonian geography can tell you, there were no rocks and stones in Babylon. As noted Old Testament scholar Walter C. Kaiser Jr. writes:

“… Surely someone who goes about stealing babies and slamming them down on the pavement or over a rocky embankment is more than a brute; but is that what we have here? Not at all, for the expression is a hyperbole, typical of the emotional Near East, which consciously exaggerates. The writer, however, locates this psalm in Babylon. One thing Babylon is devoid of is rocks or rocky cliffs. This is so different from Palestine where rocks are all over the place; but not in Babylon. If one were to build in Babylon, he would need to bake mud bricks first; rocks or stones simply do not exist there.” (Kaiser, The Old Testament Documents: Are They Reliable and Relevant? [InterVarsity Press (IVP), Downers Grove, IL 2001], p. 213)

Thus, the text is clearly a poetic cry for righteous retribution, i.e. do to them as they did to others, and not a literal description of the kind of punishment to be inflicted on Israel’s enemies.

Moreover, doesn’t the Quran itself make the claim that prophets such as David and Jesus cursed unbelievers?

Cursed were the unbelievers of the Children of Israel by the tongue of David, and Jesus, Mary’s son; that, for their rebelling and their transgression. S. 5:78

Should it therefore surprise Muslims that an inspired Psalmist cried out by the Holy Spirit to God to enact the righteous judgment upon the Babylonians for the evils and crimes which they committed against God’s people? And if these polemicists really have problems with the Psalm’s comments about the children then what of the following Quranic curse?

And whoso disputes with thee concerning him, after the knowledge that has come to thee, say: ‘Come now, let us call our sons and your sons, our wives and your wives, our selves and your selves, then let us humbly pray and so lay God’s curse upon the ones who lie.’ S. 3:61 Arberry

Muhammad, or the author of the Quran, invokes Allah’s curse upon both the children and the women, specifically the wives, requesting that Allah condemn those who are lying about God. Why should Muhammad include innocent children and risk their physical well-being when they have nothing to do with it? Perhaps these Muhammadans can explain this since they obviously have a problem with the Psalmist’s prayer for judgment to befall God’s enemies.

More importantly, these Muslims cannot deny the inspiration of the Psalms if they truly believe in the Quran. The reason why they cannot is that their own scripture affirms that God personally revealed all of these Psalms:

“And if they deny thee, even so did they deny messengers who were before thee, who came with miracles and with the Psalms (Zuburi) and with the Scripture giving light.” S. 3:184

“Lo! We inspire thee as We inspired Noah and the prophets after him, as We inspired Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and as We imparted unto David the Psalms (Zabuuraa);” S. 4:163

“And thy Lord is Best Aware of all who are in the heavens and the earth. And we preferred some of the prophets above others, and unto David We gave the Psalms (Zabuu-raa).” S. 17:55

“And if they deny thee, those before them also denied. Their messengers came unto them with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), and with the Psalms (Zuburi) and the Scripture giving light.” S. 35:25

Finally, if such a Psalm troubles these Muslims then they should definitely have problems with the following Quranic passages:

“The power of Abu Lahab will perish, and he will perish. His wealth and gains will not exempt him. He will be plunged in flaming Fire, And his wife, the wood-carrier, Will have upon her neck a halter of palm-fibre.” S. 111:1-5

Abu Lahab was Muhammad’s uncle. Both he and his wife were bitter enemies of Muhammad. Hence, it is not surprising to find Muhammad cursing his uncle and his wife for giving him a hard time. Ali Dashti claimed that these words were uttered by Muhammad seeing that it would be unbefitting for a merciful God to utter such curses:

Another utterance which, by the nature of its subject, cannot be attributed to the Sustainer of the Universe is sura 111 (ol-Masad), the retort to Abu Lahab. The Prophet had invited some relatives and influential Qorayshites to hear him expound the principles of Islam. When he began to speak, Abu Lahab angrily interrupted him, shouting “Perish you, Mohammad! Did you invite us here for this?” The sura, with its repetition of Abu Lahab’s word, “Perish,” voices the Prophet’s indignation at the rudeness of Abu Lahab and the malice of his wife, Omm Jomayyel, who had strewn thorns along the Prophet’s route. The retort as such is not out of proportion. On the other hand, it ill becomes the Sustainer of the Universe to curse an ignorant Arab and call his wife a firewood carrier. (Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad, Translated from the Persian by F.R.C. Bagley [Mazda Publishers, Costa Mesa, CA 1994], p. 149)

The Quran says elsewhere:

“And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them (qaatalahumu llahu anna yu’fakoona); how they are turned away! S. 9:30 Shakir

And the Jews say, `Ezra is the son of ALLAH,’ and the Christians say, `the Messiah is the son of ALLAH;’ that is what they say with their mouths. They only imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before them. ALLAH’s curse be on them! How they are turned away. Sher Ali

The Jews said, “Ezra is the son of GOD,” while the Christians said, “Jesus is the son of GOD!” These are blasphemies uttered by their mouths. They thus match the blasphemies of those who have disbelieved in the past. GOD condemns them. They have surely deviated. Rashad Khalifah

“Some of the Jews have said that Ezra is the son of God and Christians have said the same of Jesus. This is only what they say and it is similar to what the unbelievers who lived before them had said. May God destroy them wherever they exist!” Muhammad Sarwar

Interestingly the word for “destroy,”, “condemns,”, “curse” also appears in verse 29 where it says to kill or fight against the people of the Book, unless they pay the Jizya tax. Hence, we find Muhammad calling upon God to curse and destroy Christians and Jews who believe that Ezra and Jesus are the sons of God, respectively.

The Quran, in another place, even condones the killing of an innocent young boy:

“So they journeyed on till when they met a young boy; he slew him. Moses said, ‘What! hast thou slain an innocent person without his having slain anyone! Surely, thou hast done a hideous thing’ … ‘And as for the youth, his parents were believers, and we feared lest on growing up he should involve them into trouble through rebellion and disbelief;’” S. 18:74, 80 Sher Ali

Moses’ companion justifies the killing of a young innocent boy on the grounds that the boy may have grown up to be a rebellious unbeliever. Hence, if these polemicists have issues with the Holy Bible they need to also take issue with their own book, which condones the killing of a young boy who may have, or may have not, grown up to be a disbeliever.

In other places the Quran, in agreement with the Holy Bible, says that God destroyed the people of Noah and Lot. It even mentions other places that were completely annihilated by Allah, such as the people of Ad, Madyan and Thamud (Cf. Q. 7:59-102; 11:25-95; 69:3-12). What this basically means is that Allah decreed the utter death and destruction of not just men, but of women, children and infants also!

For example, noted Muslim historian al-Tabari stated that the so-called prophet Salih allegedly commanded certain persons of Thamud to kill the children so as to prevent one of them from growing up and killing the she-camel:

According to Hajjaj- Ibn Jurayj: When Salih told the eight evildoers that a boy would be born at whose hands they would be destroyed, they said, “What do you command us?” He said, “I command you to kill THEM” (that is their male children). SO THEY KILLED THEM except one… (The History of Al-Tabari: Prophets and Patriarchs, translated by William M. Brinner [State University of New York Press (SUNY), 1987], Volume II, p. 43; capital and underline emphasis ours)

Hence, unless these Muhammadans want to argue that there were no women, children and infants in all these places, or that Allah’s prophets never commanded the death of children in any circumstances, then it is pretty clear that the Quran has no trouble with God killing infants. So what should these Muslims have problems with it?

What is more, the so-called sound Islamic narrations permit the killing of women and children in specific situations:

Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama:
The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).” I also heard the Prophet saying, “The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=52&translator=1&start=0&number=256)

Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE

It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah, when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4321 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=019&translator=2&start=0&number=4321)

It is narrated by Sa’b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet): Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4322; see also Number 4323)

In light of the foregoing, it should be obvious that these Muslim polemicists really have no business critiquing the Holy Bible for what they perceive to be excessive cruelty.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/26/does-the-bible-really-command-dashing-babies-against-the-rocks/

IHS

Muhammad’s Visit to a Non-Existent Temple

In this post, I am going to cite various Muslim sources to provide further confirmation that, according to Quran 17:1, Muhammad actually visited the Temple in Jerusalem, which the verse calls masjid al-aqsa. The obvious problem with this assertion is that there was no Temple in Jerusalem at Muhammad’s time, nor was there a mosque by that name since masjid al-aqsa was only built around 691 AD by the caliph Abd al-Malik bin Marwan. For the complete details I recommend reading the following rebuttal to Muslim polemicist Sami Zaatari https://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zaatari/mo-false1.html.

The Islamic literature identifies the farthest Mosque is actually the Temple of Jerusalem, which is called Bayt ul-Muqaddas in Arabic (spelled variously by different translators):

Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar al-Aslami informed us; he said: Usamah Ibn Zayd al-Laythi related to me on the authority of ‘Amr Ibn Shu’ayb, he on the authority of his father, he on the authority of his (‘Amr’s) grand-father; (second chain) he (Ibn Sa’d) said: Musa Ibn Ya’qub al-Zam’i related to me on the authority of his father, he on the authority of his (Musa’s) grandfather, he on the authority of Umm Salamah; (third chain) Musa said: Abu al-Aswad related to me on the authority of ‘Urwah, he on the authority of ‘Ayishah; (fourth chain) Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar said: Ishaq Ibn Hazim related to me on the authority of Wahb Ibn Kaysan, he on the authority of Abu Murrah the mawla of ‘Aqil, he on the authority of Umm Hani daughter of Abu Talib (fifth chain) he (Ibn Sa’d) said: ‘Abd Allah Ibn Ja’far related to me on the authority of Zakariya Ibn ‘Amr, he on the authority of Abu Mulaykah, he on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas and others; their consolidated narrations are: The Apostle of Allah, was taken by night on the seventeenth night of First Rabi’ before Hijrah, and one year before the blockade in the mountain pass of Abu Talib, to Bayt al-Muqaddas. The Apostle of Allah said: I was mounted on a beast whose size was between a donkey and a mule, with two wings in its thighs, which came up to its hoofs and were set in them. When I went near it to ride, it became restive. Thereupon Gabriel placed his hand on its head and said: O Buraq! are you not ashamed of what you are doing? By Allah no servant of Allah has ridden you before Muhammad, more honoured in the sight of Allah. It felt ashamed till it was covered with sweat, and became calm; then I mounted it. It moved its ears, and the earth shrank to such an extent that its hoofs (seemed to touch its surface) at the end of the range of our sight. It had a long back and long ears. Gabriel accompanied me and he never lost touch with me nor did I till we reached Bayt al-Muqaddas; and al-Buraq reached its halting place. It was tied there and it was the place where the beasts… of the Prophets were tied before the Apostle of Allah. He (the Prophet) said: I saw the Prophets who had assembled there for me. I saw Abraham, Moses and Jesus and, I thought there must be some one to lead them (in prayers); Gabriel made me go forward till I offered prayers in front of them and inquired from them (about their mission). They said: We were commissioned with Unity (of Allah).

Some of them (narrators) said: The Prophet had disappeared that night, so the members of family of ‘Abd al-Muttalib went out to search him. Al-‘Abbas went to Dhu Tuwa and began to shout: O Muhammad! O Muhammad! The Apostle of Allah said: I am here. He said: O my brother’s son! You have worried the people since the (beginning of the) night, where had you been? He said: I am coming from Bayt al-Muqaddas. He said: In one night? He said: Yes. He said: Did you experience anything which was not good? He said: I did not experience anything but good. Umm Hani said: He was taken on this journey from our house. He slept that night with us; he offered al-‘Isha prayers, and then he slept. When it was pre-dawn we awoke him (to offer) morning (prayers). He got up and when he offered morning prayers he said: O Umm Hani! I offered al’Isha prayers with you as you witnessed, then I reached Bayt Al-Muqaddas and offered prayers there; then I offered morning prayers before you. After this he got up to go out; I said to him: Do not relate this to the people because they will belie you and harm you. He said: By Allah I shall relate to them and inform them. They wondered at it and said: We have never heard a thing like this. The Apostle of Allah said to Gabriel; O Gabriel! my people will not confirm it. He said: Abu Bakr will testify to it; and he is al-Siddiq. The narrator added: Many people who had embraced Islam and offered prayers went astray. (The Prophet continued,) I stood at al-Hijr, visualised Bayt al-Muqaddas and described its signs. Some of them said: HOW MANY DOORS ARE THERE IN THAT MOSQUE? I HAD NOT COUNTED THEM SO I BEGAN TO LOOK AT IT AND COUNTED THEM ONE BY ONE AND GAVE THEM INFORMATION CONCERNING THEM. I also gave information about their caravan which was on the way and its signs. They found them as I had related. Allah, the Almighty, the Great, revealed: “We appointed the vision which We showed thee as an ordeal for mankind”. He (Ibn Sa’d) said: It refers to the vision of the eye which he saw with the eye. (Ibn Sa’ad, Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002 India], Volume I, pp. 246-248; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Ziyad b. ‘Abdullah al-Bakka’i from Muhammad b. Ishaq told me the following: Then the apostle was carried by night from the mosque at Mecca to the Masjid al-Aqsa WHICH IS THE TEMPLE OF AELIA, when Islam had spread in Mecca among the Quraysh and all the tribes… His companion (Gabriel) went with him to see the wonders between heaven and earth, UNTIL HE CAME TO JERUSALEM’S TEMPLE… In his story al-Hasan said: “The apostle and Gabriel went their way until they arrived AT THE TEMPLE AT JERUSALEM”… (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], pp. 181, 182; bold and capital emphasis ours)

<from Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa> means the Sacred House which is in Jerusalem, the origin of the Prophets from the time of Ibraham Al-Khalil. The Prophets all gathered there, and he (Muhammad) led them in prayer in their own homeland. This indicates that he is the greatest leader of all, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and upon them. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 17:1 http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2865&Itemid=72; bold emphasis ours)

Ibn Kathir narrates some hadiths to confirm this point:

The Report of Jabir bin `Abdullah

Imam Ahmad recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said that he heard the Messenger of Allah say…

<<(When Quraysh did not believe that I had been taken on the Night Journey to Bayt Al-Maqdis, I stood up in Al-Hijr and Allah displayed Bayt Al-Maqdis before me, so I told them about its features while I was looking at it.>> This was also reported in the Two Sahihs with different chains of narration. According to Al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Shihab said: Abu Salamah bin `Abdur-Rahman said: Some people from Quraish went to Abu Bakr and said, “Have you heard what your companion is saying He is claiming that he went to Bayt Al-Maqdis and came back to Makkah in one night!” Abu Bakr said, “Did he say that?” They said, “Yes.” Abu Bakr said, “Then I bear witness that if he said that, he is speaking the truth.” They said, “You believe that he went to Ash-Sham [Greater Syria] in one night and came back to Makkah before morning” He said, “Yes, I believe him with regard to something even more than that. I believe him with regard to the revelation that comes to him from heaven.” Abu Salamah said, from then on Abu Bakr was known as As-Siddiq (the true believer). (Source http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2861&Itemid=72)

And:

I remember being in Al-Hijr, and the Quraysh were asking me about my Night Journey. They asked me things about Bayt Al-Maqdis that I was not sure of, and I felt more anxious and stressed then than I have ever felt. Then Allah raised up Bayt Al-Maqdis for me to see, and there was nothing they asked me about but I told them about it. And I remember being in a gathering of the Prophets. Musa was standing there praying, and he was a man with curly hair, as if he were one of the men of Shanu’ah. I saw ‘Isa ibn Maryam standing there praying, and the one who most resembles him is ‘Urwah bin Mas’ud Ath-Thaqafi. And I saw Ibrahim standing there praying, and for the one who most resembles him is your companion (meaning himself). Then the time for prayer came, and I led them in prayer. When I finished, a voice said, ‘O Muhammad, this is Malik, the keeper of Hell,’ so I turned to him, and he greeted me first. (Source http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2858&Itemid=72; bold emphasis ours)

Finally,

“… The truth is that the Prophet was taken on the Night Journey when he was awake, not in a dream, and he went from Makkah to Bayt Al-Maqdis riding on Al-Buraq. When he reached THE DOOR OF THE SANCTUARY, he tied up his animal by THE DOOR AND ENTERED, where he prayed two Rakahs to ‘greet the Masjid‘…

“Then he came back down to Bayt Al-Maqdis, and the Prophets came down with him and he led them in prayer there when the time for prayer came. Some claim that he led them in prayer in heaven, but the reports seem to say that it was in Bayt Al-Maqdis. In some reports it says that it happened when he first ENTERED…

“Then he came OUT OF BAYT AL-MAQDIS and rode on Al-Buraq back to Makkah in the darkness of the night. As for his being presented with the vessels containing milk and honey, or milk and wine, or milk and water, or all of these, some reports say that this happened in Bayt Al-Maqdis, and others say that it happened in the heavens. It is possible that it happened in BOTH places, because it is like offering food or drink to a guest when he arrives, and Allah knows best.” (Source http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2857&Itemid=72; bold and capital emphasis ours)

There’s more:

Glory be to Him — an affirmation of God’s transcendence — Who carried His servant Muhammad by night laylan is in the accusative as an adverbial qualification; isrā’ means ‘to travel by night’; what is instructive about this mention of laylan ‘by night’ is that through its being indefinite there is an indication of the brevity of its duration from the Sacred Mosque that is Mecca to the Farthest Mosque THE HOLY HOUSE OF JERUSALEM so called because of its distance from the former; the environs of which We have blessed with fruits and rivers that We might show him some of Our signs the marvels of Our power. Indeed He is the Hearing the Seeing that is to say the Knower of the Prophet’s sayings and deeds. Thus He God was gracious to him by way of carrying him on the night journey which comprised his encountering the other prophets his ascension to heaven and the sight of the marvels of the Divine Realm and His communion exalted be He with him. For he the Prophet said ‘I was brought al-Burāq a white animal larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule; it was able to place its hoof back towards its extremity and so I mounted it. It set off carrying me until I reached THE HOLY HOUSE OF JERUSALEM. There I fastened the animal to the ring where the prophets fasten their animals. I then WENT IN and prayed two units INSIDE IT. As I CAME OUT Gabriel came to me with a jug of wine and a jug of milk and so I chose the milk. Gabriel said to me “You have made the right choice by choosing the primordial nature fitra”.’ He the Prophet continued the narration ‘We then ascended to the heaven of this world whereat Gabriel asked to be let in. Someone asked “Who are you?”. He replied “Gabriel” “And who is with you?” “Muhammad” he said. “Has he been sent for?”. “Yes he has been sent for”. Then it was opened for us and lo! Adam stood before me; he greeted me and prayed for well-being for me. We then ascended to the second heaven and Gabriel asked to be let in. Someone asked “Who are you?”. He replied “Gabriel” “And who is with you?” “Muhammad” he said. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Q. 17:1 https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=1&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; capital emphasis mine)

And from his own narration on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas that he said regarding the interpretation of Allah’s saying (Glorified be): ‘(Glorified be) He says: He is far exalted above and exonerated from having a son or partner (He Who carried His servant) He Who took His servant Muhammad (by night) at the beginning of the night (from the Inviolable Place of Worship) from the Sacred Precinct, from the house of Umm Hani’ the daughter of Abu Talib (to the Far Distant Place of Worship) far in distance, but close to heaven, i.e. THE MOSQUE OF JERUSALEM (the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed) with water, trees and fruits, (that We might show him) that We might show Muhammad (of Our tokens!) of Our marvels, for all the things He saw that night were marvels of Allah. (Lo! He, only He, is the Nearer) of what the Quraysh say, (the Seer) He sees them just as He sees His servant Muhammad. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=1&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; capital emphasis ours)

“It is narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah said: I was brought al-Buraq who is an animal white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, who would place his hoof a distance equal to the range of version. I mounted it and came to THE TEMPLE (Bait Maqdis in Jerusalem), then tethered it to the ring used by the prophets. I ENTERED THE MOSQUE and prayed two rak’ahs IN IT, and then CAME OUT and Gabriel brought me a vessel of wine and a vessel of milk. I chose the milk, and Gabriel said: You have chosen the natural thing…” (Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0309 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=001&translator=2&start=0&number=0309)

Sunan an-Nasa’i

5 The Book of Salah

(1) Chapter: Enjoining As-Salah And Mentioning The Differences Reported by The Narrators In The Chain Of The Hadith Of Anas Bin Malik, And The Different Wordings In It

Anas bin Malik narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:

“I was brought an animal that was larger than a donkey and smaller than a mule, whose stride could reach as far as it could see. I mounted it, and Jibril was with me, and I set off. Then he said: ‘Dismount and pray,’ so I did that. He said: ‘Do you know where you have prayed? You have prayed in Taibah, which will be the place of the emigration.’ Then he said: ‘Dismount and pray,’ so I prayed. He said: ‘Do you know where you have prayed? You have prayed in Mount Sinai, where Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, spoke to Musa, peace be upon him.’ So I dismounted and prayed, and he said: ‘Do you know where you have prayed? You have prayed in Bethlehem, where ‘Eisa, peace be upon him, was born.’ Then I ENTERED BAIT AL-MAQDIS (Jerusalem) where the Prophets, peace be upon them, were assembled for me, and Jibril brought me forward to lead them in prayer…”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam)

Reference: Sunan an-Nasa’i 450

In-book reference: Book 5, Hadith 3

English translation: Vol. 1, Book 5, Hadith 451 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/nasai/5/3; capital emphasis ours)

Qaza’ah reported: I heard a hadith from Abu Sa’id and it impressed me (very much), so I said to him: Did you hear it (yourself) from Allah’s Messenger? Thereupon he said: (Can) I speak of anything about Allah’s Messenger (which I did not bear? He said: I heard Allah’s Messenger saying: Do not set out on a journey (for religious devotion) but for THE THREE MOSQUES-for this mosque of mine (at Medina) the Sacred Mosque (at Mecca), AND THE MOSQUE AL-AQSA (Bait al-Maqdis), and I heard him saying also: A woman should not travel for two days duration, but only when there is a Mahram with her or her husband. (Sahih Muslim, Book 007, Number 3099 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=007&translator=2&start=0&number=3038)

Abu Huraira reported it directly from Allah’s Apostle that he said: Do not undertake journey but to THREE MOSQUES: this mosque of mine, the Mosque of al-Haram AND THE MOSQUE OF AQSA (Bait al-Maqdis). (Sahih Muslim, Book 007, Number 3218 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=007&translator=2&start=0&number=3139)

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: One should undertake journey to THREE MOSQUES: the mosque of the Ka’ba, my mosque, AND THE MOSQUE OF ELIA (Bait al-Maqdis). (Sahih Muslim, Book 007, Number 3220 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=007&translator=2&start=0&number=3141)

Since the mosques in Mecca and Medina refer to actual physical buildings, then the mosque al-aqsa must also be an actual building as well. Not even the most ardent Muhammadan polemicist  will be able to get around the plain and obvious meaning of these narrations, all of which clearly expose Muhammad as a false prophet.

Jami` at-Tirmidhi

Chapters on Tafsir

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

“I said to Hudhaifah bin Al-Yaman: ‘Did the Messenger of Allah perform Salat IN BAIT AL-MAQDIS?’ He said: ‘No.’ I said: ‘But he did.’ He said: ‘You say that, O bald one! Based upon what do you say that?’ I said: ‘BASED UPON THE QUR’AN, (the Judge) between you and I is the Qur’an.’ So Hudhaifah said: ‘Whoever argues using the Qur’an, then he has indeed succeeded.’” (One of the narrators) Sufyan said: “He means: ‘He has indeed proven’” – and perhaps he (Sufyan) said: “He triumphed.” He (Zirr) said: “Glorified is He Who took His slave for a journey by night from Al-Masjid Al-Haram to Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa (17:1).’ He (Hudhaifah) said: ‘DO YOU SEE (this proves that) HE PERFORMED SALAT IN IT?’ I said: ‘No.’ He said: ‘If he had performed Salat in it, then it would have been required upon you that you perform Salat in it, just as it is required that you perform Salat in Al-Masjid Al-Haram.’ Hudhaifah said: ‘The Messenger of Allah was brought a beast with a long back – stretching out like this – one stride of it, is as far as his vision. So, the two of them remained upon the back of Al-Buraq until they saw Paradise and the Fire, and all of what has been prepared for the Hereafter, then they returned back to where they began.’ He said: ‘They say that he was fettered, but for what? Because he might flee? The Knower of the unseen and the witness subdued him.’”

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

English reference: Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3147

Arabic reference: Book 47, Hadith 3440 (sunna.com https://sunnah.com/urn/641660)

Here we have Muslims using Q. 17:1 to prove that Muhammad entered in bait al-maqdis to perform prayer. The disputant doesn’t deny that Muhammad visited and/or entered an actual building. He simply rejects the notion of Muhammad praying inside there.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/04/15/muhammads-visit-to-a-non-existent-temple/

IHS