Is the cross a pagan symbol?

The following is taken from #13: Is the cross a pagan symbol?.

Answers to Jehovah’s Witnesses #13

Robert M. Bowman Jr.

Post date: December 5, 2018

Alexamenos Graffito (2nd cent.), with the inscription, “Alexamenos worships God.”

Summary: The Watchtower Society teaches that Jesus was not executed on a cross but rather on a simple upright stake or pole. Jehovah’s Witnesses consider the cross a pagan symbol that was introduced into Christendom in its apostasy. However, the facts show that Jesus did indeed die on a cross and that the cross was used as a Christian symbol with no pagan meaning as early as the first century.

This article is one of a series of articles explaining in detail the doctrines of Jehovah’s Witnesses and showing why those teachings are not in harmony with the facts and teachings of the Bible. For an overview, see our article on what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe.

What the Watchtower Teaches

The Watchtower Society teaches that the cross is a pagan symbol and that its use in traditional Christian churches marks them as part of “apostate Christendom.” The Society maintains that Jesus died on a simple upright stake and not on any type of cross. The form of the instrument of Christ’s death is not in and of itself important, but the Watchtower treats the matter as of great importance because it claims that the cross was introduced into Christianity in order to make the Christian faith more palatable to pagans. The following statement from one of the Watchtower’s recent, main doctrinal instruction books summarizes their position:

An important reason is that Jesus Christ did not die on a cross. The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau·ros′. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” … There is no evidence that for the first 300 years after Christ’s death, those claiming to be Christians used the cross in worship. In the fourth century, however, pagan Emperor Constantine became a convert to apostate Christianity and promoted the cross as its symbol. Whatever Constantine’s motives, the cross had nothing to do with Jesus Christ. The cross is, in fact, pagan in origin…. Why, then, was this pagan symbol promoted? Apparently, to make it easier for pagans to accept “Christianity.”1

The Watchtower opposes not just the veneration or adoration of the cross, a practice common especially in Catholicism, but any use of the cross as a positive symbol or representation of the Christian faith. Jehovah’s Witnesses are also taught that the practice of using the cross as a symbol of Christ is inherently offensive regardless of the form it took:

Who would think of kissing the revolver that had been used by a murderer to kill one’s loved one? It is just as senseless to bestow affection on the instrument on which Jesus met a cruel death….2

In their New World Translation, the Society translates the Greek word stauros (which virtually all English versions render as “cross”) as “torture stake.”

The Watchtower’s Misuse of Scholarship on the Cross

The Watchtower Society has published many articles on the cross, citing a large number of secondary sources (especially lexical references and Christian dictionaries and encyclopedias) in seeming support of its claims regarding the nature of the cross. The main point the Society seeks to prove with these citations is that Jesus did not die on a cross (an instrument of execution using two beams of wood) but rather was executed on a single upright stake. We cannot review all of these secondary sources here. Almost all of the sources that the Watchtower cites state that the word stauros originally referred to a stake but by the first century commonly referred to the Roman instrument of execution, which typically involved two beams joined in some form. Most of these sources go on to explain that Jesus died on a cross (specifically, an upright beam with a horizontal crossbeam). Thus, nearly all of the citations the Watchtower has used over many decades to support their claim actually contradict it.

One example will have to suffice to illustrate the point. The Watchtower cites the entry on the cross in the second edition of the New Bible Dictionary as follows:

Stau·rosʹ in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a “cross” made of two timbers. It means only an upright stake, pale, pile, or pole, as might be used for a fence, stockade, or palisade. Says Douglas’ New Bible Dictionary of 1985 under “Cross,” page 253: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroo . . . ) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.”3

What the Watchtower has done here is to quote selectively from the very beginning of the dictionary entry while ignoring the rest of what it says:

The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroō; Lat. crux, crucifigo) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution. It is used in this latter sense in the NT…. Apart from the single upright post (crux simplex) on which the victim was tied or impaled, there were three types of cross. The crux commissa (St Anthony’s cross) was shaped like a capital T, thought by some to be derived from the symbol of the god Tammuz, the letter tau; the crux decussata (St Andrew’s cross was shaped like the letter X; the crux immissa was the familiar two beams , held by tradition to be the shape of the cross on which our Lord died (Irenaeus, Haer. 2.24.4). This is strengthened by the references in the four Gospels (Mt. 27:37; Mk. 15:26; Lk. 23:38; Jn 19:19-22) to the title nailed to the cross of Christ over his head.4

According to the very source the Watchtower quoted, the “primary” meaning of the word stauros as “stake” was not its only usage. It came to be used for the wooden instrument of execution that could take various specific forms, including T, X, and . The dictionary entry also offers evidence from the Gospels that Jesus was most likely executed on the last-mentioned type of cross.

A very small number of the sources that the Watchtower cites do support their contention that Jesus did not die on a cross. The most notable of these sources are E. W. Bullinger’s Lexicon (1886) and Vine’s Dictionary (1940).5 Bullinger, though a competent scholar, was a controversial theologian who was rather notorious for his extremely idiosyncratic interpretations of the Bible on various issues and for his advocacy of several dubious claims (e.g., the gospel revealed in astrology, the flat-earth theory, and more). Vine was a Plymouth Brethren educator and writer with some academic training. The claims made by Bullinger and Vine have been thoroughly debunked by more recent historical and biblical scholarship pertinent to the cross. Unfortunately, up to now the Watchtower has simply ignored such scholarship and has continued to rely heavily on these few older works as well as numerous out-of-context quotations.

Current Scholarship on the Cross

The “old” classic work of scholarship on the cross (though much more recent than almost all of the secondary sources the Watchtower cites on the subject) is a 1977 monograph by German scholar Martin Hengel. The Watchtower’s writing department cannot claim to be innocently unaware of Hengel’s work because they have cited it at least once.6 If they actually read the book they became quite aware of the abundant evidence known more than forty years ago confirming that Jesus was indeed executed on a cross.7 In addition, a number of excellent academic works dealing with crucifixion have been published in the past ten years or so. There is essentially a consensus among contemporary scholars that the Romans used a variety of crosses in crucifixion and that Jesus was probably crucified either on a crux commissa (T) or a crux immissa ().8

The main error underlying the position taken by Bullinger and Vine (and repeated by the Watchtower) is the root or etymological fallacy. This is the mistake (often found in popular “word studies” and still occasionally found in scholarly literature) of claiming that a word’s meaning is determined by or even limited to its word origin or root elements.9 We encountered this fallacy in the Watchtower’s claim that there can be only one archangel because the root element arch– means “chief.”10 Imagine someone two thousand years from now arguing that the English word bar originally denoted a pole or rod and therefore could not possibly have been used to refer to a place of business where alcoholic beverages were sold. That is the very sort of mistake made by those claiming that the word stauros originally meant a simple upright stake and therefore could not have referred to a more complex instrument of execution such as a cross.11

Multiple independent lines of evidence support the conclusion that Jesus died on some sort of cross (whether shaped like T or ).

Testimonies from Early Christian Writings

Several early Christian writings from the early second century and thereafter indicated that Jesus was executed on a cross. Contrary to the Watchtower’s claim that the cross was introduced into Christendom to accommodate pagans, one of the earliest written descriptions of Christ’s cross come from Justin Martyr, a Christian in the mid-second century who was beheaded for his faith. Justin actually gives an explicit description of the cross, which he said was formed by joining two beams of wood (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 91.2).

An even earlier description comes from the Epistle of Barnabas. The Watchtower is aware of this evidence but dismisses it on the grounds that the epistle was not written by the apostle Barnabas. They conclude that it was “written after the cross had been adopted as a symbol of Christendom,”12 which as we saw at the beginning of this article Jehovah’s Witnesses claim took place in the fourth century under the influence of the Roman emperor Constantine. However, although Barnabas was not the author, scholars date the epistle to the period AD 70-135, two centuries before Constantine.13

Another early allusion to the form of the cross comes from Ignatius of Antioch, a Christian bishop who wrote several epistles between about AD 105 and 115. True believers are “branches of the cross” bearing incorruptible fruit (Ignatius, To the Trallians 11.2). Here the “cross” is pictured as a tree with branches, apparently akin to the tree of life, though Ignatius uses the standard term “cross” and not the word “tree.” The metaphor alludes to the common form of the cross with an upright beam (the “trunk”) and a crossbeam (the “branches”).

Literary Descriptions of Crucifixion

Although ancient Greco-Roman writers generally refrained from describing crucifixion in detail, because it was a horrific and extremely shameful way to die, in various places they confirmed that it typically involved execution on a cross. We will mention just two examples here.

Plautus, in one of his Latin comedies (ca. 206-204 BC), engages in some dark humor by having the character of a slave in his story threatened with having his “hands spread out” with a “crossbar” (Latin, patibulum).14 His writings contain many other references to crucifixion, all of which are consistent with the traditional understanding.15

Epictetus, a Stoic philosopher writing in the early second century AD, scornfully described a rich man who has gotten undressed and stretched himself out to be bathed by his servants “as those who have been crucified are pressed out on this side and on that” (Discourses 3.26.22).16 This scandalous description reflects the fact that crucifixion victims were completely exposed and their arms typically stretched out on both sides.

Pagan Graffiti and Other Graphic Representations

A few graphic representations of crucifixion (produced by non-Christians) confirm the traditional understanding of crucifixion as involving the use of a crossbeam. These include a fresco in a tomb in Rome and a few instances of graffiti depicting crucified victims (most famously the Puteoli graffito).17 One of these graffiti rather clearly refers specifically to the crucifixion of Jesus. In a notorious graffito discovered in 1857 on a wall near the Palatine Hill in Rome and dated ca. AD 200, a pagan ridiculed Christianity by depicting a Christian called Alexamenos worshiping his god (with the head of an ass) on a cross.18

This “Alexamenos graffito” is important for our subject in two ways. First, of course, it attests to the fact that in the second century as far away as Rome, Jesus was understood to have died on a cross. Second, it shows that the early Christians certainly would not have invented the notion of Jesus dying on a cross in order to make Christianity more palatable to pagans. On the contrary, pagans considered the Christians’ devotion to a crucified deity something to be ridiculed. The evidence of the graffito thus refutes the Watchtower’s claim that apostate Christians introduced the cross into their religion from paganism.

The Remains of a Crucified Man

Skeletal remains of a first-century crucified man named Yehohanan (John) were found in 1968 in a cemetery in Giv‘at ha-Mivtar (in today’s east Jerusalem), including remnants of a nail still lodged in the right heel bone. The only controversy among archaeologists regarding this find was how Yehohanan’s extremities were affixed to the cross. The initial claims that his heels were nailed together by a single nail and that his wrists were nailed to the crossbeam19 were later shown to be most likely incorrect; it seems his heels were nailed separately to either side of the upright beam and that his wrists or lower arms were tied to the crossbeam.20 In any case, it was a cross—and in the same general area and time as Jesus’ execution.

The Staurogram in Early New Testament Papyri

Three New Testament papyri manuscripts from the period 175-225 abbreviate the word stauros (“cross”) using the staurogram—a symbol formed by combining the Greek letters tau (T) and rho (P). The combination of the two letters (which scholars call a ligature) formed an image that served as a graphic representation of a person on a cross. For example, instead of writing σταυρoς (stauros), the scribe in some places wrote σ.

Since the manuscripts were produced by different scribes probably independently of one another, they attest to a practice that must have predated them all. In turn, that practice attests to the fact that it was already established in Christians’ minds in the early second century (if not earlier) that Jesus had been executed on a cross.21

Summary of the Evidence

From these varied lines of evidence from geographically diverse locations22 and coming from different types of sources (both literary and archaeological) we may confidently draw the following conclusions:

(1) The Romans did indeed crucify people in the time of Jesus using crossbeams.
(2) Both Christians and non-Christians from at least the early second century agreed that Jesus had been crucified in that manner.
(3) Christians did not borrow the idea of a cross from paganism. Rather, it was a form of execution used by the pagan Romans. Christians would certainly not have invented the idea that Jesus was crucified.
(4) Although the cross became a prominent, public symbol of Christianity after Constantine, its use as a Christian symbol goes back to within a century or so of the time of Christ. 

Biblical Response

The New Testament provides no direct description of the cross on which Jesus died. However, several details in the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ execution confirm that he died on some sort of cross. 

  1. When Thomas heard from the other disciples that Jesus had risen from the dead, Thomas replied that he would not believe it unless he saw “in his hands the mark of the nails” (John 20:25). This comment indicates that (at least) two nails were used to affix Jesus’ hands to the instrument of his execution. This fact almost certainly means that each of Jesus’ two hands was nailed separately rather than being nailed together with one nail or spike (as depicted consistently in the artwork in Watchtower literature). By far the most plausible explanation for how this was done is that his hands were nailed to a crossbeam.
  2. According to the Gospels, the Romans forced a man named Simon of Cyrene to carry Jesus’ cross (stauros) for him to Golgotha (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26).23 It is very unlikely that a criminal or any one man carried the upright poles to the place of execution. They would have been too heavy for the typical man to carry by himself, and they would then have to be planted firmly in the ground before the execution could take place. Hence, most scholars understand the word stauros in this context to refer specifically to the crossbeam, what was known in Latin as the patibulum.24 Ironically, what this means is that the Watchtower is half-right: In at least some places in the New Testament, the word stauros does refer to a single pole or beam, but in these contexts it is referring to the crossbeam that was attached to the upright beam or post.
  3. The placement of an inscription specifying the crime for which Jesus had been found guilty (known in Latin as the titulus) on the cross “over his head” (Matt. 27:37; Luke 23:38) provides some information of relevance. It rules out the so-called St. Andrew’s Cross (shaped like the letter X) as the form of cross on which Jesus died. Many scholars think the titulus being placed above Jesus’ head supports the conclusion that the cross was a crux immissa or four-armed cross (shaped like ). If the crossbeam or patibulum was above Jesus’ head (with his arms stretched diagonally away from his body), it might have been a crux commissa (shaped like the capital T). Had it been a simple upright beam with no crossbeam, Jesus’ hands would have been impaled well above his head, making the upright pole very tall (and reducing further the likelihood of any one man carrying it out of the city). Moreover, one would have expected Matthew and Luke to say that the inscription was placed above Jesus’ hands, if (as the Watchtower claims) Jesus’ hands were nailed together directly over his head. Thus, the placement of the titulus above Jesus’ head is another bit of evidence that Jesus was executed on a cross.

The Watchtower’s argument that true Christians would not cherish the instrument of Christ’s death regardless of its form misses an important element of New Testament teaching. Christians have no love for crucifixion itself, but they do love the Crucified One. We love, cherish, and honor Christ for his sacrificial act of submitting himself to crucifixion on our behalf.

The apostle Paul teaches us in his epistles that the cross of Christ is central to the Christian faith. Paul referred to his message as “the word of the cross” (1 Cor. 1:18) and could sum up his message in the two words “Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23; 2:2). Christ’s death and resurrection are the essential historical events confessed in the gospel (1 Cor. 15:3-4). Those who oppose the true Christian faith are “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:18). When true Christians are persecuted, it is not for their culturally idiosyncratic practices but “for the cross of Christ” (Gal. 6:12). Paul even taught us to boast or glory in the cross of Christ:

But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal. 6:14 ESV).

Sadly, the Watchtower’s polemic against the cross obscures the very heart of the gospel.


1. “Why True Christians Do Not Use the Cross in Worship,” in What Does the Bible Really Teach? (Watchtower, 2005), 204, 205. See also “Did Christ Die on a Cross?” Watchtower (March 15, 1957): 167.

2. Ibid., 168.

3. “Impalement,” in Insight on the Scriptures (Watchtower, 1988), 1:1191, ellipsis in original.

4. J. B. T., “Cross, Crucifixion,” in New Bible Dictionary, ed. J. D. Douglas, 2nd ed. (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), 253 (253–54).

5. Ethelbert W. Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to The English and Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (London: Longmans, Green, 1895 [1886]), 818–19; W. E. Vine, A Comprehensive Dictionary of the Original Greek Words with their Precise Meanings for English Readers (McLean, VA: MacDonald Publishing, reprint [1940]), 258–59. This work was later retitled and later still combined with a similar work on the Old Testament (which is generally more reliable than Vine’s New Testament work). The combination work is known as Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, ed. Merrill F. Unger and William White Jr., rev. ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1985; with Topical Index, 1996).

6. “Resist the Pressure of Public Opinion,” Watchtower (Aug. 15, 2010): 14.

7. Martin Hengel, Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).

8. Most notably David W. Chapman, Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion, WUNT 2/244 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010); John Granger Cook, Crucifixion in the Mediterranean World, WUNT 327 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014); and David W. Chapman and Eckhard J. Schnabel, The Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus: Texts and Commentary, WUNT 344 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015); Bruce W. Longenecker, The Cross before Constantine: The Early Life of a Christian Symbol (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015).

9. James Barr, Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), 107–60; D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 28–33; Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, rev. and expanded ed. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 84–89.

10. See Robert M. Bowman Jr., “Is Jesus Michael the Archangel? Answers to Jehovah’s Witnesses #7” (Cedar Springs, MI: Institute for Religious Research, 2018).

11. Cf. Chapman, Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion, 11 and n. 47.

12. “Did Christ Die on a Cross,” 166.

13. See also Longenecker, The Cross before Constantine, 62-64.

14. Quoted in Chapman and Schnabel, Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus, 283–84.

15. See Cook, Crucifixion in the Mediterranean World, 52–57.

16. Quoted in Chapman and Schnabel, Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus, 312; see also Cook, Crucifixion in the Mediterranean World, 272-73.

17. See especially John Granger Cook, “Crucifixion as Spectacle in Roman Campania.” Novum Testamentum 54 (2012): 68–100.

18. A convenient roundup of images and drawings of the graffito may be seen in the blog note by Ronald V. Huggins, “A Place for Alexamenos Palatine Graffito (Stuff),” March 24, 2013. See also Longenecker, The Cross before Constantine, 73–75.

19. Nico Haas, “Anthropological Observations on the Skeletal Remains from Giv’at ha-Mivtar,” Israel Exploration Journal 20 (1970): 38–59.

20. Joseph Zias and Eliezer Sekeles, “The Crucified Man from Giv‘at ha-Mivtar: A Reappraisal,” Israel Exploration Journal 35 (1985): 22–27. See also John J. Davis, “Rethinking the Crucified Man from Giv‘at ha-Mivtar,” Bible and Spade (Fall 2002).

21. See especially Larry W. Hurtado, “The Staurogram in Early Christian Manuscripts: The Earliest Visual Reference to the Crucified Jesus?” in New Testament Manuscripts: Their Text and Their World, ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 207–26; cf. the brief but helpful overview in Longenecker, The Cross before Constantine, 106–110.

22. Cf. Longenecker, The Cross before Constantine, 163–66.

23. John 19:17 states that Jesus carried his own cross. Traditionally, these statements have been understood to mean that Jesus left Pilate’s presence carrying the cross and then on the way Simon of Cyrene was enlisted to carry it the rest of the way.

24. Chapman and Schnabel, Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus, 282–92.


In a recent encounter that he had with Christian apologist Anthony Rogers one Message Foundation’s chief dawagandist Uthman ibn Farooq employed the same dishonest and deceitful tactics perfected by his god and “prophet”.

When Rogers mentioned the hadith stating that the Quran will appear on the day of resurrection as a pale man to intercede for Muslims, Farooq deceptively argued that this narration was weak and therefore not authentic. Watch the following video for the details: “Shaykh Uthman Caught LYING About the Quran Becoming a Pale Man!” (

In this post I will present the evidence proving the authenticity of this report.

According to the so-called reliable narrations attributed to Muhammad, the Quran and its individual surahs are living, conscious agents that will manifest visibly at the last day for the express purpose of interceding for all of those that have faithfully recited the Muslim scripture:

Abu Umama said he heard Allah’s Messenger say: Recite the Qur’an, for on the Day of Resurrection it will come as an intercessor for those who recite It. Recite the two bright ones, al-Baqara and Surah Al ‘Imran, for on the Day of Resurrection they will come as two clouds or two shades, or two flocks of birds in ranks, pleading for those who recite them. Recite Surah al-Baqara, for to take recourse to it is a blessing and to give it up is a cause of grief, and the magicians cannot confront it. (Mu’awiya said: It has been conveyed to me that here Batala means magicians.) (Sahih Muslim, Book 004, Number 1757:

Jami` at-Tirmidhi

45 Chapters on The Virtues of the Qur’an

Narrated Abu Hurairah:

that the Prophet said: “The one who memorized the Qur’an shall come on the Day of Judgement AND (the reward for reciting the Qur’an) SAYS: ‘O Lord! Decorate him.” So he is donned with a crown of nobility. Then IT says: ‘O Lord! Give him more!‘ So he is donned with a suit of nobility. Then IT says: “O Lord! Be pleased with him.’ So He is pleased with him and says: “Recite and rise up, and be increased in reward with every Ayah.'”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam)

English translation: Vol. 5, Book 42, Hadith 2915

Arabic reference: Book 45, Hadith 3164 (; emphasis mine)

Narrated by Abdullah ibn Amr:

Allah’s Messenger said, “Fasting and the Qur’an intercede for a man. Fasting says, ‘O my Lord, I have kept him away from his food and his passions by day, so accept my intercession for him.’ The Qur’an SAYS, ‘I HAVE KEPT HIM AWAY from sleep by night, so accept my intercession for him.’ Then their intercession is accepted.”

Bayhaqi transmitted it in Shu’ab al-Iman. (Jami ‘At-Tirmidhi, Hadith Number 1963:; see also the following English version of this same hadith:; bold and capital emphasis mine)

In reports classified as hasan (“good”), Muhammad is said to have believed that the Quran will appear as a man:

It was narrated that Buraydah said: I heard the Prophet say: “The Qur’an will meet its companion on the Day of Resurrection when his grave is opened for him, IN THE FORM OF A PALE MAN. IT WILL SAY TO HIM, ‘Do you recognize me?’ He will say: ‘I do not recognize you.’ IT WILL SAY: ‘I am your companion the Qur’an, who kept you thirsty on hot days and kept you awake at night. Every merchant benefits from his business and today you will benefit from your good deeds.’ He will be given dominion in his right hand and eternity in his left, and there will be placed on his head a crown of dignity, and his parents will be clothed with priceless garments the like of which have never been seen in this world. They will say: ‘Why have we been clothed with this?’ It will be said: ‘Because your son used to recite Qur’an.’ Then it will be said to him: ‘Recite and ascend in the degrees of Paradise,’ and he will continue to ascend so long as he recites, either at a fast pace or a slow pace.”

Narrated by Ahmad in al-Musnad (394) and Ibn Maajah in al-Sunan (3781); classed as HASAN by al-Busayri in al-Zawaa’id and by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (2829). (Islam Question & Answer, Number 93151. Good deeds appear in the form of a man in the grave – Islam; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Here is the English translation of Ibn Majah’s narration:

3781. It was narrated from Ibn Buraidah that his father told that the Messenger of Allah said: “The Qur’an will come on the Day of Resurrection, LIKE A PALE MAN, AND WILL SAY: ‘I am the one that kept you awake at night and made you thirsty during the day.’” (HASAN) (English Translation of Sunan Ibn Majah – Compiled by Imam Muhammad Bin Yazeed Ibn Majah Al-Qazwini, From Hadith No. 3657 to 4341, Ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i, translated by Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Canada), final review by Abu Khalil (USA), [Darussalam Publications and Distributors, First Edition: June 2007], Volume 5, Chapters on Etiquette, Chapter 52. The Rewards Associated With Qur’an, pp. 68-69; capital emphasis mine)

To top it off, the Islamic ahadith expressly state that the Quran and its individual surahs pray to and worship Allah as their very Lord!

Khalid b. Ma‘dan said: RECITE THE RESCUER, which is A.L.M. The sending down,3 for I have heard that a man who had committed many sins used to recite it and nothing else. It spread its wings over him AND SAID, ‘MY LORD, forgive him, for he often used to RECITE ME;’ so the Lord Most High MADE IT AN INTERCESSOR for him and said, ‘Record for him a good deed and raise him a degree in place of every sin.’ Khalid said: IT WILL DISPUTE on behalf of the one who RECITES IT when he is in the grave SAYING, ‘O God, if I am a part of Thy Book, make me AN INTERCESSOR for him; but if I am not a part of Thy Book, blot me out of it.’ It will be like a bird putting its wing on him, IT WILL INTERCEDE for him and will protect him from the punishment in the grave. He said the same about ‘Blessed is He.’4 Khalid did not go to sleep at night till he had recited them. Ta’us said they were given sixty virtues more than any other sura in the Qur’an.

Darimi transmitted.”

3. Qur’an, xxxii.

4. Qur’an, lxvii. (Mishkat Al-Masabih, English Translation With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson [Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990], Volume II, Book VIII. The Excellent Qualities of the Qur’an, Chapter I, p. 459; bold and capital emphasis mine)

The following online Salafi website quotes reputable scholars such as al-Bukhari to prove that the narration of the Quran appearing as a man is a sound hadith:

And it was narrated from Buraydah that the Prophet said: “The Qur’aan will come on the Day of Resurrection, like a pale man, and will say: I am the one that kept you awake at night and made you thirsty during the day” Narrated by Ibn Majaah (3781); classed AS SAHEEH by al-Busayri in al-Zawaa’id and by Ibn Hajar in al-Mataalib al-‘Aaliyah (4/66). Al-Albaani said in Da’eef Ibn Majaah: It is da’eef but may be classed as hasan. It was classed as hasan because of the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (2829). (Islam Question & Answer, Number 91306. Doubts about the creation of the Qur’aan; bold and capital emphasis mine) 


It was narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf (30667), Ibn Qutaybah in Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadeeth (p. 258), Ibn ad-Durays in Fadaa’il al-Qur’an (89), via Muhammad ibn Ishaaq, from ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, from his father, that his grandfather said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say:

“The Qur’an will appear on the Day of Resurrection in the form of a man who will bring the man who learned it but went against its commands. It will appear as a disputant against him and will say: O Lord, You made him learn about me but what a bad learner he was; he transgressed my limits, neglected my obligations, disobeyed me and did not obey me. It will keep throwing accusations at him until it is said: Do what you like with him. Then it will take him by the hand and will not let him go until it throws him onto a rock in Hell. And it will bring a righteous man who learned it and adhered to its teachings. It will appear as a defendant and will say: O Lord, You made him learn about me and what a good learner he was; he respected my limits, did the obligatory duties, avoided the sins mentioned in me and obeyed my instructions. And it will keep presenting arguments in his favour until it is said: Do what you like with him. Then it will take him by the hand and will not let him go until it dresses him in brocade and puts on him the crown of a king.” 

This is a da‘eef (weak) isnaad, because Ibn Ishaaq is mudallis and used the word ‘an (narrating from, i.e., he did not state clearly that he heard it directly). But al-Bukhaari said in his book Khalq Af‘aal al-‘Ibaad (474)

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr narrated from the Prophet: “The Qur’an will appear in the form of a man on the Day of Resurrection and will intercede for its companions.”

Zuhayr ibn Harb told me: Ya‘qoob ibn Ibraaheem told us: my father told me from Ibn Ishaaq, and ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr told me, from his father, from his grandfather: I heard this from the Prophet. Abu ‘Abdullah (i.e., al-Bukhaari) said: “This is his earnings and his deeds.” End quote. 

So it is proven that Ibn Ishaaq heard the hadeeth from ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, thus the hadeeth IS PROVEN

The words “The Qur’an will appear on the Day of Resurrection…” mean that his recitation of the Qur’an will appear to him… 

It was narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah (30676) and ad-Daarimi (3325) from ash-Sha‘bi, from Ibn Mas‘ood who said: “The Qur’an will come on the Day of Resurrection and will intercede for its companion, and it will lead him to Paradise, or it will testify against (a person) and will drive him to Hell. Ash-Sha‘bi did not hear from Ibn Mas‘ood, as it says in al-Maraaseel by Ibn Abi Haatim (p. 25). 

But there is a corroborating report that says: “The Qur’an is an intercessor whose intercession will be accepted and an opponent whose testimony will be accepted. Whoever puts it in front of him, it will lead him to Paradise, and whoever puts it behind his back, it will drive him to Hell.” 

This was narrated via a number of isnaads from Ibn Mas‘ood. See: Fadaa’il al-Qur’an  by al-Firyaabi (20); Fadaa’il al-Qur’an by Abu ‘Ubayd (44); Fadaa’il al-Qur’an by Ibn Durays (94); az-Zuhd by Imam Ahmad (p. 155); Shu‘ab al-Eemaan by al-Bayhaqi (2010); al-Mu‘jam al-Kabeer by at-Tabaraani (8655). 

From the above it is clear that just as the Qur’an will testify for its companions on the Date of Resurrection, it will also testify against those who went against it. (Islam Question & Answer, Question 196054. Will the Qur’an testify, on the Day of Resurrection; bold and capital emphasis mine)

One of Islam’s greatest theologians and philosophers al-Ghazali even went as far as to argue that these reports of the Quran appearing as a man are to be interpreted literally, not metaphorically or symbolically:

“The great wonders of the day of judgment continue as every thing and every concept existent on earth appears in human form. The Quran APPEARS AS A MAN WITH A BEAUTIFUL FACE AND FIGURE. Similarly, the Islamic religion, din, emerges as a person – an idea somewhat resembling daena, the female personification of the ‘visionary soul’ (who guides the deceased along a narrow path to the other world) in Zoroastrianism. The world comes into sight as a hoary old woman and people are told: ‘This is the world, over which you used to envy and hate each other!’ Likewise, Friday, the day of the Muslim communal prayer, approaches ‘in the image of a bride being led in processions, as lovely as can be.’

“Al-Ghazali emphasizes that these personifications of things and ideas ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY, even though acceptance of such an understanding in the here and now may be difficult. He insists that these personifications are NOT MERELY SYMBOLIC and explains that, with their physical representation in the material world, expressions such as earth, Islam, the Quran, prayer, fasting, and patience refer to real and solid things, while their innermost nature, they belong to the spiritual world. Therefore, the Quran EXISTS ‘AS A PERSON’ and Islam ‘as something spiritual’ through the will of Almighty God. Whosoever recognizes this truth will encourage a literal understanding of the scripture and a spiritual approach to the world. This is why literalists would never speak of the ‘creation of the Quran,’ as the rationalist sect of the Jahmis does. The author of The Precious Pearl maintains that the Jahmis (apparently a derogatory or code word for Mu’tazilis) are ignorant of the spiritual reality of existence and in error when they argue, ‘the soul is annihilated at death.’” (Sebastian Guenther, Roads to Paradise: Eschatology and Concepts of the Hereafter in Islam (2 vols) [BRILL Publications, 2017], Volume 1, Sebastian Gunther, 9. The Poetics of Islamic Eschatology: Narrative, Personification, and Colors in Muslim Discourse, p. 207; bold and capital emphasis mine)

This explains why, unlike ibn Farooq, we find bonafide Muslim scholars referencing this report and deeming it to be absolutely authentic:

 7 – The Qur’aan will intercede for him with his Lord. 

It was narrated that Abu Umaamah al-Baahili said: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah say, ‘Recite the Qur’aan, for it will come on the Day of Resurrection to intercede for its companions. Recite the two bright ones, al-Baqarah and Soorat Aal ‘Imraan, for they will come on the Day of Resurrection like two clouds or two shades or two flocks of birds in ranks, pleading for those who recite them. Recite Soorat al-Baqarah for to take recourse to it is a blessing and to give it up is a cause of grief, and the magicians cannot confront it.”

(Narrated by Muslim, 804, and by al-Bukhaari in a mu’allaq report). 


With regard to his relatives and descendents, there is evidence concerning his parents that they will be clothed with garments which far surpass everything to be found in this world, and that will only be because they took care of and taught their child. Even if they themselves were ignorant, Allaah will honour them because of their child. But the one who prevented his child from learning the Qur’aan, he will be one of those who are deprived. 

It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: “The Messenger of Allaah said: ‘The Qur’aan will come on the Day of Resurrection like a pale man saying to its companion, “Do you recognize me? I am the one who made you stay up at night and made you thirsty during the day…” Then he will be given dominion in his right hand and eternity in his left, and a crown of dignity will be placed upon his head, and his parents will be clothed with garments which far surpass everything to be found in this world. They will say, “O Lord, how did we earn this.” It will be said to them, “Because you taught your child the Qur’aan.”’”

(Narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Awsat, 6/51). 

It was narrated that Buraydah said: “The Messenger of Allaah said: ‘Whoever reads the Qur’aan, learns it and acts in accordance with it, on the Day of Resurrection his parents will be given a crown to wear whose light will be like the light of the sun, and his parents will be given garments which far surpass everything to be found in this world. They will say, “Why have we been given this to wear?” It will be said, “Because your child learned the Qur’aan.”’”

(Narrated by al-Haakim, 1/756)

These two hadeeth support one another. See al-Silsilah al-Saheehah, 2829. (Islam Question & Answer, Number 14035. The advantages of the haafiz in this world and in the Hereafter; bold emphasis mine) 

Consider the Hadeeth (narration) of the Messenger of Allah: “Recite the Quran, because it will come as an intercessor for its reciter on the Day of Judgment.” [Muslim]… 

What was reported about the virtue of some Surahs, like Al-Baqarah (the Cow) [Qur’an 2], and al-‘Imraan [Quran 3], and that they come on the Day of Resurrection like two clouds, then it means that on the Day of Resurrection they will really come as such.

Ibn Batah said in al-Ibaanah:

“Al-Jahmiyyah misinterpreted the Ahadeeth and misled those who do not know the Hadeeth, such as the Hadeeth that reads: “The Qur’an will come on the Day of Resurrection, like a pale man, and will say: ‘I am the one that kept you awake at night and made you thirsty during the day.” Then the Qur’an will say to Allah: “O, yes, my Lord; he recited me, knew my meaning, and acted according to me.” And the other Hadeeth that reads: “Surah al-Baqara and AI-‘Imran will come [i.e. on the Day of Resurrection] like two clouds, or two black canopies with light between them.” So, they misinterpreted them. Rather, the meaning in these Ahadeeth “The Quran will come, al-Baqarah will come, the prayer will come, the fasting will come; is that the reward of all this will come. All this is clarified in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah. Allah Says (what means): {So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it…} [Qur’an 99:7-8] The apparent meaning is that the person does not see the good (itself) and the evil (itself); rather, he sees their reward: their recompense and their punishment.” [End of quote] (Severe Whispers about the Quran and Matters of Kufr)

Note carefully that Ibn Batah did not claim that the report is inauthentic, but that it was being misinterpreted. And:

In an AUTHENTIC Hadeeth, the Messenger of Allah said:

“The Quran will meet its companion on the Day of Judgment once he comes out of the grave AS A PALE MAN, and he will say, ‘Do you recognize me? I am your companion, the Quran, that made you thirsty during the scorching heat of the day, and sleepless at night (because of your long recitation of me). Every trader seeks to make profit from his trade, and now, you are getting the profit of your trade.’ He will be given the dominion in his right hand, and eternity in his left hand and the crown of gravity will be placed on his head. Then, it will be said to him, ‘Recite and ascend the stairs and chambers of Paradise.’ He will keep ascending as long as he is reciting, whether with quick recitation or with measured recitation.”

(WWW.ISLAMWEB.NET The Real Meaning of Striving in Ramadan; bold and capital emphasis mine)

The foregoing exposes Uthman ibn Farooq’s shameless lie that the hadith of the Quran appearing as a living, conscious white male person is weak.

The problem gets even worse for this dishonest Muhammadan.

Not only did Farooq’s false prophet smother a black stone venerated by the pagans before him,

It is Sunnah to perform certain acts in tawaf as given below:

Facing the Black Stone at the start of the tawaf while uttering a takbir (Allahu-Akbar), and a tahlil (La ilaha illahlah), and raising one’s hands as they are raised in prayers, and if possible touching it with both hands and kissing it quietly, or placing one’s cheek on it. Otherwise, one may touch it with one’s hand and kiss the hand, or touch it with something, and then kiss it, or if even that is not possible, one may just point to it with a stick, etc. as is mentioned in some of the ahadith given below.

Ibn ‘Umar said: “Allah’s Messenger faced the Black Stone, touched it, and then placed his lips on itand wept for a long time.” ‘Umar also wept for a long time. The Prophet said: ‘O ‘Umar, this is the place where one should shed tears.” (Reported by Al-Hakim, who considers it a sound hadith with a sound chain of authorities)

It is reported by Ibn ‘Abbas that ‘Umar bent down towards the Black Stone and said: “By Allah! I know that you are A MERE STONE, and if I had not seen my beloved Prophet kissing you and touching you I would have never done so.” The Qur’an says: “You have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct).”‘ (Qur’an 33.32) This was reported by Ahmad and others in slightly different words.

Nafi’ said, “I have seen Ibn ‘Umar touching the Black Stone with his hand, and then kissing his hand and saying: ‘Ever since I saw the Prophet doing this, I have never failed to do that.”’ (Reported by Bukhari and Muslim)

Sowayd bin Ghaflah said: “I have seen ‘Umar kissing the Black Stone and touching it.” He further said: “I know that the Prophet was especially very particular about it.” (Muslim)

Ibn ‘Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger used to come to Ka’bah, touch the Black Stone and then say: Bismillahi wallahu akbar (In the name of Allah, Allah is the Greatest.)” (Ahmad)

Muslim has reported on the authority of Abu Tufail that he said: “I have seen the Prophet making tawaf around the Ka’bah and touching it with a stick and then kissing the stick.”

Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Daw’ud reported that ‘Umar approached the Black Stone and kissed it. Then he said: “I know that you are A MERE STONE that can neither harm nor do any good. If I had not seen the Prophet kissing you, I would have never kissed you.”

Al-Khatabi said: “This shows that abiding by the Sunnah of the Prophet is binding, regardless of whether or not we understand its reason or the wisdom behind it.”

Such information devolves obligation on all those whom it reaches, even if they may not fully comprehend its significance. It is known, however, that kissing the Black Stone signifies respect for it, recognition of our obligation toward it, and using it as a means of seeking Allah’s blessings. Indeed Allah has preferred some stones over others, as He preferred some countries and cities, days and nights, and months over others. The underlying spirit of all this is unquestioning submission to Allah.

In some ahadith which say that “the Black Stone is Allah’s right hand on earth,” we do find, however, a plausible rationale and justification for this statement. In other words whosoever touches the Black Stone he pledges allegiance to Allah, as it were, by giving his hand into the hand of Allah, just as some followers do pledge their fealty to their kings and masters, by kissing and shaking hands with them.

Al-Muhallib said: “The hadith of ‘Umar refutes the assertions of those who say that ‘The Black Stone is Allah’s right hand on earth wherewith He shakes the hands of His slaves.’” God forbid that we should ascribe any physical organs to Allah [sic]. The commandment to kiss the Black Stone is meant to test and to demonstrate palpably as to who obeys and submits. It may be compared with the command to Iblis to bow to Adam.

We have no definite evidence, however, to believe that any of the stones used in building the Ka’bah originally (by Ibrahim and Isma’il), is still in existence today excepting the Black Stone. (Sayyid Saabiq, Fiqh-Us-Sunnah, Volume 5: Tawaf or Circumambulation around Ka’bah, Number 74b; bold, capital, and italicized emphasis mine)

He also believed that this pagan relic would come alive on the day of judgment in order to intercede for every one that smothered it like Muhammad was fond of doing!  

2944. Sa’d b. Jubairis reported to have said, “I heard Ibn ‘Abbas saying that Allah’s Messenger said, “This Stone must come on the Day of Resurrection and it will have two eyes to see with and a tongue to talk with bearing witness for him who CARASSED IT with Truth (Islam).”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam) (Sunan Ibn-I-Majah (Imam Abu Abdullah Muhammad b. Yazid Ibn-I-Maja Al-Qazwini), English version by Muhammad Tufail Ansari [Kazi Publications, Lahore (Pakistan), 1st edition 1995], Volume IV, Chapter NO. XVII: Caressing The (Black) Stone (Fixed in a Wall of Ka’ba), pp. 244-245; bold and capital emphasis mine)


9 The Book on Hajj

(113) Chapter: What Has Been Related About The Black Stone

Ibn Abbas narrated that: The Messenger of Allah said about the (Black) Stone: “By Allah! Allah will raise it on the Day of Resurrection with two eyes by which it sees and a tongue that it speaks with, testifying to whoever TOUCHED IT in truth.”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam)

Reference: Jami` at-Tirmidhi 961

In-book reference: Book 9, Hadith 155

English translation: Vol. 2, Book 4, Hadith 961 (; bold and capital emphasis mine)

The foregoing poses a dilemma for Muhammadans such as ibn Farooq since this shows that Islam is anything but monotheistic.

Muhammad’s view that the Quran is the uncreated speech of Allah that could appear as a man in order to intercede with its Lord, and whose individual surahs are all living conscious beings that could manifest visibly and separately, leads to the inevitable conclusion that there are at least 115 eternal divine beings. I.e., Allah and the 114 surahs of the Quran are all uncreated by nature, and are personally distinct and separate from one another, leaving Muhammadans such as ibn Farooq with 115 alihah (“gods”).

When we then add the pagan black stone to the mix, ibn Farooq is left with 116 divine beings, 115 of whom are Islam’s real saviors since they are the ones who defend Muhammadans such as Uthman against Allah, insuring their salvation and entrance into paradise.

Hence, ibn Farooq’s shahadah should really be: “There is no ilah (‘god’) except Allah, the Quran along with its 114 surahs, and the black stone, with Muhammad being the human manifestation and alternate ego of Allah.”     


Revisiting The Issue of the Uncreated Quran Pt. 1

Muhammad’s Incorporation of Satan’s Handiwork

The Islamic Gods Unveiled Pt. 2


Muhammad believed that virtually everything had consciousness. For instance, he thought there was a primal womb that spoke with Allah:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, “Allah created the creations, and when He finished from His creations, Ar-Rahm, i.e., WOMB, SAID, ‘(O Allah) at this place I seek refuge with You from all those who sever me (i.e. sever the ties of Kith and kin).’ Allah said, ‘Yes, won’t you be pleased that I will keep good relations with the one who will keep good relations with you, and I will sever the relation with the one who will sever the relations with you?’ IT SAID, ‘Yes, O my Lord.’ Allah said, ‘Then that is for you.’” Allah’s Apostle added. “Read (in the Qur’an) if you wish, the Statement of Allah: ‘Would you then, if you were given the authority, do mischief in the land and sever your ties of kinship?’ (47.22)” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 16


Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “Allah created the creation, and when He finished from His creation the Rahm (womb) GOT UP, and Allah said (to it): ‘Stop! What do you want?’ IT SAID: ‘At this place I seek refuge with You from all those who sever me (i.e. sever the ties of Kinship.)’ Allah said: ‘Would you be pleased that I will keep good relation with the one who will keep good relation with you, and I will sever the relation with the one who will sever the relation with you?’ IT SAID: ‘Yes, ‘O my Lord.’ Allah said (to it), ‘That is for you.’” And then Abu Huraira recited the Verse:– “Would you then if you were given the authority, do mischief in the land, and sever your ties of kinship.” (47.22) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 593

Renowned Muslim expositor Ibn Kathir cites a particular narration which states that this specific womb actually clutched Allah’s lower garment!

<spread corruption on earth, and sever your ties of kinship> …

<Such are the ones whom Allah has cursed, so He has made them deaf and blinded their vision.> This involves a general prohibition of spreading corruption on earth, and a specific prohibition of severing the ties of kinship. In fact, Allah has commanded the people to establish righteousness on earth, as well as to join the ties of kinship by treating the relatives well in speech, actions, and spending wealth in charity. Many authentic and sound Hadiths have been reported through numerous routes of transmission from Allah’s Messenger in this regard. Al-Bukhari recorded from Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<“After Allah completed creating the creation, THE WOMB STOOD UP AND PULLED AT THE LOWER GARMENT OF THE MOST MERCIFUL. He said, ‘Stop that!’ IT REPLIED, ‘My stand here is the stand of one seeking refuge in you from severance of ties.’ Allah said, ‘Would it not please you that I join whoever joins you and sever whoever severs you’ IT REPLIED, ‘Yes indeed!’ He said, ‘You are granted that!’”>> Abu Hurayrah then added, “Read if you wish…

<So would you perhaps, if you turned away, spread corruption on earth, and sever your ties of kinship> Then Al-Bukhari recorded it with another wording which states that the Messenger of Allah said…

<<Read if you wish: (So would you perhaps, if you turned away, spread corruption on earth, and sever your ties of kinship)>> Muslim also recorded it. Imam Ahmad recorded from Abu Bakrah, that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<No sin deserves that Allah hasten its punishment in the worldly life, in addition to what He reserves in the Hereafter for those who commit it, more than injustice and severance of the ties of kinship.>> This was also recorded by Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Majah. At-Tirmidhi said, “This Hadith is Sahih.” Imam Ahmad recorded from Thawban that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<Whoever likes for his life to be extended, and his provision increased, let him connect his ties of kinship.>> Ahmad was alone in recording this narration, but it has a supporting narration in the Sahih. Imam Ahmad recorded from `Abdullah bin `Amr that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<Verily, the womb is attached to the Throne. And connecting its ties does not mean dealing evenly (with the kinsfolk), but it rather means that if one’s kinsfolk sever the ties, he connects them.>> This Hadith was also recorded by Al-Bukhari. Ahmad also recorded from `Abdullah bin `Amr, may Allah be pleased with him, that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<The womb will be placed on the Day of Resurrection, curved like a spinning wheel, speaking with an eloquent fluent tongue, calling to severing whoever had severed it, and joining whoever had joined it.>> .Imam Ahmad recorded from `Abdullah bin `Amr, may Allah be pleased with him, that Allah’s Messenger said…

<<The merciful ones will be granted mercy from the Most Merciful. Have mercy on those on earth — the One above the heavens will then have mercy on you. And Ar-Rahim (the womb) is from Ar-Rahman, so whoever joins it, it joins him; and whoever severs it, it severs him.>> Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi both recorded this Hadith and it has been reported with continuous chains of transmission. At-Tirmidhi said, “Hasan Sahih.” There are numerous other Hadiths in this regard. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 47:22; bold, capital, and underline emphasis mine)

Notice how the womb stood up to clutch Allah’s garment, which means that the womb must have had an arm; otherwise how could it clutch anything?

It further shows that Allah is either a physical being by nature since he wears a garment, or that he assumes a tangible form of some kind. To top it off, this womb is attached to Allah’s throne!

The translator of Sahih al-Bukhari, Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, has this interesting footnote to the hadith of the sun prostrating before Allah’s throne:

The procedure of the sun mentioned in this Hadith and similar other things mentioned in the Qur’an like the prostration of the trees, herbs and stars (V. 55:6) are beyond our limited knowledge of this universe. It is interpreted that these are mentioned so because of the limited understanding of the people at that time about matters of the universe. (Bold emphasis mine)

In fact, there are other narrations that specifically teach that inanimate objects actually have intellect, emotions, can speak etc., such as the following:

It was narrated by Muhammad Ibn Tarif, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Fadil, narrated by Abu Hayan, narrated by Atta, narrated by Ibn Umar who said, “We were with the prophet on a journey when we were approached by a Bedouin.

When the prophet saw him he said to him, ‘To where are you heading?’ The Bedouin said, ‘To my family.’ The prophet asked, ‘Do you wish to have a good thing?’ The Bedouin asked, ‘What would that be?’ The prophet replied, ‘To bear witness that there is no god but Allah alone, who has no partners and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger.’

The Bedouin asked, ‘And who will testify to what you say?’ The prophet answered, ‘This tree will.’ So the prophet called to the tree that was in a valley by the seashore and it came to him, crawling on the ground until it stood up right between his hands. So the prophet made the tree say the Shahada three times and then it returned to where it was planted before.

The Bedouin then returned to his people and said, ‘If they follow me I will bring them (to Muhammad) otherwise I will return to him myself.” (Sunan Al-Darimi, written by Ibn Kathir, Hadith number 16, Section One: The Introduction, Entry title: “What Allah has graced His prophet with that which causes trees, animals and Jinn to believe in him”)

Here is a tree which actually recited the shahada, the Muslim confession of faith, which presupposes that it has a voice box! And:

Narrated Abdullah bin Umar:
I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “The Jews will fight with you, and you will be given victory over them so that a stone will say, ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me; kill him!’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 791; see also Book 52, Number 177)

Narrated AbuHurayrah:
Allah’s Apostle said: The Last Hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews. (Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6985

Not only do impersonal objects like trees and stones, they can also cry and prostrate as well!

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet used to stand by a stem of a date-palm tree (while delivering a sermon). When the pulpit was placed for him we heard that stem crying like a pregnant she-camel till the Prophet got down from the pulpit and placed his hand over it. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 13, Number 41

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet used to stand by a tree or a date-palm on Friday. Then an Ansari woman or man said. “O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we make a pulpit for you?” He replied, “If you wish.” So they made a pulpit for him and when it was Friday, he proceeded towards the pulpit (for delivering the sermon). The date-palm cried like a child! The Prophet descended (the pulpit) and embraced it while it continued moaning like a child being quietened. The Prophet said, “It was crying for (missing) what it used to hear of religious knowledge given near to it.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 784

Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas’ud
The Prophet said: On the night of my Ascent (Mi’raj) I met Abraham and he said to me: Muhammad, convey my salam to your people and tell them that Paradise is a vast plain of pure soil and sweet water and that its TREES CRY: Holy is Allah, all praise is due to Allah, there is none worthy of worship save Allah, and Allah is Great.

Transmitted by Tirmidhi. (Hadith of al-Tirmidhi, Number 439

Narrated Aisha
Once when Allah’s Messenger was with a number of the Emigrants and Helpers a camel came and prostrated itself before him. Thereupon his companions said, “Messenger of Allah beasts and TREES prostrate themselves before you, but we have the greatest right to do so.” He replied, “Worship your Lord and honour your brother. If I were to order anyone to prostrate himself before another, I should order a woman to prostrate herself before her husband. If he were to order her to convey stones from a yellow mountain to a black one, or from a black mountain to a white one, it would be incumbent on her to do so.”

Ahmad transmitted it. (Hadith of al-Tirmidhi, Number 963

AbuTalib went to ash-Sham (Syria) accompanied by the Prophet along with some shaykhs of Quraysh. When they came near where the monk was they alighted and loosened their baggage, and the monk came out to them although when they had passed that way previously he had not done so. While they were loosening their baggage the monk began to go about among them till he came and, taking Allah’s Messenger by the hand, said, “This is the chief of the universe; this is the messenger of the Lord of the universe whom Allah is commissioning as a mercy to the universe.” Some shaykhs of Quraysh asked him how he knew, and he replied, “When you came over the hill not a tree or a stone failed to bow in prostration, and they prostrate themselves only before a prophet. I recognize him by the seal of prophecy, like an apple, below the end of his shoulder-blade.” He then went and prepared food for them, and when he brought it to them the Prophet was looking after the camels, so he told them to send for him. He came with a cloud above him shading him and when he approached the people he found they had gone before him into the shade of a tree. Then when he sat down the shade of the tree inclined over him, and the monk said, “Look how the shade of the tree has inclined over him. I adjure you by Allah to tell me which of you is his guardian.” On being told that it was AbuTalib he kept adjuring him to send him back until he did so. AbuBakr sent Bilal along with him and the monk gave him provisions of a bread and olive-oil.

Tirmidhi transmitted it. (Hadith of al-Tirmidhi, Number 1534

And it was a tree also relayed information concerning the unseen to Muhammad!

Narrated ‘Abdur-Rahman:
“I asked Masruq, ‘Who informed the Prophet about the Jinns at the night when they heard the Qur’an?’ He said, ‘Your father ‘Abdullah informed me that a tree informed the Prophet about them.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 199

Even food can speak and glorify Allah before it is consumed!

Narrated ‘Abdullah:
We used to consider miracles as Allah’s Blessings, but you people consider them to be a warning. Once we were with Allah’s Apostle on a journey, and we ran short of water. He said, “Bring the water remaining with you.” The people brought a utensil containing a little water. He placed his hand in it and said, “Come to the blessed water, and the Blessing is from Allah.” I saw the water flowing from among the fingers of Allah’s Apostle, and no doubt, WE HEARD THE MEAL GLORIFYING ALLAH, WHEN IT WAS BEING EATEN (by him). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 779

It is therefore not surprising that Ibn Kathir could say in reference to Q. 2:74 that:

Solid Inanimate Objects possess a certain Degree of Awareness

Some claimed that the Ayat mentioned the stones being humble as a metaphor. However, Ar-Razi, Al-Qurtubi and other Imams said that there is no need for this explanation, because Allah creates this characteristic – humbleness – in stones. For instance, Allah said…

<Truly, We did offer Al-Amanah (the trust) to the heavens and the earth, and the mountains, but they declined to bear it and were afraid of it (i.e. afraid of Allah’s torment)> (33:72) …

<The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein, glorify Him> (17:44) …

<And the stars and the trees both prostrate themselves (to Allah)> (55:6) …

<Have they not observed things that Allah has created: (how) their shadows incline> (16:48) …

<They both said: “We come willingly.”> (41:11) …

<Had We sent down this Qur’an on a mountain> (59:21), and, …

<And they will say to their skins, “Why do you testify against us”‘ They will say: “Allah has caused us to speak.”> (41:21).

It is recorded in the Sahih that the Prophet said, …

<<This (Mount Uhud) is a mount that loves us and that we love.>>

Similarly, the compassion of the stump of the palm tree for the Prophet as confirmed in authentic narrations. In Sahih Muslim it is recorded that the Prophet said, …

<<I know a stone in Makkah that used to greet me with the Salam before I was sent. I recognize this stone now.>>

He said about the Black Stone that, …

<<On the Day of Resurrection it will testify for those who kiss it.>>

There are several other texts with this meaning… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Parts 1and 2 (Surat Al-Fatihah to Verse 252 of Surat Al-Baqarah), First Edition: January 2000, Volume 1, pp. 264-265

The comments of one Islam’s greatest scholars and expositors makes it obvious that the author(s)/editor(s) of the Quran, especially Muhammad, along with some of Islam’s earliest and greatest scholars, erroneously believed that inanimate objects such as trees, stars, sun etc., were rational beings with emotions and intellect. These traditions and comments conclusively demonstrate that Muhammad wasn’t merely personifying an impersonal object but erroneously thought that a womb, along with a whole host of other inanimate things, actually possessed conscious intelligence!


Legends, Myths and Fables incorporated into the Qur’an

Quran on Fearing Allah and the Wombs

The Quran Confirms Vicarious Atonement

Contrary to the claim made by Muhammadan polemicists, the Quran actually testifies that a person can bear the sins of another, and that an individual can and does stand in the place of a multitude of people as their representative.

This is most clearly seen in the garbled-up story of Cain and Abel, who are never mentioned by name in the Quran:

Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam. Behold! they each presented a sacrifice (to God): It was accepted from one, but not from the other. Said the latter: “Be sure I will slay thee.” “Surely,” said the former, “God doth accept of the sacrifice of those who are righteous. If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. For me, I intend to let thee draw ON THYSELF MY SIN as well as thine, for thou wilt be among the companions of the fire, and that is the reward of those who do wrong.” The (selfish) soul of the other led him to the murder of his brother: he murdered him, and became (himself) one of the lost ones. Then God sent a raven, who scratched the ground, to show him how to hide the shame of his brother. “Woe is me!” said he; “Was I not even able to be as this raven, and to hide the shame of my brother?” then he became full of regrets – On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew A PERSON – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew THE WHOLE PEOPLE: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life OF THE WHOLE PEOPLE. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. S. 5:27-32 Y. Ali

Pay close attention to the fact that the passage expressly teaches that Abel’s sins will be transferred or imputed to Cain, and that a human soul is equivalent to an entire nation.

With that said, note some other English renderings of the relevant verses:

Lo! I would rather thou shouldst bear the punishment of the sin AGAINST ME and thine own sin and become one of the owners of the fire. That is the reward of evil-doers… For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed ALL MANKIND, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of ALL MANKIND. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth. S. 5:29, 32 Pickthall

‘I desire that thou shouldest be laden WITH MY SIN and thy sin, and so become an inhabitant of the Fire; that is the recompense of the evildoers.’… Therefore We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain, nor for corruption done in the land, shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoso gives life to a soul, shall be as if he has given life to mankind altogether. Our Messengers have already come to them with the clear signs; then many of them thereafter commit excesses in the earth. Arberry

And here’s how the Muslim commentators and/or translators understood Q. 5:29:

I desire that you should end up with my sin the sin of slaying me and your own sin the one that you had committed before and so become an inhabitant of the Fire whereas I do not want to end up with your sin if I were to slay you and become one of them. God exalted be He says that is the requital of the evildoers’. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn; bold emphasis mine)

Lit., “my sin as well as thy sin”. It is evident from several well-authenticated ahadith that if a person dies a violent death not caused, directly or indirectly, by his own sinful actions, his previous sins will be forgiven (the reason being, evidently, that he had no time to repent, as he might have done had he been allowed to live). In cases of unprovoked murder, the murderer is burdened – in addition to the sin of murder – with the sins which his innocent victim might have committed in the past and of which he (the victim) is now absolved: this CONVINCING INTERPRETATION of the above verse has been advanced by Mujahid (as quoted by Tabari). (Muhammad Asad, The Message of the Qur’an; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Hence, the Quran is emphatically affirming the biblical doctrines of corporate solidarity and federal headship, namely, an individual stands in the place of others due to his being the head of those united to him and for those whom he represents.   

The following narrations further highlight the fact that Islamic tradition does affirm that a person’s actions do impact and affect others, whether good or bad:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “Adam and Moses met, and Moses said to Adam “You are the one who made people MISERABLE and TURNED THEM OUT OF PARADISE.” Adam said to him, “You are the one whom Allah selected for His message and whom He selected for Himself and upon whom He revealed the Torah.” Moses said, ‘Yes.’ Adam said, “Did you find that written in my fate before my creation?’ Moses said, ‘Yes.’ So Adam overcame Moses with this argument.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 260

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, “Moses argued with Adam and said to him (Adam), ‘You are the one who got the people out of Paradise by your sin, AND THUS MADE THEM MISERABLE.’ Adam replied, ‘O Moses! You are the one whom Allah selected for His Message and for His direct talk. Yet you blame me for a thing which Allah had ordained for me before He created me?’” Allah’s Apostle further said, “So Adam overcame Moses by this Argument.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 262

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira and Hudhaifa that the Messenger of Allah said: Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, would gather people. The believers would stand till the Paradise would be brought near them. They would come to Adam and say: O our father, open for us the Paradise. He would say: What turned you out from the Paradise WAS THE SIN OF YOUR FATHER ADAM. I am not in a position to do that; … (Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0380

Abu Huraira reported that God’s messenger told of Adam and Moses holding a disputation in their Lord’s presence and of Adam getting the better of Moses in argument. Moses said, “You are Adam whom God created with His hand, into whom He breathed of His spirit, to whom He made the angels do obeisance, and whom He caused to dwell in his garden; then BECAUSE OF YOUR SIN caused MANKIND to come down to the earth.” Adam replied, “And you are Moses whom God chose to deliver His messages and to address, to whom He gave the tablets on which everything was explained, and whom He brought near as a confidant. How long before I was created did you find that God has written the Torah? Moses said, “Forty years.” Adam asked, “Did you find in it, ‘And Adam disobeyed his Lord and erred’?” On being told that he did, he said, “Do you then blame me for doing a deed WHICH GOD HAD DECREED THAT I SHOULD DO forty years before He created me?” God’s messenger said, “So Adam got the better of Moses n the argument.” Muslim transmitted it. (Mishkat Al-Masabih English Translation With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson, Volume I [Sh. Muhammad Ahsraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990], p. 23; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu’z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah said, “Adam and Musa argued and Adam got the better of Musa. Musa rebuked Adam, ‘You are Adam WHO LED PEOPLE ASTRAY and brought them out of the Garden.’ Adam said to him, ‘You are Musa to whom Allah gave knowledge of everything and whom he chose above people with His message.’ He said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Do you then censure me for a matter WHICH WAS DECREED FOR ME BEFORE I WAS CREATED?‘” (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 46, Number 46.1.1

Notice how all the major hadith collections affirm that Adam’s offspring share in the guilt and judgment of Adam for the sin that he committed while in the garden, which is why none of them are dwelling in it now. The narrations even go so far as to say that mankind is in a state of misery because of Adam’s transgression. And also pay close attention to the fact of Adam blaming Allah for having already predestined that Adam would inevitably sin forty years before his creation, a fact reiterated in the following tale:

“… The following dialogue between God and Adam typifies well the theological debate concerning predestination in the early Islamic community: ‘O Lord, this sin which I have committed, is it something which you decreed for me before you created me, or is it something which I have invented of my own accord?’ God answered, ‘Rather it is something which I DECREED FOR YOU BEFORE I CREATED YOU.’ Adam said, ‘Then as you have decreed it for me, so do now forgive me my sin’ (Tabari I, p. 544).” (Mahmoud M. Ayoub, The Qur’an and Its Interpreters [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany, NY 1984], Volume 1, pp. 84-85; bold and capital emphasis mine)

The traditions also blame Eve for causing God’s curse to fall on all future generations of women. The ahadith further hold the Jews responsible for food becoming stale and the decay of meat!

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, “Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay; and were it not FOR EVE, no woman would ever betray her husband.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 611

Hammam b. Munabbih said: These are some of the ahadith which narrated to us from Allah’s Messenger, and one of these (this one): Allah’s Messenger said: Had it not been for Bani Isra’il, food would not have become stale, and meal would not have gone bad; and had it not been FOR Eve, a woman would never have acted unfaithfully toward her husband. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3472

Renowned Muslim historian and commentator al-Tabari goes so far as to narrate a story that holds Eve accountable for women being stupid!

According to Yunus – Ibn Wahb – Ibn Zayd (commenting on God’s word: “And he whispered”): Satan whispered to Eve about the tree and succeeded in taking her to it; then he made it seem good to Adam. He continued. When Adam felt a need for her and called her, she said: No! unless you go there. When he went, she said again: No! unless you eat from this tree. He continued. They both ate from it, and their secret parts became apparent to them. He continued. Adam then went about in Paradise in flight. His Lord called out to him: Adam, is it from Me that you are fleeing? Adam replied: No, my Lord, but I feel shame before You. When God asked what had caused his trouble, he replied: Eve, my Lord. Whereupon God said: Now it is My obligation to make her bleed once every month, as she made this tree bleed. I ALSO MAKE HER STUPID, although I had created her intelligent (halimah), and must make her suffer pregnancy and birth with difficulty, although I made it easy for her to be pregnant and give birth. Ibn Zayd said: Were it not for the affliction that affected Eve, the women of this world would not menstruate, AND THEY WOULD BE INTELLIGENT and, when pregnant, give birth easily. (The History of Al-Tabari: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood, translated by Franz Rosenthal [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1989], Volume 1, pp. 280-281; bold and capital emphasis mine)

According to this reference, Eve was not only made to bleed for her sin but she was also made stupid with the result being that all women now bleed and are basically stupid!

Nor is this an isolated opinion from some obscure, unknown Muslim historian since Muhammad himself taught that women were morally and intellectually deficient in comparison to men, which is why the majority of the people burning in hell are women!

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) on ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that THE MAJORITY of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion THAN YOU. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not THE EVIDENCE OF TWO WOMEN EQUAL TO THE WITNESS OF ONE MAN?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301; see also Volume 2, Book 24, Number 541)


Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said, “Yes.” He said, “THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE DEFICIENCY OF A WOMAN’S MIND.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826:

Unlike Muhammad and his god, nowhere will one find a single verse in the Holy Bible where the true God revealed in the Lord Jesus Christ teaching that women have become stupid as a result of the Fall, or that they are the majority of those who end up in hell.

What makes this all the more interesting is that the Quran cites a rabbinic tradition which it erroneously attributes to God to support its view:

Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land! S. 5:32 Hilali-Khan

Here, Muhammad and/or the author(s)/editor(s) of the Quran have quoted the following uninspired rabbinic interpretation:

How does the court intimidate the witnesses in giving testimony for cases of capital law? They would bring the witnesses in and intimidate them by saying to them: Perhaps what you say in your testimony is based on conjecture, or perhaps it is based on a rumor, perhaps it is testimony based on hearsay, e.g., you heard a witness testify to this in a different court, or perhaps it is based on the statement of a trusted person. Perhaps you do not know that ultimately we examine you with inquiry and interrogation, and if you are lying, your lie will be discovered. The court tells them: You should know that cases of capital law are not like cases of monetary law. In cases of monetary law, a person who testifies falsely, causing money to be given to the wrong party, can give the money to the proper owner and his sin is atoned for. In cases of capital law, if one testifies falsely, the blood of the accused and the blood of his offspring that he did not merit to produce are ascribed to the witness’s testimony until eternity. The proof for this is as we found with Cain, who killed his brother, as it is stated concerning him: “The voice of your brother’s blood [demei] cries out to Me from the ground” (Genesis 4:10). The verse does not state: Your brother’s blood [dam], in the singular, but rather: “Your brother’s blood [demei],” IN THE PLURAL. This serves to teach that the loss of both his brother’s blood AND THE BLOOD OF HIS BROTHER’S OFFSPRING are ascribed to Cain. The mishna notes: Alternatively, the phrase “your brother’s blood [demei],” written in the plural, teaches that that his blood was not gathered in one place but was splattered on the trees and on the stones. The court tells the witnesses: Therefore, Adam the first man was created alone, to teach you that with regard to anyone who destroys one soul from the Jewish people, i.e., kills one Jew, the verse ascribes him blame AS IF HE DESTROYED AN ENTIRE WORLD, as Adam was one person, from whom the population of an entire world came forth. And conversely, anyone who sustains one soul from the Jewish people, the verse ascribes him credit AS IF HE SUSTAINED AN ENTIRE WORLD. The mishna cites another reason Adam the first man was created alone: And this was done due to the importance of maintaining peace among people, so that one person will not say to another: My father, i.e., progenitor, is greater than your father. And it was also so that the heretics who believe in multiple gods will not say: There are many authorities in Heaven, and each created a different person. And this serves to tell of the greatness of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as when a person stamps several coins with one seal, they are all similar to each other. But the supreme King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He, stamped all people with the seal of Adam the first man, as all of them are his offspring, and not one of them is similar to another. Therefore, since all humanity descends from one person, each and every person is obligated to say: The world was created for me, AS ONE PERSON CAN BE THE SOURCE OF ALL HUMANITY, AND RECOGNIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HIS ACTIONS. The court says to the witnesses: And perhaps you will say: Why would we want this trouble? Perhaps it would be better not to testify at all. But be aware, as is it not already stated: “And he being a witness, whether he has seen or known, if he does not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity” (Leviticus 5:1)? It is a transgression not to testify when one can do so. And perhaps you will say: Why would we want to be responsible for the blood of this person? But be aware, as is it not already stated: “When the wicked perish, there is song” (Proverbs 11:10)? (Mishnah Sanhedrin, 4; capital emphasis mine)

According to the rabbinic exegesis of Genesis 4:10, the reference to the bloods (plural) of Abel which Cain shed refers to all of his offspring that would have sprung forth from his loins had Abel not been murdered. This is why Adam was created alone, in order to show that a human soul is more than a single individual. Rather, a human being stands in the place of all those human souls that spring forth from him.

Therefore, by including this rabbinic understanding of the murder of Abel as part of his so-called revelation Muhammad was basically agreeing with this biblical concept. Muhammad endorsed the notion that a person can and does represent others in what s/he does, and his/her actions are accredited to all those whom s/he represents. In other words, Muhammad pretty much accepted the idea that killing or saving a person could be attributed and even equated with killing or saving all those united to that particular individual.    

And yet in affirming this biblical concept Muhammad ended up inadvertently confirming the New Testament revelation that Jesus came to stand in the place of all those who are united to him so that his death, burial and resurrection to immortality becomes the death, burial and resurrection of all those who put their hope and trust in him.

Essentially, Muhammad confirmed what the blessed and holy Apostle Paul wrote in his inspired epistles:   

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—(For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.) Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.” Romans 5:12-21

“Do you not know that we who were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death?Therefore we were buried with Him by baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with Him in the likeness of His death, so shall we also be united with Him in the likeness of His resurrection,knowing this, that our old man has been crucified with Him, so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we should no longer be slaves to sin.For the one who has died is freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,knowing that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death has no further dominion over Him. For the death He died, He died to sin once for all, but the life He lives, He lives to God.” Romans 6:3-10

“But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming… And so it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven.As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly.And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.” 1 Corinthians 15:20-23, 45-49

“For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again. Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” 2 Corinthians 5:14-21

“You are all sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, and there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Galatians 3:26-29

“Now I say that as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ from a servant though he is lord of all. But he is under tutors and governors until the time appointed by the father. So when we were children, we were in bondage to the elements of the world. But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born from a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth into our hearts the Spirit of His Son, crying, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a servant, but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” Galatians 4:1-7

All Scriptural citations taken from the Modern English Version (MEV) of the Holy Bible.


Original Sin in Islam Revisited