A text book on Contemporary challenges facing Muslim youths in Nigeria

1. 1
CHAPTER ONE
In an attempt not to allow the Muslim woman NOT to be victims of the
punishment of Allah here on earth, in the grave and in the life hereafter, Islam has
regulated the lives of all Muslims in general with particular emphasy on the Muslim
women. They have been particularly taken care of so that they will not be like other
women who can do what they like at any time not minding whether such behaviour
accords with the wishes of Allah (S.A.W T.) or not. In doing this, many women (like
some lustful men), have become slaves to their passion and lust. It is imperative that
women sacrifice their reasoning and whimsical fancies when these come into conflict
with the laws of Allah (Shari ‘at).
Our society is now grossly enshrouded in Western influences. The western
culture, we all know, is a culture of nakedness which heavily emphasise on female
exhibitionism and, in total and blind imitation of the west, our women portray their
obsession. In the words of Maulana Mufti, Ahmed Bemat, Sheikh Ul-Hadith quoted
from Islamic Hijab (Pudah), modern Woman is passing her live as she likes. Today,
the woman is said to be free. But is she really free? Her so-called freedom has reduced
her to the position of a slave-girl; her life is worse than that of a maid- servant.
Men are exploiting her both at home and outside the home in the name of
economic betterment. Man, making her share his economic predicament, has
compelled her to take up service and she, disregarding the Islamic commandment, has
begun to live an outdoor life. Thus she has herself belittled her rights; otherwise Islam
has told her: “you are the queen of your home. Your husband is liable for maintaining
you. You have the right to bring up your children and the husband would be
responsible for bearing their expenses”. But nowadays, instead of maintaining and
supporting the wife, it is considered a master of pride if she is also made to earn
money by serving in offices and institutions. Some modern women are not even
contented irrespective of whatever the husband gives her. She must just go out and
work because of her so-called self imposed financial responsibilities. Islam is not
against the woman going out to work but is against the un-Islamic motive.
The modern women are used daily as an instrument of advertisement of
commercial products of the greedy men in papers and on Television (see Appendix v).
She is being used as a means of amusing and entertaining strangers. What surprises
one is that she feels no shame or qualms in showing off her nakedness: the woman is

2. 2
instinctively modest and bashful but shamelessly strips herself in cabarets and clubs,
sometimes with her own hands and sometimes she asks the spectators to strip her. She
feels glad in doing so and makes a show of gladness in showing off her naked or at
best half- naked: she is compelled by the greed and shamelessness in her to sell her
body for money. The many sympathisers of women are devils in the grab of human
right activists. They have interest in women’s progress education out are interested, or
of those branches of worldly education which deal with materialism, is technological
progress which thoughtfully, and arguably too, is essential in the acquisition of peace,
prosperity and power. Worldly education is pursued for purpose of livelihood,
attaining good and high-placed employment which promises high salaries and
position in worldly society.
Assuming the pursuit of such mundane education does not entail any conflict
with any principles, teaching and commands of Islam, what are the sympathisers of
women doing in curbing the evils associated with such education?. in reality, pursuit
of such education via the agency of institutions that are not rooted in the fear of Allah
as understood and preached by Islam is littered with pitfalls and dangers which are
most destructive to absolute faith in the oneness of Allah (Iman) and natural shame,
modesty and chastity of women.
Another purpose of acquiring worldly education is not for livelihood, but for
the attainment of some fame, glory and position in society. This notorious and un-
Islamic purpose of education is forbidden for both men women and those who embark
on the pursuit of such mundane education are deviated and diverted from the life here-
after from the way inception of their worldly careers. The sympathisers of women (the
human right activists and women Liberation Movement such as Better Life for Rural
Women now tagged Family Support Programme (FSP) never care about checking or
chiding our women in making sure they protect themselves or save their honour. The
women is free and nobody dare tells or advises her as to now she can preserve her
honour and chastity. The women’s sympathisers (even among women themselves) see
nothing bad our institutions where liberalism is preached daily. The consequences of
such liberalism is often the evil, immorality, unbelief in the oneness of Allah,
disruption of home-life, and elimination of Islamic values. Their talk is that women
should be appointed to high places especially the Presidency not minding what might
be lost in the process her- honour.

3. 3
The modern woman has thus been intoxicated by liberty making her to loose
her sense and balance and therefore acres a tinker’s damn for her honour, chastity and
modesty. Even if she is openly insulated, she likes it because she thinks she is free. If
someone, except her husband or members of her family passes a remark about her
youth, beauty or charm, she is a free person. The sympathisers of the women all
believe and make are (the woman) to believe that her liberty consists her
shamelessness and immodesty. The educated Muslim women entangled in the
ramification of western technological progress and caught up in the Cesspool of
moral and spiritual corruption and bankruptcy ensuring in the wake of the material
cultures in vogue, find it extremely difficult to understand the Islamic positions on
some issues and some of them either get converted to Christianity along the line or at
best remain a sinful Muslim women: such women seem not to understand that the
purpose of our creation and despatch to this ephemeral existence (world) which is
merely a stage (a temporary halt in our on- ward march, back home from where we
have originally hailed, that is Jumat (paradise) is to worship Allah.
This is the (Jannat) the home birth of our parents Aadam (A.S) and (Hawwaa
(A.S). thus Jannat is our birthplace, our original and true homeland.
The Muslim Woman is not genuinely interested in raising a good Islamic
home and therefore making good the future of the nation. Some Muslim women in
particular do not sincerely co-operate with their husbands in making sure every
member of their family does the work of Jannat before living this sinful world instead
of running after mundane materials that will perish sooner or later. The world itself,
after on, will perish. Allah (S.W.T.) says:
“O ye believe save yourself and your families from a fire whose fuel
is men and stones over which are appointed angels stern and severe
who flinch not from executing the commands they receive from
Allah” (Al-Qur’an chapter 55 verse 6).
This ayah of the Quran is an eloquent testimony to the superlative position the
family plays in the life of a nation and succinctly puts the role of the Muslim women,
just like the husband, as the shepherd of the home. The Holy prophet himself said
“You are all shepherds and we shall question you on the day of
judgement) how best you have taken care of your flocks”.
The perfect understanding of a Muslim woman of her role in creating a
peaceful home in the face of the challenges of modern westoxicated civilisation with

4. 4
its Euro-Christian values cannot therefore be swept under the carpet. When one
considers the rate at which our society with particular reference to the women, is
becoming submerged in a cesspool of immorality and Godlessness one wonders what
the future has for mankind.
The ambition of the western concept of a woman vis-a vis family life by
Nigerian Muslim with its accompanied animalistic embellishment that gives inhibited
freedom to each of the components that make the home and in particular, the Muslim
women, to do whatever he or she likes under the guise of democratisation of the home
has been discovered to be due largely to ignorance of Islamic ethics and the earlier
something is done to reverse this unfortunate trend the better for the coming
generation.
The prophet of Islam, Muhammad Mustapha (S.A.W) says:
On the night of my ascension to heaven (miraj), I saw Oven of copper in the hell….
The snakes (and) scorpions used to bite them and consequently blood and pus were
coming out from the private parts of these men and women. All the inhabitants of
smell ensuring from them. I enquired from Angel Jibril (A.S) about these persons and
was told they were adulterers and adulteresses.
This work is to protect the Muslim from deviation and as a means of true
guidance along the right path.
The prophet of Islam, Muhammad Mustafa (S.A.W) says:
“.. Be on your guard against the temptation of life and the temptations of Women. For
the first disaster that had befallen the Israelites was caused by Women” (Muslim).
He further says...I look at hell the majority of its inhabitants are women…….”
Satan seems to have its world headquarters in our society with its agents
looking robust and unconquerable. The reason is not far- fetched: The Muslim’s
condition is not different from that of Jews or Christians: This is so because most
Muslims do not follow the Quranic injunction of “modest dressing and lowering their
gaze” in our society. Muslim Men and Women, on a daily basis, openly commit the
adultery of the eye and the tongue.
The Muslim Women no longer abstain from the display of their beauties and
fineries. Muslim Women adorn themselves in transparent and, or, tight fitting dresses
which in most cases, by design, reveal than concealing their beauty. Muslim ladies
( the educated in particular and some Muslim mothers wear such provocative dresses
as a women can wear before none but her husband- all in the name of civilisation .

5. 5
obscene and filthy love-romances pornographic literatures and movies are freely
shown on our T.V stations and related and listened to in our society. There is no sense
of guilt what so-ever or being ashamed in describing one own illicit sex relations
before others. Muslim women now abort pregnancies and kill unwanted babies at will
all in the name of family planning.
People no more shudder (as it was in the past) with disgust as regards obscene
and indecent behaviour. Obscenity is now in vogue. Innocent Muslim children daily
watch absence pictures in the electronic media. These media exhibit the nudity of
women. The children thus inadvertently become used to indecency sexual love, rape
and murder. The educated and semi-educated Muslim women parade themselves
about in semi-nude dresses. Neither the women themselves nor their sympathisers
consider such women as being indecent and immodest. It is the madness and
democracy called civilisation and democracy. In fact what we exhibit today is nothing
but culture of nakedness and thereby exposing the nakedness of the so-called western
culture.
Gaining more prominence in this country today is the extremely and passion
exciting songs of of the music of the so-called “Fuji” musicians. This dirty songs are
played in almost very Muslim home and in every shop and NONE is immured from
their sex- appeal-event the saints. The only immunity is NOT to listen to these songs.
The Muslim are pestered) on a daily bases) by the Bible Thumpers who want them
converted to Christianity at all cost. This is the nature of the society in which the
Muslim finds themselves. Obviously one is faced with a lot of challenging questions
and demands and if care is not taken he will easily find himself outside the fold of
Islam. Overturning these dangerous trends pose a lot of challenges to the Muslims
Women. Allah says:
“Surely, Allah changes not the condition of a people until they change
that which is in their hearts”. (Qur’an ch. 13 verse 11)
The object of this work therefore is to analyse the challenges faced by the
Muslim in our society in the areas of so-called sex inequality, restrictions, modesty
and chastity vis-à-vis the debasement of womanhood, modest dressing, family
planning, and most importantly the conversion to Christianity through ignorance
among other challenges.

6. 6
CHAPTER TWO
THE CHALLENGE OF CHRISTIAN EVANGELISATION IN CASTING
ASPERSION ON THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE QUR’AN
Casting aspersions and doubts on the authorship of the Holy Qur’an and
falsely attributing to Prophet Muhammad the authorship of al-Qur’an, the Divine
Book of Islam has been the handwork of enemies of Islam from time immemorial. In
some instance, in the book of Moshay ‘Who is this Allah? For example he attributed
the authorship to somebody else besides Allah. He refers to this author elsewhere in
the book as the ‘writer’ ‘speaker-writer’ e.t.c.
Moshay’s style of writing is not only offensive but inciting notwithstanding his pre-
emptive assertion:
….if there are areas that seem offensive, it is not intentional.
Besides its inciting nature a casual and cursory look at the book reveals a lot of lies;
fabrications half-truths, e.t.c.
For example, Moshay on pages 13-14, said:
“…. Apart from direct quotes
From reported events, while
Some parts of the narratives
are in the first person plural,
and the first person singular,
and so on. There are places
where Allah is being addressed
by the writer…. For example,
when the speaker-writer says:
will not believe ….. who
is speaking- Allah or
Writer?”
Moshay in the above work tries to prove that there is somebody besides Allah
speaking to Muhammad different from His (Allah). The words: writer speaker- writer
should be noted in the quotation. Moreover he said in the Qur’an there is the phrase “
I swear by Allah….”. The fact that all his quotations above can not be found in the
Qur’an is enough evidence that what he has said above are all fabrications and

7. 7
figments of his imagination. If the quotation is contained in the Qur’an, why did he
fail to mention the relevant passage(s) in the Qur’an?
The intention of Moshay here is to confuse his readers as regards the authorship of
Qur’an. In other words, he went to ‘prove’ to the world that the Qur’an in not of
Divine origin:. In the words of Allah in the Qur’an, however,
“it is Allah Who has sent down the Book in truth”. (42:17).
This refutes the non-Muslim assertion that it is the product of a writer or speaker-
writer or even Muhammad’s mind.
Allah says:
Thus did we reveal to you
(O Muhammad an inspired
book by our command. You
did not know what the
Book was, nor (what) the
faith (was), but we made
it a light, guiding thereby
whom we please of our
servant; and most surely
you show the way to the
right path”. (42:52).
Allah in the Qur’an gives the proofs to substantiate this claim that it is divinely
inspired.
PROOFS THAT AL-QUR’AN IS FROM ALLAH (GOD)
The Qur’an is beyond human knowledge
This proof is in the verse
“This Qur’an is not a
Thing that could be composed
without Allah’s Revelation, but
it is a confirmation of what
was revealed before it
and an explanation of

8. 8
what is decreed for
mankind. There is no
doubt that it is from
the Lord of the Universe”. (10:37)
The content of the Qur’an is enough proof to show that the author could not
have been human after all. A Christian convert the Islam, a Frenchman, Dr. Maurice
Bucaile in his eye-opening book, “The Bible; the Qur’an and science” has compared
statements made in the two Books about the universe with modern science.
In the process of his research work in finding the truth, he gave on page 20 of
his book some criteria which he called. Criteria for Truth. These criteria for Truth of
his are as follows:
1. Rational Teachings: Since God bestowed reason and intellect to mankind, it
is our duty to use it to distinguish truth from falsehood. True undistorted
revelation from God must be rational and can be reasoned out by all unbiased
minds.
2. Perfection: since God is perfect; His revelation must be perfect and accurate,
free from mistakes, omissions, interpolations and multiplicity of versions. It
should be free from contradictions in its narration.
3. No Myths Or Superstitions: True revelation from God is free from myths or
suppressions that degrade the dignity of God of man.
4. Scientific: since God is the creator of all knowledge, true revelation is
scientific and can withstand the challenge of science at all times.
5. Prophecy: God is the knower of the past, present and future. Thus His word of
prophecies in His revelation will be fulfilled as prophesied.
6. Un-imitable by Man: true revelation fro God is infallible and cannot be
imitated by man. God’s true revelation is a living miracle. An open book
challenging all mankind to see and prove for themselves. Thus in the process
of finding the truth M.Bucaile, described his approach to truth as follows:
“Throughout my research I
have constantly tried to
remain totally objective. I
believe I have succeeded
in approaching the study of
the Qur’an with the

9. 9
same objectivity that a
doctor has when he opens
a file on a patient. In other
words, by carefully
confronting all the symptoms
he can find to arrive at
a diagnosis. I must admit
that it was certainly not a
faith in Islam that first
guided my steps, but
simple research for the
truth. This is how I see
it today. It was mainly
fact, which by the time
I had finished my
study, had led me to see
in the Qur’an a text
revealed to a Prophet”.
Thus this scientist in his book under reference, after supplying his six criteria
listed above, said he did not even have to go beyond the first book of the Bible
called Genesis before he found statements that are totally out of keeping with the
cast of iron facts of Modern science; to his amazement however, he said he could
not find a single statement in the Qur’an that was assailable from a modern
scientific point of view:
The American scientist, and in fact an embryologist, Dr. Keith Moore, said
that the Qur’an contains statement about the growth of the human embryo in the
womb which were known to the world only this 20th century; In other words,
scientific discoveries made in the 20th century are already found in the Qur’an
written in the 7th century ; Muhammad (S.A.W.), a stark illiterate, let alone a
scientist, could not have put up any human effort in knowing about all these things
by himself if Allah was not the author of the Qur’an.
“Thus have We inspired in you
(Muhammad) a spirit by our
command. You did not know

10. 10
at all what was the Book
and what was the Faith
but We have made it
a light whereby we guide
any of Our servants we will.
You are indeed guiding
to the Right way, the way
of that God, to whom
belongs everything in the
heavens and the Earth.
Beware; All affairs reach
Allah at last”. (42:52)
The following are some of the Qur’anic verses which refer to
science and nature and the creation of the Universe:
7:54; 20: 4; 41:11; 21:30; 1:1; 25:59;.
Of Astronomy- Light and Movement;
21:33; 55:33.
Of the Earth;
39:21, 78:6-7, 21:30; 20:53; 13:3; 16:66.
Of creation of man;
96:2; 23:14; 22:5; 32:9
Of Burning and Replacement of Skin in Hell; 4:56
Thus the author of the Qur’an is, without doubt, the one who created nature.
Allah says in the Qur’an that
“It is He who has taught
the Qur’an. He created
man and has taught him speech”
(55:2-3).
The Qur’an is unique
The uniqueness of the Qur’an is the everlasting challenge to mankind issued by Allah,
the author of the Qur’an.
“Do they say that the Prophet
has composed (forged) it?” Tell
them, “If what you say

11. 11
is true, then produce
one chapter like this, and
you may call to assistance
any one you can other
than God”. The fact is
that they have denied
that, the knowledge whereof
they could not compass,
and whereof the interpretation
has not yet come
unto them. Even so
did those before them
deny. Then see what was
the consequence for the
wrong-doers”. (10:38-39).
This is an everlasting challenge the Qur’an and the Muslims talk about. People
of all shades of thinking beside Islam are challenged to produce another book like it
and put to test whether human minds are capable of producing such a book or not.
This challenge is not in terms of the fatness of the book as Moshay’s insinuated but in
its quality of being unique.
The challenge is that critics of Islam (Moshay and others) should produce
another book like it and prove that human minds are incapable of producing such a
book of theirs. This challenge which has not been met to date, and which shall never
be met, In sh-Allah, is the challenge issued by Qur’an is of Divine Origin. Anyone
who reads the Qur’an objectively will agree that there is no book like it on earth.
Giba, a non-Muslim, the reputed Western historian in his book, “Mohammedanism”
says:
“Well, then, if the Qur’an
were his composition, other
men could rival it. Let
them produce ten verses
like it. If they could not
(and it is obvious that
they could not) then let

12. 12
them accept the Qur’an
as an outstanding evidential
miracle”.
Concerning the author, Moshay said: The Qur’an …… is supposed to have
been written by one man, and it surprises us how one person could write a book, with
scores of serious categorical contradictions… how do we explain the many
translations… written in this 20th century and yet written in some archaic language?
….It is necessary for us to dig up one or two contradictions in the Qur’an to
prove our case. This would aid our understanding of who Allah is. The first
contradiction…. Is of the claim of Muhammad’s illiteracy. Secondly, … such a claim
is necessary to validate the assertion that the Qur’an was not written by Muhammad
but came down from heaven, and is therefore free from human instrumentality….. In
Surah 96:1-5, however, Muhammad was commanded to READ, and he did; … Call it
a miracle?. Some call it a contradiction…… the followers of Jesus Christ shall be
exalted above all others on the day of Resurrection” (Surah 3:55)
Moshay was wrong is attacking the Qur’an because of the archaic language in
its translation by its translators. Is Moshay not aware that there are now so many
translation in modern English Language/. What connection has archaic language got
to do with the divinity of the book and its content? . in an attempt to confuse his
readers he insinuated that in surah 96:1-5 the first verse “Proclaim: ( or Rehearse or
Read;) In the name of thy Lord and cherisher who created” implies that Muhammad
could read and therefore could not have been an illiterate after on; Historians (non-
Muslim inclusive) say Muhammad was not literate and the Qur’an says:
“Those who followed the Apostle
the unlettered Prophet; ..” (7:157)
The word Iqraa, Scholars of Arabic say, means “Read” or ‘Rehearse” or
“Recite”. Thus the prophet was asked to recite what he was being taught by his God
through arch angle-Jibril. Period.
That the followers of Jesus shall be exalted above all others on the day of
Resurrection as interpreted by Moshay needs some clarification. According to Yusuf
Ali in his commentary 396 to Surah 3:55, he says
“Those who follow thee: the Muslims
are the true Christians (followers of
Christ)’ for they follow (or should

13. 13
follow the true teaching of Christ,
which did not include the blasphemy
that he was God or the Son on God
in the literal sense. But there is
a large body of men , who by birth inherit
such teaching nominally, but their
hearts do not consent to it. Their
real Muslim virtues (which from
their point of view they call Christ-
an virtues) entitle them to be
called Christians, and to receive
the leading position which they
at present occupy in the world of men”.
In the work of Moshay, he said:
‘….the Qur’an talks of the
Bible as the “Guide for the
Wise “(sura 5:49).
The word interpreted as Bible by Moshay in Sura 5:49 is Injil which scholars of
Arabic all agree is ‘The Gospel’ revealed to Jesus Christ and not the present (Bible’
which consists of either 66 books ( The protestant version) or 73 books (the Catholic
version).
Did the word ‘Bible’ occur in the Bible itself?. No . how then in the Qur’an? Where
was it recorded even in the Bible that Jesus was moving from house to house with a
book in his armpit? No; It was the message revealed to him, INJIL, that he preached
to the people. There was no book of any kind. The present gospels in the N.T of the
bible was written years later after his death by eye and ear-witnesses who were under
the so-called “inspiration” even including a one- time persecutor of Christ called Saul
later christened Paul: furthermore, Moshay, for example, quoted;
“ … and we breathed our
spirit into her ,and we made
her and her son, a sign for
all mankind” (sura 21: 91).

14. 14
to prove the sonship and divinity of Jesus and the so – called contradiction in the
Qur’an because he quickly said on the same pages 96-97;
“…. We do not believe in the book
because there are categorical denials
of all these truths in the same book,
and we believe that a holy book
should be consistent …”
Yes, that is the Word: CONSISTENCY: A Holy book should not contradict
itself. The next section of our discussion deals with these so-called contradictions of
the Holy Book- al Qur’an. However, considering surah 21: 91 as quoted above, Jesus
being described as a sign to mankind does not mean anything but as Adam, created
without a father and mother is a sign of Allah’s Might to mankind; the victory given
to Yusuf (Joseph) over the plot of his envious brothers is a sign of Allah. The same is
true of all Prophets of Allah such as Ibrahim, Nuh, Ayub etc. period.
The Qur’an is free from Contradictions
The Qur’an being a Divine Guidance, is free from internal inconsistencies and
contradictions as it is from an infallible power. Allah says:
“ Do they not consider
the Qur’an (with care)?
Had it been from other
than Allah, they
would surely have
found their-in much
discrepancies” (4:82).
In-shaa Allah, the contradictions between the four gospels in the Bible now
well documented and known even to objective Christian scholars which Moshay tried
to deny or explain away in his book on pages 61-63 therefore will be discussed later
in detail. Meanwhile, it is amazing to say in the words of Moshay and his born again
co-horts that the obvious and glaring contradictions in the Bible do not disprove the
divinity of the Bible; The uniformity of the Qur’an is the foundation of the method of

15. 15
interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an and to Islamic scholars, this is the best method
of interpretation.
Allah says
“Allah has revealed (from
time to time) the most
beautiful message in
the form of a Book,
consistent with itself,
(yet) repeating (its
teaching in various
aspects):…..” (39:23)
“ Nay more, it is for
us to explain it (and
make it clear)” (75:19).
The Qur’an is uncorrupted by man since it is incorruptible.
This last proof is really the proof that the Qur’an is the last guidance from
Allah. This proof of incorruptibility of the Qur’an by man is an indication that there is
not going to be another guidance after the Qur’an because it is not required. The
previous scriptures were corrupted one after the other and thus there were series of
scriptures but with the incorruptibility of the Qur’an the need for another guidance is
out of point.
“We have without doubt sent
down the Message; and
We will assuredly guard
it (from Corruption)” (15:9)
This is a fact some non-Muslims and orientalists have even attested to
.Arbuthnot, in his book “The construction of the Bible and the Qur’an says:
“……….It will thus be seen, from
the above, that a final and
complete text of the Qur’an
was prepared within twenty
years after the death of

16. 16
Muhammad, and that it has
remained the same, without
any change or alteration…. The
same cannot be said of the Old and
New testaments”.

17. 17
CHAPTER THREE
THECHALLENGE OF THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE
BIBLE
The following prefaces and introductions of some of the versions of the bible
answer the question of Bible’s consistency, accuracy, contradiction, interpolations,
versions editions, divinity etc.
1. FROM THE TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE OF THE NEW
INTERNATIONAL VERSION OF THE BIBLE.
‘As in other ancient documents, the precise meaning of the biblical texts is
sometime uncertain….. Although archaeological and linguistic discoveries in this
century aid in understanding difficult passages,” some uncertainties remain”. In
the New Testament, Footnotes that refer to uncertainty regarding the original text
are introduced by “some manuscripts” or similar expressions”. “Like all
translations of the Bible, made as they are by imperfect man, THIS ONE
UNDOUBTEDLY FALLS SHORT OF ITS GOALS”.
2. FROM THE PREFACE OF THE LIVING BIBLE
“This book, though arriving late on the current translation scene, has been under
way for many years. It has undergone several major manuscript revisions and has
been under the careful scrutiny of Greek and Hebrew experts to check content,
and English critics for style … though none of those consulted feels entirely
satisfied with the present result. This is therefore a tentative edition …”
3. (a) FROM THE INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT OF THE
NEW ENGLISH BIBLE.
“So much for the text of the Hebrew old Testament as it lies before us; but it is
certain that this does not always represent what was originally written. In spite of
the wealth of ancient versions, and even the earliest known from of the text has
been established, many obscurities still remain in the Hebrew scriptures. The
classical Hebrew vocabulary as known today is small, with the consequence that
the meaning of an unusually large number of words is uncertain or unknown”

18. 18
3 (b) FROM THE INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT OF THE NEW
ENGLISH BIBLE
“ The translators are well aware that their judgement is at best provisional, but
they believe the text they have followed to be an improvement on the
underlying the earlier translations … The translators are conscious as anyone
can be of the limitations and imperfections of their work …”
4. FROM THE PREFACE OF THE GOOD NEWS BIBLE
“ There are, in addition, several kinds of notes which appear at the bottom of
the page. (1) Cultural or Historical Notes…
(2) Textual Notes. In the old testament, these indicate primarily those places
where the translators were compelled for a variety of reasons to base the
translation on some text other than the Hebrew. Where one or more of the
ancient versions were followed, the note indicates this by one Ancient
Translation (e.g Genesis 1:26) or some Ancient translation (e.g Gen. 4: 8);
where a conjectural emendation was adopted, the note reads Probable Text
(e.g Gen. 10: 14);. In the New Testament there are textual notes indicating
some places where there are significant differences among the Greek
manuscripts. There differences may consist of addition to the text (e.g
Matthew21: 43), delegation (e.g Matthew. 24: 36); or substitutions (e.g Mark
1 : 41); (3) Alternative Rendering. In many places the precise meaning of the
original text is in dispute, and there are two or more different ways in which
the text may be understood. In some of the more important of such instances
an alternative rendering is given (e.g Gen. 2: 9 ; Matt. 6:11);
5. FROM THE PREFACE OF THE REVISED STANDARD VERSION OF THE
BIBLE (RSV)
We are told in the preface of the Revised Standard Version (1952, 1971) that
it was produced by thirty two eminent scholars backed up by fifty
co- operating denominations. These scholars were sincere enough to admit
the inaccuracy and unauthenticated facts in the Bible. These in their words
are:
1. “The Revised standard version of the Bible is an authorised revision of the
American Standard Version published in 1901, which was a revision of the
King James Version, Published in 1611.

19. 19
2. “The King James version has grave defects … these defects were so many and
so serous as to call for a revision of the English translation”.
3. “Thirty two scholars have served as members of the committee changed with
the making of the revision, and they have secured the review and counsel of an
Advisory Board of fifty representatives of the Co-operating denominations …;
and the charter of the committee requires that all changes be agreed upon by a
two-third vote of the total membership of the committee”.
4. Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of
the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the
best judgement of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction
of the original text”.
5. “A vast quantity of writing in related Semitic languages, some of which have
only recently been discovered, has greatly enlarge our knowledge of the
vocabulary and grammar of Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic. Sometimes the
present translation will be found to render a Hebrew word in a sense quite
different from that of the traditional interpretation”.
6. “ The King James version of the New testament was based upon a Greek text
was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen
centuries of manuscript copying”.
7. “the publication of the Revised standard version of the Bible, containing the
Old and New Testament, was authorized by vote of the National council of the
churches of Christ in the U.S.A. in 1951
8. “truly we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a
new translation, nor yet to make a bad one a good one … but to make a good
one better”. Thus in the words of the Christian scholars above, the King James
Version is not the ‘good one’ because it is the one with “grave defects” that
were “so many and so serious” and that it was based upon a Greek text that
“was marred by mistakes”. it is equally true to say that the Revised standard
version (RSV) is not the ‘better one’ because as Christian scholars affirmed
above, it was based only on the ‘judgement’ of the scholars and a majority
vote of two-third (2/3 ). Objectively, therefore, some of the statement ascribed
to Jesus are uncertain as ‘the most probable reconstruction of the original text’,
which the makers of the RSV affirmed. Even though there may have been
improvements in the limited knowledge of the vocabulary and grammar of

20. 20
Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic on the part of the translators; it is not only naïve
but wrong and therefore unwise and unsafe to assume that their knowledge is
now complete. In other words, the discovery of errors by virtue of knowledge
in the vocabulary and grammar of Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic is a
continuous exercise and therefore further errors will continue to be revealed
with the progress of research and scholarship.
The Jehovah Witnesses did not help issue either. In one of their publications
titled “Awake” published on 8 September, 1957 they accepted there are about
50,000 errors in the Bible. (see Appendix 1 p.325). They compounded the issue by
saying that the errors have been reduced to the barest minimum. To how many?,
They failed to say. Perhaps the next verse one is going to read in the Bible about
Jesus is an error, who knows? Thus the best a Muslim could say about the Revised
Standard Version of the Bible, and any Bible for that matter, is that only such
statements as confirmed by the Qur’an about Jesus should be considered authentic
and therefore true. Period.
As the Qur’an has been thus protected from corruption, if there is a
disagreement between the earlier scriptures and the Qur’an on any point, the
Qur’an should be taken as the final arbiter
“To thee We sent the scripture in truth
confirming the scripture that came before it,
and guarding it in safety …”(5:51)
t
The scholars of Arabic say the word used for ‘guarding’ or as in some other
translation ‘watcher’ in the above verse is also used for quality- control in
industry. The quality controller rejects or accepts the finished product coming out
the assembly line on the basis of set criteria. Similarly, parts of the earlier
scriptures, and the Bible in particular, should be accepted or rejected on the basis
of whether they conform with the Qur’anic account of it or not. Allah says
“And We sent down the Book to thee for the express purpose that you shouldst
make clear to them those things in which they differ’ (16:64).
The Qur’an , therefore is the final arbiter in any dispute,
“Thus have We revealed it to be a judgement
of authority in Arabic,Wert thou to follow their
(vain) desires after the knowledge which hath

21. 21
reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither
protector nor defender against God”. (13:37).
The Qur’an cannot, even, be corrupted in the future for Allah says
“….. none can change His Words ……………….” (18:27).
In the light of this it would remain as the guidance for all mankind till eternity,
in contrast to previous Guidances, including the Bible, which were sent to a
particular race and time.
Allah says:
“This is a declaration of mankind
a guidance and admonition unto those who
fear God;” (3:138)
“Verily We have revealed the Book to thee in Truth,
for (instructing) mankind”. (39:41)
“We have sent thee not, but
as a Mercy for all creatures” (21:107)
“it is nothing than a Message (Admonition)
to all the worlds” (68:52).
The reason for the corruption of the Bible is not only in the diety of Jesus as
claimed by Moshay, for example on page 63 of his book, but it is because of
the???
I want to intimate my readers with the reason for why series of guidance. After
all God could have sent down one single book and then finish it off without
sending scriptures in series. Has He not got the power to protect His Scriptures
from adulteration by men? Yes, He has.
REASONS FOR GUIDANCES IN SERIES
There are three reasons for series of guidance. These are:
1. With the passage of time, the Words God became interpolated with the words
of men. This was so because there were no recording facilities in the ancient
days and the mode of transmission of the Message was mouth-to-mouth. The
process of mouth-to-mouth transmission of the Message gave room to
exaggerations and interpolations. The possibility of this type of adulteration is
mentioned in the Qur’an.
“Have You any hope that they will be true to you

22. 22
when a party of them used to listen to the
word of God, then used to change it, after they
had understood it, knowingly?” (2:75).
“ then woe to those who write the Book with their
own hands; and then say:
“This is from Allah” to traffic with it for
a miserable price;” (2:79).
The Bible is the classic example of this adulteration. Allah only knows how
much Deedat puts it at 15 million dollars for 1971 alone) the publishers of the
Revised Standard Version of the Bible had as a result of that revisions of the Bible in
1881, 1952 and1971. it is reported that hardly can one find a home in America
without a copy of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible even though it may be
put under a pillow or a permanent lock; No wonder, the number of RSV in circulation
has done nothing in curbing the incessant cases of rape, murder, violence, moral
debasement, incest, adultery, fornication and alcoholism in the western society e.g
America, Britain, France etc. these crimes are committed on daily basis and are given
the widest publicity in the media.
No wonder the Europeans in Britain and America are converting to Islam in
droves (see Appendix II and Appendix III pp327-329). The latest is that of Abdul-
Malik Tyson (formerly called Mike Tyson). Cathedrals are being converted to
Mosques especially in America and Europe with particular reference to London and
Rome each being the heart city of Christianity. In the booklet discovery series, we are
told: “…. Worshippers of Allah are praying for the Islamic conversion of America.
They are active in our inner cities and are converting athletes to Muslims and turning
churches in to Mosques…” (see p. 327) . Even here in Nigeria, a whole Celestial
church in Odinjo area of Ibadan was changed to a Mosque and thirty- six of the
former Worshippers of Jesus Christ in that church got converted to Islam on Saturday
25th of June 1995. the Nigerian ‘ Secular Sunday Sketch of 25 of June 1995 and the
Christian Third Eye on Saturday of 1st of July, 1995 carried the news in their tabloids
(see Appendix III p.329P. as to the second question of whether God cannot project
His scripture from men’s adulteration. He can, But what happens when the scripture is
relevant only to a particular time? Why should it then be protected?.

23. 23
2. The second reason for the series of Guidance is that guidance was relevant
only to a certain circumstance and had to be succeeded by a more complex
guidance. This is so because man’s intellectual development was gradual. The
primitive man could not have understood element of modern banking neither
could a banker of yesteryears could understand the application of computer in
banking. The code of live given to Adam would have permitted brothers to
marry sisters, which is a repugnant idea to us, but then there was no other
family around from where they could marry. This idea is, however, irrelevant
to later generations and hence stand abrogated. The Qur’an testifies to the
possibility,
“None of our revelation do We abrogate or cause
to be forgotten, but We substitute something
better or similar: Knowest thou not that
Allah has power over all things?’ (2:106)
3. The reason of geography is the third reason for series of Guidance. In those
days of the Prophets the mode of travelling was not as easy and fast as of
today. There were no motor cars, let alone, aeroplane; This make as it
impossible to take one scripture, by its believe, to other parts of the then
known world. Since the favourites of Allah are those who fear Him sincerely
and all people have to be rightly guided without any partiality. All says
“Or hence you should say;
“The Book was sent down to two peoples (communities)
before us, and for our part, we remained
unacquainted with all that they learned
by assiduous study;
Or hence you should say:
“If the Book had only been sent down
to us, we should have followed its guidance
better than they. Now that they have come unto you
a clear (sing) from your Lord,- and a guide
and a Mercy: them who could do more
wrong then one who rejects Allah’s signs, and turns
away there from?. In good time shall we requite
those who turn away from Our Signs, with

24. 24
a dreadful penalty, for their turning away”. (6:156-157)
Moshay for example, on page 63 in his book mentioned fallacious
statement in his attempt to confuse his readers as regards the difference between a
translation and a version. He claimed to have read about six translation and the
Qur’an in the process of writing his book. He said there are about fifty translations
of the Qur’an (p.63) just as there are translations of the Bible.
Translations or Versions of the Qur’an ?
The Qur’an can be translated into as many languages as possible. The only
difference that could be seen in any two of translations by objective translators
will be in the use and choice of words. Take for example the translations of Yusuf
Ali, Marmaduke Picktall and Al-Hilaf Muslim Khan of the second verse of the
second chapter of the Quran:
“This is the book; in it is guidance sure,
without doubt, to those who fear Allah”
(Yusuf Ali’s translation)
“This is the scripture where of there is
no doubt a guidance unto those who ward off
(evil)” (Marmaduke Picktall’s translation)
“This is the book (Qur’an), whereof there is
no doubt, a guidance to those who are pious”
(Hilal & Mushin Khan’s translation).
Any mentally balanced speaker of the English language anywhere in the world
will understand the three different translations above to mean the same thing. The
difference is in the choice of words.
However, this is not true in the case of versions of the Bible. There are never
versions of the Qur’an. What we have throughout the world is the authentic copy
of the Qur’an.
The catholic version Bible called the Roman Catholic version (RCV) is a
version of the Bible (even from the name) and it is the oldest version in market
today. Why is it a version?. It is a version because it contains seven extra “books”
not contained in other versions altogether. The outcasts are:
The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias

25. 25
The Book of Baruch
The Book of Esther e.t.c.
Despite the old age of the RCV of the Bible, the whole of the Protestant
Worldwide including the Jehovah Witnesses, thee Seventh Day Adventists
e.t.c.condemm it because of its extra seven “books” which they contemptuously
refer to as the “apocrypha” meaning doubtful authority. These rejecters of the
additional books did not mind the warning in the ‘Apocalypse’ of the Roman
Catholic version and renamed as ‘Revelation’ by the Protestants,
“….if any men shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the
plaques written in this Book”. (Revelation 22:18-19).
Mention has been made earlier of the Authorised version (AV) of the
protestant Bible called the King James version and the Revised standard version
of the Bible. Sir Winston Churchill said of the King James Version:
“The Authorised Version of the
Bible was published in 1611 by the Will and
Command of His Majesty King James the 1st whose
name it bears till today”.
In short the Roman Catholic Bible is a version, The revised Standard Version
is a version, The Living Bible is a version, the Good News Bible is a version e.t.c.
what is expunged in one edition is only to be added in another with or without
modification to another one elsewhere; these are versions. The Qur’an is devoid of
these versions.
Ahmed Deedat in his book, is the Bible God’s Word? Throws more light on
the issue of different versions of the Bible. In the words of Deedat
“One of the most serious of those
” grave defects” which authors of the
RSV had tried to rectify concerned the
Ascension of Christ. There have been only
two references in the Canonical Gospels
of Mattew, Mark, Luke and John to the most
stupendous event in Christianity- of
JESUS BEING TAKEN UP INTO HEAVEN. These two
references were obtained in every Bible

26. 26
in every language prior to 1952, when the RSV first
appeared. These were:
4 (a) “ So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was TAKEN UP INTO
HEAVEN, and sat down at the right hand of God”. (Mark 16:19).
4. (b) “ While he blessed them, he parted from them and was CARRIED UP INTO
HEAVEN”. (Luke 24:51) (Referring to page 52 of RSV 1971)….. you will be
shocked to not that mark 16 ends at verse 8, and after an embarrassing expanse
of blank space the missing verses appear in “small print” as a footnote at the
bottom of the page. If you can lay your hands on a RSV 1952, you will find the last
six words of 45 above, i.e “AND WAS CARRIED UP INTO HEAVEN” replaced by
a tiny” a” to tell you to see the footnote if you please, where you will find these
missing words. Every honest Christian has to admit that he does not consider ant
footnote in any Bible as the Word of God. Why should the paid servants of
Christianity consign the mightiest miracle of their religion to a mere footnote?
…… Naturally, “MOST” Ancient deserves credence more than mere “ANCIENT”.
But not finding a word about Jesus being “taken up” or “carried up” into heaven in the
MOST ANCIENT Manuscripts, the Christian fathers expurgated those references
from the RSV 1952.
THE DONKEY CIRCUS
The above facts are a staggering confession by Christendom that the
“inspired” authors of the canonical Gospels did not record a single word about the
ASCENSION of Jesus. Yet these “inspired” authors were unanimous in recording that
their Lord and saviour rode a donkey into Jerusalem as his mission draw to a close:
“…. And they sat thereon”
(The Donkey) (matt. 21:7)
“… and they sat Jesus thereon”
(The Donkey) (Luke 19:35)
“…. Jesus… sat there on”.
(the Donkey) (John 12:14)
Could God Almighty have been the author of this incongruous situation- going
out of His way to see that all the Gospel writers did not miss their footing recording
His “son’s” donkey ride into the Holy city- and yet “inspiring” them to black-out the
news about His “Son’s” heavenly flight on the wings of angel?....

27. 27
In every new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was
“RESTORED TO THE TEXT”….” Two PASSAGES, THE LONGER ENDING OF
MARK (16:9-20)… AND LUKE 24:51 ARE RESTORED TO THE TEX”. 9preface-
collins’ pages vi and vii) “why ‘restored’’? Because they had been previously
expunged; why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place?. The
MOST Ancient Manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all. They were
interpolations. ….Why eliminate one and re-instate the other ……………………..
The Jehovah’s Witness have already eliminated 27 revealing pages of their
FOREWORD to their “New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures”,
(this is their way of saying- New testament)…………… The “scofield reference
Bible”, thought it appropriate to spell the Hebrew word “Elah” (meaning God)
alternatively as “Allah.
The Christians had swallowed the camel- they seemed to have accepted at
least that that the name of God is Allah but were still straining at the gnat by spelling
Allah with one “L”;….., by a clever sleight- of-hand, blotted out the word “Allah”
altogether. There is not even a gap where the word “Allah” once used to be. This is in
the Bible of the orthodox.
The indispensable “VIRGIN” in the verse below has now been replaced in the RSV
with the phrase “a young woman” which, according to Deedat, is the correct
translation of the Hebrew word Almah.
‘ Therefore the Lord himself
shall give you a sign.
Behold, a VIRGINE shall conceive,
and bear a son and shall call his name
Immanuel”. (Isaiah 7:14-AV)..
“Almah is the word which has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT
bethulah which means virgin”.
The following is another example
“For god so loved world,
that he gave his only BEGOTTEN Son,
……………….”(John 3:16-AV).
‘The fabrication- “BEGOTTEN” – has now been unceremoniously excised by the
Bible Revisers, without a word of excuse… This blasphemous word “BEGOTTEN”

28. 28
was another of the many such interpolations in the ‘Holy Bible”. The word
“BEGOTTEN” has been replaced with the word “UNIQUE” in the version of the
Bible of the Bible- thumper Rev. Jimmy Swaggert of United State America; yet,
another example:
“For these are three that bear
record in heaven, the FATHER, the WORD,
and the HOLY GHOST; and these three
are one”. (1st Epistle of John 5:7AV).
This verse which is the closest approximation to what the Christians call their
Holy Trinity is the keystone of the Christian faith. This verse has, however, been
expunged from the RSV without even a semblance of explanation. To the Muslims,
this is a well-deserved pious fraud which has come close to the teaching of the Qur,an
on trinity.
“….And don’t say ‘Trity’:
desist: It will be better
for you for Allah is one God:………(4:171)
thus we read in Hugh schonfield’s book Those Incredible Christians, “
“Within the covers of the Bible
we can meet with forgeries, manipulations
and deliberate inventions just as mush as
outside it. Scholarship is well aware
of this………..”
the non-Muslim reader who is after the truth should neither hesitate or be
afraid to look hard at what he/ she believes in (for example the Christian looking hard
at the Bible) and by so doing the truth shall be known and thereby “the truth shall set
you free”. The fact that there are versions of the Bible can never be contradicted. Thus
the following are versions of the Bible and not translations as Moshay would want us
to believe erroneously. Some of them even bear the nomenclature; Version;
1. King James Version (KJV)
2. Living Bible (LB)
3. New English Bible (NEB)
4. Revised Standard Version (RSV)
5. New International Version (NIV)
6. New World Translation (NWT)

29. 29
7. New Jerusalem Bible (NJB)
8. American Translation of the Holy Bible (ATHB)
9. Holy Bible (HB)
10. Amplified Bible (AB)
11. New American standard Bible (NASB)
12. Good News Bible (GNB)
13. Authorised Version (AV)
These versions contradict themselves and as said earlier verses dropped
somewhere were added elsewhere not minding the warning in the Book of
Revelation that None should add or delete from the Bible as suggested by its
authors. We shall refer to these versions of the Bible by their abbreviations in the
following further discourse.
In NEB, for example, Saul’s age when he began to rule was 50 years old.
NIV says he was 30 years old. AB and NASB say he was 40 years old. The
KJV,RSV,HB,LB,NWT,NJB and ATHB say Saul’s age is unknown. The GNB
tactfully dropped out the whole controversial verse in their own version of the
Bible. The verse in question is 1 Samuel 13:1. Check these versions of the Bible
yourself and you will discover the truthfulness of this claim.
As regards the tenure of Saul’s reign, as found in 1Sam. 13:1, the NEB
says it was 22 years. The KJV,HB.AB, LB and NWT say it was only for 2 years
while the NIV says it was for 32 years. In the RSV,NJB and ATHB it is unknown
and the GNB dropped out the verse in its entity.
In the KJV,NEB,RSV,NJB,AB and ATHB Ahaziah become King when he
was 42 years old (2Chron. 22:2) which is a contradiction to the claim of 2 Kings
8:26 in these same versions of the Bible; The NIV,HB,LB,NWT,NASB and GNB
put the age simply at 22 years old.
The land of David was afflicted with famine in 2 Sam,24:13 according to
KJV, HB, ATHB,NASB,AB, LB, NWT for 7 years which is a contradiction to 1
Chronicles 21:12 in these same Bibles. The NEB GNB NJB NIV and RSV put it
at 3 years.
According to ATHB,LB, NASB, NEB ,KJV, and RSV, Jehoiachim’s age
when he become a King (2 chron. 36:9) was 8 years old which contradicts 2Kings
24:8 in these same Bibles. The NIV, GNB HB NJB, and NWT put the age at 18
years.

30. 30
1. In the New Testament we read of a creature crying in the sky (Rev.
8:13) and the KJV says the creature is an angel. However, the NEB,
RSV, ATHB, NASB, NIV, LB, HB, AB, GNB, NJB and NWT say the
creature was an eagle meaning it was a bird; sure, a bird differs from
an angel.
The KJV,HB, LB and AB contain Matthew 17:21 Mark 15:28 and Luke
17:36. however these verses have all been dropped out of the NEB RSV,NIV
NJB, GNB and the ATHB. NASB retains Matt. 17:21 but dropped out MK. 15:28
and LK. 17:36.
The KJV,NIV , HB,LB,NWT NASB,AB and ATHB all contain Matt. 21:44
but has been dropped out of the NEB RSV, NJB and GNB. Furthermore, the KJV
and AB only contain Matt.23:14 and Acts 15:34. these have met the wrath of the
compilers of the NEB, RSV,NIV,HB.NWT, NJB, GNB , and ATHB and have
thus been ‘wisely’ expunged.
Mark 11:26 and Mark 9:44 and 46 are present only in the KJV and HB, and
have been expunged in the NEB, RSV, NIV,LB, NWT, NJB, GNB, NASB, and
ATHB. AB does not contain Mark 9:44 and 46 . the book of Luke 22:43 and 44
are only present in the KJV ,NEB, NIV, HB, LB, AB,NASB, NWT,NJB,GNB and
ATHB The common RSV has dropped out these verses:
There are other verses on which various versions of the Bible differ. These
include: LK 10:2 and 17, 1Sam. 13:5 Ezra 8:35, mark7:16 ,Matt 12:47, Acts 8:37,
Rom. 16:24. Matt. 18:11, John 5:4, 2Timothy 3:16 e.t.c.
Quoting the RSV, the Bible says
“All scripture is inspired by God
and profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction and for training
in righteousness…….” (2 Timothy 3:16)
This is the Bible’s yardstick for knowing whether a book is that of God or not.
Therefore, how do we described the following ungodly and shameless acts
reported in the Book and still created to God?. Does this agree with 2 Timo. 3:16?.
1. Abraham wedded his own Sister? Genesis 12:19; 20:12, 16:3.
2. Absurdities in the Book of God- the Bible?. These include;
(i) ATAKING ass Numbers 22:27-28
(ii) FOUR Footed fowls, Lev. 11:20

31. 31
(iii) Birth of Females a DOUBL pollution, Lev. 12:1-8.
(iv) Shamgar KILLS 600 with an ox goad, Judges 3:31
(v) Samson KILLs A THOUSAND with the jaw bone of a donkey. Judges
15:15-16.
(vi) A SEVEN HEADED leopard. Revel,13:1-2.
(vii) To eat SHIT and drink PIS. 2Kings 18:27 and Isaiah 36:12.
(viii) DUNG on your faces.Malach 2:3.
(ix) Samson had SEX with a whore in Gaza, Judges.
(x) Ruth COHABITS with Boaz in the Barn. Ruth 3:4-15
(xi) David SLEEP with a young virgin. 1Kings 11:1,3.?
(xii) To eat cake with SHIT. Ezek. 4:12-15.
3. ALCOHOL- a devilish advice in the so-called Book of God. From the
“Good News Bible in Today’s English” we read.
(i) “Alcohol is for people who are DYING for those who are in MISERY. Let
them drink and FORGET their poverty and unhappiness”. Prov. 31:6-7.
(ii) Alcohol is recommended in preference to water. 1 Timo. 5:23
4. More contradictions in the Bible-
(i) The “LORD” tempted David 2 Sam. 24:1 or “Satan” provoke David….
1Chron. 21:1.
(ii) 700 or 7000 “Horsemen” or Footmen”…? 2 Sam. 10:18 vs. 1Chro. 19:18.
(iii) Solomon had 2000 baths or 300 baths? 1 Kings 7:26 vs 2 Chron 4:5.
(iv) Solomon had 4000 stalls of horses or 40,000? 2Cronicles 9:25vs 1Kings
4:26
(v) Did Saul enquire of the Lord or didn’t he? 1 Sam. 28;6 vs 1Chron.
10:13-14
(vi) Heaven, no man hath ascended John 3:13 contradicted by; 2Kings 2:11
where Elijah ascended, and Gen. 5:24 where Enoch ascended.
(vii) Jesus lost “None” of his disciple John 18:19 contradicted by ; he lost only
“One”. John 17:12.
(viii) “ALL” are sinners 2Chron.6:36 contradicted by ;“Whosoever is born of
God DOTH NOT commit Sin …”
5. David- a “Man after God’s own heart” commits adultery with Bath-Sheba
the wife of Uriah. 2Sam.11”4. David-shamelessly danced NAKE 2Sam.6:20.
Noah got drunk and lay NAKED. Gen.9:21. Saul … lay down NAKED

32. 32
1Sam.19:24. Isaiah… walked NAKED and barefoot three years…… even
with their buttocks UNCOVERED, to the shame of Egypt. Isaiah 20”3-4
David- wickedly caused the death of Uriah, the husband of Bath-Sheba
2Sam.11:6-25.
6. God – qualities ill-befitting God
(i) hissing: Isaiah 5:26;7:18, Zecharia 10:8.
(ii) Roaring: Isaiah 42:13,Jer. 25:30.
(iii) A “barber” God:Jer.15:6, Gen.6:6.
(iv) Riding: 2 Sam. 22:11
(v) Murders 50,070 for looking into a box 1Sam. 6:19.
7. HATE AS FOUNDATION OF JESUS’ FAITH “IF any man comes to me,
and HATES NOT his father, and mother, and wife and children…… HE
CANNOT be my disciple” Lk. 14:26.
8. Peter contradicts Jesus;
‘Jesus saith unto him ,Iam
the way, the truth, and the Life,
no man cometh unto the Father but by me”
John 14:6 .
This is contradicted by:
“Then Peter opened his
mouth…… But IN EVERY
NATION he that feareth him (God)
and worketh righteousness, is ACCEPTED
with him (God)”. Act 10:34-35.
9. KETURAH- the third wife or concubine of Abraham.
“ then again Abraham took
a WIFE and her name was Keturah”
Gen. 25:1-2.
Contradicts from 1 chron.1:32-33 where Keturah is described as Abraham’s
concubine. Is a wife not different from a concubine?
10. INCEST i.e.” Sexual intercourse between two persons who are too closely
related such as between father and daughter, son and mother, brother and
sister etc.

33. 33
(i) Incest between a Father and his daughter Gen. 19:33-35.
” Sexual intercourse”” is vaguely described as LAY or “COLLECTING THE
SEED OF OUR FATHER” in the older versions of the Bible such as the King
James and the Roman catholic versions.
(ii) Incest between Mother and Son:Gen. 35:22.
(iii) Incest between Father- in –law and daughter-in-law and even resulted in
pregnancy; Gen.38:15-18.
In is dishearting to note that it is one of such incestuous relationship between a
father-in-law and daughter-in-law that resulted in the birth of twins who were
DESTINED to BECOME THHE GREAT-GRAND-FATHER OF JESUS
CHRIST (God forbid;)
“ and Judas begat
Perez and Zerah of Thamar……………
………………” Matt.1:16.
(iv) Incest and Rape between Brother and Sister;
“……..he took hold of her
( Thamar his sister, not to be
confused with Thamar in (iii) above),
and said unto her come lie with me
(have sex with me), my sister.
And she answered him, Nay my brother (Amoon);
one of the sons of David, (the Man after
God’s own heart), do not force me…”But
he would not listen to her; and since he
was stronger than she was, he overpowered
her and RAPE her (his sister)”. 2 Sam.13:1-14
(v) Wholesale RAPE and INCEST between son and his Mother;2Sam.16:22
(vi) Other various types of Incest: showing (i)-(iv) are abominations Lenitious
18:8-18,20:11-14 and 17-21.
11. RAPE: Brother rapes and commits incest with his sister: 2Sam.13:1-14.
12. ONANISM i.e The Withdrawal of the penis from vagina before ejaculation
(coitus interruptus in the medical term:; Gen. 38:8-9.(sex with one’s
brother’s wife!)

34. 34
13. Sodomy (why human being become lesbians and homosexuals); (Romans
1:25-27).
The whole songs of Solomon is nothing but a catalogue of pornographic literature.
No wonder George Bernard Shaw said: “THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK( the
Bible) ON EARTH, KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY”. Keep it out of your
children.
THE USE OF PLURAL FOR GOD: In the book, “who is this Allah? On page 15
for example, the Qur’an is accused of the predominant use of the first person
plural and singular even though the author indirectly accepted this as a dignified
or honorific personality or deity on the same page. Arabic is a Semitic language
just like Hebrew and Aramaic. Semitic languages (scholars say) make use of
“plural of numbers” and also “plural of respect or majesty”. In English language,
there is a Royal “We” even though this is now regarded as being archaic. The
Yoruba language has a “plural of respect” too. The plural of respect is a reminder
to the listeners “ of the authority of the sovereign”.
Thus in Arabic, Allah is using the Royal “we” as a plural of respect or majesty
for Himself to remind us of His majesty of our Sovereign and Ruler of all the
worlds. Quoting Muhammad Ahmad in his book, Misinterpretations of the Qur’an
he say
“No reasonable person whose language includes
this “plural of respect” would ever understand
it to mean a plural of numbers (or Trinity).
Arab Christians who number millions in the
world, never misunderstood the Qur’an in this
way, because of their proper understanding of
the Arabic language. Moreover , in view of
the fact that the Qur’an has specifically
rejected belief in the Trinity (Qur’an 5:73),
it is absurd and mischievous to claim that the
same Qur’an is secretly affirming it by the
use of the “plural of respect” or majesty”.
Some commentators of the Qur’an have interpreted the uses of the three
pronounce, I, We and Him (with their other forms of Me, My, Us our and His) and
in which Allah sometimes refers to Himself as “I”, “We” and “Him” within a

35. 35
single verse or passage to mean that God is using this to emphasise the fact that he
is not comparable to any human being who, in his human and mortal form has
imposed limitations.
All told an objective analyst can easily decide for himself the type of Book he
wishes to follow. Is it the one that is flawless beyond human knowledge, unique,
free from contradictions and incongruities and incorruptible by man which the
Qur’an is; or the Bible which, even though, fanatical Christians have denied its
shortcomings but which Christian scholars (as have been shown earlier) found to
be characterised with “uncertainty”, “tentative edition”, “obscurities”, “unknown”,
“provisional”, “imperfections”, “conjecture”, “substitutions”, “differences among
manuscripts”, “additions”, deletions”, “meaning of original text in dispute”,
“alternative rendering”, “grave defects”, “suffered in transmission”, “most
probable reconstruction”, “doubtful”, “corruption in the text”, “mistakes”,
“errors”.

36. 36
CHAPTER FOUR
THE QUR’AN AS A PROOF OF JESUS’ DIVINITY?
The enemies of Islam have misinterpreted several verses of the Qur’an to
‘prove’ that Jesus is God. Some of these verses we exhaustively discussed in
several chapters in this book. However, about fie additional misinterpretations of
the Qur’an would be briefly discussed in this section.
The misinterpretation of the verse of the Qur’an (chapter 3 verse 55 ) that the
followers of Jesus will be exalted above all others on the day of Resurrection. The
verse, correctly quoted is as follows:
“Behold! God said: O Jesus! I will take
thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee
(of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme;
I will make those who follow the superior to
those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection.
Then shall ye all returns on to me, and I will
judge between you of the matters wherein you
dispute”. (Qur’an ch. 3:55).
Comments 394-397 of Yusuf Ali are eye openers to the correct interpretation
of this verse. In the words of Yusuf Ali, this verse should be read with Qur’an
chapter 4 verses 157 which read:
“That they said (in boast),”We killed Christ Jesus. The son of Mary, the
Apostle of God”; but the killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to
appear to them and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain)
knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for a surety they killed him not (Qur’an
ch.4:157).
From this verse, it is clear that the Jews neither crucified nor killed Jesus, but
that another was killed in his likeness. The guilt of the Jews remained but Jesus
was eventually taken up to God. The Gospel of Barnabas and his theory of
substitution on the cross (rejected by the church of supporting this truth
notwithstanding the fact that Barnabas was one of Christ’s twelve disciples and
Mark, Luke and Matthew were never eye witnesses to the ministration of Jesus)
confirmed this position of the Muslims.

37. 37
In the words of Yusuf Ali, “Jesus was charged by the Jews with blasphemy as
claiming to be God or the son of God. The Christians (except a few early sects
which were annihilated by persecution and the modern sect of Unitarians, who are
almost Muslims) adopted the substance of the claim, and made it the cornerstone
of their faith. God clears Jesus of such a charge or claim. Those who follow thee;.
The Muslims are the true Christians (followers of Christ) for they follow (or
should follow the true teaching of Christ, which did not include the blasphemy
that he was God or the son of God in the literal sense. But there is a large body of
men, who by birth inherit such teaching nominally but their hearts do not consent
to it.
Their real Muslim virtues (which from their point of view they call Christian
virtues) entitle them to be called Christians and to receive the leading position
which they at present occupy in the world of man. All the controversies about
dogman and faith will disappear before God.
The source of misinformation, that is, the enemies of Islam, misinterpret the
next verse i.e. chapter 3 verse 56 to mean “whomsoever rejects Jesus will be
punished with terrible agony in this world and after death”. The correct
interpretation as given by all objective translators of the Qur’an is as follows:
“As to those who reject faith………”. The word in Arabic is “Kafaru”
meaning; ‘rejecter of faith’ and not “whomsoever that reject Jesus”. It behoves on
all Muslims to read and understand his scripture- the Qur’an. The most
unfortunate thing is that most ignorant Muslims do not have a copy of the Qur’an
in whatever language they can understand. Thus the ignorant Muslims take the
enemies of Islam for their words in their misinterpretation of the words of Allah;
Moreover, chapter 43 verses 61 and 63 have been deliberately misinterpreted
as meaning that “Jesus knows the hour of judgement “when Jesus (even in the
Bible) himself attributed the power of knowing the Hour to God only. The verse,
correctly translated, as done by Yusuf Ali, reads:
“And (Jesus) shall be a sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of judgement).
Therefore have no doubt about the (hour), but follow ye Me: this is a straight
way” (verse 61).
…… “When Jesus came with clear signs, he said: Now have I come to you
with Wisdom and order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye
dispute: therefore fear God and obey me. (Verse 63)

38. 38
Verse 61 according to Yusuf Ali and all other Muslim scholars over the ages is
“understood to refer to the second coming of Jesus in the Last day just before the
Resurrection when he will destroy the false doctrines that pass under his name,
and prepare the way for the universal acceptance of Islam, the Gospel of Unity
and Peace, the straight Way of the Qur’an.
The verse of the Qur’an ch. 3:54-55 has been mischievously interpreted by
Alan Isscson (1990) in his book “Deeper Life” on pg. 42 as follows
“Allah is the Supreme Plotter. He said
“Jesus, I am about to cause you to die and
lift you up to Me. I shall take you away from
the unbelievers and exalt your followers above
them till the day of Resurrection. Then to Me you
shall all return and I shall judge your disputes”.
(ch.3:55).
The reader can now see the difference between the correct interpretation as
given earlier and the “Deeper life” and other similar misinterpretations.
Moreover, there is another annoying misinterpretation of the Qur’an often to
prove the divinity of Christ viz ch.4:159 and 173.
“Jesus will be a judge on the Day of judgement against those who do not
believe hi (Jesus).
This verse (v.159), correctly translated, is as follows:
“And there is none of the people of the Book
(Christians) but must believe in him before
his death; and on the Day of judgement he
will be a witness against them”,(verse 159).
The Arabic word mistranslated as a judge above means a witness are they
synonymous?
…..”But to those who believe and do deeds of
righteousness, He will give their (due) rewards,
and more, out of His bounty; But those who are
disdainful and arrogant, He will punish with

39. 39
a grievous penalty; nor will they find, besides
God, any to protect or help them )verse173).
The interpretation that Jesus will be a witness against his followers who
blaspheme about God is further strengthened by another verse of the Qur’an.
“How then id we brought from each people a
witness and We brought thee as a witness
against these people”. (Qur’an ch.4 verse 41).
This has only shown, in the words of Yusuf Ali. That each Prophet and Leader
is a witness for his people and his contemporaries for those who accept God and
against those who reject Him.

40. 40
CHAPTER FIVE
DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST IS A MYTH CREATED BY SOME
OVER-ZEALOS CHRISTIANS.
The concepts of Jesus as God is as intellectualized concept proposed to the
Christians by John, Paul and others. There is no mystery in this intellectualized
concept as the proponents would want us believe. The positive statements
highlighted bellow are what Jesus was said to have claimed for himself and the
negative statements listed thereafter are clear and conclusive statements on
negation of the divinity of Jesus. All are proved from the Biblical point of view.
For brevity, a short comment will always follow each statement.
POSITVE STATEMENTS
1.Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the
father but through me ”John 14:6.
Comment; Each Prophet was the way to Allah during his own time. It is only the one
that was sent to the whole world (Muhammad) that is the only way to Allah for man
of all ages. As would be seen later, Jesus was not sent to anybody besides THE LOST
SHEEP OF ISRAEL- not even to all the Israelites but the lost one. Jesus never
preached to anybody or any nation besides the Jews even through his home birth was
surrounded with people of other nations. He never had any other nationals (besides
the Jews as his disciples and adherents e.t.c. Muhammad (S.A.W.) had non- Arabs
such as Salm fro Persia, Bilal from Abyssinia etc. as disciples.
2.”I and the father are one”. John 10:30.
comment: Jesus and God are one NOT one in essence but in purpose and/ or in
spiritual communion. The Bible is clear on this:” And now I am no more in the world,
but I am coming to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thous hast given
me, that they may be ONE<EVEN AS WE ARE ONE”. John 17:11.
This shows that the disciples (according to Jesus prayer above) should be one-
definitely not in essence but in purpose of propagation of God’s message otherwise
each of the disciples is a unique God on his own. What a blasphemy?
“I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
that they may be one, even as thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may also

41. 41
may be in us, that….. that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and thou in
me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world”……. John 11:20-23.
Thus the Oneness mentioned in John 10:30 is not in essence but in purpose.
3.“… He who has seen me has seen the Father….” John 14:9.
Comment: The word ‘see’ as used here implies knowledge and followership. In
otherwords it means “He who has knowledge of my message and follows me and my
message has known and followed God otherwise the passage contradicts the Bible
itself which says nobody can see God and live as reported in Exodus and other places:
“No one has ever seen God….” John 1:18
“And the Father who sent me has himself
born witness to me. His voice you have
never heard, his form you have never seen”….
John 5:37.
Thus knowing Jesus means having knowledge of God.
“If you had known me, you would have known my father also henceforth you know
him and have seen him2 John 14:7.
4. Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I
am”. John 8:58.
Comment: Jesus was not said to have said that before Adam was he was.
Everything existed in the knowledge of God before anything came into being.
“Iam” as used in the book of Exodus for God does not imply divinity when used
by any other prophet or Saint afterwards.
5. That Jesus was worshipped by others.
Comment: people worship money, incense love, and creatures like themselves,
Jesus himself worshipped God and told his followers to do the same. He did not
worship himself.
” But he withdraw to the wilderness and prayed”. Luke 5:16.
Who besides God did Jesus pray unto in Luke 5:16?
6. That Jesus was called the son of God or the only begotten son.
Comment: He was equally called the son of man. “Jesus…… being the son of
Joseph, …. The son of Enos, the son of Seth, Luke 3:1-38.
Several people were referred to as as sons of God and even first born meaning best
of them.
These are:

42. 42
“… for Iam a father to Israel (Jacob) and Euphraim is my first born” Jeremiah
31:9.
“… Thus says the Lord, Israel is my first-born son”. Exodus 4:22.
“ I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son”. 2sam 7:14.
“He shall build a house for my name. he shall be my son, and I will be his
father…” 1 Chronicles 22: 10.
Thus one can see that first born implies best born and neither does it mean the first
in terms of chronology nor the only best. The concept of begotten son is defeated
in the Bible as well.
“..You are my son, today I have begotten You2. Psalm 2:7.
“Take your son, your only son Isaac, … Genesis 22:2.
(Even though this is not true because before Isaac, Abraham had given birth to
Ishmael through the second wife Hagar (Hajar). However, this is not the issue
under discussion).
“…..you are the sons of the Lord Your God;…. Deuty. 14:1.
“…. It shall be said to them,
“……. It shall be said to them, “ Son of the living God” Hosea 1:10.
It is now clear that begotten as used in Psalm 2:7 does not refer to Jesus. In other
words there are many begotten sons; Also ‘only son’ is not literally used as Gen.
22:2, Deut. 14:1 and Hosea 1:10 above among other references readily show.
7. That Jesus called God his father.
Comment: father as used here does not mean father the way every sane person
understands it. When there is a father, then there exists a mother. Definitely that is
not meant here. What is meant is explained as follows:
“Iam ascending to my father and your father, to my God and your God”. John
20:17)..(What picture does John 20:17 sent to one’s brain amongst other things?.
That the father is DIFFERENT from the son).
“And because you are sons, God has sent the spirit of his son into our hearts,
Crying, “Abba; father;” Galat. 4:6.
“….When we cry Abba; Father;”. Rom.8:5.
8. That Jesus was called Messiah (meaning the anointed).
Comment: David was also called Messiah in the books of Psalm 2 and Isaiah
45:1.
9. That Jesus was called saviour

43. 43
Comment: A lot of Saviour exist. A doctor is a saviour. A benefactor is a saviour.
A good leader is a saviour of those he leads. Some prophets were similarity
referred to as Saviours.
“…. (Therefore the Lord gave Israel
a Saviour, so that they escaped from
the hand of the Syrians….
2 Kings 13:5.
“… and according to thy great mercies
thou dist give them Saviours who saved
them from the hand of their enemies.
Nehemiah 9:27.
“Saviours shall go up to Mount Zion
to rule Mount Esau “.
The book of Obadiant:21.
10. That Jesus called himself and/ or was called ‘ Lord’.
Comment: The word Lord was used in the sense of a master or teacher. Judges in
our Western courts and clergymen in our society are even honourably addressed
(in terms of protocol as my lord;
11. That Jesus was filled with Holy Spirit. Comment:- There were cases of others who
were also filled with it in and same is true of Barnabas. Taking of Barnabas (whose
gospel of truth has been expunged from the Bible because he told the truth about Jesus
and how he foretold the coming of Muhammad (S.A.W.) e.t.c.) . The Bible in
Acts:11:24 Barnabas was described as being good and faithful.
“for he was a good man, full of the Holy
spirit and of faith…”act 11: 24
the church, nevertheless, rejected the gospel of Barnabas as being too critical of
the position of the church on the issue of Christ.
12...That Jesus’ words would not pass away.
Comment:- The words meant here is that of God. In other words, God’s words
would not pass away.
“.. and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me”. John
14:24.
13. That Jesus said all authority has been given to him.

44. 44
Comment:- If this blasphemy is true (for the sake of argument) it implies the
authority of the father and Holy spirit has ceased since all authority has been given
to the son. Moreover, the phrase “given to” him implies someone who is greater
than him (Jesus) has given it to him.
The giver is always grater than the receiver. He who is greater has now has now
conceded all authority to a subordinate for the letter to rule over the former; Does
this make sense?
14.That Thomas called Jesus my God, my Lord: in John 20:28
Comment:- the implication of this statement is that Jesus, is God-like which is a
metaphor. This is further cleared by the author of confusion, Paul, when he said:
“yet for us there is one God the father, …”1 Corinth. 8:6.
(Reading the verse in full you will see another evidence of confusion from the
master confusionist- Paul). See chapter 21 pp 261 for details on Paul and his
guides.
15 That the Jews wanted to get rid of him for blasphemy for associating himself or
being associated with divinity as in John 10:34.
Comment: Jesus accused them of hypocrisy e.t.c in their ways of doing things
and wanted to end his life. The blasphemy never implied divinity.
In John 10:34, Jesus told his accusers that he could not be guilty of their
accusations. God sent Moses to Pharaoh as Messenger of God. Is Moses God or
has he ever been one? He is God-like. This is the context of Jesus being called
God.
“For who in the skies can be compared to the
Lord? Who among the heavenly beings is like?
the Lord…” Psalms 89:6.
16. That Jesus will come to the world again.
Comment:- Muslims also believe this even more than the Christians (not in the
context they believe in it, however). Jesus is coming back because he was the only
controversial figure that needs to clear him of what people attribute to him which he
never preached. He will come to establish the shariah and this is what it means to say,
in Islamic parlance, that he will come to kill the Dhajjal and Pig.
17. That all things were created by him and for him.

45. 45
Comment:- This statement is self-contradictory. If all things were created by him
then all things that were thus created were created for somebody else and therefore
not for himself. On the hand, if all things were created for him then this has the
implication that all that were created were created by someone else.
Miscellaneous Statement and bundles of contradictions.
Jesus was a creature of God and he said my father and your father. Can he
then sit by the side of himself if he were to be the same as the father? Obviously is a
balderdash.
If the concept of both finite and infinite; limited and unlimited, mutable and
immutable means the same thing to a sane man, then Jesus and God would mean the
samething. But we all know these pairs of words do not mean the samething. If we
say father, it means the father of somebody else; and if we say son, it means the son of
somebody else. Thus Jesus, if we say son, he is different from the father, and if the
father is different from the son. The statement, God, why thou hast forsaken me is
obviously not the voice of God. It is not even that of a prophet because prophets
would face persecution squarely and will offer no excuse or complain. That reported
voice is unequivocally that of a transformed Judas; there are about 27 contradictions
in the Bible as regards the crucifixion of Jesus, who carried the cross? etc.
NEGATIVE STATEMENTS
1.That Jesus did nothing on his own authority.
comment:- The following are evidences:
“I can do nothing on my own authority;
as I hear, I judge; …” John 5: 30.
“…. But to sit at my right hand and
at my left is NOT MINE TO GRANT …”Matt. 20:23.
2. That Jesus did not speak of his own authority.
Comment:- “.. The words that I say to you
I do not speak on my own authority,…”
John 14: 10
“… I do nothing on my own authority
but speak as the Father taught me.
And he who has sent me is with me;