A Rebuttal to
Part 1
Jalal Abualrub sent me an article attacking the genealogies of the Lord Jesus, calling into question the integrity of the Canonical Gospels. Anticipating that this article will appear on his website, we have decided to address his points in advance.
He begins his article by attacking the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity:
Introduction: The Old Testament never spoke of Trinity in worship, never stated that the Holy Ghost is God or that he is the Creator, never mentioned Jesus by name as being the eternal son of the Creator or as being a part of a trio of creators that should be worshipped. Biblical Prophets never mentioned Trinity in worship either by name or by hint. Biblical Prophets never worshipped the Holy Ghost or Jesus, and they never stated that the Creator has or will have a son. While walking on this earth, Jesus never preached Trinity, never worshipped the Holy Ghost or himself and never declared this, "I, Jesus, created you; worship me; Trinity is your faith; I am equal to God." The Bible does not contain a single reference to ‘Trinity’ by name, nor does it ever call itself ‘The Bible’.
ANSWER:
First, Abualrub is incorrect regarding the teaching of the Hebrew Bible since it does teach that the true God, Yahweh Elohim, is a triune Being. In fact, the Hebrew Scriptures establish the following truths which the Quran vehemently denies:
In order to prevent this rebuttal from being too lengthy we will not delve into all these points here. Instead, we will now present specific links so that the readers can see for themselves how the OT Scriptures establish these specific truths:
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin01.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin02.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/sacra.html
http://www.conservativeonline.org/journals/01_03_journal/1997v1n3_id06.htm
http://www.conservativeonline.org/journals/02_04_journal/1998v2n4_id05.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/jeremiah23.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/gabriel.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/tam1.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/tam_app.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Shabir-Ally/storkey.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/atonement1.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/atonement2.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Abualrub/allahs_identity.htm
Second, regarding the teaching of Christ and the claim that he never said he was God or demanded worship etc., these issues have been dealt with in the following articles:
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin03a2.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin03b.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin03c.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin04a.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin04a2.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/trin03a.html
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/biblicaljesus.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/worship.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/tam2.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/tam3.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/deny_app.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/12anti-trinitarian.htm
Therefore, we will only briefly address the issues of God having a Son and the Messiah’s Deity, providing just a few OT examples supporting these points:
Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD and against his anointed [Messiah, Christ], saying, ‘Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us… I will tell of the decree: The LORD said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.’ Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him." Psalm 2:1-3, 7-12
This Psalm refers to the Anointed King of the Lord as God’s Son, and finds its ultimate fulfillment in the Lord Jesus:
"When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, ‘Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit, "Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord and against his Anointed"-- for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.’" Acts 4:23-28
"And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you.’" Acts 13:32-33
"Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?’" Revelation 6:15-17
Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ [Anointed, Messiah], and he shall reign forever and ever." Revelation 11:15
"She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, … And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, ‘Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ [Anointed, Messiah] have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God.’" Revelation 12:5, 10
Here is another OT text that mentions God’s Son:
"Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son's name? Surely you know!" Proverbs 30:4
The writer knows that God has a Son who shares in his Father’s sovereignty.
Finally, the prophet Isaiah refers to the Davidic King as Deity:
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this." Isaiah 9:6-7
Isaiah foresees a child who will be born that is the Mighty God ruling over David’s throne forever. According to both the NT and rabbinic tradition this child is the Messiah, whom Christians and Muslims both agree is Jesus!
Abualrub will obviously try to deny that Isaiah 9 refers to the Messiah, or that the king is literally the Mighty God. He may wish to contend that these names are nothing more than honorific titles, names which are not intended to be taken as literal descriptions but in an exaggerated or hyperbolic fashion in order to highlight the king’s exalted status before God. Even conceding for argument’s sake that this was a correct understanding of the passage, which it isn’t, this would only prove that the OT contradicts the Quran. The Quran does not allow for anyone to be addressed as the Mighty God, even if it is nothing more than an exaggerated form of speech praising the exalted position of a king or prophet.{1}
Third, Abualrub is in blatant error regarding the Holy Bible never calling itself the Bible. The Holy Bible, in several places, refers to inspired Books as the Bible. For more on this issue, please consult the following article: http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/inspired.htm.
Fourthly, since Abualrub is complaining that the exact word "Trinity" isn’t found in the Holy Bible, we challenge him to show us the following words from the Quran.
The most important message of Islam to Muslims such as Abualrub is "Tauhid" or monotheism. And because it is so central we challenge him to produce from the Quran verses where the actual word "Tauhid" ever appears.
We further challenge him to show us from the Quran the following exact terms which Muslims claim to be the subset of Islamic Tauhid: tauhid al-rububiyyah, tauhid al-uluhiyya/ibaadah, tauhid al-asma wa sifat.
Abualrub continues:
Suddenly and miraculously, though, the New Testament, which Jesus never wrote or authorized, which was not even written during his lifetime, started advocating a totally different religion that destroyed not only the Monotheism advocated in the Old Testament, but also altered and abrogated all of the Biblical Law. Suddenly, the one and only God worshipped by all the Prophets, including Jesus, was replaced by a fantastic polytheistic dogma advocating concepts never spoken of before in the Old Testament: Trinity, Original Sin, Crucifixion, God having a son –and they mean it literally, the Holy Ghost being God and, of course, that famous formula 1+1+1=1.
ANSWER:
It is quite inconsistent for Abularub to undermine the NT documents when he just tried to appeal to these very same texts in his argument above regarding Jesus never teaching the doctrine of the Trinity, his Deity etc. If Abualrub doesn’t consider the NT books authoritative because they were not written during Jesus’ lifetime, how can he then use them to show what Jesus taught or did not teach? He even says that the Bible doesn’t teach the Trinity, but now admits that the NT does teach the Trinity, and other essential Christian doctrines, which is part of the Holy Bible!
Abualrub may be basing his claim that Jesus didn’t teach truths such as the Trinity on the basis of what his book, the Quran, claims. In other words, he is basing his claim not on what the NT teaches, but on what the Quran says the prophets taught. Yet the Quran wasn’t written during Jesus’ lifetime either, but over six centuries after Christ’s ascension, and contradicts most of the key essential truths of the Holy Bible!
Here is a list which gives a rough timeline for the dates of the NT books:
45-48 A.D.:
The book of James is written. Most non-Catholic Bible scholars agree that James was one of the half-brothers of Jesus (Catholics disagree because they believe that Jesus' mother had no other children) and the one who presided over the "Jerusalem Conference" in Acts 15:1-30 (48-50 A.D.). There are several other men named James in the New Testament (including two apostles), but there are strong reasons for eliminating them as the author of the book of James (see for example People's New Testament).48-50 A.D.:
The apostle Paul is in Antioch and he writes his first letter, which we call the book of Galatians. This is during the time period of Acts 15:25-35.50 A.D.:
The Gospel of Matthew is believed to have been written in this year by the apostle Matthew.50-54 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 1 and 2 Thessalonians from Corinth (Silas and Timothy are listed as co-authors of these books. See 1 Thessalonians 1:1 and 2 Thessalonians 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 18:1-11.54-55 A.D.:
The apostle Paul spends roughly 3 years in Ephesus (from 53 to 55 A.D.), where he writes his second letter to the church at Corinth (his first letter to them has been lost). We call this second letter the book of 1 Corinthians (Sosthenes is listed as a co-author of this book. See 1 Corinthians 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 19:1-41.56-57 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes his fourth letter to the church at Corinth from Macedonia (his third letter to them has been lost). We call this fourth letter the book of 2 Corinthians (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book. See 2 Corinthians 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 20:1-2.Late winter/early spring of 57-58 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes his letter to the Romans (Tertius is listed as the one who actually wrote this letter, so he was probably taking dictation from Paul. See Romans 16:22. Other passages indicate that Paul may have frequently dictated his letters to someone else, and that he preferred to write the concluding remarks himself. See 1 Corinthians 16:21, Galatians 6:11, Colossians 4:18, 2 Thessalonians 3:17, and Philemon 1:19, for example). This is during the time period of Acts 20:2-6.57-59 A.D.:
The Gospel of Mark is believed to have been written during this time period. The early church fathers believed that this Gospel was written by Mark, an associate of the apostle Peter and the one who is referred to as "John, also called Mark" in Acts 12:12.58-60 A.D.:
The Gospel of Luke is believed to have been written during this time period. Luke was a physician who sometimes traveled with the apostle Paul, and he is also the author of the book of Acts.60-63 A.D.:
The apostle Paul is under house arrest in Rome for four years. He writes the book of Ephesians around 60 A.D., Colossians around 60-61 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book. See Colossians 1:1), Philippians around 61-62 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book. See Philippians 1:1), and Philemon around the summer of 62 A.D. (Timothy is listed as a co-author of this book. See Philemon 1:1). This is during the time period of Acts 28:14-31.60-62 A.D.:
The book of Acts is written by Dr. Luke (see Colossians 4:14), Paul's part-time traveling companion and the author of the Gospel of Luke.60-65 A.D.:
The apostle John writes the books of 1, 2, and 3 John.63-66 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 1 Timothy and Titus from Macedonia.64 A.D.:
The apostle Peter writes the book of 1 Peter.64-68 A.D.:
The apostle Peter writes the book of 2 Peter. This is the last New Testament book that Peter will write. He is believed to have been martyred in late 67 or early 68 A.D.67 A.D.:
The apostle Paul writes 2 Timothy while imprisoned in Rome. This is the last New Testament book that Paul will write. He is believed to have been martyred in 68 A.D.68-69 A.D.:
An unknown person writes the book of Hebrews. Some scholars believe that the apostle Paul wrote Hebrews, but the evidence that he did not write this book is very strong (for example, notice that all of the books written by Paul say that they were written by Paul, yet Hebrews is anonymous). Many other scholars believe that there is strong evidence that Barnabas wrote Hebrews. Barnabas (who is mentioned a number of times in Acts chapter 11 through chapter 15) was the apostle Paul's traveling companion, so he would have picked up many of Paul's phrases and expressions from hearing Paul preach so much. This may be why Hebrews sounds similar to Paul's writings, even though it does not say that it was written by Paul (Paul's letters all say that they were written by him) and it does not have Paul's usual greeting.It is interesting to note that the human authors of other books and portions of Scripture are unknown as well, such as the Old Testament books of 1 and 2 Kings, Job, Esther, and 1 and 2 Chronicles.
67-80 A.D.:
Jude writes his letter. He calls himself a brother of James. There are several men named Jude in the New Testament, but for a number of reasons many scholars believe that Jude was one of the half-brothers of Jesus.85-95 A.D.:
The Gospel of John is believed to have been written during this time period by the apostle John.95-96 A.D.:
The apostle John writes the book of Revelation while in exile on the island of Patmos. This is the last New Testament book that John will write. At this point he is the last surviving member of the twelve apostles and perhaps the only apostle to have died a natural death. The other ten of the original twelve apostles were martyred (not counting Judas Iscariot, who hung himself):
- Andrew: Crucified.
- Bartholomew: Crucified.
- James, son of Alphaeus: Crucified.
- James, son of Zebedee: Death by the sword.
- Matthew: Death by the sword.
- Peter: Crucified upside-down at his own request (he did not feel worthy to be crucified in the same manner as the Lord).
- Philip: Crucified.
- Simon the Zealot: Crucified.
- Thaddaeus: Death by arrows.
- Thomas: Death by a spear thrust.
140 A.D.:
The first formal list of the books of the New Testament is generally believed to have been published in 140 A.D. by Marcion (The History of Christianity, Dr. Tim Dowley, p.106). (Source)
Since the above list may be too conservative for Abualrub’s tastes, seeing that he has a fascination with liberal-critical scholarly views of the Holy Bible, here is another list which is less conservative:
Interpreter's One Volume Commentary of the Bible
- 1 Thessalonians - 50 (p. 1275).
- Philippian, Colossians, Philemon - 55 or 60 (Ibid.).
- 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians - 56 (Ibid.)
- Romans - 57 (Ibid.).
- 1 Peter - 60 or 96 (Ibid.).
- 2 Thessalonians - 75-90 (Ibid.)
- Mark - 64 to ca. 75 (p. 644), 70 (p. 609), 75 (p. 1275).
- Matthew - 80-85 (p. 609), 85 (p. 1275).
- Luke - 85-95 (p. 673), 90 (p. 1275).
- Acts - 90-100 (p. 729), 100 (p. 1275).
- Hebrews, Revelation - 95 (p. 1275).
- Ephesians - 95 (p. 835).
- John, James - 100 (Ibid.).
- John's Epistles - 110 (Ibid.)
- Jude - 125 (Ibid.).
- Pastoral Epistles - 130 (Ibid.).
- 2 Peter - 150 (Ibid.).
Even if we accept the above liberal dating of the NT books, we are still left with most of the books, specifically the Pauline epistles and the Synoptic Gospels, being written within the first generation of the eye and ear witnesses of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, if the NT is unreliable because it wasn’t supposedly written during Jesus’ lifetime, then the Quran is even more unreliable since it didn’t even come into existence until over 600 years after Christ walked this earth! More on this below.
Finally, Abualrub thinks of the Trinity in terms of mathematical equations, mockingly implying that the Trinity is equivalent to saying that 1+1+1 = 1. Abualrub needs to pursue further studies in math, especially formal logic, since he erroneously assumes that three things cannot still be one in some sense. We will help him advance in his understanding of math by having him meditate on the following equations and formulas:
1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
1 divided by 1 divided 1 = 1.
13, or 1 to the third power = 1.
Infinity + infinity + infinity = infinity.
Infinity – infinity – infinity = infinity.
Abualrub has some questions to ask of us:
Three Questions
There is no denying that Christianity is mostly built around Jesus being the son of God, as the Christians falsely claim. They also believe that the Bible was inspired by God Himself and that the Old and the New Testaments constitute ‘The Literal Word of God’. Thus, I, Jalal Abualrub, would like to humbly ask these three questions of the Christians.
- Why would the claimed ‘son of God’ who, only according to Christians descended from God Himself, need a genealogy?
- If Jesus needed a genealogy, then why would two ‘divinely inspired’ Gospels contained in the Bible narrate genealogies that list sons of Adam as ancestors for Jesus, a man who has no genealogy since only according to Christians, he descended from God Himself?
- If the Bible is ‘The Literal Word of God’ as Christians claim, then why would two ‘divinely inspired’ Gospels contained in the Bible list two different genealogies for Jesus, a man who has no genealogy since only according to Christians, he descended from God Himself?
Abualrub also places the two genealogies side by side for comparative purposes and then says:
Solving Biblical Errors by Conjecture
Ever since the four Gospels, written by ‘Authors Anonymous’, appeared many years after Jesus departed this earthly life without being crucified, Christians tried in vain to explain the dramatic discrepancies between these two genealogies in the number of generations and in the names. They give various explanations for the discrepancies, always based on conjecture, but avoid answering this crucial question:
Why did the writes [sic] of these Gospels, whoever they were, write a genealogy for Jesus to begin with?
One more time:
Even if the Two Genealogies of Jesus Were Perfectly Identical, Why Would They Appear in the Bible to Begin With?
The problem is not only in the discrepancies between the two genealogies of Jesus found in Matthew and Luke, but also in the fact that each one of these two Gospels listed a detailed genealogy for a man Christians falsely claim to be the son of God. Thus, even if Christians were ever able to solve this clear error by whatever suggestion they may give, how can they answer the question of why these writers would bring names of groups of men in the genealogy of Jesus, men who are not the paternal ancestors of Jesus at all? The Fact that these genealogies appear in the New Testament proves that the Bible is not the ‘Literal Word of God’, but the corrupted version of what was once the word of God before it was edited, changed, translated, retranslated, amended and then changed again until Christians can no longer differentiate between what is true and what is false in their Holy Book. I am amazed at how Christian scholars avoid answering this crucial question and instead insist on spending tremendous time and effort in trying to reconcile the truly enormous and apparent differences found in the Bible with regards to the genealogy of Jesus.
ANSWER:
It is normal to wonder about the differences in the genealogies found in Matthew and Luke – and these differences have been discussed by Christians long before the advent of Islam – but for Abualrub to question why Jesus would have any genealogy at all is somewhat new. The question is not whether Jesus "needs" a genealogy but since Jesus was born from a human mother, he obviously inherits her genealogy. Abualrub tried to be particularly clever and blundered greatly.
In fact, Abualrub grossly distorts the Christian view and is simply attacking straw man arguments at this point. We will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he does so in ignorance, that he really has no clue what the Bible and Christians truly believe. Therefore, we humbly provide the answers to his questions:
1) The reason why Christ has a genealogy is because Jesus became a true human being when he became flesh:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made… He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him… And the Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:1-3, 10, 14
The way that Christ became flesh was by being born from the virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit:
"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ… Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.’" Matthew 1:16, 18-20
"In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, ‘Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!’ But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.’ And Mary said to the angel, ‘How will this be, since I am a virgin?’ And the angel answered her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy--the Son of God.’" Luke 1:26-35
"On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, ‘They have no wine.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.’ His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever he tells you.’ … After this he went down to Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for a few days." John 2:1-5, 12
"but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son!’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother!’ And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home." John 19:25-27
Abualrub’s question erroneously presumes that we Christians deny the real humanity of the Lord Jesus, thinking that we believe that Jesus had only one nature, that of Deity. On the contrary, we believe in the testimony of the Holy Bible that the one person of Christ had two distinct natures, Deity and humanity, which were united perfectly together, not mixed or fused into each other:
"For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" Colossians 2:9
2) Common sense indicates that every human being [with the exception of Adam and Eve of course] has multiple genealogies, two from the mother’s side and two from the father’s side. For instance, a person has a genealogy from his/her paternal grandfather and another from his/her paternal grandmother. The same is the case with one’s mother’s side, i.e. one receives another set of genealogies from the maternal grandfather and grandmother.
In the case of the Lord Jesus, he receives multiple genealogies from both his biological mother and his adoptive father. This also addresses his third point.
3) Abualrub erroneously assumes that one can only trace his/her genealogy through the paternal side. Abualrub isn’t simply contradicting what the Holy Bible says at this point, he is also falsifying the Quran:
That is Our argument, which We bestowed upon Abraham as against his people. We raise up in degrees whom We will; surely thy Lord is All-wise, All-knowing. And We gave to him Isaac and Jacob -- each one We guided, And Noah We guided before; and of his seed David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Moses and Aaron -- even so We recompense the good-doers -- Zachariah and John, Jesus and Elias; each was of the righteous; S. 6:83-85
Jesus is listed as being of the seed of Noah. Ibn Kathir wrote regarding the above:
Mentioning `Isa in the offspring of Ibrahim, or Nuh as we stated above, is proof that the grandchildren from a man's daughter's side are included among his offspring. `Isa is included among Ibrahim's progeny through his mother, although `Isa did not have a father. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Abu Harb bin Abi Al-Aswad said, "Al-Hajjaj sent to Yahya bin Ya`mar, saying, `I was told that you claim that Al-Hasan and Al-Husayn are from the offspring of the Prophet, did you find it in the Book of Allah I read the Qur'an from beginning to end and did not find it?' Yahya said, `Do you not read in Surat Al-An`am, …
<and Yahya and `Isa…>
Al-Hajjaj said, `Yes.' Yahya said, `Is not `Isa from the offspring of Ibrahim, although he did not have a father' Al-Hajjaj said, `You have said the truth.’" For example, when a man leaves behind a legacy, a trust, or gift to his "offspring'' then the children of his daughters are included. But if a man gives something to his "sons'', or he leaves a trust behind for them, then that would be particular to his male children and their male children ... (Source; underline emphasis ours)
In fact, Ibn Kathir even stated that Mary was from David's line!
<And mention in the Book, Maryam,> She was Maryam bint `Imran from the family lineage of Dawud. She was from a good and wholesome family of the Children of Israel. Allah mentioned the story of her mother's pregnancy with her in Surah Al `Imran, and that she (Maryam's mother) dedicated her freely for the service of Allah. This meant that she dedicated the child (Maryam) to the service of the Masjid of the Sacred House (in Jerusalem). Thus, they (Zakariyya, Maryam's mother and Maryam) were similar in that aspect. (Source; bold and underline emphasis ours)
Thus, Islam concurs that a person can trace his genealogy through his mother’s side.
Abualrub writes:
Further, why would Matthew (1:1) say this, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham", when this statement contradicts the foundation of Christianity, that is, Jesus being the son of God? Why would Luke (3:38) say this, "Adam, which was the son of God", when according to Christians, it was Jesus who was the son of God not Adam?
ANSWER:
Abularub is again attacking a straw man. How can any Christian claim that Adam is not the son of God when their own Scriptures say he was?! Abualrub is committing another fallacy, namely the fallacy of equivocation since he assumes that Jesus is God’s Son in the same sense that Adam was. Again, instead of demonstrating here why this claim is erroneous, for the sake of brevity we will simple defer the discussion to the following papers:
http://answering-islam.org/Hahn/son.html
http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Challenge/chap3.html
http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Sharing/12son.html
http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol2/8b.html
http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/christ.html#1.5
http://abrahamic-faith.com/Jesus-son-of-God.html
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Alharamain/60_questions_answered_1.htm
More importantly, Abualrub apparently doesn’t want to see how this passage from Luke refutes the Quran. It shows that both the Old and New Testaments perfectly agree that God is a Father to his people, having many sons and daughters in a purely spiritual sense, which disagrees with the Quran that says that Allah is nobody’s father!
This concludes this section. Our examination of Abualrub's arguments continues in Part 2.
Endnotes
{1} There are several places where the OT applies the noun Elohim, or God, to humans who function as God’s representatives:
"He shall speak for you to the people, and he shall be your mouth, and you shall be as God to him." Exodus 4:16
"And the LORD said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.’" Exodus 7:1
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness; you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions;" Psalm 45:6-7
Moses and the King of Israel weren’t called God because they were divinities, nor are these passages using the word God in an exaggerated, hyperbolic manner. These individuals were called God in a functional, representational sense, i.e. since they were God’s representatives they functioned in the role of God to the people.
However, the child in Isaiah 9 isn’t simply called Elohim, but is given titles that go far beyond a functional sense. For instance, the child is given a title, Mighty God, which elsewhere is attributed only to Yahweh God:
"For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe." Deuteronomy 10:17
"Now, therefore, our God, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who keeps covenant and steadfast love, let not all the hardship seem little to you that has come upon us, upon our kings, our princes, our priests, our prophets, our fathers, and all your people, since the time of the kings of Assyria until this day." Nehemiah 9:32
"In that day the remnant of Israel and the survivors of the house of Jacob will no more lean on him who struck them, but will lean on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God." Isaiah 10:20-21
"You show steadfast love to thousands, but you repay the guilt of fathers to their children after them, O great and mighty God, whose name is the LORD of hosts," Jeremiah 32:18
Hence, Moses and the King were merely types pointing to the reality embodied in the Messiah, i.e. they were God solely in a functional sense pointing to the One who was God in an actual sense.
Again, the fact that the OT can call God’s spokespersons God, as well as address the Davidic King as the Mighty God, proves that the OT is not in line with the Quran. The OT is perfectly in line with the theology and teaching of the NT scriptures.
Responses to Jalal Abualrub
Articles by Sam Shamoun
Answering Islam Home Page