Mr.

Johnsons Bias & Islams

Critique

By Christian Anarchist

In todays world of Islamic

apologists, it seems even those who
dont adhere to the Muslim faith will
adhere to the call of defense.
However, whats worse is that when
you have somebody who is a non-
muslim and not even an orientalist
scholar defending Islam or its sacred
writings, you tend to display
ignorance or just a sense of social
justice warrior hatred. Henry Johnson,
a user on YouTube, commented on my
video Muhammad Is Not In Isaiah 42
(Refuting EFDawah) and left some
interesting critiques. However, he
seemed to be interesting in being
much more of one who was looking to
agitate if anything. So I am going to
take the time to respond to his
remarks since he claims: You are not
a scholar and you have no idea about
the Quran nor Islam. I'm personally
not a Muslim, I followed my Mother
but my Father is a Sheikh and has
taught me so don't try tell me I'm
wrong about the Quran because I
know I'm not wrong. I may not be a
scholar, but while your knowledge of
Islam seems to come from a Sheikh
who is your father (which you never
said if he was a Sunni or Shiite), my
sources come from Islamic scholars as
well. Such as Yasir Qadhi, Ibn Kathir,
and many others. Plus, I actually have
a Quran software that gives me
multiple translations of the Quran in
English as well as both Sahih Bukhari
and Sahih Muslim. So my knowledge
of the Quran is not just hear say. Also,
I have a copy of the Study Quran, a
scholarly translation and commentary
by four Islamic Scholars of various
schools of Islam.
The first thing to reply to be the
following: You say the Quran is a
book of falsehoods and I'd imagine
you think Muhammad is a false
Prophet. For one, the Quran declares
to the Muslims: The Jews and the
Christians will never approve of you
unless you follow their Religion.
[2:120]. You are a living example of
this 'timeless prophecy', if you will.
Also, according to the Bible, the way
to identify a false Prophet is in
Deuteronomy 18:21-22: If what a
Prophet proclaims in the name of the
Lord does not take place or come true,
that is a message the Lord has not
spoken. You can believe whatever you
want, be arrogant I'm cool with it but
at least we know that by the Bible
standards, Muhammad was a Man of
Truth. He told many Prophecies of the
Day of Judgement. Well, if we are to
measure Muhammad by the standard
of Deuteronomy 18, then lets do just
that. [30:2-4] is a prophecy from
Muhammad in his revelation from
Allah where he says that the
Byzantines would defeat the Persians
within three to nine years after the
Persians first defeated them. The
Byzantines have been defeated. In the
nearest land. But they, after their
defeat, will overcome. Within three to
nine years (fi bidi sinina). To Allah
belongs the command before and
after. And that day the believers will
rejoice. It is agreed upon by Islamic
Scholars such as Abdullah Yusuf Ali (in
his own Quran notes) and Abdul
Mannan Omar (in Dictionary of the
Holy Quran) that the Arabic phrase
here means three to nine years. In
fact, Allama Shabir Ahmad Usmani, an
Islamic scholar, even notes not just
the lexical support for this meaning or
range, but that Islamic tradition even
gives this as the reading for the
Arabic: in lexicon and in the
Tradition, the word bid I is applied to
a period ranging from three to nine
years (1). However, in Irfan Shahids
Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth
Century, the Orientalist scholar notes
that in 614 AD, one of Muhammads
claimed prophecies had potential to
come true. The Persians conquered
Jerusalem and defeated the
Byzantines. The Byzantines were led
by Emperor Heraclius (2). Of course,
these Byzantines would defeat the
Persians later, but as historical
sources show, especially in The
Oxford History of Byzantium, we see
this happens thirteen years later in
627 AD (3). I did briefly mention this
to Mr. Johnson, but what was his
response? Um, he predicted it
correctly actually but miscalculated
a few years, ooohh what a big
deal. Actually it is a pretty big deal.
If you as a non-Muslim are going to
defend Islam, then the first mistake is
when you say he miscalculated.
Because either youre saying a
prophet of Allah did not receive divine
revelation, but instead try to naturally
predict an event, or you are saying
that Allah made a mistake in the
Quran. Which according to Islamic
doctrine, this would not be possible
especially in reference to the doctrine
of Qadar, which is the Arabic word for
fate. In fact, Qadar is actually one of
the six articles of faith in Islam as
mentioned in Book One of Sahih
Muslim. What does Qadar teach in the
Quran? If you read [3:145], [4:88],
[7:188], [9:51] and other verses in the
Quran, you will read that it teaches
that whatever Allah wills to happen
will happen. So if Allah wanted three
to nine years, he wouldve wanted and
have done just that and not
miscalculate at all. In fact, to sum up
the doctrine, Islamic scholar Alfred
Guillaume notes the following: There
are texts which clearly assert that
man is responsible for his own
actions, though the majority of
texts seem to assert that they are
definitely decreed. The Mutazila
dealt with these passages as best as
they could by softening the language
of predestination, but still it could
not be denied that the orthodox
party had the Quran on their side
when they asserted that God's
predestination was absolute. This
view is borne out by the chapter on
predestination in the books of
canonical tradition which do not
contain a single saying of
Muhammads which leaves freedom of
action to man. Everything is
predestined from the first and a
mans fate is fixed before he is
born (4). So here, Henry Johnson
slipped up and made a mistake by
admitting that the date was note
accurate. Since after all, if whatever
Allah decrees in the Quran comes
true, it will happen how he wants. And
the Quran clearly says within three to
nine years. Not thirteen. Therefore,
according to Deuteronomy 18,
Muhammad was a false prophet.
Secondly, Henry Johnson says:
The Quran does not give divine
attributes ANYTHING else other than
God Almighty alone. It holds Jesus in
high esteem, he was born of a Virgin
by God's command, not because he
wanted to **** his own creation and
have his own child, he gave Jesus
miracles to prove he was the Messiah
as the Quran affirms. The Quran says
"Far exalted is God to have a Son."
While he is not a Muslim, he sure can
argue like one. However, again he is in
error. The Christians do not believe
that YHWH in the bible had sex with
anybody. The term Son of God is in
reference to the relationship between
Jesus and The Father. We as Christians
believe Jesus existed eternally with
the Father and that he did not have a
beginning. For more about an Old
Testament understanding of a physical
being that beared the same name as
YHWH, look up the concept up of The
Shekhinah. However, going to what
the Quran says, the Study Quran
actually makes a statement that
Islamic scholars make out to be
interesting: His creating live birds
out of clay birds, healing the blind and
the leper, and raising the dead are
likewise recounted in 3:49 (for blind
and leper, see 3:49c). These last
three miraculous powers
attributed to Jesus are
extraordinary in that they
suggest powers usually reserved
for God; God is the one who heals
(26:8 [sic]); He is the raiser of the
dead throughout the Quran: and the
creation of birds from clay and
bringing them to life by breathing
upon them is exactly parallel to
Gods creation of the human
being (15:26-29; 32:7-9; 38:71-72)
(5). Interesting indeed that even the
Study Quran admits this. A Quran with
study notes done by Islamic Scholars.
How then does Henry argue with
these people he tries to defend here?
Thirdly, he claims Paul was the
false apostle who created
Christianitys doctrines: Paul is the
false apostle. He put in his own
doctrine based upon the world he
lived in. I have already refuted this
claim in my article, A Case For Paul,
where I even went and left a section
showing that early Muslims viewed
Paul as a follower of Jesus who taught
the same teachings that Peter and the
other disciples taught. If one were to
actually examine the historical
evidence, they would not make the
same claims Henry Johnson is making
on this issue, which are only claims
that are made today and not by early
Muslims and skeptics. He also claims
that Christianity was a result of
paganism influence. To which I ask the
same tired question: Where is your
evidence for such a claim?
I honestly dont care if Henry
Johnson responds to this article or not.
I only hope that those who read these
arguments be prepared for what the
future holds in regards to the
defending our faith. Shalom.

Sources & Citations

1.) Allama Usmani, Tafseer-E-

Usmani, Vol. 3, [Islamic Book
Service, 2004], p. 1768 n. 2).

2.) Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and

the Arabs in the Sixth Century,
[Dumbarton Oaks, 2002], p. 232
3.) Cyril Mango, The Oxford
History of Byzantium, [Oxford
University Press, 2002], p. 308

4.) Guillaume, Alfred, Islam,

Whitefish, MT: Literary Licensing,
2011. p. 131

5.) Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, Caner

K. Dagli, Maria Massi Dakake,
Joseph E. B. Lumbard, and
Mohammed Rustom, eds. The
Study Quran: A New Translation
and Commentary, New York, NY:
HarperOne, An Imprint of
HarperCollins Publishers, 2015.
p. 334