Did Jesus Really Obey Satan?

Exposing Another Muslim Fraud and Lie

Sam Shamoun

Nadir Ahmed, in light of our exposing him and his lies, has decided to write some responses, wherein he tries his best to save face before his readers. His responses are mainly an accumulation of insults directed against me personally. Since they present basically no substance on the issues debated by us, I see no need to respond to most of it. There are only two points which I will deal with in this article. Nadir has accused me of (1) saying that Jesus obeyed Satan(*), and (2) lying about Surah 4:157(*).

We now turn to the first of these weighty charges.

Did Sam Shamoun Say That Jesus Obeyed Satan?

Unbeknownst to me, Nadir Ahmed's Muslim friend was in a room on Paltalk, where he asked a question, and then recorded my response. Not that this bothers me, since the recording of my response will now actually backfire against Nadir, and will show that he is willing to lie and use deceit in order to promote the cause of Allah. We at Paltalk have come to expect this of Nadir and his cohorts.

The truly sad thing about this is that Nadir is only perfectly exemplifying the spirit of his religion, since Allah permits his followers to lie and cheat in his cause:


Nadir claims that I admitted that Jesus obeyed Satan, and quoted only a portion of what I actually said:

"The question why did Jesus accept Satan’s invitation, well I guess you didn’t hear me, I thought it was clear to the room, the reason why Jesus accepts his invitation is to conquer and overcome and to defeat him... he’s defeating Satan by overcoming every temptation and trial he puts unto. Now how is that not clear? The very purpose of Jesus going into the desert, and I said in the beginning and everyone heard it.. let me repeat it again.. the very purpose of Jesus going into the desert... the very purpose of Jesus going into the desert, was so that Satan could tempt him and try to cause him to fail. Now does everyone see that? Put a "1".... Now this guy is trying to be silly by saying Oh, obeying Satan is a sin.. oh really? So you are saying because Jesus obeyed Satan that is a sin? Or should you see it for what it says, Gods will was ... the fathers will was... that Christ enter the wilderness, and face Satan’s every trial and overcome and destroy him"

Not being able to control himself from the excitement, he writes in the following email:

From: nadirahmedassalafi@hotmail.com
To: Muslim2099@aol.com
Subj: Re: Debate Review: Osama Abdullah defeated Sam Shamoun and proved Islam.
Date: 9/1/2004 2:08:30 AM Central Standard Time


alhumdulilah, Sam Shamoun was on paltalk with a mic, and one of my friends challenged him how Satan TOOK Jesus to go mountain climbing, and SHamoun responded :

"Jesus obeyed Satan."

how then can jesus be sinless? I have it on tape. Im VERY excited. lets talk about what this could mean.

Nadir Ahmed
www.ExamineTheTruth.com   (Source: http://answering-christianity.com/satans_offer.htm)


What is this all about? Nadir is totally excited that I (supposedly) said something wrong. Wow! I am a human being, and I make mistakes. I never claimed that I am infallible. I thought the issue of our discussions is whether the Bible or the Quran is God’s revealed truth, not whether every statement of Sam Shamoun is correct or not. The validity of the Bible does not depend on any of the statements of Sam Shamoun. If I made a mistake, what is the big deal? I will happily correct myself. Neither am I interested in the question of whether or not Nadir accidentally made a mistake, or formulated a statement somewhat awkwardly. The issue is the truth or falsehood of the scriptures. For Nadir, the goal in life seems to have become whether he can show that Sam Shamoun made a wrong move. How pitiful, how irrelevant, how desparate! In this case, however, Nadir misquoted my words and deliberately distorted them, which means that he got excited over nothing.

To begin with, Nadir has conveniently chosen to omit substantial parts of what I said regarding this issue by failing to quote what I had said both before and afterwards, which helps to put all this in its proper perspective. I will show why Nadir chose to edit my comments in a moment.

But first I want to mention the fact that, in my response, I basically repeated what I had already written regarding this subject about ten weeks earlier (cf. Part 2 of the series on Muhammad's Bewitchment). In fact, Nadir was explicitly informed of my written response here.

Seeing that he essentially chose to ignore it, I will basically repeat it here for all to read:

Third, Bravo doesn’t seem to realize that Jesus was specifically tempted in order to defeat Satan and do what neither Adam nor Israel could do. Note the text carefully:

"Then Jesus WAS LED BY THE SPIRIT into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.’ But he answered, ‘It is written, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God."’" Matthew 4:1-4

The text says that it was the Spirit who drove Jesus into the wilderness to be tested, showing that it was God’s will for Christ to confront the enemy precisely at a time when he was physically weak. The Lord Jesus quotes Deuteronomy 8:3, and for good reason. That particular context has to do with God driving his people into the wilderness in order to test them and to teach them to learn to depend completely on God:

"The whole commandment that I command you today you shall be careful to do, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land that the LORD swore to give to your fathers. And you shall remember the whole way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years in them wilderness, that he might humble you, testing you to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not. And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. Your clothing did not wear out on you and your foot did not swell these forty years. Know then in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, the LORD your God disciplines you." Deuteronomy 8:1-5

Thus, Jesus, by quoting Deuteronomy 8:3, was showing that he came to do what Israel couldn’t do. He came to overcome the Adversary and prevail over his trials by completely trusting in the providence of his Father.

And, just as I did in my initial response to Johnny Bravo, I had also stated that Jesus was greater than Muhammad since Muhammad failed to overcome Satan. Here is the relevant data from my response, which I had basically summarized in my online Paltalk discussion:

Thirdly, Allah’s help came a little too late. Unlike the God of the Bible, Allah wasn’t able to prevent Muhammad from falling under a Jew’s enchantment which caused Muhammad to hallucinate some very embarrassing things:

Narrated Aisha:
Magic was worked on Allah's Apostle SO THAT HE USED TO THINK THAT HE HAD SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH HIS WIVES WHILE HE ACTUALLY HAD NOT. (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an effect). Then one day he said, "O 'Aisha do you know that Allah has instructed me concerning the matter I asked Him about? Two men came to me and one of them sat near my head and the other sat near my feet. The one near my head asked the other. What is wrong with this man?' The latter replied he is under the effect of magic. The first one asked, ‘Who has worked magic on him?' The other replied Labid bin Al-A'sam, a man from Bani Zuraiq who was an ally of the Jews and was a hypocrite.' The first one asked, What material did he use)?' The other replied, 'A comb and the hair stuck to it.' The first one asked, 'Where (is that)?' The other replied. 'In a skin of pollen of a male date palm tree kept under a stone in the well of Dharwan' '' So the Prophet went to that well and took out those things and said "That was the well which was shown to me (in a dream) Its water looked like the infusion of Henna leaves and its date-palm trees looked like the heads of devils." The Prophet added, "Then that thing was taken out.' I said (to the Prophet) "Why do you not treat yourself with Nashra?" He said, "Allah has cured me; I dislike to let evil spread among my people." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660)

Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet continued for such-and-such period imagining that he has slept (had sexual relations) with his wives, and in fact he did not ... (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 89)

From Ibn Sa’d:

... Labid ibn al-Asam, the Jew, bewitched the Prophet, may Allah bless him, by which his sight became weak and his Companions paid him visits as if he was a sick man ...

‘Umar Ibn Hafs informed us on the authority of Juwaybir, he on the authority of al-Dahhak, he on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas: he said, the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, fell ill. He was bewitched about women and food ... (Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al- Kabir, Volume II, parts I & II, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi- 110 002 India], pp. 245, 247; italic emphasis ours)

Allah managed to save his "prophet" only after the latter fell sick and started hallucinating that he was sleeping with all eleven of his wives. But it gets worse. The hadith states that Muhammad repeatedly asked Allah to cure him:

Narrated 'Aisha:
that Allah's Apostle was affected by magic, so much that he used to think that he had done something which in fact, he did not do, and he invoked his Lord (for a remedy) ...
Narrated Hisham's father: 'Aisha said, "Allah's Apostle was bewitched, so he invoked Allah REPEATEDLY requesting Him to cure him from that magic)." Hisham then narrated the above narration. (See Hadith No. 658, Vol. 7) (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 75, Number 400)

According to certain traditions, Muhammad had to wait a long time before Allah would even answer him. Ibn Hisham, in his edited version of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasulullah, wrote:

"From B. Zurayq: Labib b. A'sam, who bewitched the apostle of God so that he could not come at his wives." (Alfred Guillaume, [Oxford University Press, Karachi], p. 240; bold emphasis ours)

Alfred Guillaume, the translator, noted:

I In commenting on this Suhayli asserts that the tradition is sound and is accepted by the traditionists. He found in the Jami’ of Mu‘ammar b. Rashad (a work which I cannot find mentioned by Brockelmann) THE STATEMENT THAT THE SPELL LASTED FOR A YEAR. He adds that the Mu‘tazila and Modernists rejected the tradition ON THE GROUND THAT PROPHETS COULD NOT BE BEWITCHED OTHERWISE THEY WOULD COMMIT SIN and that would be contrary to the word of God ‘And God will protect thee from men’ (5.71). He finds the tradition unassailable. It is properly attested and intellectually acceptable. The prophets were not preserved from bodily afflictions in which category sorcery falls. (Ibid., bold and capital emphasis ours)

So Allah allowed his "messenger" to remain bewitched and to hallucinate for a year! Silas’ comments are quite relevant at this point:

Pause and think for a minute. Muhammad is supposed to be God’s greatest and last prophet. Muhammad is supposed to be receiving revelations from Allah. Yet Muhammad was so bewitched and befuddled that for one year he thought he was having sexual relations with his wives, when he actually was not! Imagine what were his wives thinking? Do you really think he was a prophet? (Source)

Keep in mind that this bewitchment did not happen before the prophetic call of Muhammad, nor did it happen in the fatrah period (an intermission where Muhammad received no revelation, see this article and the further discussions linked in it) at the beginning of Muhammad’s prophetic call. This happened in Medina when he received "revelations" regularly. In fact, the later years were the most "productive", i.e. he had revelations more often towards the end:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah sent down His Divine Inspiration to His Apostle continuously and abundantly during the period preceding his death till He took him unto Him. That was the period of the greatest part of revelation; and Allah's Apostle died after that. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 61, Number 505)

The late biographer, Muhammad Husayn Haykal, places the time of Muhammad's bewitchment right after the Muslim victory at the Battle of Khaybar:

Muhammad returned from Khaybar, and Ja'far and the Muslims returned from Abyssinia. The messengers of Muhammad returned from those lands whither Muhammad had sent them. All of them met again and were reunited in Madinah. Inspiring each of them was the longing to go to Makkah in the following year and to do so in security, with shaven heads or short hair, and to perform their pilgrimage without fear. Muhammad was so pleased to be reunited with Ja'far that he said he could not tell which was the greater: victory over Khaybar or reunion with Ja'far. It was in this period that, according to a certain report, a Jew called Labid charmed Muhammad and put him under a spell. The report is self-contradictory and highly questionable. The claim that Muhammad did anything at any time without consciousness or under a spell is a sheer fabrication and hence devoid of truth. (Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, tran. Isma'il Raji al-Faruqi [American Trust Publications, USA 1976; Malaysian edition by Islamic Book Trust], p. 379; online edition)

Notice just how adamant Haykal was in denying the historicity of Muhammad's bewitchment. Unlike Bravo, he apparently realized the serious implications this event has on Muhammad's claims to prophethood.


... Nothing had adversely affected his health throughout this period except a brief lack of appetite in 6 A.H. falsely attributed to Jewish magic, and a little discomfort following his eating a bite of poisoned lamb in 7 A.H. (Ibid., p. 493; online edition; bold emphasis ours)

According to some other Muslim sources the Battle of Khaybar took place at 7 A.H. (Reference).

This implies that several parts of the Quran were "revealed" at the same time as Muhammad was under the spell and influence of demons. These Quranic revelations were given through a man under demonic influence. Seemingly, both spiritual forces could coexist without a problem in Muhammad’s life. If the Quran is itself of demonic origin, this makes sense. In any case, the fact that Muhammad could be under a spell and speak "revelation" at the same time certainly makes the source of his revelations highly questionable.

Guillaume’s comment that the Mutazilas and Modernists rejected these traditions confirms what we have been saying. It shows that Bravo, by agreeing that Muhammad could be bewitched, really doesn’t understand the gravity of such an admission. He will concede and admit just about anything in order to stubbornly cling to his religion and defend the indefensible.

Thus, I set out to prove that Jesus didn’t obey Satan, but soundly defeated him, whereas Satan defeated Muhammad. Let me again cite from the Gospel accounts:

"Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, ‘If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.’ Jesus answered, ‘It is written: "Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."’ Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. ‘If you are the Son of God,’ he said, ‘throw yourself down. For it is written: "He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone."’ Jesus answered him, ‘It is also written: "Do not put the Lord your God to the test."’ Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. ‘All this I will give you,’ he said, ‘if you will bow down and worship me.’ Jesus said to him, ‘AWAY FROM ME, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."’ Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him." Matthew 4:1-11

Quite clearly, Jesus didn’t obey Satan at all, but refused to give in to all three of his requests. How can one then conclude from this that Jesus obeyed Satan, or that I would even concede to such an idea, is simply beyond me.

Nadir demonstrates his lack of reading comprehension, since he says:

In this verse Satan orders Jesus to go sit on the very top of the temple, and Jesus obeys Satan’s commands. This is simply an outrageous story found within the Bible. The actions of Jesus flatly contradicts God’s Word:

James 4

Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.

What is probably the most shocking aspect of this story, is how can Jesus chose to go mountain climbing with Satan? You have to wonder, what did they talk about on their journey? Can you imagine Jesus saying, "Hey Satan, give me a hand up this cliff...". How can Jesus make a partisanship with Satan? There had to have been some kind of teamwork and unity for the journey to the mountain, or else it would be impossible for Satan and Jesus to ever have left the desert! This also flatly goes against the teachings of God’s Word:

1 Corinthians 10

No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons.

Yet, Jesus took Satan as his traveling partner. There can be no question, that obeying Satan is a terrible sin, and Jesus Christ was NOT sinless, which contradicts numerous Bible verses which teach that Jesus was sinless. Therefore, Christianity can not be true.

It is quite obvious that Nadir hasn’t even understood what he just read and how it actually backfires against him. Let me repeat the text once again:

"Submit yourselves, then, to God. RESIST the devil, and he will flee from you. Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded." James 4:7-8

James clearly says that by submitting to God and RESISTING the devil, Satan will flee from you. The statement that a person must resist the devil implies that Satan will try to come up against true believers in some fashion. Note, for instance, what Peter wrote:

"Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings." 1 Peter 5:8-9

Yet, by submitting to God and resisting his attacks, no matter what form these attacks may take, the devil will then flee. And what did Jesus do! You got it, HE SUCCESSFULLY RESISTED SATAN BY PERFECTLY SUBMITTING TO HIS FATHER’S WILL, NOT GIVING IN FOR A MOMENT TO ANY OF THE ADVERSARY’S OBSTACLES, CAUSING SATAN TO FLEE. Note again the conclusion of Jesus’ showdown with Satan:

"Jesus said to him, ‘AWAY FROM ME, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."’ THEN THE DEVIL LEFT HIM, and angels came and attended him." Matthew 4:10-11

In other words, Jesus perfectly lived out and demonstrated that James was correct in his claim that Satan will flee from those who submit to God! Thus, Nadir’s appeal to James backfires against him, exposing his inability to read texts carefully in order to understand what the passage is actually saying. Nadir’s appeal to 1 Corinthians 10:20, which speaks of offering sacrifices to demons, as if this is somehow relevant to Jesus’ situation with Satan, only provides further proof for our accusation that he cannot think logically or present a reasoned response.

Furthermore, note carefully again what I did say in my Paltalk discussion:

"The question why did Jesus accept Satan’s invitation, well I guess you didn’t hear me, I thought it was clear to the room, the reason why Jesus accepts his invitation is to conquer and overcome and to defeat him... he’s defeating Satan by overcoming every temptation and trial he puts unto. Now how is that not clear? The very purpose of Jesus going into the desert, and I said in the beginning and everyone heard it.. let me repeat it again.. the very purpose of Jesus going into the desert... the very purpose of Jesus going into the desert, was so that Satan could tempt him and try to cause him to fail. Now does everyone see that? Put a "1".... NOW THIS GUY IS TRYING TO BE SILLY BY SAYING OH, OBEYING SATAN IS A SIN.. oh really? So YOU ARE SAYING because Jesus obeyed Satan that is a sin? OR SHOULD YOU SEE IT FOR WHAT IT SAYS, Gods [sic] will was ... the fathers [sic] will was... that Christ enter the wilderness, and face Satan’s every trial and overcome and destroy him"

Notice the part where I said, "NOW THIS GUY IS TRYING TO BE SILLY BY SAYING OH, OBEYING SATAN IS A SIN... YOU ARE SAYING", since I was using the Muslim’s logic at this point. Pay close attention to what Nadir cited since I never did say that Jesus obeyed Satan, but said that he accepted Satan’s invitation to go to the mountain and to the pinnacle of the Temple FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF DEFEATING AND HUMILIATING THE ENEMY. As anyone reading the Gospel accounts can see, Jesus refused to obey Satan.

Thus, I wasn’t claiming for a moment that Jesus obeyed Satan, but was simply applying the Muslim’s erroneous logic at this juncture to illustrate my point.

Now why is this important? It is important because Nadir conveniently omitted what I said right afterwards. I said that if the Muslim insists that Jesus "obeyed" Satan for accepting his invitation, thus making him a sinner, then he must also accept the fact that Allah is the biggest sinner out there, and here is why. According to this erroneous logic, Allah also obeyed Satan for giving in to his requests, a point I even raised in my response to Johnny Bravo:

Bravo’s assertion that the Quran leaves God out of it only serves to prove that the Quran is an incoherent record, and makes little sense if one didn’t have recourse to the previous Scriptures to understand it. Note, for example, what 38:41-44 says (not 40 as Bravo wrongly suggests):

And make mention (O Muhammad) of Our bondman Job, when he cried unto his Lord (saying): Lo! the devil doth afflict me with distress and torment. (And it was said unto him): Strike the ground with thy foot. This (spring) is a cool bath and a refreshing drink. And We bestowed on him (again) his household and therewith the like thereof, a mercy from Us, and a memorial for men of understanding. And (it was said unto him): Take in thine hand a branch and smite therewith, and break not thine oath. Lo! We found him steadfast, how excellent a slave! Lo! he was ever turning in repentance (to his Lord). S. 38:41-44

To begin with there is absolutely nothing in the context which denies that Allah had anything to do with Job’s trials. In fact, the Quran says that it is Allah who unleashes satans on people:

So WE HAVE APPOINTED to every Prophet an enemy -- Satans of men and jinn, revealing tawdry speech to each other, all as a delusion; yet, had thy Lord willed, they would never have done it. So leave them to their forging, S. 6:112 A.J. Arberry

O children of Adam, let not Satan seduce you, even as he turned your parents out of the Garden, stripping them of their raiment that he might show them their nakedness. Truly, he sees you, he and his tribe, from where you see them not. Surely, WE have made Satan friends of those who believe not. S. 7:27 Sher Ali

Seest thou not that WE send satans against the disbelievers, inciting them to acts of disobedience? S. 19:83 Sher Ali

Hence, since these satans cannot do anything without Allah permitting it, this means that Allah is indirectly responsible for the trials these satans inflict on people. More on this below.

Furthermore, the Quran doesn’t explain the reason for Allah commanding Job to strike the ground with his foot, or why Job had to strike someone or something with a branch due to an oath he had made. We aren’t even told why he even made an oath in the first place, nor the reason why the need for a cool bath and refreshing drink.

Appealing to the hadiths and commentators only complicate matters for Bravo. Note for instance what al-Tabari wrote about Job:

... His wife, WHOM HE WAS ORDERED TO BEAT WITH A BRANCH, was a daughter of Jacob b. Isaac named Liyya, whom Jacob married to him ...

It is said that his wife whom he was ordered to beat with the branch was Rahmah bt. Ephraim b. Joseph b. Jacob. She owned all of al-Bathaniyyah in Syria and all that it contained.

... Iblis, may God curse him, heard the angels respond by blessing Job when God mentioned and praised him. Desire and envy overcame him, and he asked God to give him power over Job in order to seduce him away from his religion. GOD GAVE IBLIS MASTERY OVER JOB’S POSSESSIONS, though not over his body or mind ...

When the accursed Iblis saw that [Sam- Job praising God in spite of his afflictions], he asked God to give him mastery over Job’s children. God gave him mastery over them, but still did not give him mastery over Job’s body, heart, or mind... Iblis asked God to give him mastery over Job’s body. So God gave him mastery over Job’s body except for his tongue, his heart, and his mind over which he did not appoint him ruler ... (The History of al-Tabari: Prophets and Patriarchs, translated by William M. Brunner [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany, 1987], Volume II, pp. 140-142; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Al-Tabari saw no problem in borrowing information from the biblical version of the story in order to fill in some necessary details to the quranic account. He also definitely saw no conflict with Allah granting Iblis authority over Job...

But since Bravo takes exception to God being incited by Satan to allow the latter to test Job, we duly return the favor. Since he threw out these smokescreens we only need to remind him of the following passages:

And certainly We created you, then We fashioned you, then We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam. So they did obeisance except Iblis; he was not of those who did obeisance. He said: What hindered you so that you did not make obeisance when I commanded you? He said: I am better than he: Thou hast created me of fire, while him Thou didst create of dust. He said: Then get forth from this (state), for it does not befit you to behave proudly therein. Go forth, therefore, surely you are of the abject ones. He said: Respite me until the day when they are raised up. He said: Surely you are of the respited ones. He said: As Thou hast caused me to remain disappointed I will certainly lie in wait for them in Thy straight path. Then I will certainly come to them from before them and from behind them, and from their right-hand side and from their left-hand side; and Thou shalt not find most of them thankful. He said: Get out of this (state), despised, driven away; whoever of them will follow you, I will certainly fill hell with you all. S. 7:11-18 Shakir

He said: O Iblis! what excuse have you that you are not with those who make obeisance? He said: I am not such that I should make obeisance to a mortal whom Thou hast created of the essence of black mud fashioned in shape. He said: Then get out of it, for surely you are driven away: And surely on you is curse until the day of judgment. He said: My Lord! then respite me till the time when they are raised. He said: So surely you are of the respited ones Till the period of the time made known. He said: My Lord! because Thou hast made life evil to me, I will certainly make (evil) fair-seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to deviate Except Thy servants from among them, the devoted ones. He said: This is a right way with Me: Surely, as regards My servants, you have no authority over them except those who follow you of the deviators. And surely Hell is the promised place of them all: It has seven gates; for every gate there shall be a separate party of them. S. 15:32-44 Shakir

He said: O Iblis! what prevented you that you should do obeisance to him whom I created with My two hands? Are you proud or are you of the exalted ones? He said: I am better than he; Thou hast created me of fire, and him Thou didst create of dust. He said: Then get out of it, for surely you are driven away: And surely My curse is on you to the day of judgment. He said: My Lord! then respite me to the day that they are raised. He said: Surely you are of the respited ones, Till the period of the time made known. He said: Then by Thy Might I will surely make them live an evil life, all, Except Thy servants from among them, the purified ones. He said: The truth then is and the truth do I speak: That I will most certainly fill hell with you and with those among them who follow you, all. S. 38:75-85

Iblis asks Allah for respite with the intention of plunging man into destruction, and Allah grants him his request! Now either Allah knew Iblis’ intention and therefore wanted Iblis to cause men to stray, or Allah didn’t know it and is therefore ignorant. (Also note the glaring contradictions between these three reports. It seems that the author of the Quran couldn’t recall the exact words Allah and Iblis used in their alleged conversation.)

(Source: Part 3 of the series of Muhammad's Bewitchment)

In my response on Paltalk, I had made mention of Allah acquiescing to Satan’s request to tempt Job. As I made clear in the talk, if we were to use the logic employed by Nadir and his cohorts, we must conclude that the very fact that Allah gave in to Satan’s requests shows that Allah obeyed Satan, making Allah the biggest sinner out there!

Interestingly, the hadiths record an incident in which Muhammad’s Companion had a rather amusing conversation with Satan:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
The Prophet said, "If while you are praying, somebody intends to pass in front of you, prevent him; and should he insist, prevent him again; and if he insists again, fight with him (i.e. prevent him violently e.g. pushing him violently), because such a person is (like) a devil."

Narrated Muhammad bin Sirin: Abu Huraira said, "Allah's Apostle put me in charge of the Zakat of Ramadan (i.e. Zakat-ul-Fitr). Someone came to me and started scooping some of the foodstuff of (Zakat) with both hands. I caught him and told him that I would take him to Allah's Apostle." Then Abu Huraira told the whole narration and added "He (i.e. the thief) said, ‘Whenever you go to your bed, recite the Verse of "Al-Kursi" (2.255) for then a guardian from Allah will be guarding you, and Satan will not approach you till dawn.’" On that the Prophet said, "He told you the truth, though he is a liar, and he (the thief) himself was the Satan."  (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 495)


Narrated Abu Mas'ud:
The Prophet said, "If somebody recited the last two Verses of Surat Al-Baqara at night, that will be sufficient for him."

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle ordered me to guard the Zakat revenue of Ramadan. Then somebody came to me and started stealing of the foodstuff. I caught him and said, "I will take you to Allah’s Apostle!" Then Abu Huraira described the whole narration and said: That person said (to me), "(Please don't take me to Allah’s Apostle and I will tell you a few words by which Allah will benefit you.) When you go to your bed, recite Ayat-al-Kursi, (2.255) for then there will be a guard from Allah who will protect you all night long, and Satan will not be able to come near you till dawn." (When the Prophet heard the story) he said (to me), "He (who came to you at night) told you the truth although he is a liar; and it was Satan." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 61, Number 530)

Now if we apply the rather warped logic of Nadir and his cohorts to these narrations, we must believe that Muhammad and Abu Hurayrah were gross sinners. Abu Hurayrah was a sinner for obeying Satan by letting him go, and Muhammad sinned by embracing Satan's advice about surah 2:255, claiming that it was correct, thereby causing his followers to adopt a teaching from Satan.

Here is another example of Muhammad sinning because of Satan:

Narrated Al-Bara:
The Prophet said to Hassan, "Lampoon them (the pagans) in verse, and Gabriel is with you." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 174; see also Volume 4, Book 54, Number 435 and Volume 5, Book 59, Number 449; Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6074)

Note that Muhammad endorses the poetry of Hasan bin Thabit. What makes this truly astonishing is that Muhammad also belittled poetry, believing that it was the result of demon possession:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "It is better for a man to fill the inside of his body with pus than to fill it with poetry." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 175; see also Number 176)

According to Ibn Ishaq, in "Sirat Rasulallah," translated by Alfred Guillaume (The Life of Muhammad, Oxford Press, Karachi), Muhammad is reported to have said:

... There was no one of God's creation more hateful to me than a poet or a madman; I could not bear to look at either of them. I said to myself, "Your humble servant (meaning himself) is either a poet or a madman..." (p. 71, bold emphasis ours)

We read in footnote 1151 of The History of Al-Tabari, volume 9, p. 167, that:

"The pre-Islamic Arabs believed in the demon of poetry, and they thought that a great poet was directly inspired by demons..."

This accounts for Muhammad being afraid that he was demon-possessed. Karen Armstrong expounds on this:

Muhammad came to himself in terror and revulsion, horrified to think that he might have become a mere disreputable kahin whom people consulted if one of their camels went missing. A kahin was supposedly possessed by a jinni, one of the spirits who were thought to haunt the landscape and who could be capricious and lead people into error. Poets also believed that they were possessed by their personnel jinn. Thus, Hasan ibn Thabit, a poet of Yathrib who later became a Muslim, says that when he received his poetic vocation his jinni had appeared to him, thrust him to the ground and forced the inspired words from his mouth. This was the only form of inspiration that was familiar to Muhammad, and the thought that he might have became majnun, jinni-possessed, filled him with such despair, that he no longer wished to live. He thoroughly despised the kahins, whose oracles were usually unintelligible mumbo jumbo, and was always very careful to distinguish the Koran from conventional Arabic poetry. Now, rushing from the cave, he resolved to fling himself from the summit to his death. But on the mountainside he had another vision of a being which, later, he identified with the angel Gabriel:

When I was midway on the mountain, I heard a voice from heaven saying, "O Muhammad! Thou art the apostle of God and I am Gabriel" ...

... This was no pretty naturalistic angel, but an overwhelming ubiquitous presence from which escape was impossible. Muhammad had had that overpowering apprehension of numinous reality, which the Hebrew prophets had called kadosh, holiness, the terrifying otherness of God. They too had felt near to death and at a physical and psychological extremity when they experienced it. But unlike Isaiah or Jeremiah, Muhammad had none of the consolations of an established tradition to support him. The terrifying experience seemed to have fallen upon him out of the blue and left him in a state of profound shock. In his anguish, he turned instinctively to his wife, Khadija. (Armstrong, A History of God [Ballantine Books, 1993], pp. 137-138; bold emphasis ours)

What all of this means is that, by encouraging and promoting the poetry of Hasan, Muhammad was encouraging and promoting the work of Satan, and even dared to attribute it to Gabriel! Muhammad clearly says that Gabriel inspired Hasan to recite poetry, and he also said that poetry is a work of possessed people. This means that if Muhammad was right, then Gabriel was endorsing and spreading a work of Satan! So both Muhammad and Gabriel were sinners for obeying Satan and for promoting his work of poetry! This also exposes Muhammad's hypocrisy, condemning poetry one moment, but then praising and encouraging it when it served his purpose the next moment.

Nadir must consistently apply his erroneous logic at this point and conclude that Muhammad, Abu Hurayrah, Hasan bin Thabit, and even Gabriel himself by inspiring poetry, obeyed Satan. To not do so only exposes his real agenda in claiming that Christ obeyed Satan, namely his utter hate of the truth of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and his desire to vindicate Muhammad's demon-possession and bewitchment.

Now, I am sure a Muslim would say that this is completely ridiculous, as none of the preceding examples, such as Allah granting Satan’s request to do as he pleases, means that Allah, Muhammad etc., were obeying the devil. This is precisely our point! Jesus going up on a mountain with Satan doesn’t mean that Jesus was obeying Satan, since the context shows that Jesus came to destroy Satan, by defeating Satan exactly at the point where Satan thinks he can put the strongest temptation before Jesus. But if one insists to employ this erroneous logic, then one must use it consistently and also conclude that Allah, Muhammad, Gabriel, Hasan bin Thabit, and Abu Hurayrah were all big sinners. After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander!

For the record, let me repeat the point in all capitals.


And now, in light of the preceding, here is our open challenge to Nadir:

Since you have an audio file of my response to the question posed to me on Paltalk, we invite you to post the entirety of my answer on your website. In order to prove to the readers that you haven’t deliberately twisted my words out of context, and lied about what I actually did say, we challenge you to produce the full, unedited response so all can hear and judge for themselves what I did in fact say. If you do not post the complete, unedited lecture, then this will be evidence that you know that you are lying and will stoop to any level to slander Christianity. Your unwillingness to provide the unedited response only proves what we have been saying all along, namely that you do not have what it takes to provide an intellectual response to the facts marshaled against you. Your inability to produce the entire answer will also show that you are only following the example set by your prophet, who permitted people like you to lie and use deception in order to achieve their goals. After all, is not your God called the best conniver and deceiver of them all? (cf. 3:54; 8:30)

We will inform our readers whether or not Nadir does the right and honest thing and provides the unedited speech I gave regarding this issue. We highly doubt he will since he knows that my entire response will only further humiliate him and expose him as a fraud, much like I did in our debate. It will serve to demonstrate how illogical the argument is, and how it can be used more forcefully to prove that Muhammad was a false prophet, and that Allah of the Quran is a false god (which in fact is true). He also knows that the full version will expose him for being a liar and a deceiver, demonstrating that this is the by-product of following Muhammad sincerely. Thankfully, not all Muslims do follow Muhammad wholeheartedly, and therefore do not condone lying and deception.

Lying about Surah 4:157?

In another part(*) of his series of responses, Nadir tried to address some of the points made in our article(*), where we exposed his lies that we are supposedly afraid to debate him. He writes:

Shameless Shamoun wrote:

The statement itself is impossible: No Jew would BOAST that he killed Jesus, THE MESSENGER OF GOD. The Jewish leaders wanted Jesus to be put to death because they considered him to be a blasphemer and FALSE prophet, i.e. the opposite of the Quranic statement


Baseless assertion, here we see that Shameless Shamoun refutes his own false prophet Paul, because Paul said "with God all things are possible!" I guess St. Paul must also be a liar according to Shamoun. Also it is VERY EASY for a Jew to make this statement, because it can be done out of mockery by calling him the "messenger of God".

Matthew 27:

and saying, "The One who would demolish the sanctuary and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross!"
In the same way the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked Him and said,
"He saved others, but He cannot save Himself! He is the King of Israel! Let Him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in Him.

He is the king of Israel?? What disbeliever would admit that??? Thatís impossible! Here we see that Shamounís criteria disproves the Bible.


First, what does Paul’s statement have anything to do with the impossibility of Jews, not God, admitting that they killed their Messiah?

Second, in order to justify what the Quran says, Nadir proceeds to attack the Bible. This is known as the fallacy of ad hominem tu quoque. For those not familiar with this fallacy, here is the definition:

There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches.


(i)You may argue that God doesn't exist, but you are just following a fad. (ad hominem abusive)
(ii) We should discount what Premier Klein says about taxation because he won't be hurt by the increase. (ad hominem circumstantial)
(iii) We should disregard Share B.C.'s argument because they are being funded by the logging industry. (ad hominem circumstantial)
(iv) You say I shouldn't drink, but you haven't been sober for more than a year. (ad hominem tu quoque) (Source; italic emphasis ours)

Maybe it never dawned on Nadir that both the Bible and the Quran could be wrong on this point, so, therefore, attacking the Bible doesn’t justify the error within the Quran.

Now, lest Nadir repeats the same fallacy by merely accusing us of doing the same, namely that we too turn to the Quran when addressing an issue in the Bible, we want to quickly point out that, unlike him, we first try to prove our case from the text of the Bible itself. ONLY AFTER WE HAVE DONE THIS, do we then use the same argument against the Quran.

Now, is there anything in the context of the passage to show that the Jews in the Gospels were mockingly calling Jesus the King of Israel? You bet, since it comes from the very same chapter that Nadir cited:

"Those who passed by HURLED INSULTS AT HIM, shaking their heads and saying, ‘You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!’ In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders MOCKED HIM. ‘He saved others’, they said, ‘but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, "I am the Son of God."’ In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him ALSO HEAPED INSULTS ON HIM." Matthew 27:39-44

On the other hand, as far as the plain reading of the text of the Quran is concerned, it nowhere states that the Jews were mockingly calling Jesus the Messiah, the Apostle of Allah, but reads as a confession on the part of the Jews that they killed the One whom they knew was their Messiah. At the least, the text doesn’t say EXPLICITLY that the Jews were mockingly calling Jesus the Messiah, unlike the Gospel accounts, so one may wish to argue that it is inferred or implicit within the context.

There is further evidence that the author of the Quran erroneously assumed that the Jews did believe that Jesus was the Messiah, despite their boasting to have killed him, since he quotes them as identifying Jesus as the Son of Mary:

"And because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a tremendous calumny; And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain." S. 4:156-157 Pickthall

One can argue from the context that the Jews spoke a calumny against Mary by bragging that they humiliated and killed her Son, Jesus, publicly shaming him by having him crucified as a common criminal, even though they knew he was the Messiah. Now, the Jews obviously believed it when they called Jesus the Son of Mary, and didn’t simply call him such as a way of mocking him. They knew that his mother was Mary and their statement is an endorsement of that fact, which supports the fact that they were affirming that he was the Messiah. Hence, despite their confessing that they killed him, the Jews were admitting that even though Jesus was indeed the Messiah, the Son of Mary, they still didn't want to have anything to do with him. After all, didn’t the Jews also do the same thing to Moses according to the Quran?

And (remember) when Moses said unto his people: O my people! Why persecute ye me, WHEN YE WELL KNOW THAT I AM ALLAH'S MESSENGER UNTO YOU? So when they went astray Allah sent their hearts astray. And Allah guideth not the evil-living folk. S. 61:5 Pickthall

The Quran states that Moses was persecuted by the Israelites EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW he was God's prophet. Note for instance:

And when Musa said to his people: O my people! remember the favor of Allah upon you when He raised prophets among you and made you kings and gave you what He had not given to any other among the nations. O my people! enter the holy land which Allah has prescribed for you and turn not on your backs for then you will turn back losers. They said: O Musa! surely there is a strong race in it, and we will on no account enter it until they go out from it, so if they go out from it, then surely we will enter. Two men of those who feared, upon both of whom Allah had bestowed a favor, said: Enter upon them by the gate, for when you have entered it you shall surely be victorious, and on Allah should you rely if you are believers. They said: O Musa! we shall never enter it so long as they are in it; go therefore you AND YOUR LORD, then fight you both surely we will here sit down. He said: My Lord! Surely I have no control (upon any) but my own self and my brother; therefore make a separation between us and the nation of transgressors. He said: So it shall surely be forbidden to them for forty years, they shall wander about in the land, therefore do not grieve for the nation of transgressors. S. 5:20-26 Shakir

Now, after having seen God miraculously deliver them from Pharaoh through signs and wonders, they still refuse to enter the land and give Moses a hard time to the point of telling him that he and his Lord should go and fight. They obviously knew that Allah was God and Moses was his prophet despite their unwillingness to go and fight the giants of the land.

Thus, Israel’s persecution of Moses, even though they knew that he was God’s prophet, supports the view that the Quran's author erroneously assumed that the Jews believed Jesus was in fact the Messiah, the Apostle of Allah, despite their killing him.

In support of our exegesis we cite the late Muslim scholar Sayyid Abu A’la Mawdudi who wrote in reference to Sura 4:157:

191. Their criminal boldness had reached such proportions that they attempted to put an end to the life of the one THEY THEMSELVES KNEW TO BE A PROPHET, and subsequently went around boasting of this achievement. The least reflection on the incident of Jesus talking in his cradle (see the preceding note) makes it clear that there was no strong reason to doubt his prophethood. Moreover, the miracles of Jesus which they themselves witnessed (see Sura Al ‘Imran 3:49) had firmly established his claim to prophethood. Thus, whatever treatment they meted out was not based on any misconception, for they were FULLY AWARE that the person whom they were subjecting to criminal treatment had been appointed by God as the bearer of His message.

It seems strange that a people should recognize a man to be a Prophet in their hearts and still try to assassinate him. The ways of degenerate nations are indeed strange. Such people are absolutely unprepared to tolerate the existence of those who reproach them for their corruption and seek to prevent them from evil. Hence the reformers, including Prophets, who arise among corrupt nations are always persecuted; they are imprisoned and even put to death. The Talmud mentions that:

Nebuchadnezzar laid waste the land of Israel … when the city had been captured, he marched with his princes and officers into the Temple … on one of the walls he found the mark of an arrow’s head, as though somebody had been killed or hit nearby, and he asked: ‘Who was killed here?’ ‘Zachariah, the son of Yohoyadah, the high priest’, answered the people. ‘He rebuked us incessantly on account of our transgressions, and we tired of his words, and put him to death.’ (The Talmud Selections by H. Plano, London, Frederick Warne & Co.)

The Bible also mentions that when the corrupt practices of Israel exceeded all limits, and Jeremiah warned them that God would have them overrun by other nations in punishment for their wickedness, his warning was greeted by the Jews with the accusation that he was a collaborator with the Chaldeans and hence a traitor. And under that pretext Jeremiah was sent to prison. In the same manner, about two and half years before Jesus’ crucifixion, John the Baptist suffered a cruel fate. On the whole the Jews knew him to be a Prophet, or at least acknowledged him to be on of the most religious people in the nation. But when he criticized the royal court of Herod, the King of Judah, he was first thrown into prison, and then, in response to the demand of a dancing girl, who was Herod’s favourite ‘mistress’, his head was cut off.

If this record of the Jews is kept in mind, it does not seem surprising that, after having subjected Jesus – according to their belief – to crucifixion, they might have been overcome by jubilation and in a fit of self-congratulation might have boastfully exclaimed: ‘Yes, we have put a Prophet of God to death!’ … (Mawdudi, Towards Understanding the Qur’an: English Version of Tafhim al-Qur’an, translated and edited by Zafar Ishaq Ansari [The Islamic Foundation, Leicestershire, United Kingdom, Reprinted 2004], Volume II, suras 4-6, pp. 106-107; capital emphasis ours)

Apart from his desperate, but valiant, effort to explain away this gross Quranic error Mawdudi’s comments clearly demonstrate that the plain reading of this text is that the author of the Quran truly believed that the Jews knew Jesus was their Messiah but decided to kill him anyway.

Besides all of this, Nadir is taking for granted that the Quran is an accurate record, so that the Quran cannot be erroneously suggesting that the Jews believed that Jesus was the Messiah whom they killed. But, as has been shown over and over again, the Quran is often mistaken about the claims and beliefs of groups such as Jews and Christians:


Those examples support the interpretation that this is just another instance of the author of the Quran mistakenly assuming that the Jews would have admitted to killing their Messiah, with the obvious intention of trying to portray them in the worst possible light.

NA also overlooked one seemingly small but decisive difference between the statements in the Gospel and the one in the Quran.

Gospel:   ‘He saved others’, they said, ‘but he can't save himself! He IS the King of Israel!
Let him come down NOW from the cross, and we will believe in him. ...’
Quran: And because of their saying: We SLEW the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger ...

The Gospel is present tense, yet the Quran is past tense. Why is this important? In the Gospel, the Jews are mocking Jesus who is hanging on the cross in front of them. They insult him in order to make his suffering on the cross even greater. As cruel and evil as it is, it makes sense since that is how people often are. In the Quran, however, the Jews are boasting about a deed that they had performed in the past, saying "We SLEW the Messiah, ..." i.e. this is not about the Jews mocking Jesus, but it is about their boasting of what they had accomplished. It cannot be "a mocking of Jesus" like in the Gospels, because Jesus is not there to be mocked. In the Gospel, the Jews are addressing Jesus, while in the Quran, the Jews are viewed as either speaking to a general audience, or to the Muslims.

In fact, Muhammad was bothered that the Jews and Christians resisted his message, and rejected his claim to be a prophet of God in the same tradition as the prophets of their scriptures. As in many other quranic passages, the author of the Quran is responding here to one of the troubling claims of the Jews that contradicted his own message. In this case, they probably said (as some do to this day): We killed Jesus, this imposter and false Messiah, i.e. the Quran answers an obstacle for the credibility of Muhammad’s message.

It would have made sense if he had quoted some Jews as saying boastfully:

We killed Jesus, this imposter and false Messiah, or:

We killed Jesus, who falsely claimed to be the Messiah and messenger of Allah.

However, since Muhammad’s message contained the claim that Jesus was a true messenger of Allah, and the Messiah, and in this passage he was only concerned with the issue of whether Jesus was crucified or not, he simply replaced their accusation (that he was a false Messiah) by his own conviction (that he is the Messiah, and Messenger from Allah), which resulted in a statement that is impossible to have been uttered by the Jews of Muhammad’s day, or indeed of any time.

In light of the above, the burden of proof is upon Nadir to show that the Quran isn’t mistaken here, and that the Jews were indeed mocking when they boasted in killing the Messiah. He can’t do so by appealing to the Bible since he has tried to argue, quite unsuccessfully, that it is a corrupted text.

In the same article, Nadir writes:


Did you all catch the "Shamounian twist"? take a look again. Shameless Shamoun is now accusing me that I did the following:

  1. Did not comprehend his answer
  2. Ignored his REPEATED CLAIM
  3. Inability to understand his point
  4. not able to comprehend the response

These are nothing more than a projection of himself, as we shall prove below. Again, I would implore you to take the ACID TEST and please download the debate to see for yourself that these are outright lies! So what is this great response Shameless Shamoun is boasting about? Here it is:


Nadir is constantly proving my point that he really doesn’t understand what he reads, nor is he able to provide a meaningful response. Here is what I said regarding my response in the debate:

And now, for the sake of our readers, we will post the response we gave in the debate so that everyone can see NA’s failure to address the point. The QUICK AND SIMPLE ANSWER is that by denying the crucifixion while affirming the Bible as God’s preserved Word, the author of the Quran exposes his gross ignorance and fallibility. The author wrongly assumed that his denial of the crucifixion didn’t conflict with his views that the Bible was God’s preserved Word, providing more proof that the Quran is not from the true God. Or, the author of the Quran assumed that he could appeal to the Bible while denying one of its essential teachings by claiming that these passages are either misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Now, please do as Nadir says, and see whether or not I did mention this quick and simple answer in our debate, and watch how Nadir deals with it. Nadir again misrepresents me when he writes:

To begin with, Shameless Shamoun is claiming that Surah 4:157 is only condemning the idea that "the Jews crucified Jesus". But Shameless Shamoun doesnít know his own Bible because it is the Bible which clearly states that the Jews crucified Jesus:

1 Thessalonians 2

For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews,
who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all men

Therefore, The Quran states that the Jews did not kill Jesus, and those that disagree follow nothing but conjecture(corruption). And we all know that the New Testament disagrees with this position. Therefore, the Quran calls the New Testament conjecture (corruption).

In the first place, where in my statement do I deny that the Jews had a hand in crucifying Christ? I don’t, as even Nadir realizes, since he even states that I was referring to what surah 4:157 is saying. Notice again how Nadir appeals to the Bible to refute my point, when I wasn’t speaking about what the Bible says, but what the Quran was saying! But even here, Nadir hasn’t read my point carefully, since this is what I said IN CONTEXT, this time with added emphasis:

Note here that WHAT THE QURAN IS SEEKING TO REFUTE IS THE CLAIM OF THE JEWS, i.e. what the Jews WERE SAYING. It says nothing about the text of the Bible (particularly the Gospels, the CHRISTIAN scriptures), especially in relation to its view of the crucifixion. We know that this is referring to the Jews since Christians wouldn’t speak against Mary nor would they boast that they killed Jesus.

In light of this, one can argue THAT THE QURAN IS NOT ALTOGETHER DENYING JESUS’ CRUCIFIXION, BUT DENYING THAT the Jews KILLED JESUS, even though it appeared to them that they did. The fact is that it was the will of God for Jesus to die on behalf of sinners. If God didn’t want Jesus to die, then no one could have taken his life away, which is precisely what the Holy Bible teaches:

"For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father." John 10:17-18 ESV

The Quran provides some support for taking 4:157 to mean that Allah, not the Jews, had Jesus crucified. Speaking of the Muslims’ victory at the Battle of Badr, the Quran says:

"Ye (Muslims) slew them not, but Allah slew them. And thou (Muhammad) threwest not when thou didst throw, but Allah threw, that He might test the believers by a fair test from Him. Lo! Allah is Hearer, Knower." S. 8:17 Pickthall

It wasn’t the Muslims who fought and won the victory, but Allah who did so through the Muslims. Likewise, the Jews didn’t crucify Jesus, but God had him crucified. GOD USED THEM AS HIS INSTRUMENTS TO ACCOMPLISH HIS WILL that Jesus should die for sinners:

"Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know - this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it." Acts 2:22-24 ESV

The above interpretation is also consistent with the Quran’s train of thought, i.e. that after denying that the Jews killed Jesus, the verse right after (4:158) says that God raised him to himself. In context, this implies that, contrary to the Jews’ belief that Jesus’ crucifixion signaled the end of him, signifying to them that God rejected Jesus as a false prophet, God raised him from the dead unto himself in heaven as the greatest validation that he was indeed the Christ of God.

(Source: http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/preserved-crucifixion.htm)

Anyone reading my paper carefully would have seen what I actually meant when I said that the Quran, not the Bible, might be denying that the Jews killed Jesus. Let me repeat the key point of my argument:

It wasn’t the Muslims who fought and won the victory, but Allah who did so through the Muslims. Likewise, the Jews didn’t crucify Jesus, but God had him crucified. GOD USED THEM AS HIS INSTRUMENTS TO ACCOMPLISH HIS WILL that Jesus should die for sinners:

Please notice that I said that God USED THE JEWS to have Christ crucified. The fact that Nadir could have read my paper and still have gotten it so wrong is not surprising to those who know him and his apologetics.

These examples prove over and over again that Nadir is not qualified to interact with us, or anyone else for that matter, on an intellectual level. This is why he has to resort to ad hominems, lies, contextual distortion and deliberate misrepresentations of what his opponents actually say.

We want to conclude this response by highly encouraging Nadir to continue doing what he does best, writing papers that further expose him and his religion for being both irrational and evil. The more he writes, the better he makes his opponent look, so we sincerely hope that he keeps up the great work!

Responses to Nadir Ahmed
Articles by Sam Shamoun
Answering Islam Home Page