October 2016

GOD IN ISLAM

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE MOSLEM CONCEPTION OF GOD

اللّهُ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ1

“God, there is no God but He, the Living, the Self-subsisting.”

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Saudi Arabic Flag

National Flag of Saudi Flag

"There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet."

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian  Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY

LONDON, MADRAS AND COLOMBO
1908

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE
  INTRODUCTION  
I. THE UNITY OF GOD  
II. THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD  
III. ANTHROPOMORPHIC CONCEPTIONS OF GOD  
IV. GOD IN HIS RELATION TO MAN  
V. GOD IN HIS RELATION TO SIN AND SALVATION  

INTRODUCTION

IN the final analysis, the worth of any religion will be decided, not by the magnitude of its conquests in the world or the number of its professors, but by its teaching concerning the person and character of God. This latter is fundamental, for upon it will depend the whole nature and value of its moral precepts, no less than of its social legislation. The question is not merely whether a certain religion is monotheistic or polytheistic, but it is one involving a definition of the character and attributes of God; for the abstract doctrine of one God can never, of itself, suffice to elevate humanity or inspire reverence; the character attributed to that God must ever be of fundamental importance.

The student who seeks to know what is the Muhammadan idea of God is shut up, broadly speaking, to four sources of information. First of all he has the Qur'an with its brief and pregnant watchword, “La ilaha illa’llahu.” “There is no God but God”; then secondly he has the Traditions which represent much of the oral teaching of Muhammad, and, perhaps, some ideas also of a later age; thirdly there is the Ijma or unanimous doctrinal opinions of the leading theologians of Islam, and, finally, there is Qiyas which represents the results of the analogical reasoning of Moslem divines with regard to the teaching of Islam. It is evident then, that, in order to a complete view of the Islamic conception of God, each of these witnesses must be examined and drawn upon for its quota of testimony, and it will be our endeavour in the following pages to let these speak for themselves, so that the reader may be in a position to judge whether the Islamic idea of God is a sufficient and worthy one.

Muhammad's conception of God must have been derived from many sources. Nature was, perhaps, his greatest teacher, and some of the finest passages of the Qur'an are those which describe the creative majesty of the Supreme. Even as a youth, Muhammad must often, as he tended the flocks of Mecca, have been struck with the evidences of a supreme Creator, and his attention must often have been drawn to the signs of an unseen power spread all around him. Thus in the silent passing of the stars and the orderly succession of day and night, no less than in the roll of the thunder as it pealed around the hills of Mecca, Muhammad must have beheld those “signs” of a divine wisdom and power which he afterwards rehearsed with such beauty to his idolatrous countrymen. Later on, those months of quiet retirement in the cave of Mount Hira' must have furnished many a golden opportunity for the contemplation of the great Architect. To Mohammad, with his nervous and highly-wrought temperament, the great truth must often have impressed itself upon him that,

“The Almighty King
Not always in the splendid scene of pomp,
Tremendous, on the sounding trumpet rides,
Or sweeping whirlwind; nor in the awful peal
Of echoing thunder is He always heard,
Or seen in lightning's vivid flames; but oft,
When every turbid clement is hushed,
In the still voice of nature stands confest
The Lord omnipotent!”

Thus Muhammad's earliest ideas of God were gained from the sublime wonders of nature round about him, and again and again in the earlier passages of the Qur'an, in eloquent and impassioned verse, he calls his Arab countrymen to the contemplation and worship of the great Cause of all causes; and the one dominant note in these earlier Suras is the matchless power and transcendent wisdom of the Almighty. A good sample of the “revelations” of this period is furnished in the early portion of Qur'an Ar-Ra'd 13 where we read:—

«هُوَ الَّذِي يُرِيكُمُ الْبَرْقَ خَوْفاً وَطَمَعاً وَيُنْشِىءُ السَّحَابَ الثِّقَالَ. وَيُسَبِّحُ الرَّعْدُ بِحَمْدِهِ وَالْمَلاَئِكَةُ مِنْ خِيفَتِهِ وَيُرْسِلُ الصَّوَاعِقَ فَيُصِيبُ بِهَا مَن يَشَاءُ وَهُمْ يُجَادِلُونَ فِي اللّهِ وَهُوَ شَدِيدُ الْمِحَالِ».

“He it is who shows you the lightning for fear and hope; and He brings up the heavy clouds. And the thunder celebrates His praise, and the angels too, for fear of Him. And He sends the thunder-clap and overtakes therewith whom He will;—Yet they wrangle about God! But He is strong in might.” (verses 12, 13)

Another fine passage in Qur’an Al-Baqarah (2) runs thus:—

«وَإِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ لاَّ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الرَّحْمَنُ الرَّحِيمُ. إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ وَالْفُلْكِ الَّتِي تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمَا يَنفَعُ النَّاسَ وَمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ مِنَ السَّمَاء مِن مَّاء فَأَحْيَا بِهِ الأرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ دَآبَّةٍ وَتَصْرِيفِ الرِّيَاحِ وَالسَّحَابِ الْمُسَخِّرِ بَيْنَ السَّمَاء وَالأَرْضِ لآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ».

“Your God is one God: there is no God but He, the Merciful, the Compassionate. Verily in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day, and in the ship that runneth in the sea with that which profits man, and in what water God sends down from heaven and quickens therewith the earth after its death, and spreads abroad therein all kinds of cattle, and in the shifting of the winds, and in the clouds that are pressed into service betwixt heaven and earth, are signs to people who can understand.” (Qur’an Al-Baqarah 2:163-164)

A second source of Muhammad's beliefs concerning God was undoubtedly the Hanifs, 2 a contemporary Theistic sect, who rejected the popular idols of the Arabians, and stood for the worship of one God alone. With these men Muhammad must often have come into contact, and any comparison of his teaching concerning God with the tenets of the Hanifs will make it clear that Muhammad was indebted to them not a little for his conception of the Supreme.

In the third place, Muhammad's ideas concerning God must have been largely shaped and modified by his contact with the numerous Jews and Christians who lived in Arabia at that time. One has only to read the many repetitions of Jewish tales, scriptural and legendary, which cover the pages of the Qur'an, and are pressed into service in order to enforce the teaching and claims of the Prophet, in order to realize to what a large extent Muhammad was indebted to the Jews for his views of God and His government of the world. Add to all this a fervid imagination combined with a true poetic genius, and one is in a position to understand some of the complex influences which were at work in combining to produce the Moslem conception of God.

All students of Islam are agreed that its strength lies in its doctrine of the unity of God. The polytheist who forsakes his idols and learns to say, “There is no God but Allah” attains at once a self-respect—rather a fanatical pride—which gives him conscious power, and carries him triumphant over many difficulties; and yet, as we have already remarked. the abstract doctrine of one God cannot regenerate humanity or provide an adequate motive for holiness; everything will depend upon the character and attributes of that God. Let the Moslem reader, then, divesting himself of all prejudice, accompany us in our analysis of the Muhammadan conception of God as it stands recorded in the writings of Islam; and let him remember that, if at times the language used seems harsh, it is directed, not against him, but against those dishonouring conceptions of God which every true worshipper must necessarily repudiate with righteous indignation.

As we proceed to take up and analyse this Moslem conception of God, both in its origin and development, we shall frequently find occasion to compare it with the Christian idea as based upon the revelation of God contained in the Torah and Injil; and may He, the One without a second, lead us in the right path.


1. Qur’an al-Baqarah 2:255.

2. See further in W. Goldsack's “The Origins of the Qur'an,” pp. 3-5.

THE BIBLE IN ISLAM

BEING

A STUDY OF THE PLACE AND VALUE OF THE BIBLE IN ISLAM

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Bible
Bible

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY
FOR INDIA

MADRAS, ALLAHABAD, CALCUTTA, RANGOON, COLOMBO.
1922

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE a
I. MUHAMMAD'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE BIBLE 1
II. MUHAMMAD'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE BIBLE 6
III. MODERN CHARGES OF CORRUPTION BASED ON THE QUR'AN 11
IV. MODERN CHARGES OF CORRUPTION BASED ON THE BIBLE 24
V. MODERN CHARGES OF ABROGATION 43
VI. BIBLE DOCTRINE IN ISLAM 52
VII. BIBLE HISTORY IN ISLAM 66

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

MUHAMMAD AND THE BIBLE

BEING

An Inquiry into the Allegation that
Certain Passages in the Bible Foretell Muhammad

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Reading Bible
Reading Bible

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian  Baptist Missionary  and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY
FOR INDIA

MADRAS, ALLAHABAD, CALCUTTA, RANGOON, COLOMBO.
1915
Price 3 As

CONTENTS
Section   PAGE a
  Introduction 4
I. Raise Up Unto Thee A Prophet”, Deuteronomy 18: 15, 18-19. 5
II. Seir and Mount Paran, Deuteronomy 33:2. 14
III. Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O mighty one’, Psalms 45: 3-5. 19
IV. Muhammadim”, Song of Songs 5:10-16. 22
V. Camel”, Isaiah 21:7. 26
VI. Kedar”, Isaiah 42:11. 27
VII. Teman and Mount Paran, Habakkuk 3:3. 29
VIII. One Mightier Than I”, Mark 1:7. 31
IX. That Prophet”, John 1:19-21. 33
X. The Paraclete”, John Chapters 14 to 16. 36
XI. The Prince Of This World”, John 14:30. 44

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

MUHAMMAD AND THE BIBLE

INTRODUCTION

MOST Muslims believe that their Prophet Muhammad has been foretold in the Torah and Injil, and some Muslim writers have even quoted various passages from those books in which, it is affirmed, the Arabian lawgiver has been predicted. Such attempts to find the Prophet Muhammad in the Bible are not without reason, for if, as is believed by Muslims, Muhammad was indeed the last and greatest Prophet, and if, by his coming, all previous dispensations have been abrogated, then we should certainly expect to find clear and repeated predictions concerning him in the previous Scriptures, in the same manner that the Lord Jesus Christ was foretold in the Scriptures of the Jews. Muhammad was pleased to call himself the Ummi Prophet; and although the exact meaning of the term is disputed, yet there can be little reason to doubt that he never personally read the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. At the same time there were not wanting Jewish and Christian converts to Islam who undoubtedly led Muhammad to believe that he was a Prophet whose advent was clearly foretold in the Bible. ‘The Jewish anticipation of their Messiah, and the perfectly distinct anticipation by the Christians of the second advent of Christ were thus fused into a common argument for a coming Prophet expected by both Jews and Christians, and foretold in all the Scriptures.’ Under such circumstances it is not surprising to find Muhammad describing himself in the pages of the Qur'an as,

النَّبِيَّ الأُمِّيَّ الَّذِي يَجِدُونَهُ مَكْتُوباً عِندَهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالإِنْجِيلِ

‘the Ummi Prophet—whom they (the Jews and Christians) shall find described with them in the Torah and Injil’ (Qur’an Al-A'raf 7:157). In another place, in still more explicit language, he claims to have been prophesied by name. Thus we read:—

وَإِذْ قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِلَيْكُم مُّصَدِّقاً لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيَّ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَمُبَشِّراً بِرَسُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ

‘And, remember, when Jesus the son of Mary said, “O Children of Israel! of a truth I am God's apostle to you to confirm the Torah which was given before me, and to announce an apostle that shall come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad”’ (Qur’an As-Saff 61:6). Under such circumstances it is perfectly natural for Muslims to seek the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments for the prophecies which Muhammad was persuaded to believe were hidden there. It is our purpose, therefore, in this little book, to examine the principal passages of the Bible quoted by Muslims in which they claim to find predictions, more or less explicit, of the coming of Muhammad, and to show that in no passage whatever is there the slightest hint of any true Prophet who should come after Jesus the Messiah.

CHRIST IN ISLAM

THE TESTIMONY OF THE QUR’AN TO CHRIST

إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِنْهُ 1

The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah,
and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him.

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Crucifixion: Nails, Hammer, Wooden Cross
Crucifixion: Nails, Hammer, Wooden Cross

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY
FOR INDIA

LONDON, MADRAS AND COLOMBO.
1905

PRINTED AT THE
S.P.C.K. PRESS, VESPERY, MADRAS.
1905

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE a
  Introduction 4
I Christ The Israelite 4
II The Birth Of Christ 5
III Jesus The Promised Messiah 10
IV Christ The Word Of God 13
V Christ The Spirit Of God 20
VI Christ The Only Intercessor 24
VII The Sinless Prophet Of Islam 29
VIII Christ The Wonder-Worker 33
  Papers For Thoughtful Muslims 44

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

CHRIST IN ISLAM

INTRODUCTION

ENDLESS praise be to the one only God, the Great and the Merciful. Who through His messengers the Prophets has revealed His will to man, and in his word pointed the way of eternal life.

In this little book we purpose to select one from amongst all the prophets, namely, Jesus Christ, and show from the Qur’an and the Traditions the position which the Prophet of Nazareth occupies in Islam. Our Muslim brethren often speak of 'Isa Ruh Ullah,’ yet but few of them have any idea of the high position which is accorded Him in both the Qur’an and the Traditions. For this reason, we purpose here to show from the authorities of Islam itself the high testimony which is borne to Christ by these books, and to point out the duty of all true Muslems with respect to the same. The various high titles given to Christ in the Qur’an, no less than the works there ascribed to Him, have been predicated of no other prophet, and they place Him high above all others. Thus Jesus Christ is called in the Qur’an, ‘The Word of God,’ ‘A Spirit from Him (God),’ ‘The Messiah,’ etc., titles which have been given to no other, and which constitute a claim on our attention to this important subject. Let us then, freeing our minds from all prejudice and preconceived notions, examine the testimony of the Qur’an and the Traditions upon this important matter.


1. Qur’an an-Nisa’ 4:171.

THE ORIGINS OF THE QUR’AN

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE SOURCES OF ISLAM

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Muhammad & the Bible

بَلْ هُوَ قُرْآنٌ مَجِيدٌ فِي لَوْحٍ مَحْفُوظٍ

“Verily it is a glorious Qur’an written on a preserved table.”

Al-Buruj 85:21-22

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY

LONDON, MADRAS AND COLOMBO.
1907

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE  a 
  Introduction vii
I. Heathen beliefs and practices incorporated into the Qur’an 1
II. Jewish beliefs and practices incorporated into the Qur’an 12
III. Christian beliefs and practices incorporated into the Qur’an 24
IV. Portions of the Qur’an called forth by the circumstances of the time 35

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

Preface

THIS little book has no claim to originality. It is principally based upon the larger works of Geiger, Tisdall, Zwemer, Muir, Sell and Imadu’d-Din, and aims at presenting in a brief, and therefore inexpensive, form for Indian readers some of the results of the exhaustive studies of those scholars. If it helps any enquiring Muslims to understand more clearly the origin of the faith taught by Muhammad, it will have accomplished the purpose for which it was written. The transliteration adopted is that recommended the Royal Asiatic Society, namely,

TRANSLITERATIONS
th for ث for ط
" ح z " ظ
kh " خ " ع
dh " ذ gh " غ
" ص q " ق
" ض , " ء

William Goldsack

MADRAS, December, 1907.

MUHAMMAD IN ISLAM

Sketches Of Muhammad

From Islamic Sources

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Kaaba in Mecca
Kaaba in Mecca

 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian  Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY FOR INDIA

MADRAS ALLAHABAD CALCUTTA RANGOON COLOMBO
1916

PRINTED AT THE
S.P.C.K. PRESS, VEPERY, MADRAS
1916

CONTENTS
  PREFACE v
  PART I  
  MUHAMMAD AT MECCA  
CHAPTER   PAGE  a 
I. THE ARABS IN THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD 1
II. THE BIRTH AND EARLY LIFE OF MUHAMMAD 9
III. THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE MESSAGE 18
IV. DISPUTATIONS WITH THE QURAISH 29
V. THE FLIGHT FROM MECCA 48
  PART II  
  MUHAMMAD AT MADINA  
CHAPTER   PAGE
I. SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS LEGISLATION 57
II. THE PROCLAMATION OF JEHAD 71
III. MUHAMMAD'S RELATIONS WITH THE JEWS 86
IV. MUHAMMAD'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS WOMEN 96
V. THE DEATH OF MUHAMMAD 107

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

PREFACE

THIS little book does not profess to offer a complete biography of the prophet Muhammad. As its title suggests, it aims at presenting to the reader a number of pen-pictures of the great reformer, based upon purely Islamic sources. It seeks to pourtray the place given to Muhammad ‘in Islam’ and by Islam, and for that reason eschews the theories of non-Muslim authors. Not a few of the so-called ‘biographies’ of the founder of Islam written in India by modern Muslims are famous, chiefly, for their utter lack of historical accuracy. Their authors have given rein to an exuberant fancy, and have conjured up a picture of the great Arabian as untrue to history as to his own utterances which have been preserved to us by his contemporaries.

Every statement of importance made in the following pages is based upon Muhammadan authorities, and when anything of special interest or value has had to be chronicled, we have invariably given the ipsissima verba of the authorities quoted; whilst care has been taken to give precise references for the guidance of those who wish to prosecute their enquiries further.

Our first and principal authority for information regarding the personality of Muhammad is, naturally, the biographies written by his early followers, and it is a matter for sincere regret that the earliest of these is not now extant. Indeed more than one life of the prophet is mentioned by the early historians, of which no trace can now be found. It seems probable that Zuhri, who died in A.H. 124, was the first to write a biography of Muhammad. It is at least certain that he compiled collections of the traditions bearing upon various aspects of the prophet's life and character, and there is but little doubt that later writers made good use of the materials thus collected.

Two other historians are mentioned in early Muslim annals as having compiled biographies of Muhammad. These both belong to the second century of the Hijrah, and are named respectively Musa bin Okba 1 and Abu Ma’shar. None of the writings of these authors have come down to us. The same remark applies to the voluminous works of Madaini who lived during the last half of the second century of the Muhammadan era.

Another writer whose works gained a high place in the esteem of his contemporaries was Muhammad bin Ishaq, who died in A.H. 151. His collection of traditions relating to the prophet no longer exists, but his friend and disciple, Ibn Hisham, embodied in his Siratu'r-Rasul or Life of the Prophet, 2 which exists to the present day, the materials collected by Ibn Ishaq. The work of Ibn Hisham is thus the earliest extant life of the prophet available for scholars at the present time; and no one can pretend to a very extensive acquaintance with the subject who has not studied the Siratu'r-Rasul of Ibn Hisham. This writer, who is justly famous in Muslim history, died in A.H. 213, and all succeeding biographers of the prophet have largely drawn upon his work for their materials. The reader will observe that in this brief memoir also we have had frequent occasion to quote this great author.

Another writer of repute, whose works have come down to us, is Muhammad Ibn Sa’d, 3 the secretary of the famous Waqidi. He died in A. H. 230. This scholar was the author of no less than fifteen treatises, one of which was his famous Sirat or Life of Muhammad. This work is, however, rather a collection of traditions grouped according to subject-matter, than a chronological record of the prophet's life; but it contains invaluable material for all who wish to study the subject at first-hand.

Our second source of information concerning the life of Muhammad is the Traditions or Ahadith. 4 These voluminous writings, which exist in many different collections, record the sayings and actions of the prophet, and give a vivid picture of his everyday life. Originally transmitted in oral form by the earliest ‘companions’ of Muhammad they were ultimately collected and reduced to writing, and have come down to us under the names of the most famous collectors. Of these latter Bukhari and Muslim are deservedly famous. Both these scholars died in the middle of the third century of the Hijrah. Their works have been continually referred to in the present volume, as has also the Jamiu't-Tirmidhi.

Our third source of information relating to Muhammad is the Qur'an, 5 together with the standard commentaries thereon. Whatever may be said to discount the value and importance of later tradition, it must be conceded that in the Qur'an we have contemporary evidence regarding much that intimately touches the life of the founder of Islam; and no pen-picture of the warrior-prophet would be complete that did not take into account the witness of the Qur'an. This, again, is richly supplemented by the commentators, who relate innumerable incidents in the prophet's life in order to elucidate some obscure passage or illustrate some ambiguous text. In our study of Muhammad in Islam we have referred continually to the great classical commentaries of ‘Abbas, 6 Baidawi 7 and the Jalalain, 8 as well as to the later, and less authoritative commentaries of Qadari, ‘Abdu’l-Qadir, Raufi and the Khalasatu't-Tafasir.

One thing more remains to be said. We have, to some extent, followed the lead of some of the earlier biographers of Muhammad, and have chosen to group the various chapters of the book according to subject-matter, rather than in strict chronological order; so that, whilst, in the main, the two great divisions in the prophet's career—his life at Mecca, and his life at Madina—have been observed, it has not infrequently happened that events belonging to the one period have been grouped with similar events belonging to the other. The endeavour has been made throughout to remain true to the title of the book, and to record only those events relating to the life of Muhammad which are found chronicled ‘in Islam’.

December, 1915

William Goldsack


1. Musa bin Uqba, Kitab-ul-Maghazi, A Fragment of the Lost Book of Musa B. 'Uqba, A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, p. xlii -  xlvii.

2. Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, Oxford Press, Oxford, England, 2002, p. 860.

THE QUR’AN IN ISLAM

AN INQUIRY INTO THE INTEGRITY
OF THE QUR’AN

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Hussaini Dalan Masjid in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Hussaini Dalan Masjid in Dhaka, Bangladesh

فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ

“Ask those who are acquainted with the Scripture, if ye know not.”

Qur’an al-Anbiya 21:7


 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY

LONDON, MADRAS AND COLOMBO.
1906


S.P.C.K. PRESS, VEPERY, MADRAS.

 

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE  a 
  INTRODUCTION 1
I. THE SEVEN READINGS OF THE QUR’AN 3
II. THE RECENSIONS OF ABU-BAKR AND ‘UTHMAN 5
III. THE READING OF IBN MAS’UD 10
IV. THE TESTIMONY OF IMAM HUSAIN CONCERNING THE VARIOUS READINGS OF THE QUR’AN 14
V. THE TESTIMONY OF KAZI BAIZAWI CONCERNING THE VARIOUS READINGS OF THE QUR’AN 18
VI. THE TESTIMONY OF THE TRADITIONS TO THE QUR’AN 24
  APPENDIX  
  SURAH “TWO LIGHTS”  

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

 

THE QUR’AN IN ISLAM

INTRODUCTION

THE foundation of Islam is the Qur’an. Muhammadans treat this book with the most profound respect, and give it many high titles. Chief amongst these may be mentioned the names “Furqan,” the Distinguisher; “Qur’an Majid,” the Glorious Qur’an; “Qur’an Sharif,” the Noble Qur’an; and “Al Kitab,” the Book. It is the universal belief of Muslims that the Qur’an is the uncreated word of God, which He sent down to His servant Muhammad through the medium of the angel Gabriel. Many hold the language of the Arabic Qur’an to be unequalled anywhere in literature, and Muhammad himself challenged the unbelievers to produce another like it in these words:—

“If ye be in doubt concerning that revelation which we have sent down unto our servant, produce a chapter like unto it, and call upon your witnesses besides God, if ye say truth.” (Qur’an Al-Baqarah 2:23.)

There can be no doubt that the language of the Qur’an is in places exceedingly beautiful, and Muslims the world over love to recite it in a low monotonous chant. The feat of memorizing the whole is still regarded as both praiseworthy and meritorious.

The contents of the Qur’an are exceedingly varied; but it may be noted that the Jewish and Christian religions occupy a large amount of attention. The many references to these earlier faiths are instructive, and go to show that Muhammad did not so much represent himself as the founder of a new system as the promulgator of that faith which was held in the beginning by Abraham himself. Muhammad’s references to the Jewish and Christian scriptures also go to show that in the Qur’an he did not so much claim to supersede those books as to ‘confirm’ and substantiate them. Verses to this effect may be found all over the Qur’an; indeed the most extravagant praise is bestowed upon both Torah and Injil, and these books are ever held up as worthy of faith and obedience. It thus becomes a matter for surprise that, in spite of this fact, modern Muslims almost invariably speak of the Jewish and Christian scriptures as ‘corrupted’, and therefore unworthy of serious attention to-day. The reason for this attitude is obvious; for careful comparison of the Christian and Muslim scriptures shows that the Qur’an, which claims to ‘confirm’ the preceding scriptures, in reality differs very much from them. Muhammadans have thus been driven to the expedient of denying the integrity of the Torah and Injil in order to explain away this discrepancy. The question as to whether the Qur’an has been corrupted since the time when the prophet of Arabia captivated the Arabs by his eloquence, seems never to have been seriously considered by modern Muslims; yet the slightest acquaintance with Arabic history and literature reveals the fact that the present Qur’an is far indeed from being a complete and accurate copy of that Qur’an which Muhammad taught his followers. In the following pages we shall proceed to establish the fact from reliable Muslim authorities, and shall show that, in fact, the present Qur’an has been so mutilated and corrupted since the time of Muhammad that it can no longer be relied upon as an accurate and complete record of what he taught.

GHULAM JABBAR'S RENUNCIATION


A TALE OF EASTERN BENGAL

Baitul Aman Jame Masjid — Dhaka, Bangladesh
Baitul Aman Jame Masjid — Dhaka, Bangladesh

 


With Minor Edits


 

William Goldsack

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Traditions In Islam, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY FOR INDIA

LONDON, MADRAS AND COLOMBO.
1913


PRINTED AT THE

S.P.C.K. PRESS, VEPERY, MADRAS.

 

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE  a 
I. THE MISSIONARY'S LETTER 1
II. A MOMENTOUS INTERVIEW 20
III. THE SWORD OF THE SPIRIT 29
IV. THE MAULAVI'S CHALLENGE 39
V. THE MUNSHI'S STORY 51
VI. NEW VIEWS OF TRUTH 69
VII. THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION 75
VIII. COUNTING THE COST 117
IX. GHULAM'S CONFESSION 124
X. EMARAT'S CONVERSION 133

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

THE

TRADITIONS IN ISLAM

BEING

An essay on the origin and value of
Muhammadan Tradition

 


Qur'anic references were edited to reflect the verse numbers used in modern translations of the Qur'an.
Also, some footnotes were edited to give additional support for the text.


 

Kaaba in Mecca
Kaaba in Mecca

 

BY THE

REV. WILLIAM GOLDSACK

Australian Baptist Missionary and Apologist

1871–1957

Author of: The Qu’ran In Islam, Christ In Islam,
The Origins of the Qur'an, God In Islam, Muhammad In Islam.
. .

THE CHRISTIAN LITERATURE SOCIETY FOR INDIA

MADRAS ALLAHABAD CALCUTTA RANGOON COLOMBO
1919

MADRAS

PRINTED AT THE S.P.C.K. PRESS, VEPERY

 

CONTENTS
CHAPTER   PAGE  a 
I. THE ORIGIN OF TRADITION 1
II. THE AUTHENTICITY AND INTEGRITY OF TRADITION 28
III. THE COMPILATION AND SYSTEMATISATION OF THE TRADITIONS 51
IV. TRADITION AND THE BIBLE 63
V. TRADITION AND THE QUR'AN 79
VI. THE TRADITIONS AND REASON 89
  APPENDIX 101
  INDEX 103

a. Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the original book.

PREFACE

THE importance of the traditions in Islam can hardly be over-estimated. Muslim scholars define them as wahi ghair matlu (وحي غير متلو), or ‘unrecited revelation’, and in the theology of Islam they occupy a place second only to the Qur’an itself. Indeed they are described as the ‘uninspired record of inspired sayings’, and have, all down the ages, been used by Muslim divines both in the formation of canon law, and also in the exegesis of the Qur’an.

In popular Islam the traditions have usurped the place of the Qur’an itself, and for every Muhammadan who knows anything of the Qur’an, there are a thousand who are conversant with the stories of the traditions. Indeed, in countries in which Arabic is not the vernacular of the people, the Qur’an is an unknown book to all except a select few; whilst, on the other hand, books of traditions, such as the Qisasu’l-Anbiya, are read by the masses in vernacular translations almost wherever Muslims are to be found.

Yet there have always been Muslims who have questioned the authority of the traditions. For example, there died in the year 276 of the Hijra a Muslim scholar, named Al Imam Ibn Qutaybah ad-Dinawari, 1 who wrote a remarkable book, quoted frequently in the following pages, entitled Kitab Tawil Mukhtalifu’l-Hadith. 2 In the preface to his work the author describes it as written in refutation of the enemies of the people of the traditions and a reconciliation between the traditions which they accuse of contradiction and discrepancy; and an answer to the doubts which they cast on some of the obscure or seemingly ambiguous traditions.’

If thus early in the history of Islam opposition to the traditions had become so pronounced as to call forth a reply of nearly five hundred pages, one is less surprised to find a modern scholar, like Syed Amir Ali, describing the stories of those same traditions as golden dreams and beautiful and gorgeous legends.

Educated and thoughtful Muslims to-day ought no longer to be content to take on trust the extravagant claims made for the traditions. Intellectual honesty requires that they test for themselves this great mass of literature, which has come down to them from the second and third centuries of the Muslim era. If the following pages help any such to a clearer appreciation of moral values, and lead them to view the traditions in a truer historical perspective, the author’s labours will not have been in vain.

There are few phases of Islam about which more general ignorance prevails amongst English-speaking people than the traditions. Books, in the English language, dealing with the Qur’an, are not rare; but, so far as the author is aware, no critical study of the traditions of Islam has yet appeared in English. The late Sir William Muir, it is true, has dealt with the subject in a popular way in the valuable introduction to his Life of Mahomet; and the same writer has given us, in his book The Mohammedan Controversy, an admirable review of Sprenger’s famous essay on tradition; but, so far, nothing has been produced in English corresponding with Goldziher’s epoch-making essay on the traditions in his Mohammedanische Studien (vol. ii) in German.

The following essay is, at best, an introduction to the study of a most important and fascinating subject; and it is to be earnestly hoped that some capable scholar will yet do for English students of Islam what Goldziher has done for German.

In compiling the following pages the writer has laboured under somewhat severe limitations. In the first place, he had access neither to Goldziher’s famous study of the traditions, nor to Sprenger’s celebrated essay on the same: yet these two scholars have undoubtedly given us the best analysis of the traditions which has yet appeared in any European language. In the second place, the writer has endeavoured, all through, to confine himself to the briefest possible limits consistent with perspicuity. The book was written, primarily, for educated and intelligent Muslims, and this object is reflected, not only in the size, but in the style of the book. Over twenty years of close personal intercourse with Muslims in India has taught the writer the value and necessity of giving chapter and verse for every statement made in a book which is, necessarily, more or less of a controversial character. Hence the following pages are burdened with a much larger number of original quotations than would have been the case had he been writing exclusively, or even primarily, for western readers. The same reason has operated to keep these quotations in the body of the book, instead of placing them in footnotes at the bottom of the page.

For the convenience of students generally, and of educated Muslims in particular, a complete list of the works made use of in the preparation of this volume is given in an appendix. The writer has, all through, made large use of the famous Mishkatu’l Masabih which is, to-day perhaps, the most popular collection of traditions in India. Generally speaking, the quotations from that book are made from Matthew’s translation.

William Goldsack

Jessore, Bengal

1918


2. Ta’wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith  (The Interpretation of Conflicting Narrations).

CHAPTER I

THE UNITY OF GOD

THE Qur'an abounds in Passages, some of rare beauty, which teach the unity of God. By way of illustration we quote the 112th chapter of the Qur’an, entitled Al-Ikhlas, which runs thus:—

«قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ. اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ. لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ. وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُواً أَحَدٌ».

“Say, He is God alone. God the Eternal. He begets not, and is not begotten; nor is there like unto Him any one.” Muhammad was never tired of pointing to the creation as a “sign” of the unity of God, and the famous “verse of the throne” may well be quoted here as a specimen of such passages. It is found in Qur’an Al-Baqarah 2:255, and is as follows:—

«اللّهُ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ لاَ تَأْخُذُهُ سِنَةٌ وَلاَ نَوْمٌ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الأَرْضِ مَن ذَا الَّذِي يَشْفَعُ عِنْدَهُ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِهِ يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلاَ يُحِيطُونَ بِشَيْءٍ مِّنْ عِلْمِهِ إِلاَّ بِمَا شَاء وَسِعَ كُرْسِيُّهُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ وَلاَ يَؤُودُهُ حِفْظُهُمَا وَهُوَ الْعَلِيُّ الْعَظِيمُ».

“God, there is no God but He, the Living, the Self-subsistent. Slumber takes Him not, nor sleep. His is what is in the heavens and what is in the earth. Who is it that intercedes with Him save by His permission? He knows what is before them and what behind them, and they comprehend not aught of His knowledge, but of what He pleases. His throne extends over the heavens and the earth, and it tires Him not to guard them both, for He is high and grand.”

In the Qur'an the unreasonableness of polytheism is frequently dwelt upon as an argument for the unity of God, and in Qur’an Al-Mu'minun 23:91, we are told that:—

«مَا اتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ مِن وَلَدٍ وَمَا كَانَ مَعَهُ مِنْ إِلَهٍ إِذاً لَّذَهَبَ كُلُّ إِلَهٍ بِمَا خَلَقَ وَلَعَلاَ بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ».

“God never took a son, nor was there ever any god with Him;—then each god would have gone off with what he had created, and some would have exalted themselves over others —celebrated be His praises above what they attribute (to Him).” Another passage to the same effect is found in Qur'an Al-Anbiya' 21:22, where it is argued that:— “Were there in both (heaven and earth) gods besides God, both would surely have been corrupted,” 3 i.e., the whole creation would necessarily fall into confusion and he overturned by the competition of such mighty antagonists.

Muhammad's denunciation of idolatry was unsparing, and, with the exception of one temporary lapse, consistent. The idols were “an abomination of Satan” and were constantly held up to reprobation and contempt as objects “which neither profit nor harm us,” whilst the punishment of those who call upon them is painted in realistic colors. Not only is pagan idolatry reprehended by Muhammad in the Qur'an, but another system which the Prophet denounced with all the invective of which he was capable was that which ascribed to God wives and daughters from amongst the angels. “What!” exclaims the Prophet, “has your Lord chosen to give you sons, and shall He take for Himself females from among the angels?” (Qur’an Al-Isra' 17:40). Another opinion, closely allied to this, which Muhammad denounced as opposed to the unity of God was that of ascribing to Him partners in His government. Thus in Qur’an Al-An'am 6:100, we read:—“Yet they made the jinn partners with God, though He created them!”

But not only did Muhammad rightly denounce idolatry and the association of inferior gods and goddesses with God, but he also accused the Christians of polytheism, or rather tri-theism, on account of their doctrine of the trinity, including, as it does, the doctrine of the divine Sonship of Jesus Christ. Even the Jews are accused of calling Ezra the Son of God, though there is no record, either scriptural or profane, that they ever did so. The numerous references in the Qur’an to the Christian trinity make it undeniably clear that Muhammad failed absolutely to understand the doctrine as held and taught by orthodox Christians, and he, more than once, mistakenly represents the Christian trinity as consisting of Father, Son and Virgin Mary! Thus in Qur’an Al-Ma’idah 5:73-75, we read:—

«لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُواْ إِنَّ اللّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلاَثَةٍ ... مَّا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ صِدِّيقَةٌ كَانَا يَأْكُلاَنِ الطَّعَامَ».

“They misbelieve who say, verily, God is the third of three . . . . The Messiah, the son of Mary is only a prophet; prophets before him have passed away, and his mother was a confessor; they used both to eat food.” It is perfectly clear from the statements of the Qur'an, that what Muhammad mistakenly combatted was not the doctrine of the trinity as held by Christians at all, but an imaginary belief in three gods. Thus in Qur’an Al-Ma’idah 5:116, we read:—

«وَإِذْ قَالَ اللّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَهَيْنِ».

“And when God said, O Jesus, son of Mary! is it thou who didst say to men, take me and my mother for two gods beside God?” Muhammad's mistake was thus a double one; first in substituting Mary for the Holy Spirit as the third person of the Holy Trinity, and secondly, in imagining that the Christians worshipped these as three separate Gods. What the Qur'an denounces, therefore, is polytheism, a practice which Christians repudiate quite as indignantly as do Moslems. It is, indeed, difficult to see how sincere Moslems can reconcile these mistakes of Muhammad with the belief that the Qur'an is the word of God communicated direct to the Prophet by the angel Gabriel. The fact is worth noticing here that modern archaeological discoveries in Arabia fully corroborate the verdict of literature and of history, and show conclusively that the trinity of the Arabian Christians consisted of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; for on the Christian monuments found by Dr. Edward Glaser 4 in Yemen, the Sirwah inscription (A.D. 542) opens with the words:—“In the power of the All-Merciful and His Messiah and the Holy Ghost.” 5

The Christian conception of God is based upon the words used by Jesus Christ, “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord” (Mark 12:29) and involves a triune conception of the one true God rather than a doctrine of three Gods; but Muhammad's misunderstanding of the Sonship of Christ—a misunderstanding shared by his followers ever since—left him no alternative but to condemn what he considered the blasphemy of attributing a son to the Almighty. But the Sonship conceived of by Muhammad was a purely carnal one, as his many references to the subject clearly show, and it is a purely imaginary physical generation of Christ which is so scathingly condemn in the Qur'an. One or two passages will make this clear. In Qur’an Al-An'am (6:101), it is written:— “The inventor of the heavens and the earth; how can He have a son when he has no female companion?” 6 And in Qur’an Al-Mu'minun 23:92 [91], we read, God hath not taken a son.” 7 Some idea of the Muhammadan belief on this subject can be gained from the remarks of the famous commentator Zamakhshari. Commenting on verse 171 of An-Nisa' Chapter 4 of the Qur’an, he says, “that which the Qur'an here refers to is the clear statement of theirs (the Christians) that God and Christ and Mary are three gods, and that Christ is a child of God from Mary”! Little wonder, with such ideas of the trinity in their minds, that Moslems should consider that it detracts from the unity of God. Rightly understood it does not do so, and Christians believe quite as strongly as do Muhammadans that God is one. To worship Mary as God is indeed blasphemy, and to call Jesus another God beside God is polytheism; but to say that there is only one living and true God who eternally exists in a three-fold selfness is not derogatory to the unity of God. Upon the other hand, this revealed truth helps to explain many things both in religion and philosophy, and throws not a little light upon the ascription to Jesus of titles such as “Word of God” and “Spirit of God,” which certainly can he applied to no mere human being.

We cannot help thinking that if our Muhammadan brethren would only divest themselves of their pre-conceived ideas of a carnal sonship of Christ, and would, instead, strive to conceive of it as a spiritual doctrine, they would find nothing in the Christian doctrine of the trinity which conflicts with the unity of God. Let them, first of all, separate the one true God from all else, setting Him in all the majesty of His unique oneness on one side, as it were, and all creation on the other; and, then, after that, let them come with an open mind to the study of the nature of that one God. They may find a plurality within that nature as they certainly do within the attributes of God, but in neither case is His essential oneness violated: He will still remain, in essence, One without a second. Thus the real question of debate between Moslems and Christians is not whether God is one or more, but what is the nature of that one God, and what mysteries lie hidden within that nature. If Moslems would approach the subject of the nature of God in this manner, we feel certain that many of their difficulties would vanish. It should ever be remembered that the doctrine of the triune nature of God is a matter of revelation, and Christians rest their belief in it on that fact. There may be difficulties connected with it, but these are certainly not greater than those connected with a sterile monism in which God is conceived as existing from all eternity in solitary oneness, a “Lover” without an object of love, and a “Knower” without an object of knowledge. It was this conception of God as a single and solitary monad which called forth Shelly's sneer in his “Queen Mali” when, in alluding to the creation of the world he says, “from an eternity of idleness God awoke!” When the creation around us is so full of mystery, mystery, too, which often points to a trinity in unity, as in the light, power and heat of the sun, or the trinity of body, mind and spirit in the individual man, it should not be thought strange if there should be found a plurality of existences within the nature of the Godhead, the one knowing and loving the other. At any rate, when we cannot understand the mysteries of creation round about us, it is surely the height of presumption to claim a knowledge of the mystery of the Divine nature, and to dogmatically deny the possibility of a trinity within that nature.

On the other hand, there are many considerations which lead us to expect some kind of plurality within the unity of God. For example, one of the purest, divinest instincts of the human heart is to love and he loved by an equal. Shall we say, then, that this was at one time denied to God the Creator, and that, before the creation of the world and of the angels, He existed in solitary and loveless isolation! Such a God can scarcely be conceived of as a Person at all, for personality implies self-consciousness having both subject and object. Even pantheistic philosophy has recognized this, and has tried to construct a kind of trinity which is, of course, dependent upon the universe. That is, God is conceived of as distinguishing Himself from the world, and so finding the object of his self-consciousness. Thus Hegel says, “as God is eternal personality, so he eternally produces his other self, namely nature, in order to self-consciousness.” 8 Christian philosophy finds this object of the eternal self-consciousness in Jesus Christ the eternal Son of God, and thus a true philosophy exists in fullest harmony with divine revelation. Let the Muhammadan reader compare what has been written above with the words of Christ as recorded in the Injil, and he will find a more complete and satisfying conception of the Supreme in this revealed doctrine of a triune God, than in the sterile monism of Islam. How full of meaning become the words of Jesus addressed to the Father in the great high-priestly prayer when He says, “O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17: 5); and yet more emphatically, “For thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.” (John 17: 24).

One of the names given to God in the Qur'an is “الْقَيُّومُ” “The Self-Subsisting,” but does not the very idea of God's self-sufficiency demand some plurality of existences within the divine nature or essence in order to the full expression of that nature? In one of the oldest mosques of Lahore there may he seen the inscription “Allah Kafi,” “God is sufficient,” which implies that God contains within Himself everything that is necessary for the full expression of His personality. Therefore as “الودود” The “Lover” He must have had within His own personality, and without any dependence on anything outside of Himself, all things necessary for the fullest expression of His own perfections. If God be “self-sufficient,” He must have had within His own nature the object of His eternal love. In the sterile deism of Islam the highest form of love—a form, be it noticed, which is exercised by man himself—is denied the Creator; but this is unthinkable, for the mode of existence of the Supreme can never he inferior to that enjoyed by His sinful creatures.

Finally, the very fact that the doctrine of the Trinity seems to present difficulties at first tends rather to prove that it is not a product of the human imagination; and it should not be forgotten also, that the doctrine arose amongst monotheistic Jews whose personal predilections must have been all the other way. Man must, after all that can be said is said, be dependent upon divine revelation for his knowledge of the nature of the Supreme, for he can never by searching find out God, or by the exercise of his own fallible reason fathom the depths of His infinitude. To know God fully we should require to be God, or, to reverse the figure, we may say that a God understood would be no God at all. Yet when, from the considerations adduced above, it is seen that some kind of plurality is required within the divine essence, and when the Holy Scriptures themselves reveal such a triune God, faith is strengthened and hope quickened. As the ascending Christ turned to leave His wondering disciples, He bade them go “and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name (not names) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.” It is this “name” which Christians preach the Father, Fount and Source of all, the Son eternally co-existing with the Father, and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son—one God.

In Islam God, “sterile in His inaccessible height, neither loving nor enjoying aught save His own self-measured decree, without son, companion or counsellor, is no less barren for himself than for His creatures,” 9 and remains little removed from the pantheistic ‘it’ of the Upanishads. Thus Islam fails in its very definition of God, and contradicts the revelation of the Supreme made in the Torah and the Injil.


3. لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَا آلِهَةٌ إِلَّا اللَّهُ لَفَسَدَتَا

4. Edward Glaser, Skizze der Geschichte Arabiens, Munich, 1889.

5. Zwemer, “Islam,” p. 21.

6. بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ أَنَّى يَكُونُ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ تَكُن لَّهُ صَاحِبَةٌ

7. مَا اتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ مِن وَلَدٍ

8. Quoted in Shedd's “Dogmatic Theology,” vol. .1, p. 185.

9. Palgrave, “Central and Eastern Arabia,” vol. 1, p. 366.

Pages