Sie sind auf Seite 1von 18

The Arrogance and Ignorance of Bassam Zawadi

Exposing More of Zawadis Gross Blunders and Mistakes Sam Shamoun Muslim dawagandist Bassam Zawadi has written an article where he pretty much attacks the character of Reformed Christian scholar and apologist Dr. James R. White. Zawadi insults White by calling him both arrogant and ignorant. However, a careful analysis of Zawadis article actually proves the exact opposite and demonstrates that Zawadi will not hesitate to distort the facts in order to serve his agenda of discrediting the opposing view in order to prevent Muslims from ever seriously considering what the other side has to say. In logic this is called ad hominem attacks and poisoning the well, fallacies that Zawadi has perfected. In his rebuttal Zawadi chides Dr. White for asserting that the Quran claims that the Torah which God sent down is the Old Testament Law. James White in his video entitled Shirk: A Basic Definition said: But according to the Qur'an God sent down the Torah and the Injeel. The Torah, the Old Testament law. The Injeel, the Gospel. (Time Slice: 3:10-3:16) This is a joke, where does the Qur'an say that the Torah is the Old Testament law? The Qur'an said that the Torah was revealed to Moses. How could the Old Testament law have been revealed to Moses when even many conservative evangelical scholars even admit that Joshua contributed to it? (The Arrogance and Ignorance of James White) In the above quoted statement, James White does not say that the Quran says the Torah is the OT Law, and the Injil the Gospel. That is merely his explanation for the uninitiated listeners as to what these words refer. The Quran simply uses the words and assumes familiarity with these terms. Even if Zawadi thinks that White is wrong to equate them, Zawadi is twisting Whites words, since White did not say, in this sentence, that the Quran said this verbatim. So Zawadis personal attack is totally unfounded here. In fact, Dr. White went on to inform his audience that Muslims will deny that the Quran refers to the Old and New Testaments and demonstrates why they are mistaken: Now Muslims today will argue, Well that doesnt mean, thats not the same thing as what you have today. I dont think they have any basis for doing that. It seems very, very clear that Muhammad knew of the New Testament, he knew of the Old Testament. He just couldnt read it! He didnt know what was in it! But he did say that Allah had nuzul, he had sent down those books and, in fact, he told us to believe them! He told us to test him by them! Which thats what I do, and sometimes they get upset when you do that. But thats what you have do. And so he believed, Muhammad believed that God had sent down the Torah and the Injil, and so you have the people of the Book who have a special place, uh, over against the standard pagans and the polytheists.

And if a person that is making a claim about the Quran which this book doesnt explicitly contain implies that the claimant is ignorant and arrogant then this applies to Zawadi since in actuality the Quran never once says that the Torah was given to Moses. Instead, the Quran says that Allah gave Moses the Book which is never once identified as the Torah. This is a point which even Muslims agree with. For instance, in his comments on Q. 5:44 the late Rashad Khalifa wrote: *5:44 The Torah is a collection OF ALL THE SCRIPTURES revealed through all the prophets of Israel prior to Jesus Christ, i.e., TODAYS OLD TESTAMENT. NOWHERE in the Quran do we find THAT THE TORAH WAS GIVEN TO MOSES. (Source; capital emphasis ours) Appealing to the Holy Bible wont help Zawadi since according to the inspired Scriptures, specifically the NT writings, the word Torah or Law is used for writings other than those of Moses, just as the following verses prove. Jesus answered them Has it not been written in your LAW, I said you are gods? John 10:34 In this verse Jesus cites Psalm 82:6 and calls it the Law. The crowd spoke up, We have heard from the LAW that the Christ will remain forever, so how can you say, The Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man? John 12:34 There is no reference in Moses writings which teach that the Christ remains forever. The only places one finds such indications are Psalm 110:1,4, Isaiah 9:6-7 and Daniel 7:13-14. The Jews were evidently using Law to refer to the OT in general. But this is to fulfill what is written in their LAW: They hated me without reason. John 15:25 Jesus calls Psalms 35:19 and 69:4 the Law here. Paul does something similar in Romans 3:10-19 where he refers to what is written in the Law but then cites Psalms 5:9, 10:7, 36:1, 14:1-3, 51:4, 53:1-3, 59:7-8, 140:3 and Ecclesiastes 7:20. He also does this in the following example: In the LAW it is written: Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord. 1 Corinthians 14:21 The other problem with appealing to the Holy Bible is that the inspired Scriptures clearly identify the Pentateuch, or the first five Books of the OT, as the Torah or Law which God gave to Moses:

Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins. 2 Kings 14:6 And the Levites carried the ark of God with the poles on their shoulders, as Moses had commanded in accordance with the word of the LORD. 1 Chronicles 15:15 Then Jehoiada placed the oversight of the temple of the LORD in the hands of the priests, who were Levites, to whom David had made assignments in the temple, to present the burnt offerings of the LORD as written in the Law of Moses, with rejoicing and singing, as David had ordered. 2 Chronicles 23:18 So the king summoned Jehoiada the chief and said to him, Why have you not required the Levites to bring in from Judah and Jerusalem the tax levied by Moses, the servant of the LORD, and the congregation of Israel for the tent of testimony? For the sons of Athaliah, that wicked woman, had broken into the house of God, and had also used all the dedicated things of the house of the LORD for the Baals. So the king commanded, and they made a chest and set it outside the gate of the house of the LORD. And proclamation was made throughout Judah and Jerusalem to bring in for the LORD the tax that Moses the servant of God laid on Israel in the wilderness. 2 Chronicles 24:6-9 Stand in the holy place with a group of Levites for each subdivision of the families of your fellow countrymen, the lay people. Slaughter the Passover lambs, consecrate yourselves and prepare the lambs for your fellow countrymen, according to the word of the LORD commanded through Moses. Josiah provided for all the lay people who were there a total of thirty thousand sheep and goats for the Passover offerings, and also three thousand cattleall from the king's own possessions. His officials also contributed voluntarily to the people and the priests and Levites. Hilkiah, Zechariah and Jehiel, the administrators of God's temple, gave the priests twenty-six hundred Passover offerings and three hundred cattle. Also Conaniah along with Shemaiah and Nethanel, his brothers, and Hashabiah, Jeiel and Jozabad, the leaders of the Levites, provided five thousand Passover offerings and five hundred head of cattle for the Levites. The service was arranged and the priests stood in their places with the Levites in their divisions as the king had ordered. The Passover lambs were slaughtered, and the priests sprinkled the blood handed to them, while the Levites skinned the animals. They set aside the burnt offerings to give them to the subdivisions of the families of the people to offer to the LORD, as is written in the Book of Moses. They did the same with the cattle. They roasted the Passover animals over the fire as prescribed, and boiled the holy offerings in pots, caldrons and pans and served them quickly to all the people. After this, they made preparations for themselves and for the priests, because the priests, the descendants of Aaron, were sacrificing the burnt offerings. 2 Chronicles 35:5-14 Then Jeshua son of Jozadak and his fellow priests and Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and his associates began to build the altar of the God of Israel to sacrifice burnt offerings on it, in accordance with what is written in the Law of Moses the man of God. Ezra 3:2 Then I said: O LORD, God of heaven, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with those who love him and obey his commands, let your ear be attentive and your eyes open to hear the prayer your servant is praying before you day and night for your servants, the people of Israel. I confess the sins we Israelites, including myself and my

father's house, have committed against you. We have acted very wickedly toward you. We have not obeyed the commands, decrees and laws you gave your servant Moses. Remember the instruction you gave your servant Moses, saying, If you are unfaithful, I will scatter you among the nations, but if you return to me and obey my commands, then even if your exiled people are at the farthest horizon, I will gather them from there and bring them to the place I have chosen as a dwelling for my Name. Nehemiah 1:5-9 On the second day of the month, the heads of all the families, along with the priests and the Levites, gathered around Ezra the scribe to give attention to the words of the Law. They found written in the Law, which the LORD had commanded through Moses, that the Israelites were to live in booths during the feast of the seventh month and that they should proclaim this word and spread it throughout their towns and in Jerusalem: Go out into the hill country and bring back branches from olive and wild olive trees, and from myrtles, palms and shade trees, to make booths-as it is written. Nehemiah 8:13-15 On that day the Book of Moses was read aloud in the hearing of the people and there it was found written that no Ammonite or Moabite should ever be admitted into the assembly of God, because they had not met the Israelites with food and water but had hired Balaam to call a curse down on them. (Our God, however, turned the curse into a blessing.) When the people heard this law, they excluded from Israel all who were of foreign descent. Nehemiah 13:1-3 A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees, If you are willing, you can make me clean. Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. I am willing, he said. Be clean! Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured. Jesus sent him away at once with a strong warning: See that you don't tell this to anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them. Instead he went out and began to talk freely, spreading the news. As a result, Jesus could no longer enter a town openly but stayed outside in lonely places. Yet the people still came to him from everywhere. Mark 1:40-45 And he said to them: You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, Honor your father and your mother, and, Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death. Mark 7:9-11 Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them. Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife? What did Moses command you? he replied. They said, Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away. It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law, Jesus replied. But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate. Mark 10:1-9 Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. Teacher, they said, Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. At the resurrection

whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her? Jesus replied, Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Now about the dead risinghave you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken! Mark 12:18-27 On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been conceived. When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord), and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: a pair of doves or two young pigeons. Luke 2:21-24 Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: The man who does these things will live by them. But the righteousness that is by faith says: Do not say in your heart, Who will ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down) or Who will descend into the deep? (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: Romans 10:5-8 Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding. Romans 10:19 Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? For it is written in the Law of Moses, You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain. 1 Corinthians 9:8-9 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts! Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 2 Corinthians 3:7-16 In the above references all of the following passages are ascribed to Moses: Exodus 3; 12; 13:2,12; 20:12; 21:17; 24-32:16; 34; Leviticus 3; 12:8; 14:2-32; 18:5; 20:9; 23:33-44; 26:33; Numbers 1:47-54; 4:1-15; 7:9; Deuteronomy 5:16; 12:5-6; 16:1-7; 24:1-4, 16; 23:3-5; 25:510; 30:1-4, 12-14; 32:21. Thus, the NT ascribes Mosaic authorship to four of the five books of the Pentateuch, namely Exodus, Leviticus Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Zawadi cannot therefore appeal to the Holy Bible to prove that the Torah was given to Moses when he rejects what that Torah is according to the inspired Scriptures of God. Turning to the hadith literature for help isnt any better since the ahadith employ the term Torah for all of the inspired Scriptures, not just to the Book of Moses. Here is what Ibn Kathir wrote in regards to Q. 7:157: Ibn Jarir recorded that Al-Muthanna said that `Ata' bin Yasar said, I met `Abdullah bin `Amr and asked him, `Tell me about the description of Allah's Messenger in the Tawrah.' He said, `Yes, by Allah! He is described in the Tawrah, just as he is described in the Qur'an (O Prophet! Verily, We have sent you as a witness, and a bearer of glad tidings, and a warner.) [33:45] as a safe refuge for the unlettered ones. You are My servant and Messenger. I have called you Al-Mutawakkil (who trusts in Allah), not hard or harsh.' Neither uttering foul speech in the markets nor returning evil deed with one in kind. Rather, he forgives and forgoes. Allah will not end his life until He straightens through him the crooked religion, so that they might proclaim, There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah. He will open through him sealed hearts, deaf ears and blind eyes. `Ata' then said, I also met Ka`b and asked him the same question, and his answer did not differ from `Abdullah's answer, even concerning one letter. Al-Bukhari recorded it from 'Abdullah bin 'Amr. It was also recorded by Al-Bukhari [up to the word] forgoes. And he mentioned the narration of 'Abdullah bin 'Amr then he said: It was COMMON in the speech of our Salaf that they describe the Books of the People of the Two Scriptures AS THE TAWRAH, as some Hadiths concur. Allah knows best. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 4, (Surat Al-Ar'af to the end of Surah Yunus), abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First Edition: May 2000], p. 179; bold and capital emphasis ours) Ibn Kathir writes elsewhere, And it should be recognized that many of our forebears used to apply the word Torah to the books of the peoples of the scriptures. These are in their view more comprehensive than those God revealed to Moses. This fact is attested from the hadith. (The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, 1998], Volume I, p. 237; bold and underline emphasis ours) These quotes from Ibn Kathir prove that Zawadi is not a true Salafi since he contradicts the teachings of the Salaf. He only pays lip service to what the so-called rightly guided predecessors believed and practiced. This, perhaps, explains why the following translator of the English version of Sahih alBukhari included the words Old Testament within parentheses next to the word Torah in the following narration:

Narrated Ata bin Yasar: I met Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As and asked him, Tell me about the description of Allah's Apostle which is mentioned in Torah (i.e. Old Testament)." He replied, Yes. By Allah, he is described in Torah with some of the qualities attributed to him in the Quran as follows: O Prophet! We have sent you as a witness (for Allah's True religion) and a giver of glad tidings (to the faithful believers), and a warner (to the unbelievers) and guardian of the illiterates. You are My slave and My messenger (i.e. Apostle). I have named you AlMutawakkil (who depends upon Allah). You are neither discourteous, harsh Nor a noisemaker in the markets And you do not do evil to those Who do evil to you, but you deal With them with forgiveness and kindness. Allah will not let him (the Prophet) Die till he makes straight the crooked people by making them say: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, with which will be opened blind eyes and deaf ears and enveloped hearts. (Sahih alBukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 335) The translator knew that in this particular context Torah could not be a reference to Moses Book and, since he was a Salafi Muslim who knew what the Salaf taught, he could see that Abdullah was clearly using it in relation to the other prophetic writings found in the Old Testament. This same translator, in the comments to Q. 7:157 found in the English version that he and another Salafi scholar produced, states that, (1) (V. 7:157) There is in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel), even after the original text has been distorted, clear prophecies indicating the coming of Prophet Muhammad, e.g. Deut. 18:18, 21:21; Psl. 118:22-23; Isa. 42:1-13; Hab. 3:3-4; Matt. 21:42-43; Jn. 14:12-17, 26-28, 16:7-14. (Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Quran in the English Language From Surah 6 to 9 [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Lahore, Houston and New York], Part 2, p. 221) Thus, not only do these two Salafi scholars equate the Torah with the Psalms, Isaiah and Habakkuk they even identify Matthew and John as the Gospel! Thankfully, not all modern Muslims try to distort the truth like Zawadi. The late Muslim translator T.B. Irving was honest enough to realize that the Torah could refer not only to the books of Moses but also to the rest of the prophetic writings. In his English version of the Quran Irving even translated the word Torah as Old Testament: We had Jesus, the son of Mary, follow in their footsteps in order to confirm what had come before him from the Torah and We gave him the Gospel which contains guidance and Light, to confirm what he already had in the Old Testament (al-Taurat), and as guidance and a lesson for those who do their duty. S. 5:46 T. B. Irving God has bought up their persons and their property from believers, so they may have the Garden [instead). They fight for God's sake; they kill and are killed as a rightful promise from Him [to be found] in the Old Testament (al-Taurat), the Gospel and the Quran. Who is more Trustworthy with His word than God? ... S. 9:111 Irving

So Jesus the son of Mary said: Children of Israel, I am God's messenger to you, confirming whatever came before me in the Testament (al-Taurat) and announcing a messenger coming after me whose name will be Ahmad." Yet when he brought them explanations, they said: "This is sheer magic! S. 61:6 Irving Those who are laden with the Old Testament (al-Taurat), yet do not carry it out may be compared to a donkey who is carrying scriptures. S. 62:5 Irving The other problem Zawadi faces by appealing to the ahadith is that according to these sources Muhammad believed and honored the Torah in the possession of the Jews of that time: Abu Dawud recorded that Ibn `Umar said, Some Jews came to the Messenger of Allah and invited him to go to the Quff area. So he went to the house of Al-Midras and they said, O Abu Al-Qasim! A man from us committed adultery with a woman, so decide on their matter. They arranged a pillow for the Messenger of Allah and he sat on it and said <<Bring the Tawrah to me.>> He was brought the Tawrah and he removed the pillow from under him and placed the Tawrah on it, saying <<I TRUST YOU and He Who revealed it to you.>> He then said <<Bring me your most knowledgeable person.>> So he was brought a young man and then he mentioned the rest of the story that Malik narrated from Nafi`. These Hadiths state that the Messenger of Allah issued a decision that conforms with the ruling in the Tawrah, not to honor the Jews in what they believe in, for the Jews were commanded to follow the Law of Muhammad only. Rather, the Prophet did this because Allah commanded him to do so. He asked them about the ruling of stoning in the Tawrah to make them admit to what the Tawrah contains and what they collaborated to hide, deny and exclude from implementing for all that time. They had to admit to what they did, although they did it while having knowledge of the correct ruling (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 5:41; bold, capital and underline emphasis ours) Zawadi has desperately tried weaken the reliability of this particular narrative but to no avail since even one of Zawadis premiere Salafi scholars and student of the so-called renowned Shaykh of Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, namely Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, mentioned this very same narration in his Ighathat Al Lahfan, Volume 2, p. 351: On the other side, another party of hadith and fiqh scholars said: these changes took place during its interpretation and not during the process of its revelation. This is the view of Abi Abdullah Muhammad bin Ishmael Al-Bukhari who said in his hadith collection: No one can corrupt the text by removing any of Allahs words from his Books, but they corrupted it by misinterpreting it. Al-Razi also agrees with this opinion. In his commentary he said: There is a difference of opinions regarding this matter among some of the respectable scholars. Some of these scholars said: the manuscript copies of the Torah were distributed everywhere and no one knows the exact number of these copies except Allah. It is impossible to have a conspiracy to change or alter the word of God in all of these copies

without missing any copy. Such a conspiracy will not be logical or possible. And when Allah told his messenger (Muhammad) to ask the Jews to bring their Torah and read it concerning the stoning command they were not able to change this command from their copies, that is why they covered up the stoning verse while they were reading it to the prophet. It was then when Abdullah Ibn Salam requested that they remove their hand so that the verse became clear. If they have changed or altered the Torah then this verse would have been one of the important verses to be altered by the Jews. Also, whenever the prophet would ask them (the Jews) concerning the prophecies about him in the Torah they were not able to remove them either, and they would respond by stating that they are not about him and they are still waiting for the prophet in their Torah. Abu Dawud narrated in his collection that Ibn Umar said: A group of Jewish people invited the messenger of Allah to a house. When he came, they asked him: O Abu Qasim, one of our men committed adultery with a woman, what is your judgment against him? So they placed a pillow and asked the messenger of Allah to set on it. Then the messenger of Allah proceeded to say: bring me the Torah. When they brought it, he removed the pillow from underneath him and placed the Torah on it and said: I believe in you and in the one who revealed you, then said: bring me one of you who have the most knowledge. So they brought him a young man who told him the story of the stoning. The scholars said: if the Torah was corrupted he would not have placed it on the pillow and he would not have said: I believe in you and in the one who revealed you. This group of scholars also said: Allah said: And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. And the Torah is Allahs word. (Bold and underline emphasis ours) In light of the foregoing, it is apparent that Muhammad truly believed in the inspiration and reliability of the Torah which the Jews of his time possessed. And seeing that the Torah which Muhammads Jewish contemporaries were reading is the same as what we currently possess this means that Muhammad basically confirmed the Holy Bible that we have today! To see more of our rebuttals to Zawadis failed attempts of refuting the fact that Muhammad confirmed the Holy Bible we recommend consulting the articles found in this link. There you will find our replies to Zawadi where we expose his deliberate mishandling and gross distortions of scholars and sources, as well as documenting his gross misunderstanding of what these references say and his severe inability to see their implications. More of Zawadis gross blunders and blatant inconsistencies To make matters worse Zawadis reply to Dr. White contradicts what he had written in response to Christian apologist David Wood concerning the Bible prophesying the advent of Muhammad:

The Qur'an EXPRESSLY STATES THAT BOTH THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS contain references to Muhammad: Those who follow the Messenger, The unlettered Prophet, Whom they find mentioned In their own (Scriptures) - In the Law and the Gospel?... It is they who will prosper. (Qur'an 7:157)[2] And remember, Jesus, The son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (Sent) to you, confirming The Law (which came) Before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger To come after me, Whose name shall be Ahmad [i.e. Muhammad]." (Qur'an 61:6) (Rebuttal to David Wood's Article "Muhammad in the Bible?: An Analysis of the Muslim Appeal to Biblical Prophecy"; bold and capital emphasis ours) By citing Q. 7:157 Zawadi has not only identified and equated the Torah with the Old Testament he has further confirmed that the Gospel which the Quran mentions is actually the New Testament which Christians possess! Notice Zawadis words carefully here. He does not argue that the Quran claims that the original Torah and Gospel contain predictions of Muhammad. Zawadi clearly says the Islamic scripture affirms that there are predictions of Muhammad in the Old and New Testaments! This means that when Zawadi goes on to write the following right afterwards, I want to make it clear from the beginning what Muslims actually believe. We believe that Muhammad was predicted in the original Torah and Gospel revealed to Moses and Jesus respectively. Some of these prophecies happened to remain preserved and found their way into the Bible, which also contains much falsehood according to Islamic teachings. He is merely contradicting himself. Zawadi must either accept that the Quran is identifying the Old and New Testaments as the Torah and the Gospel respectively, or must face the fact that he is grossly mistaken and made a huge blunder by saying that the Quran testifies that the Old and New Testaments contain predictions of Muhammad. After all, if the Torah and the Gospel are not the Old and New Testaments then this means that the Quran says absolutely nothing about Muhammad being predicted in the books that are found within these two Testaments. But it gets worse for Zawadi since he also writes: The book of Acts is not the Gospel, thus I don't know how it is relevant to the dicussion[sic]. Secondly, the verse itself does not clearly indicate that what is promised to come (The Comforter) is the Holy Spirit that they will be baptized with. However, if Acts isnt the Gospel then why did Zawadi mention the New Testament when quoting Q. 7:157 which refers to the unlettered Prophet that is announced in the Gospel? Isnt Acts part of the New Testament? And if the New Testament is the Gospel mentioned in Q. 7:157 then surely Acts must be considered the Gospel as well according to Zawadis own argument! So which is it? Which position of Zawadis should we believe? Should we accept his assertion that the Quran expressly states that both the Old and New Testaments mention Muhammad, which means that the Quran is equating these Scriptures with the Torah and the

Gospel? Or should we believe that the Old and New Testaments are not the original Torah and Gospel revealed to Moses and the Lord Jesus? Can Zawadi ever make up his mind and stop contradicting himself as often as he does? More importantly, how can he attack Dr. White on a point that he himself agrees with since Zawadi himself identifies the Torah and Gospel as the Old and New Testaments (even though this was clearly a huge blunder on his part, one which cost him dearly)? According to Zawadis own criterion doesnt this prove that he is downright arrogant and rather ignorant since he, like White, inadvertently identified the Torah as the Old Testament and the Gospel as the New Testament? The Holy Bible has a few words to say to people like Zawadi who, in their arrogance, think that they are actually offering a meaningful rebuttal to the arguments of their opponents: When pride comes, then comes dishonor, But with the humble is wisdom. Proverbs 11:2 Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before stumbling. Proverbs 16:18 Before destruction the heart of man is haughty, But humility goes before honor. He who gives an answer before he hears, It is folly and shame to him. Proverbs 18:12-13 A man who hardens his neck after much reproof Will suddenly be broken beyond remedy A man's pride will bring him low, But a humble spirit will obtain honor. Proverbs 29:1, 23 It has been clear to us that Zawadi simply doesnt want to accept reproof and refuses to learn from all the countless times that we have exposed his inability to comprehend his opponents arguments as well as his blatant willingness to distort the facts to suit his purpose. This is why Zawadi is constantly getting embarrassed because, as the Holy Scriptures say, the risen and immortal Lord will expose and humble such arrogant and stubborn persons who refuse to submit to his Word. Lord Jesus willing, there will be further rebuttals to Zawadis inconsistencies, distortions and lies to follow shortly.

OPEN CHALLENGE WE CHALLENGE ZAWADI TO PRODUCE ONE SINGLE VERSE FROM THE ENTIRE QURAN WHERE IT SAYS THAT ALLAH REVEALED THE TORAH TO MOSES. WE WOULD LIKE FOR HIM TO SHOW US A SINGLE PLACE WHERE HIS "HOLY" BOOK SAYS THAT MOSES RECEIVED THE TORAH.

Related Articles http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/bible.htm http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/bible2.htm http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/bible_r1.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/bible_r2.htm http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/bible_r3.htm http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/taurat.htm http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/taurat_challenge.htm

Appendix Zawadi has produced an appendix to his initial article in order to interact with my criticisms. Zawadi starts out by raising a red herring since he asserts that I ignored all the crystal clear statements which he thinks illustrates that James White is ignorant concerning basic matters about Islam. The problem with this claim is that my purpose wasnt to address all of Zawadis false accusations in this particular rebuttal since that will come later if the Lord Jesus wills. The point of this specific response was to show how Zawadi committed a blunder regarding what the Quran says concerning the revelation of the Torah and that he was wrong for attacking Dr. Whites integrity and character. Since Zawadi acknowledges that he made a mistake and candidly admits that the Quran never says that the Torah was given to Moses this means that by the sovereign grace of the Triune God I successfully established what I had set out to prove. Now the honest person would have left it at that and retracted his attack against Dr. White, at least in regards to this point. However, Zawadi cant leave well enough alone and feels the need to save face by coming up with some excuse justifying his gross blunder. Zawadi appeals to what he had written elsewhere regarding how the Quran uses the terms Torah and the Gospel in order to show that he is fully aware that the Islamic scripture applies these terms in reference to the Old and New Testaments: The main problem with Christians who put forth these arguments is that they fail to identify and understand how the Qur'an uses the terms 'Torah' and 'Gospel' in the Qur'an. When the Qur'an talks about the Torah and Gospel, one of its intentions is to speak about the original revelations sent to Moses and Jesus peace be upon them both respectively. Sometimes the Qur'an or authentic hadith MIGHT APPEAR to be speaking about the Torah and Gospel, which Jews and Christians refer to. For example, when I debate the topic 'Did Jesus Claim Divinity' with Christians, I usually issue this challenge 'Show me where Jesus claimed divinity in the Gospel'. Now, my intention here is that I am referring to the Gospel referred to by Christians and that is the combined four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. However, my intention is not to state that this is the actual Gospel that God revealed to Jesus peace be upon him. So the word is used in different contexts and Christians fail to identify this when it comes to studying the Qur'an and authentic hadith. (Refuting The Argument Regarding The Qur'an Ordering The Jews And Christians To Judge By Their Scriptures; capital emphasis ours) Doesnt Zawadi realize that this only provides further evidence that he is inconsistent and dishonest? Doesnt he see that this simply demonstrates that he contradicted himself since he obviously forgot what he had written in his previous articles? Notice once again his assault against Dr. White:

This is a joke, where does the Qur'an say that the Torah is the Old Testament law? The Qur'an said that the Torah was revealed to Moses. How could the Old Testament law have been revealed to Moses when even many conservative evangelical scholars even admit that Joshua contributed to it? Zawadi chides Dr. White for stating that the Quran uses the word Torah for the Old Testament Law, going so far as to call what he said a joke! But seeing that Zawadi admits that the Torah in the Quran can mean and does refer to the Old Testament why then did he take Dr. White to task? Why did he insult Dr. White and call his statements a joke? The reason is clear. Zawadi forgot what he had written and thought he had caught Dr. White in a mistake and in his arrogance went on the attack. Little did he realize that this blunder would come back to bite him and expose his intellectual ineptness. Moreover, in the same paragraph where he admits that he was mistaken Zawadi comes up with another excuse to justify his gross blunder: As for Shamoun's second question, I will have to admit that I made a mistake when I said that the Qur'an says that the Torah was revealed to Moses. Sometimes as a Muslim I mistakenly say "Qur'an" instead of "Islam". Islamic teachings consist of both the Qur'an and the authentic hadeeth. The problem with this assertion is that Dr. White said nothing about Islam, i.e. the Quran AND the authentic hadiths, identifying the Torah as the Old Testament Law. Dr. White explicitly stated that the Quran says that God sent down the Torah, which he then identified as the Old Testament Law. So if Zawadi meant that it is the so-called authentic hadith which asserts that the "original" Torah was revealed to Moses then he had no business to attack Dr. White since the latter wasnt speaking of the ahadith. Besides, as we demonstrated in this very rebuttal even these allegedly sound narratives identify the Torah in the possession of the Jews at Muhammads time as the very revelation which God gave to Moses! And since the only Torah which these Jews had at that time is the very Pentateuch or the first five books of the Old Testament which we currently possess this means that Dr. White was right! As if Zawadi couldnt make it any worse for himself he goes on to attack a straw man and in so doing only further embarrasses himself. He mentions that Ibn Kathir claimed that the story of Adam in the Old Testament was false and deceptive in order to show that this renowned Muslim expositor believed that these Scriptures were corrupt and unreliable. He then argues that the Salaf didnt believe that the two Testaments were the Torah revealed to Moses! As anyone who has actually taken the time to read my article carefully can testify I said absolutely nothing about the Salaf believing that the two Testaments were the revelation given to Moses, nor did I ever claim that Ibn Kathir viewed the Old Testament as completely reliable. My only point in referencing them was to establish that the word Torah is not limited to the revelations which Moses received since the first generation of Muslims used it to refer to the other inspired Books that God had sent down. In fact, Zawadi himself admits as much since he later writes:

Hence, they had no problem in recognizing that the word Torah could in certain contexts refer to the original revelation sent to Moses AND IN OTHER CONTEXTS REFER TO THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. (Emphasis ours) Therefore, since Zawadi acknowledges that the early Muslims would refer to both the Old and New Testaments as the Torah this means that he was wrong for attacking Dr. White since it turns out that the latter was right after all. The simple matter is that it was Zawadi who was grossly mistaken. Zawadi then quotes specific narratives from al-Bukhari which speak of Allah revealing the Torah to Moses so as to prove that the early Muslims and Islamic scholars were aware of these hadiths and therefore knew that the Torah was given to Moses. Seeing that I never contested this fact this further shows that Zawadi is doing nothing more than attack a straw man again. Zawadi needs to face the music and accept the fact that he is not qualified to defend Islam or criticize the arguments of his opponents. Zawadi is simply doing more harm than good by producing articles that are filled with logical fallacies, gross misrepresentations of sources, outright distortions of facts, and major blunders which result in serious embarrassment for his fellow Muslims and his religion. If Zawadi really loves Islam then he should stop producing articles that only hinder the Islamic cause since his replies demonstrate why Islamic apologetics are intellectually bankrupt and dishonest. His arguments go a long a way in demonstrating why any serious student of truth should never be a follower of the false prophet Muhammad but should actually be repulsed by the Muslim god and the vile and immoral teachings of this wicked false religion.

Appendix 2 Zawadi couldnt leave well enough alone and so decided to reply back to our appendix! It is evident that Zawadi is on a path of self-destruction and that it is simply a matter of time before his career as an apologist is over. Zawadi still insists that his gross mistake doesnt affect his criticism of Dr. Whites statements! In this statement James White is trying to argue that the Qur'an is saying that God sent down the Old Testament Law and the Gospel (his intention is four Gospels). This is my problem. It seems I am going to have to break this down step by step. 1. Dr. White said that the Quran mentions the Torah which he identifies as the Old Testament Law. 2. Zawadi objects to this and claims that the Quran is referring to the "original" Torah given to Moses, which he says is not the same as the Old Testament Law. 3. However, the Quran never says that the Torah was given to Moses. In fact, the Islamic scripture never tells us who exactly received the Torah!

4. Zawadi, therefore, has no basis for objecting to what Dr. White stated since the Quran never said that Moses received the Torah. 5. In light of this fact how does Zawadi know for certain that the Torah mentioned in the Quran is not the OT Law? He doesnt. 6. The only way for Zawadi to find the answer to this question is to either appeal to the Holy Bible or the Islamic traditions. 7. However, appealing to the Holy Bible wont help his case since Gods inspired Word identifies the Torah as the Old Testament Law or Pentateuch, the very revelation which Zawadi said IS NOT the Torah mentioned in the Quran! 8. The Holy Bible also uses the word Torah or Law for the other inspired Books. 9. Nor are the hadiths helpful to Zawadi's cause since they also identify the Torah as the Old Testament Law which the Jews of Muhammads time possessed. 10. And, much like the Holy Bible, these same Islamic narratives testify that the first generation of Muslims would call the books which the Jews and Christians possessed the Torah as well. 11. Thus, both the Biblical and Islamic sources confirm that Dr. White is right and that Zawadi is grossly mistaken. The Holy Bible and specific ahadith agree that the Torah is the OT Law which Jesus confirmed and which the Jews of Muhammads day were reading. Zawadi next misrepresents Dr. White: This has nothing to do with me admitting that its okay for the Qur'an to refer to the two testaments as the Torah and Gospel in certain contexts. Rather my problem was James White trying to insinuate that the Qur'an is saying that these two testaments were revealed. This is a joke and clearly unfounded. And: This neophyte has to understand that I was attacking James White's attempt to interpret the Torah and Gospel revealed by God according to the Qur'an as the two testaments. This has nothing to do with me admitting that the Qur'an could use the words Torah and Gospel in different contexts to refer to the Bible. It is apparent that in his anger and haste to save face Zawadi wasnt thinking clearly thereby confusing himself since Dr. White NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE TWO TESTAMENTS. Dr. White identified the Torah as the Old Testament LAW, meaning the Pentateuch, and stated that the Injil is the Gospel. He said absolutely nothing about the Torah being the entire Old Testament or the Gospel being the New Testament. Cant Zawadi keep his facts straight? Now Dr. White does go on to say that Muhammad knew of the Old and New Testaments and thought that these books were sent down and should be used to test him. However, Dr. White

is clear that Muhammad was ignorant of what these writings contained which may have been why he thought that these were the writings which Allah had sent down. In order to understand what Dr. White is saying it is vitally important we quote what he says in another video: Now the writer of the Qur'an may have been confused enough to think that the Injil was a book written by Jesus. There's clear evidence that that's what he thought or at least could be interpreted that way. But thats due to the ignorance of the writer of the Quran not due to the historical realities. And, again, when Muslims take that later error and make it the standard by elevating it to be the word of God and saying, Well, this is what it is!, so there must be some lost book back there that no one has ever heard of called the Injil. It only shows the circular nature of accepting unfounded assertions that are historically contradicted by reality and making them the standard by which you look at everything. And yet we see our Muslim friends doing this all the time. (Zakir Naik on the Deen Show: Review and Rebuttal Pt. 1) By saying that the writer of the Quran may have mistakenly thought that the Gospel was a book which Allah gave to Jesus it is clear what Dr. White meant. Muhammad thought that the NT writings which the Christians possessed must have been the book which Allah gave to Jesus. However, Muhammad was mistaken since Jesus didnt receive a book but proclaimed the Gospel. It was Jesus followers whom he commissioned and their companions who eventually wrote down what Jesus had revealed to them. In fact, this was the view of one the earliest Islamic biographers named Ibn Ishaq who claimed that John the Apostle wrote down the Gospel of Jesus for his followers: Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted FROM WHAT JOHN THE APOSTLE SET DOWN FOR THEM WHEN HE WROTE THE GOSPEL FOR THEM FROM THE TESTAMENT OF JESUS SON OF MARY: He that hateth me hateth the Lord. And if I had not done in their presence works which none other before me did, they had not sin: but from now they are puffed up with pride and think that they will overcome me and also the Lord. But the word that is in the law must be fulfilled, "They hated me without a cause" (i.e. without reason). But when the Comforter has come whom God will send to you from the Lord's presence, and the spirit of truth which will have gone forth from the Lord's presence he (shall bear) witness of me and ye also, because ye have been with me from the beginning. I have spoken unto you about this that ye should not be in doubt. The Munahhemana (God bless and preserve him!) in Syriac is Muhammad; in Greek he is the paraclete. (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaqs Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], pp. 103-104; bold and capital emphasis ours) Interestingly, Zawadi doesnt contest Whites assertion that the writer of the Quran thought that the Injil was a book given to Jesus. He only objects to the four Gospels being the Gospel that the Muslim scripture has in mind:

Well it depends on what Gospel James White is talking about. If he is talking about the four Gospels, well then that is not what the Qur'an is even talking about to begin with. The Qur'an is speaking about the actual revelation sent from God to Jesus (peace be upon him). The problem with this reply is that it ignores the plain statements of the Islamic scripture that the Christians of Muhammads time had in their possession the very Gospel which God gave to Jesus: And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah that was between his hands and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah that was between his hands, as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing. So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what Allah has sent down therein. Whosoever judges not according to what Allah has sent down -- they are the ungodly. S. 5:46-47 Here, Muhammad exhorts the Christians of his time to judge by the Gospel which God gave to Jesus thereby presupposing that the true Gospel was still in existence and hadnt been corrupted. Now since the only Gospel which these Christians would have possessed are the NT documents this means that Muhammad thought that the NT was actually the revelation which God had given to Jesus! However, since Zawadi denies this here is another open challenge for him. PLEASE IDENTIFY THE GOSPEL WHICH THE QURAN MENTIONS IN BOTH Q. 5:47 AND 7:157 WHICH WAS AVAILABLE AND IN CIRCULATION AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD. PROVIDE SOME HISTORICAL DATA WHICH WILL SHED SOME LIGHT ON THE GOSPEL WHICH THE CHRISTIANS POSSESSED AND WERE READING AT MUHAMMADS TIME. Zawadi then argues that the Quran is to be interpreted in light of the so-called authentic sunna: Why is Shamoun being so incompetent? What kind of response is this? At the end of the day the Qu'ran is to be interpreted in light of the authentic Sunnah and how the early Muslims understood it. What business does James White have to interpret the Qur'an as saying that the Torah and Gospel revealed refers to what is in his Bible today!? This is nothing more than a case of obfuscation since Zawadi never attacked Dr. White for failing to read the Quran in light of the authentic sunna. His objection against White was that he claimed that the Torah which the QURAN, not the authentic sunna, mentions is the Old Testament Law. Besides, who says that the Quran has to be understood in light of Muhammads sunna? The Quran? No since the Muslim scripture claims to be a sufficient record and that its verses are fully explained and elaborated: A Book whereof the Verses are explained in detail; A Qur'an in Arabic for people who know. S. 41:3

However, in making this assertion the Quran raises a problem for itself since it is anything but fully detailed! All Muslims? No since there are plenty of Muslims who follow the Quran alone and reject the hadiths as lies and fabrications (1; 2; 3). More importantly, which Islamic sect has actually preserved the actual sunna of Muhammad? The Sunnis or the Shias who accuse the former of perverting the teachings of Muhammad and of corrupting the historical sources of Islam (1; 2)? Finally, Zawadis assertion is rather ironic since the authentic sunna itself confirms that the Torah which was given to Moses is the same which the Jews of Muhammads time possessed. See the narrations which we quoted earlier for the proof. Since the Torah which the Jews were reading is virtually the same as the Old Testament Law which we currently possess today this means that Dr. White is right and Zawadi is wrong. Zawadi needs to simply humble himself and admit that he got caught for making such a huge blunder.

Answering Islam, 1999 - 2010. All rights reserved.