The Story of France with Firown (Pharaoh)

Is it possible that this mummy in front of me is the one who was chasing Moses?:Professor Maurice Bucaille


One of the best gifts that we can offer ourselves is forgiveness

Miracles Of The Quran

The unprecedented style and the superior wisdom inherent in the Qur'an is conclusive evidence confirming that it is the Word of God.

The Truth About Jesus Christ

Tells the truth about Christianity-How the gospels are unreliable- Audience member shouts at him a few times.

Parent-Child Relationship in Islam

Islam recognises family as a basic social unit. Along with the husband-wife relationship the Parent-child relationship is the most important one

Editor's Picks

30 September 2011

Picture Perfect: If a woman is FREE!

All sizes | If a woman is FREE | Download This Photo 

Stress and its impact on the heart and body

Anger, negative thinking and stress are considered destructive factors for the health of heart and body, So Islam orders us to stay away and avoid them …

The Messenger of Allah peace be upon him wasn’t be angry to any life matters. His satisfaction and anger were for Allah .He, therefore, was the happiest and the most stable and tranquility person, and gave us the best examples of this. 

It's rarely for the Messenger of Allah to spend a day without facing events of anger and emotion and stress but we did not know he was angry except when someone exceed the limits of Allah. The Prophet deals with any problem calmly and patiently. This is what makes people entering the religion of Allah in crowds. Therefore, God praise him in the Holy Quran:

"And you on an exalted standard of character" [Quran 68:4]

Recent scientific studies have shown that psychological tension, stress and anger are considered destructive factors to human health and heart and it may lead to serious diseases like cancer!

Researchers believe that, despite the fact that exercise and good diet and other factors which have vital importance to heart health, the social factors, happiness, a sense of satisfaction and perfection and work towards a goal in life have an impact in their turn. 

The Prophet ordered his companions to repeat important words that express satisfaction, in mornings and evenings. This is: "I declare to Accept Allah as my Lord, to accept Islam as a religion and to Muhammad as Prophet and Messenger" Who say it ten times in the morning and evening, it will be really on God to reward him in the Day of Resurrection.

The researchers maintain that satisfaction is one of the most important remedies for any mental illness.

Most mental disorders results from dissatisfaction, Anger is at the head of factors that are detrimental to humans, it causes sudden death, stroke and myocardial infarction and blood pressure.

Stress affects the physical and mental health 

U.S. research has revealed that stress and psychological pressures faced by individuals on a daily basis can cause some types of cancer. While a similar European study found that stress is harmful to heart health. The study carried out by researchers from the American University "Yale," that psychological stress may stimulate the daily growth of tumors, And that any shock, emotional or physical, Can serve as a "corridor" between cancerous mutations which eventually lead to serious tumors. 

The results of the study published in the Nature journal showed That the necessary conditions for this disease can be affected by emotional environment  including all the daily tasks that we undertake, whether at work or in the family. 

Tian Xu, a specialist Professor in genetics from Yale University Says: "There are a lot of different circumstances can lead to stress. And reduce or avoid the circumstances that cause it, are always a good advice... ". 

European study addressed another aspect of the stress, The British research has shown a negative effect on the heart and the disease which may be caused by stress .This study confirms  scientifically, the prevailing belief since ancient times being linked to heart attacks. 

All participants were subjected to stress tests, and then the levels of the hormone cortisol were measured. It is a primary stress hormone produced by the body when exposed to psychological pressure or physical, and lead in the event of release to narrowing of the arteries. The researchers observed that participants who were injured by the stress tests were the most vulnerable, by weakness, in which lack of sufficient arterial injury for those who kept calm. 

We can See in this drawing, the mechanism that operates cortisol; a steroid hormone that regulates blood pressure and cardiovascular function and immune system. It also controls the body's use of protein, carbohydrates and fats, as a result of increased stress, whether physical such as illness or trauma. And increases the production of the cortisol hormone as a natural reaction in the body and is essential if the levels remain high for a long time. The new British study found that stress caused by work is an important factor in the incidence of heart disease, diabetes and exposure to the risks of stroke. 

Many verses urging peace of mind

The one who contemplates the Koran noted that many of the verses telling us to be patient and not to be anger and urge for forgiveness. One of these verses says:

"The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto: but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah: for loves not those who do wrong". [Quran 42: 40]

Allah says also:
" And if you do catch them out, catch them out no worse than they catch you out: but if you show patience that is indeed the best for those who are patient. And do you be patient, for your patience is but from Allah; nor grieve over them: and distress not yourself because of their plots. For Allah is with those who restrain themselves, and those who do good" [Quran 16:126-128]

He says about the righteous who promised them Paradise as wide as the heavens and the earth: 

"Those who spend, whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon men; for Allah loves those who do good". [Quran 3:134]

The best way to treat the psychological pressure is Amnesty. Because Allah says:

"The remission is the nearest to righteousness. And do not forget liberality between yourselves. For Allah sees well all that you do." [Quran 2: 237]

Many daily pressures of human are caused by a sense of injustice and the inability to take from others. But once human practice "amnesty", the problem will evaporate like the heat when the water evaporates!                                                                 

To remember the day of the conquest of Mecca when Allah grant victory over his enemies, who mocked, insulted, took and cursed him, But he pardoned them and said: “Go away you are free!

This situation is a lesson for the believer who like the Messenger of Allah peace be upon him.

It is mercy of Allah towards His slaves that made the reward of tolerance and forgiveness in the Hereafter a very large one, and make its reward a great thing in this world which is enjoy better health and greater Psychological stability. 

Look attentively at this wonderful text of the Quran:

"Nor can Goodness and Evil be equal. Repel with what is better: Then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were your friend and intimate. And no one will be franted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self-restraintـــــ none but persons of the greatest good fortune." [Quran 41:35]

Whatever your problem with others is, it can be resolved as soon as the transaction in the best manner and with a little patience and with a good word. As Allah said:

See you not how Allah sets forth a parable? A goodly Word like a goodly tree, whose root is firmly fixed, and its branches to the heavens. It brings  forth its fruit at all times , by the leave of its Lord. So Allah sets forth parable for men, in order that they may receive admonition" [Quran  14:24-25]

By: Abduldaem Al-Kaheel


29 September 2011

Beautiful woman, Who wanted to get married

There was this beautiful woman, who wanted to get married, but she wanted a very pious husband, so she said that she’ll marry the man who recites the whole Quran every single day, fasts for the whole year and stays awake and worships Allah all throughout the night.

She was a very beautiful woman, and a lot of suitors wanted to marry her, but they knew they couldn’t fulfil the conditions she set. Until this one man stepped forward and said he could fulfil them. So the Imam got both of them married.

After the first night of the marriage, the wife sees that the husband doesn’t recite the whole of the Quran, nor does he fast, nor does he stay awake in the worship of Allah, she decided to let it roll on for a few weeks to see if there were any changes, there weren’t, so she filed a complaint and asked for a divorce.

They are both taken in front of the judge, and the judge asked, ‘What were the conditions of the marriage?’ the man replied ‘They were for me to recite the whole Quran daily, keep fast for the whole year and to worship Allah all throughout the night.

The Judge asked, ‘ did you fulfil them? The man calmly answered, ‘…yes.

The judge answers, ‘you lie, your wife has said that you don’t, that’s why she’s asking for a divorce’.

But the man insisted that he had fulfilled the conditions, so the judge asked, ‘did you recite the full Quran everyday?’ The man answered 'yes'. The Judge, baffled asked, ‘how? How can you do that?

The man coolly answered, ‘I recite Surah Ikhlas three times a day and according to Prophet Muhammad (saw), reciting Surah Ikhlas three times is equivalent to reciting the whole Quran.’ 

The Judge was intrigued, so he asked, ‘how did you fast the whole year?

The man answered, ‘ I fasted for the whole month of Ramadan, then kept another six fasts in the month of Shawwal, according to Prophet Muhammad (saw), keeping all of the fast of Ramadan then keeping six fasts in the month of Shawwal, is as if you have fasted for the whole year.

The Judge remained silent, he couldn’t give a reply saying the man was wrong, so finally he asked, ‘ how did you stay awake all night and worship Allah, when your wife saw you sleeping?’ The Judge thought the man wouldn’t be able to answer this one, 

But the man, cool as a cucumber answered, ‘I prayed Salatul Isha with jamaat, then the next day prayed Salatul Fajr with jamaat, according to Prophet Muhammad (saw), the one who prays Salatul Isha and Salatul Fajr with jamaat, it is as if he had stayed up all night worshipping Allah.

The Judge sat there looking at the man; the final verdict was about to be released…

He said to the man and his wife, ‘…go, just go, there is nothing wrong with this marriage’…



28 September 2011

Farming Ants

It turns out ants, like humans, are true farmers. The difference is that ants are farming fungus.

One of the most important developments in human civilization was the practice of sustainable agriculture. But we were not the first -Just as farming helped humans become a dominant species, it has also helped leaf-cutter ants become dominant herbivores, and one of the most successful social insects in nature.

According to an article in the November issue of Microbiology Today, leaf-cutter ants have developed a system to try and keep their gardens pest-free; an impressive feat which has evaded even human agriculturalists.

Leaf-cutter ants put their freshly-cut leaves in gardens where they grow a special fungus that they eat. New material is continuously incorporated into the gardens to grow the fungus and old material is removed by the ants and placed in special refuse dumps away from the colony. The ants have also been designed to the practice of weeding. When a microbial pest is detected by worker ants, there is an immediate flurry of activity as ants begin to comb through the garden. When they find the pathogenic 'weeds', the ants pull them out and discard them into their refuse dumps.

"Since the ant gardens are maintained in soil chambers, they are routinely exposed to a number of potential pathogens that could infect and overtake a garden. In fact, many of the ant colonies do become overgrown by fungal pathogens, often killing the colony," said Professor Cameron Currie from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA. "Scientists have shown that a specialized microfungal pathogen attacks the gardens of the fungus-growing ants. These fungi directly attack and kill the crop fungus, and can overrun the garden in a similar fashion to the way weeds and pests can ruin human gardens."

Ants Harbor Antibiotic to Protect Their Crops

A curious observation was that some worker ants had a white wax-like substance across their bodies. When they looked at it under an electron microscope scientists discovered that this covering was not a wax, but a bacterium! These bacteria are part of the group actinobacteria, which produce over 80% of the antibiotics used by humans. The bacteria produce antifungal compounds that stop the microfungal pathogen from attacking the garden. This discovery was the first clearly demonstrated example of an animal, other than humans, that uses bacteria to produce antibiotics to deal with pathogens.

"Research in our laboratory has revealed a number of interesting properties between the bacteria and the pathogenic fungus. The bacteria appear to be specially suited to inhibiting the pathogenic fungi that infect the ants' fungus garden," said Entomologis Professor Currie of the University of Wisconsin.

"Every ant species [that we have examined] has different, highly modified structures to support different types of bacteria," Currie observes. "This indicates that the ants have rapidly adapted to maintain the bacteria. It also indicates that the coevolution between the bacteria and the ants, as well as the fungus and parasites, has been occurring since very early on, apparently for tens of millions of years."

In fact, more than 200 species of ants display this complex symbiosis, according to Currie. "It now appears that the fungus-growing ants are more modified for culturing their mutualistic bacteria than for their mutualistic fungi," Currie notes.

The unexpected finding also bears promise for human agriculture and medicine: the ants have been able to avoid promoting resistance. "I think it has to do with the ants having several mechanisms to suppress the parasite," Currie says. "In addition to the bacteria, the ants have specialized behaviors that involve removing the parasite from the fungus garden."

The Attine ants join a short list of other insects, animals and plants known to harbor beneficial microbes. Many more such species may remain to be discovered, however. "For me, it shows us how little we know about the natural systems and microbes in nature," Currie adds. "Fungus-growing ants are very well studied, yet this morphological characteristic went unnoticed until now. What other organisms might be taking advantage of this type of association? What don't we know about other systems that are not as closely studied as those of ants?"

Amazing fact: It has been estimated that an ant's brain may have the same processing power as a Macintosh computer. Another way of putting it is that a Mac has as much brains as an ant!

"There are signs for the believing nation in the creation of their (own) selves, and the creation of the animals He has scattered (across the world)." [Quran 45:4]

Courtesy: Science Daily

27 September 2011

The Empty Soap Box

This happened in one of world’s biggest cosmetics companies. The company received a complaint that a consumer had bought a soap box that was empty.

Immediately the authorities isolated the problem to the assembly line, which transported all the packaged boxes of soap to the delivery department. For some reason, one soap box went through the assembly line empty.

Management asked its engineers to solve the problem. Post-haste, the engineers worked hard to devise an X-ray machine with high- resolution monitors manned by two people to watch all the soap boxes that passed through the line to make sure they were not empty.

No doubt, they worked hard and they worked fast but they spent whoopee amount to do so. But when a workman was posed with the same problem,he did not get into complications of X-rays, etc but instead came out with another solution.

He bought a strong industrial electric fan and pointed it at the assembly line. He switched the fan on, and as each soap box passed the fan, it simply blew the empty boxes out of the line.

Moral : Always look for simple solutions. Devise the simplest possible solution that solves the problem. And, learn to focus on solutions not on problems.

26 September 2011

Missing Salah (Prayer)

Salaat is a basic pillar of Islam it is mentioned again and again in the Quran the importance of prayer is in even hundred places but in the mosque,do you see many young faces?

Praying in the mosque gives 27 times the reward pray with the intention that you're pleasing your Lord when you walk to the mosque, just remember within you gain a reward and you're losing a sin.

For every step towards your destination this is a blessing from Allah swt to his creation the Quran has foretold, that before you are dead'say your prayers before your prayers are said'.

Our prophet (saws) said about those who miss prayer fifteen punishments they'll have to bear six in this life, three on passing away three in the grave and three on judgement day.

while seeing elders pray at the mosque door remember as a young person, your reward is 70 times more.

Read salaat punctually, read it with care on judgement day, we will be asked about prayer that's the first question, so take this advice salaat is the key to paradise.

Spread this word to muslim sisters and brothers salaat will separate muslims from others salaat is a blessing which Allah swt gave it will intercede and protect us in the grave.

When it comes eventually, to the day of rising the believers body washed by wudu will be shining for the believers who are regular in offering salaat it becomes a light of guidance on the pul-siraat.

Don't miss the prayer dhurh- maghrib at any cost it will be like your family and wealth is lost the ayat-ul-kursi after fardh, should be read it will lead you to paradise (insha Allah) after you're dead.

Not performing salaat will lead you to hell surrounded by serpants in a deep well perform your salaat whilst still in your prime.

You'll get ten rewards, Allah (insha Allah) will accept your pleas and you'll be closer to Allah swt by ten more degrees so embrace islam with all your heart and remember the key is in perfoming salaat.

25 September 2011

A nice begin a day with

You never know

when Allah is going to bless you!!

Good things happen when

you least expect them to !!!!!!!!

Oh Allah, I thank You for this day,

I thank You for my being able to see

and to hear this morning.

I'm blessed because You are

forgiving and


You have done so much for me

and You keep on blessing me.

Forgive me this day for everything

I have done, said or thought

that was not pleasing to you.

I ask now for Your forgiveness.

Please keep myself and my family safe

from all danger and harm. 

Help me to start this day

with a new attitude and plenty of gratitude.

Let me make the best of each and every day

to clear my mind so that I can hear from You.

Please broaden my mind

that I can accept all things.

Let me not whine and whimper

over things I have no control over.
And give me the best response

when I'm pushed beyond my limits.

I know that when I can't pray,

You listen to my heart.

Continue to use me to do Your will.

Continue to bless me that I may be

a blessing to others.

Keep me strong that I may help the weak...

Keep me uplifted that I may have

words of encouragement for others.

I pray for those that are lost

and can't find their way.

I pray for those that are misjudged

and misunderstood.

I pray for those who

don't know You intimately.

I pray for those that will delete this

without sharing it with others

I pray for those that don't believe.

But I thank You that I believe

That you change people and

change things.

I pray for all my sisters and brothers.

For each and every family member

in their households.

I pray for peace, love and joy

in their homes; that they are out of debt

and all their needs are met.

I pray that every eye that reads this

knows there is no problem, circumstance,

or a situation greater than Allah.

Every battle is in Your hands for You to fight.

I pray that these words be received 

into the hearts of every eye that sees it ---Aameen!

23 September 2011

Healing by listening to Quran

How could listening to the verses of Allah affect the brain cells? What's the scientific explanation to this phenomenon? Is there a hidden energy in the Holy Quran? Let's read….….

Personal Experience

The reason behind writing this article is my own personal experience with the Holy Quran. I was with the Holy Quran all the time; even while I am sleeping I used to leave the radio on with reciting the Holy Quran. As a matter of fact, I had no idea at that time about the technique of learning during sleep!

After a few months, I noticed great changes inside me. I felt that each one of my brain cells is vibrating and reacting with the voice of the Holy Quran recitation I was listening to. I was memorizing the Holy Quran using the technique of listening and repeating the chapter many times. Therefore, I found that the verses of the Holy Quran were getting easily into my memory.

Twenty years ago I told one of my friends that listening to the Holy Quran recitation reprogrammed the brain cells completely! But a few days ago I was really surprised to read about the experiments of the scientists in treating some of the incurable diseases using the sound waves of music. Some of the researchers such as the American scientist Annie Williams ,who is using the music therapy technique, has come out with important results. Those results, however, was limited until now because of the inability of the music to create the required effects on the cells. Nevertheless, she asserts that she has come up with unbelievable results in treating the Colon Cancer and the Brain Tumor and other diseases. She also states that the sense of creativity has been increased in each one of the patients who has listened to the recorded music.

Consequently , I'd like here to mention to my dear readers the results I got from the long period of listening to the recitation of the Holy Quran: I feel now that I have become stronger than before, that the immunity of my body has increased ,and my character has become better ,especially in dealing with people. The Holy Quran has also awakened the sense of creativity inside me and all these articles I wrote in a short period were the result of reading and listening to the Holy Quran constantly .

I can say , my dear reader, that constant listening to the Holy Quran increases the creativity in the human being and this is what happened to me. I still remember that before reading and memorizing the Holy Quran I was unable to write a single sentence correctly , but now I am able to write a scientific research paper in a day or a couple of days.

So we can see that listening to the Holy Quran does not only help in healing illnesses, but also contributes to developing the human personality and the communication skills together with the ability of creativity and coming up with new ideas. Therefore, you, dear reader, can try this and definitely will get fantastic results.

Scientific Facts

In 1839, the scientist" Enrick William Duve" discovered that exposing the brain to certain wave sounds can affect it positively and negatively . When he exposed the ears to different wave sound frequencies, he found that the brain reacts with those sound vibrations. Then, scientists found that the brain cells are in a state of vibration during its life time. Each cell vibrates in a certain system and is affected by the other cells around it. So it can be noticed that any bad incident can lead to a disorder in the vibration system of the brain.

Neural cell in the brain in a state of constant vibration. This cell contains a complex program through which billion cells around interact in an amazing coordination that exhibit the greatness of God. Any disorder in this program leads to a deficiency in the immunity system and causes diseases.
The mechanism of the cells in processing information depends on vibrating and producing electric fields through which a human being can talk, move, drive and interact with others. Therefore, when negative actions such as the shocks , embarrassing situations or problems that happens to a person during his/her life accumulate , they cause a kind of mess in the brain cells. This mess is irksome and exhausting for the brain because it does an extra unnecessary work.

Before the baby is born , his brain cells begin vibrating rhythmically in a balanced way. But after its birth, each action will influence the brain cells and the way they vibrate. So if some of the brain cells are unprepared to tolerate high frequencies, this may cause a disorder in the vibrating system which in turn leads to a lot of physical and psychological diseases.
Nowadays, scientists state that each form of behavior is a result of a certain vibration of the brain cells and they asserts that exposing a human being to certain sound frequencies frequently changes the way in which the brain cells vibrate (i.e. changes the frequency of the cellular vibration).Consequently, there are frequencies that make the brain cells vibrate positively and actively and there are others that hurt the brain cells and my cause death. Therefore , the important question now is What are the frequencies that can be suitable for the brain?

Scientists also discovered that the DNA strap inside each cell vibrates in a certain way as well. This strap contains the necessary information for life, so any changes resulted from an accident ,a problem, a virus or a disease attacking the body could make it vibrate less than the normal speed. And the best way to make this strap perform well is reprogramming this strap using a certain wave sound. Thus , the strap as the scientists assert, reacts with those waves and starts vibrating vigorously. However, there are some waves that might damage this strap.
Recently, many therapists treat people using wave sound vibration to cure some incurable diseases such as Cancer and some other chronic diseases in which the traditional medicine has failed . They also found this way useful in treating some psychological diseases such as Schizophrenia, Anxiety, sleeping problems and some bad habits such as smoking, drug addiction and etc.

What is the best medicine?

The best medicine to cure all illnesses is the Holy Quran. This is a result of a long time experience in treating people. Many cases that had incurable illnesses recovered after exposing them to the recitation of Holy Quran. That is because of the ability of Holy Quran in rebalancing the brain cells and increasing their capability in performing well.

Each cell has a vibrating system that Allah has created to do its job and those cells do not understand the speech language but they deals with frequencies and vibrations like those in the mobile phones which receive electromagnetic waves and in turn send other waves. Therefore, we can say, metaphorically, that in each cell there is a very complex mobile phone. And you can imagine thousand billions of cells in your brain vibrating rhythmically in a way that no human being can understand , realize or imitate and if any cell was being in disorder , all the body would be in a disorder. So Holy Quran is a blessing that urges us to thank Allah . But do we really appreciate such a blessing?

An image for the brain cells in which we can see the damaged area appear in red color .Those cells are not so active, and nearly lack energy. Those cells are about to die. But after exposing them to a certain wave sound they start vibrating actively. (source: National Research Council of Canada)

The Verses of Holy Quran Heal

According to the recent discoveries, scientists say that any illness must make a change in reprogramming the cells and each cell works according to a certain program from birth to death. Therefore, any physical or psychological disorder causes a confusion in the vibration system of the cell which makes a disorder in the cellular program. So we need to restore and correct this program in order to heal this disorder.

During my meditation with the Holy Quran , I found that there is a very precise digital system in each verse. Those verses, however, do not only carry the language of numbers but also carry some thing like what we call "data" or "programs" that can deal with the cells. Therefore, we can say that those verses carry the language of those cells!

The reader may think this unscientific theory, but I assure you that I found a lot of verses in the Quran confirming that the Holy Quran verses carry a lot of data exactly like those normal radio waves used in carrying information, music , sounds and so on.

Allah says in His Holy book

" Had it been possible for a Lecture to cause the mountains to move , or the earth to be torn asunder , or the dead to speak , this Quran would have done so . Nay , but Allah ' s is the whole command" [Quran13:31]

If we deeply analyze this verse we, we can come up with this question: How can the Holy Quran cause the mountain to move, or the earth to be torn or the dead to speak?? The answer is through the data that only dead people can understand.

As the mountains are concerned, it is known that the earth layers move slowly nearly few centimeter a year, driving the mountains to move, too. This movement is resulted from thermal waves produced from the melting area under the crust. Therefore, we can say that the Quran contains data that can deal with these thermal waves causing layers to stir and move faster that makes cracks and earthquakes; and cuts the crust into many small pieces. This great power is put in the Holy Quran, but we are not allowed to reach it . Instead ,we have been told about this great power to realize how great is this Holy Book. Now, Can this Holy Book which has this advantage of this great power heal weak creatures like human beings?

When Allah tells us that this Holy Quran is a" healing", this means that it carries data and programs sufficient to heal the damaged cells in the body and cures what the doctors was incapable of.

The easiest medicine for all illnesses and diseases

Dear reader! I can say confidently according to my experience that from a simple change in your life you can get unexpected big results that may change your life completely as it happened to me before you. What you have to do is to listen to the recitation of the Holy Quran as much as you can all the time: in the morning, in the afternoon , at night, while you are asleep, when you awake up and before you sleep. What you need to listen to the Holy Quran is to have a media such as a Lap Top, a tape recorder, a small iPod or mp3 with headphones, a TV, a radio or any other device.

The Holy Quran recitation sound has wave sounds that have a certain frequency and a certain wave length. These waves spread wave fields that affect the brain positively and restore its balance. This grants the body a strong immunity to resist illnesses or diseases such as Cancer . Cancer is a disorder in the performance of the cells, so listening to the Holy Quran reprograms the cells as a computer which was full of viruses and was "reformatted" and downloaded with new programs in order to perform effectively. This is what man-made programs do for computers. What about the programs which are carried in the words of Allah, the creator of all human beings.

The amazing effect resulting from Listening to Quran

 The continuous listening to the recitation of Holy Quran gives you the following real fruitful results:

- Increase the immunity of the body

- Enhance the creativity sense

- Improve the concentration ability

- Heal the chronic and incurable illnesses

- Change the behavior and enable people to communicate better and gain trust

- Create inner peace and heal the neural tensions

- Heal nervousness, irritation and precipitation

- Improve the ability of taking right decisions

- Decrease fear and hesitation

- Improve and strengthen the personality

- Heal the normal illnesses such as allergy, headache, flu ,etc.

- Improve the speech ability

- Protect from diseases such as cancer and so on

- Change some bad habits such as excessive eating and smoking

Dear reader! those things I mentioned above are the results I myself got: I remember I was a heavy smoker and could not imagine giving up smoking ever, but after the continuous listening to the Holy Quran I found myself giving up smoking without any effort. I was really surprised "how my life changed and why? But after I read about the recent technique in healing ,one of which was the therapy by sounds and sound frequencies, I knew the secret of this great change in my life. It was listening to the recitation of the Holy Quran. What I simply did was only listening to the Holy Quran continuously.

To conclude, I 'd like to tell you a fact that I encountered and really tried: howsoever you spend your time in reading or listening to the Holy Quran, you will find that this time will not be wasted nor decreased . But you will notice that you will always have an extra time. You will find that the same works that takes sometimes days or hours to be done can be finished in few minutes only!

"O mankind! There has come unto you an exhortation from your Lord , a healing for that which is in the breasts ,and a guidance and a mercy for believers . Say : In the bounty of Allah and in His mercy : therein let them rejoice . It is better than what they hoard." [Quran10:57,58]


By: Abduldaem Al-Kaheel

1- Brain cells tune in to music,
2- Neural oscillations,
3- Brain wave therapy, Brain Sync Corporation, 2006.
4- Vibration,
5- Mike Adams, Vibrational Medicine, NewsTarget Network, July 14, 2004.
6- Simon Heather, The Healing Power of Sound.
7- Virginia Essene, You are Becoming a Galactic Being.
8- Revolutionary nanotechnology illuminates brain cells at work,, 6/1/2005.

Non-Muslims Quotes: Prof. C. Snouck Hurgronje

Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje (8 February 1857 – 26 June 1936)

"The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations.The fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations ."

22 September 2011

Heavens without any pillars

Are there any invisible pillars that link the parts of the universe, which the Quran verse talked about? Is it possible that these pillars are the forces of gravity? Let’s consider the following …

Allah Almighty says : 

"Allah is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see" [Quran 13:2]

I would like, here, to stop with the word (pillars) of the sky, but what is the sky? The sky is everything above us and it extends from the atmosphere to the last galaxy in the universe. Anyone who looks at the sky from outside the universe sees a tightened thread. This thread is a construction of the blocks of the sky which are galaxies.

This is a simulated image of the universe as if we look at it from outside! We see groups of galaxies placed on threads, as if they are building blocks and gravity forces link these galaxies and controls its distribution by this wonderful system .This testifies the greatness of Allah, the creator of all.

Each thread extends to millions of light years and hundreds of galaxies are placed on these threads. All of which are based on gravity forces which Allah created to ensure the coherence of the universe so it doesn't collapse. We find in this holly verse two miracles, they are:
1- We understand, from this verse, that Allah created the sky without pillars, and anyone who looks at the universe from outside sees huge groups of galaxies linked together and it moves in a system as one group. These groups of galaxies have been lifted and put in their allocated places without pillars, but by physical laws created by Allah Almighty for the continuation of the universe.
2- We can understand the verse in another way: that there are pillars but invisible! And the meaning of the verse "raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see". There is a miraculous aspect here, as gravity forces that we don`t see are the columns that are created by Allah. Without which, the universe couldn`t continue and galaxies had not been distributed in this way.
Whatever our understanding of the verse is, it remains a constant miracle. This indicate that the verse is from Allah, the wise and the well-acquainted, Allah says :

"(This is) a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning), further explained in detail,- from One Who is Wise and Well-acquainted (with all things) " [Quran 11:1]

While we see in other books, at the same time of descending Quran, some wrong cosmic information. There was a prevailing belief that the Earth is based on a turtle or a whale or an ox…..No one was aware of the invisible pillars that link parts of the universe.That is the gravity forces.

By: Abduldaem Al-Kaheel


21 September 2011

What the Gospels Mean to Muslims?

By Gary Miller, Ph.D. Mathematics, Kansas 
Transcribed from a videotape


The Muslim used to have probably a very different attitude about the gospels than he does today. I’m just speaking of the majority or large segments of the community who use to feel much differently than large segments of the community feel today. And most of the blame for that I suppose could be placed on one hand on the Muslim and on the other hand on some of the Christian community and how it was they present the gospel. So I have to talk a little bit about that, I am trying to clear the air both for the Muslim and the Christian, and the interested bystander.

You see the Quran commands the Muslim to show respect for the books of other people, their religious scriptures. That commandment was abused by certain, I stress just certain, missionary efforts. By taking these verses that relate to the respect for scripture out of their context, and quoting them back to the Muslims saying, "Look, your book says my book is true. So read my book and then you’ll be in trouble because you’ll find out that my book is different than your book." And I’m afraid than that the blame must be shifted over to the Muslim who very often never thought about that before but thought that made a lot of sense, and he was letting someone else tell him what his own book said. So it was that before too long when the missionary would on the one hand say your book says you should listen carefully to my book now let me read you my book, the Muslim tended to think that it must be that your book is full of lies.

Even if the Quran says respect the books of other people, it must be that some people have put some lies in there, because I don’t go along with that thing you’re reading. He looked back into the Quran to try to find some verses to justify the position that the Christian changed his scriptures and put some lies in there. And that just made it worse because now the missionary said, "You’re really off your book because on one hand it says believe in our book and on the other hand it says we changed our book. "The problem being that the Quran doesn’t say any such thing of the kind, and these arguments that were first brought forward about 200 years ago are reprinted every year by certain missionary groups. The arguments are old and tired and quite insufficient."


What the Quran really criticizes is not anybody else’s books. It never mentions the Bible, but as a matter of fact neither does the bible, that is just a nickname for a collection of books. What it talks about are scriptures and what it criticizes is the way that some, I stress some people, use their scriptures. It criticizes the handling of whatever people call scripture. It endorses the fact that the truth has been preserved by people, that they have in their scriptures the truth, but they mishandle it.

May 14, 1999 - John Paul II kisses the Koran (Qu'ran) at the Vatican.

It makes basically three accusations which probably you could go to any church and the pastor will say those things are true of those people over there.

(I) The Quran says some of the Jews and Christians pass over much of what is in their scriptures.

(II) Some of them have changed the words, and this is the one that is misused by Muslims very often giving the impression that once there was a true bible and then somebody hid that one away, then they published a false one. The Quran doesn’t say that. What it criticizes is that people who have the proper words in front of them, but they don’t deliver that up to people. They mistranslate it, or misrepresent it, or they add to the meaning of it. They put a different slant on it.

(III) And the third accusation is that some people falsely attribute to God what is really written by men.

Now probably in any church there will be people who will say, "Yes, I know a church that does all those three things. They pass over much of what is in their scripture, they‘ve changed things, they put the wrong slant on the words, and they’ve credited God with things that men said. "So really there is not a cause for a problem between the Christian and the Muslim on these charges, the Christian, I would like to think, would generally go along with those ideas."

And again, I stress it only accuses some people of doing that.


Unfortunately, also, in more recent years, discussions of Christianity and Islam have usually been attacked by the Christian on the Quran or by the Muslim on the Bible. Which is quite an un-Islamic thing to do, that is, to attack somebody’s scriptures. Usually these discussions or presentations are coordinated in such a way as to, for example, the Muslims will be here to blast away at all the errors in the Bible, then the Christian takes a turn blasting away at the Quran. What is really unfortunate and really rather silly about that whole approach is that people who try to do that are trying to do something that’s extremely difficult. They’re trying to demonstrate the nonexistence of a certain item. And I’ll illustrate it in this way, when you assert that such and such a thing does not exist, you have a big job on your hands, if you want to prove it does not exist. If I say there is no such thing as a pink elephant, how am I going to show you that? I have to somehow prove to you that I’ve been all over the world, I’ve looked in every closet, I’ve been everywhere that’s big enough to hold an elephant, and I have pictures to show that there are no pink ones in any of those places. It really can’t be done -- to demonstrate the nonexistence of something.

When people single out errors to say, "Look, there is a mistake in the Bible," they are claiming that no where else in that book is there a verse which would clear up this apparent error. It would be pretty hard work to demonstrate that is the case. It would have to say, okay, here is chapter 1 verse 1, this verse does not clear up that mistake. Now this verse, that does not put a new light on that verse and go through all these thousands of verses to show that there is no verse to clear up what apparently is an error. That would be pretty hard work. The only other way to show that something doesn’t exist is to show that its existence would be self-contradictory and I don’t think that method of proof lends itself to the thing I’m talking about.

As to whether or not there legitimately are errors in scripture it is simply food for thought. It is quickly dismissed by a lot of people to say these are only apparent errors – it deserves a better treatment than that. One, James Barr, who has written a number of books endorsed by the Church of England, has suggested that maybe these apparent errors in the bible are a signal from God. That they are a warning: "Look out, don’t credit me with this, a man did this, I don’t write like that," he said that might be a possible interpretation. So it deserves a better investigation than to simply say, "I’m sure it is only an apparent mistake."


So more useful discussions are going to be concerned with other subjects, I would hope, rather than just trying to find errors in a book. But unfortunately, people often confuse explanation for proof. That is, you ask a man how do you know that such and such is so, and he tells you how it works. AN EXPLANATION IS NOT A PROOF. I might give you a completely coherent explanation that a television works by Black Magic but that doesn’t prove that it does. It just means you could explain it that way. When the Muslim asks, "How do know someone died for your sins?" and the answer comes back, "Someone has to BECAUSE, etc, etc, etc,God is here, man is there, and we have to pay this debt and so on and so forth." That is an explanation not a proof that it ever happened or will happen or whatever. That is an explanation of HOW it works. AN EXPLANATION IS NOT A PROOF.

It is fascinating to dwell on those explanations and sometimes I do that. Fascinating because virtually all of these explanations are built on analogies and the analogies are always faulty in the first place. That is, people don’t usually even explain things directly, they usually will tell you, "Well, it’s like this." Then they talk about something else. Now they has two problems: they've got to explain this thing and then show you that this thing is really like the other thing. To explain to you that the redemption of man is like a Traffic Court judge who pays the fines for all the guilty parties is a faulty analogy, for example. Because the traffic court judge is not the offended party, the State is offended and the State does not forgive when the State fines someone. Whoever pays the fine is beside the point. That is just to cite one example of a common analogy.


As I mentioned earlier, the real complaint of the Quran is the handling of scriptures, so maybe one of the most important questions that the Muslim would want to stress for those who are discussing the gospel and are trying to show someone the meaning they have discovered; the important question might be to urge a person to ask himself: Did you discover that meaning in the scriptures or did you invent that meaning, then prop it up with what you found in the scripture? It’s an old problem, mathematicians have talked about it for at least 26 centuries: "Did we discover mathematics or did we invent it?" It’s not entirely clear because we make up some rules, then we work with it, then we say look what we’ve found, but, no, did you invent it in the first place or did you find it? It’s a delicate kind of thought and it’s worth examining in the same way as if someone says: "look what I’ve found! the scripture tells me such and such; it may well be that it’s a discovery but possibly it was a preconceived idea that now fits what is read."

Of course, the Bible has been read in a great many different ways, a great deal of emphasis is place by some on the Crucifixion as being THE salvation of man. Yet according to the 19th chapter of Luke, Jesus told a certain Zacchaeus, "Today salvation has come to your house." He didn’t say next week when I die that will be when salvation comes. He says, Today, salvation, whatever that means, has come into your house. It is rather easy to read that and think that the Crucifixion is not quite what someone told it was. That is a possibility.

The 14th Chapter of John has two favorite verses but the whole thing, when put in its context, doesn’t read quite the way a lot of people tell it, that is on the one hand Jesus says, "No one comes to the father but through me". It is often quoted in order to establish some kind of an idea that if man is reaching for God, you’ve got to talk to Jesus first or go through him or whatever. When put back in its context, the whole subject of that chapter is not so much man reaching for God but God reaching for man. That Jesus says that I came to show you God, Philip says show us the Father, Jesus says you’ve seen me you’ve seen the Father. He didn’t seem to be claiming divinity because in the first place he’s suppose to be the son not the father.

And in the 5th Chapter of John, he says, No one has ever seen the father. My point here is that I’m not going to try to reinterpret the Bible: I’m just trying to show that sometimes it just as easily reads in quite a different way as the EXCLUSIVE way some have tried to put on it. It is not _ and that’s a more recent development I suppose _ the Muslim’s job to try and reinterpret the Bible. There are plenty of people busy doing that. There’s plenty of cultists who will tell you that they’ve found everything in there from flying saucers to word processors.


It’s not the Muslim’s job to find some novel twist on the meaning. It’s merely his job to remind an individual that if you are sure about what it says ask yourself again: Did you have that in your mind before or did you really discover it? This means an encouragement to think and there are different views on that subject as to whether it’s a good idea to think or not.

There are in a sense two streams of Christianity, and the Muslim, as a foreign student, is usually quite confused because he never thought about that before. He comes to this country and he turns on the television one Sunday morning after a few minutes he thinks that must be Christianity. He’d never seen a Christian before in his life, possibly. And certainly in the minds of those people speaking they have Christianity. But what the Muslim is sometimes unaware of is that, he has spent some years in the country, and never caught on to the fact that there’s a lot of people who call themselves Christians but they have nothing to do with what was seen on television that Sunday morning.

There are widely different views. And one of the things which divides these streams concerns the understanding of the term "lost." What does it mean when somebody is lost? Does it mean that he isn’t saved or does it mean something else? You might ask the question this way, is an explorer lost? If a man is going into a land where no one has ever been before, is he lost? Well, one branch of Christianity would tend to say, "Yes." Another branch would say, "No, he is an explorer, he is not lost, he’s exploring the territory."

The problem the Muslim has is not with the man who will tell you that explorers are not lost. He has a problem with the man who tells you, "Until you find what you’re looking for, you’re lost." That stream of Christianity is the one that gives him the problem, because that is the stream of Christianity that does an awful lot of study and preparation but does not encourage a reinvestigation, an objective investigation of things. As an example, I suppose that the key question or a test question to all Muslims, as it is put to them by those who are anxious to bring them into the fold, they want a yes or no answer to the question: Is Jesus Divine? Is he divine, yes or no? Which skips a very important matter. The question is what is that supposed to mean? What do you mean, is he divine?


It was Spinoza, a few hundred years ago, who was a Jew, at least by heritage, then he withdrew from the Jewish community. He was quite a philosopher and felt alienated from that community and there were Christians who came to him and said, "Now, of course, that you’ve left the Jews you will become a Christian." He said that, "Maybe, I will when I understand what you’re talking about." His main thing was to stick to the definition, "I hear the words but I don’t know what they mean." You tell me that God became man, what do you mean, like my father became dead or like ice became water? You mean once there was God and he squeezed himself down and now he’s a man, he used to be God, what do you mean? The words sound like one thing but the actual definition is pretty hard to explain if it ever has been explained.

As a matter of fact, the insistence on the humanity and divinity of Jesus is a puzzling thing for the Muslims, not trying to be a smart Alec. He’s trying to ask simple childlike questions. What is that suppose to mean? Because on the one hand he’s told, "God is 100% Holy, that’s why God can’t deal with sinful man, man is sinful, he’s down here and God is 100% Holy. So we need a mediator." The Muslim asks, "How Holy is the mediator, 50%? - 51%?" The answer is, "No, no, he’s a 100% Holy, he’s God!"

Well, now, we still have this problem. If the problem is that God because of his Holiness can’t deal directly with man, we HAVE NOT really put anyone in the middle if he is still God. Again, it is said that God cannot deal with the sinners, and yet Jesus used to eat with them, according to the Bible. It didn’t seem to annoy him to get that close to a sinner.


My main point is this, however, as the title was announced WHAT THE GOSPELS MEANS TO MUSLIMS. To the Muslim who has studied it and investigated it, and it has been a topic among Muslims for hundreds of years -- The Muslim does not really expect that the gospel, the message of Jesus, contains any theology in the first place.

There is a verse that is often quoted from the Quran to the Muslim, which says that the Jews and the Christians should have stood fast by their Torah and their Injeel, and they would be successful. If you put that all in its context what is under discussion is the fact that some of the Jews and Christians had complained that they were not successful, they did not have a Christian state. And they were told in the verses leading up to this in the Quran that the reason for that was they had ignored the rules and the advice giving to them in their books, the Torah and the Injeel. Saying: If they had done what Jesus said to do, they’d be today successful.

So, the Muslim does not expect there’s any theology in there, whatever the gospel is, it’s a bunch of advice and rules of conduct. It doesn’t deal with subtle and convoluted definitions of the nature of God and a whole manufactured Greek vocabulary to describe all these various subtleties. And ironically enough, there are four books that go by the name Gospel, and the only one with any theology of any significance is the Gospel According to John. The irony is that’s the only one of the four gospels that doesn’t have the word Gospel in it anywhere. That is, if people would explain theology from the words of Jesus they have to quote from John, not from Matthew, Mark, and Luke which call themselves gospels or at least mention the gospel.

I know how the rest of the argument goes, I’m not trying to ridicule anybody, and I’m just trying to show you that I’m familiar with it. I’ve heard it many times. The documentation of the life of Jesus is usually cited as being a proof of the theological claims.

That is people will usually start by saying, "But look, the Jews who were right there with him, they understood him to claim divinity." So they did. The problem is, did they understand him correctly or not. His disciples didn’t seem to know what he was talking about. We are all the way to the 16th chapter of Matthew, before Peter gives some kind of a theological statement, and Jesus congratulates him saying, "You didn’t even know that until it was revealed." Evidently it was not very obvious what Jesus had been saying to that point.

But on the other hand, to the Jews every time he opened his mouth he was claiming to be God. It may well be that the Jews were misunderstanding him. And that is precisely the point of the 10th chapter of John. Where the Jews accused him of blasphemy, claiming equality with God, and the rest of the verses continue on to have Jesus go on and defuse the situation. To show them that if they listened more carefully to what it is he said -- if they read there own scriptures more carefully -- they’d see they have NO grounds for a claim of blasphemy.


He doesn’t congratulate them on their insight -- That they heard him right, it’s too bad they don’t like it. No, he goes back to show them that they cannot convict him according to anything he just said. Both the Jews and Jesus used the term son of God of themselves and one another. What did they mean? Did they both mean the same thing? Or did they mean differently? According to the 8th chapter of John, the Jews came to Jesus and said, "We are sons of God." He said, no, no, I’m the son of God, you’re sons of the devil.

Well, why should the one be a great theological statement: "I’m the Son of God," capital "S", and, "You’re sons of the devil" figuratively speaking, of course. Perhaps they were both talking about the same sorts of things, figuratively, at that time. In any case, as I said, the encouragement is to think these things through and there is a number of standard objections that are made. That is, if a person thinks too hard about these things he may be told, "If you are going so deeply into something you are forgetting something very important: the Bible is written for simple people."

Interestingly enough, the same people who say that really mean to tell me that your problem is you haven’t consulted an expert. You see, on the one hand, you are told it is written for simple people, and in the same breath you’re told the reason you don’t understand it is because you don’t know enough about it. You should go and ask this man, he studied it for years. Those are really quite contrary ideas.


Thinking will lead you astray people have often said. In fact, I’ve heard it said, "Thinking will lead you astray, I want you to think about that." Now, put that all together, you see, is the thinking going to lead us astray, that certainly is a subject for thought, right, that I might go astray, it’s a tangled little knot, the common statement: This is a substitution of slogans for thinking. Another common statement is: "If you will surrender your own judgment, God will guide you." Well, maybe he will.

But maybe it works like this, maybe God says: "Surrender your own judgment, and I’ll see to it that you go astray." That might be the way things work. That also makes a little more sense, to me. That is after all the view the scientists have, he says, "Set aside your personal preferences and use objectivity." That is keep your judgment when investigating something, don’t be blinded by what you are sure must be the case or what you would LIKE to be the case. Set aside personal preferences. And that’s such a good argument, such a good suggestion, that in fact it is used by some of the very people that I have the confrontation with. Their problem is they say, "Yes, set aside your personal preferences," but in the list of personal preferences they put using your personal judgment. "Your problem is you prefer to use your head. You should suspend your judgment."


The objective questions that at least I would suggest are maybe not the ones that people might expect. I think that most often a Christian feels he has a duty to convince the Muslim that Jesus is divine and the Muslim feels he has a duty to prove that he isn’t. And that could be an endless discussion but I feel that’s not a very worthwhile point to get into. I suggest that some of the problems become more apparent if the Muslim asks the Christian to prove the humanity of Jesus.

To say, whatever you say he was, I’ll grant you that except for this one thing, prove to me that he was a man. How do you know he wasn’t God and disguised like a man? Prove he was a man. What did he do that God can’t do, that only a man can do? Prove he was a man. There’s only one thing: What did he do that God can’t, you have to be a man to do it. The Christian will tell you, "He died." See God can’t do that. Only a man can do that. The problem then is that, that same death is supposed to be the saving act that man can’t do only God can do. That is to say, if we crucify a man it won’t save anybody from his or her sins, on the other hand you can’t kill God, only a man can die.

As one Muslim put it, about 850 years ago, he said they have an idea about God, man, and a God-man. They’ll tell you what we crucified is the God-man. A God-man -- What it really comes down to is that God lived and the man died. That’s not really crucifying a God-man. Anymore than if I tell you I had a sandwich for lunch I had a piece of cheese. A sandwich is bread and cheese.

To kill a God-man, but to say only the man died, not the God, then that is what happened, not the God-man thing. And these are not novel ideas; these are things appreciated by the mainstream of Christianity. There has always been a doctrine of Incarnation that’s well defined, there’s never been a defined doctrine of atonement, how exactly it’s suppose to work – YOU DON’T FIND THAT EXPLAINED IN ANY ANCIENT OR MODERN DOCUMENT. You find a lot of talk about it but there is no creedal statement on that idea because it has never really been figured out – how it is supposed to work. I’m not claiming that proves it doesn’t work, I’m just saying that it is still an open issue.


I know that there is a great concern, and the Muslim who is pestered or annoyed by people who are anxious to have him come along to their church. He may feel annoyed but at the same time he has to appreciate that people may have a proper intention in all of this and that they are genuinely concerned. Their concern, though, is related to, often anyway getting someone to take an action, which brings about salvation. And there is an interesting point about salvation here, and human action. That is, suppose there is an act that is connected with salvation, a human act, and it has to do with a man being saved.

Well, according to the fundamentalist view, if there is such an act, and IT IS NECESSARY for salvation, then that same act cannot be sufficient for salvation. That is, if it is something that we must do, then it is, in itself, not enough for salvation. I’ll explain why in a moment. Conversely, if there is an act which if you do it, IT IS ENOUGH to be saved, it is sufficient, then that same act is not necessary. That is, if it is enough then it is not required. It will do the job but so will something else: Don’t NEED to do that thing.

The reason being that if there is a human act which is both necessary and sufficient for salvation, then you have a human act which is equivalent to salvation. That goes against at least one branch of Christianity in a basic tenet: There is nothing a man does that is equivalent to his salvation. But that is what you get when you have these two directions of the Aerial implication: It is necessary and sufficient. That means if and only if a man is saved, IF AND ONLY IF this or that means A is equivalent to B. It is a difficult position but it is a position that some have created for themselves.


Salvation, as it happens, is not precisely the concern of the Muslim in the first place. That is, the Quran does not say anything about it: Salvation. It talks about men being lost but it draws as a contrast not that they are lost or they are saved. The contrast is that a man may well be lost or it maybe that he has gained something: He is successful to some extent, to varying degrees. He loses out completely or he gains something and maybe more than somebody else does. YOU LOSE OR YOU ARE SUCCESSFUL. It is not a question of black and white. IT IS NONE OR SOME, not all or none. So the Muslims’ real concern is concerning his actions. He wants to appreciate his limitations and his duties. That’s basically all.

It is interesting enough that it is the nature of proof that if something is impossible, it is theoretically, or in principle at least, subject to being proved. You can’t always prove when something is possible. But if something is impossible that is always open to proof and it is always open to proof if something is necessary. You can’t always prove that something is unnecessary. You can always demonstrate that something is necessary. So it is that it can always be established what it is a man cannot do and what it is he must do -- His limitations and his duties. That is what the Muslim is trying to find out about. Not so much about how to get saved, he’s trying to find out which things are a waste of time because they cannot be done and which are things that I cannot overlook, that I must do.


Now to go back, in a kind of summary, I suppose there are two thoughts that came up here. I spent a lot of time, and maybe more then I should have, on the treatment of Scripture and how it is viewed. For the most part that is for the benefit of the Muslim. I tried to get across to the Muslim that not everybody who calls himself Christian has the same ideas about what the Bible does, what it is suppose to do. They are varying views on that.

It is one stream of Christianity that says the Bible is inerrant, "These are the words that God spoke." Even in the places where he said he didn’t, I guess, because there are places like that. Paul said in one place: What you are about to read didn’t come from God. There are those who say these are God’s words precisely. The mainstream of Christianity doesn’t go along with that.

When the apparent errors are cited the usual retreat is to say, "These are errors of transmission, that is, these mistakes were not there in the original manuscripts." Which might be true but we’ll never know, will we? Since no one has the original manuscripts. It makes it a pretty empty claim to say I have a perfect book I just can’t get my hands on a perfect copy. What good is this book if you don’t know what used to be in it? It has not been so well preserved historically. At this point, the two streams of Christianity tend to meet because they will both say, "Yes but all these apparent errors do not touch on major doctrine in the first place." Personally, I disagree with that {Atonement being one issue}.

The mainstream of Christianity will try to tell the other branch the reason for that is the Bible, itself, doesn’t talk very much about major doctrines. That’s the reason why these verses that may have been miscopied don’t touch on major doctrine because most of the Bible doesn’t in the first place. That’s what Martin Luther said about the Bible, that most of it is irrelevant. His basic philosophy was that unless a verse talks about a certain subject, his particular pet subject, he says that it is doubtful that is scripture. In his edition of the Bible, he took the books of James, Hebrews, and Revelations and put them in the back, like an appendix, because he said that they don’t belong up here with the rest of the scripture. A hundred years later, they were moved back. The point is that the attitude that all of it is of equal value is an old and even fundamentalist position – well, they won’t go along with that – to say not all of it speaks in the same way. It doesn’t very often really touch on major doctrine. So the next step in this explanation is to say, "But we know that the doctrine has been transmitted historically correct because that is what the Bible is about, it is a record of a continuity of the Christian community." That is largely true but remember the original objection was that this document of historical continuity has suffered some problems in the continuity. It hasn’t been that well translated.

Regarding thought, I was trying to encourage the idea of thinking about these things. There is just one final suggestion I would make there: Beware of a lot of things that pass for proof. Very often what people consider proof of something is a proof of something which is unreasonable by nature. That is, a person will tell you about a certain doctrine. You say that makes no sense. They’ll tell you, yes, it is beyond reason and look, "I have proof that it is true!" That is self-contradictory.

If you produce a proof of something that is unreasonable, then something is wrong with your proof. The scientist who does a thought experiment in his mind, "If A is true then B is true, that would mean C and therefore D – and that’s crazy! Wow, let me call the newspapers. I’ve proved a crazy thing." He doesn’t do that. When he arrives at something that makes no sense, he goes back and thinks well I must have started with a wrong assumption or something is faulty with my argument. We don’t rejoice at an unreasonable conclusion by process of reasoning. Something is wrong with the proof is the usual signal.

So those are some thoughts, and I’d actually be more interested in what you’re thinking than what I’m thinking. If you have some questions or comments, don’t be shy to speak up. Thank you for your time and attention, in any case. Don’t do that. {Miller politely objects to APPLAUSE by a Christian audience of 40 or so people}

Listen to the lecture by Abdur Raheem Green: The Truth About Jesus Christ

Questions &Answers

QUESTIONER1: Can we ask you questions not exactly on the Gospel but on…


QUESTIONER1: In relationship to some words that we hear: Sunnis and Shi’ite. Like we understand Protestants and Catholics, so…

DR MILLER: Yes, it’s not quite parallel to that, historically, those are really nicknames that were bestowed on people, I don’t think people at least years ago deliberately told you, "I am Sunni or Shia or Wahabi" or something like that. Those are nicknames bestowed from outside. Just as I don’t think the first protestant said, "I am protestant." That is a label that came on. That basically refers to different approaches to certain issues. The labels were unknown until some period of time after the time of the prophet I am saying, well, at least 250 years before people were using these kinds of things. And Shia just came from an Arabic word which means "party" like the Republican party, that sort of thing. It was kind of a nickname bestowed on people who claimed to historically belong to a certain party loyal to a certain man. Others put the emphasis on saying that the loyalty is not to a certain bloodline but to a certain code of behavior. That is basically the root meaning of Sunna, which has to do with characteristic behavior or habit or whatever. That is how these two nicknames came about: One said we want to follow the behavior of a certain group of people; and, the other group wanting to emphasize the line of descent of people. They are roughly divided 90% to 10%. Some of the issues that divide are much more important to a small group of people than they are to the bulk of individuals. That is to say, if you approached someone and said I take this position and I am against the position you take, chances are he doesn’t know about either one of those positions. It is like a layman trying to debate the matters that Church councils take up. Usually they don’t even know what it is they are talking about in the first place. Most of those issues are far removed from people, or if they have an idea of what those issues are, it maybe some simplistic view of one or the other favorite thing they carried over. I hope that’s helpful.

DR MILLER: Yes (pointing to the next questioner)

QUESTIONER2: I was just curious how does a Muslim, how does he know that he has eternal life, what does a Muslim believe once he dies in sin?

DR MILLER: Well, as to exactly what happens to him, there are all kinds of stories about that, nobody really knows. MAYBE DEATH IS AS INTERESTING AS LIFE. It’s like saying what’s going to happen to this baby now that it is born (referencing an infant screaming and crying out in the audience)? What’s going to happen now that this man has died may be a very complicated thing, too? The first part about what you are asking is how does he know about where he stands?

Look at it in this way, the Quran says that on the final judgment that the record of each man will be put in his hand. He knows by that record what the decision is what the verdict is. There are no surprises. It is not going to be the case where someone looks over his record and is thinking, "This looks pretty close, I hope the judge is in a good mood today." (Audience laughter) It’s going to be very clear by the record.

So given that that is the case, anybody at any given moment should be able to stop and think, "What if I died right now? Am I ready or not?" The difference between that approach and the approach of some at least who would say, "I KNOW that my well being is looked after," is some of those who would say that, "I know that I am saved and a week from tomorrow I’ll still be saved." Whereas the Muslim would say, "I am ready to die now, a week from tomorrow ask me a week from tomorrow." That is he knows what the situation is to now.

There is a confidence there I guess which the Muslim doesn’t often talk about, there is the story of one of the men of 14 centuries ago, he was about to be executed, in fact crucified, by the people in Mecca, Hubaibe (a.s.), I am thinking of. The people who were about to kill him said, "You can have a moment to make some prayers if your want." So he prayed very quickly and then he came back, "I would have prayed longer but you would think that I was stalling and I was afraid, and I am not, let’s get on with it, I shortened my prayer." So he was quite confident of what the situation was at that point. That is distinctly a possibility. It is just a matter of being honest with yourself, to say why have I done what it is that I’ve done, what are my intentions, what brought me to here. Is it good or is it bad? That’s something you know from the inside.

QUESTIONER2: So how do you know the things that you’ve done throughout your life whether God thinks they’re good enough for Him? I’m saying you appear before Him when you die, how do you know that it is good enough?

DR MILLER: It is not a question precisely of what is done, it is a question of intentions. That is, it is said that if a man made up his mind to do a good thing and he got up to leave the house to go do it and fell and broke his neck and died, the credit is his as though he did it. Because what matters is that he was of that frame of mind that he was intending to do that. Whereas if a man made up his mind to do a bad thing, and he broke his neck on the way, he has committed no crime, too bad that he was in that state of mind -- but he has committed no crime. In the third case, if a man made up his mind to do a bad thing and then changes his mind he has credit for changing his mind.

You see it is a matter of the intention, what is the frame of mind that you are in, NOT NECESSARILY THE VALUE OF YOUR ACTS. The good things that people do have a certain value but they really don’t add up to anything like the compensation that comes back. As the one verse says, The punishment that men receive is exactly equal to the wrong done but the reward they receive is 10 times greater than any good they’ve actually ever done. That using the figure 10 apparently figuratively, just to say penalties correspond with crimes, but rewards are much greater than any particular good thing that was done.

QUESTIONER2: Well, my point would be, how do you know that your intentions are good enough?

DR MILLER: Well, it’s a matter of being perfectly honest with yourself. That is all and that takes practice.

QUESTIONER2: How do you know that what you intend as good is good in His Sight?

DR MILLER: Well, it sounds like, and I’m not trying to make fun or anything, but that’s a problem sometimes psychologists talk about called "scruples." Those are people who are paranoid about their own motivation. It is always good to ask why do I do this, and you’ve got to be honest with yourself, but you drive yourself insane if you are continually trying to accuse yourself of wrong doing. To think back, "When I was six years old, I remember my mother picked me up. Was I sexually aroused?" That is mentally ill but people can get into that state of mind if they are always doubting what was my intention. It good to on a regular basis to ask yourself why do I really want to do this thing, but if you are convinced that, "I’ll never know," then you are losing your mind. If you are convinced that you'll never know your own mind, I think you’ve lost it.

QUESTIONER2: The point I’m trying to make is that you will never know.

DR MILLER: I disagree one hundred percent. You are saying a man will never know his own intentions and I saying that is should be an easy thing to do.

QUESTIONER2: The point is you will never know.

DR MILLER: Okay, then you have your opinion and I have mine. I think it is rather easy to know your own intentions.

QUESTIONER3: I think I understand his question. I’m not trying to reword it but what I’m trying to think of is the comparison of two people. If your intention is to do one thing: to wear a coat and tie because you think it’s a good thing to do; and, my intention was to not wear a coat and tie, cause I didn’t think it was necessary. In God’s Eyes are your intentions better than mine or in God’s Eyes is each person’s good intentions, is there a standard of good intentions or does each person do the best they can do according to their own scruples?

DR MILLER: Well, I suppose maybe what you’re, that’s a complex question in this sense. However I answer it, I’m agreeing with something that you’ve wrapped up in a question with which I disagree. You’ve made it sound as though different people have different scruples, and that is basically what I disagree with. On the inside of every person is the same standard. The Quran says that men are made of one sort of thing, they have one kind of a nature, that is human nature. Men are not produced in such a way that some are a little more careful than others, they get to be that way but they didn’t start out that way. They all have the same standards. If people develop different standards it is precisely because of that, they have developed those different standards.

QUESTIONER3: Yeah, so you’re saying that the essence of human would be an across the board, everyone has the same…

DR MILLER: It should be the same

QUESTIONER3: I didn’t hear you say that earlier.

DR MILLER: I didn’t, it’s my fault.

QUESTIONER4: I really appreciate the way you’ve presented yourself, and your obvious intelligence, and your competence in scripture. And I appreciate the gentle approach that you’ve taken both toward Christians and Moslems.

Do you believe that Muhammad taught that God gave the Law to Moses?

DR MILLER: See that’s like one of the questions that are asked when you’re put in a double bind of answer yes or no that eliminates any qualification as to the terminology that is used. And you say, "The Law" given to Moses. That He gave Moses a law I have no doubt. Yes, that is basically the Muslim position. That he gave Moses "THE" Law, which you can pick up from your public library, is another question.

QUESTIONER4: The only Law that we have of Moses goes back to the Dead Sea Scrolls which is about 200 years before Christ. There is nothing older than that and they have essentially agreed with the ones we had before that which were about a 1000 years after, maybe I should say, Jesus. Of course, Muhammad called Jesus Messiah as you know but he didn’t mean what Christians mean, obviously. The reason I’m asking is that the center of the Mosaic Law was blood sacrifice. And in Leviticus 17 it says that without blood sacrifice there couldn’t be atonement made for the soul. And it carries over into the Christian New Testament that there is a blood sacrifice made to make atonement for the soul, which is, of course, the blood of Christ. May I read a passage from scripture to support what I’m saying?

DR MILLER: Go ahead, if it is not that long.

QUESTIONER4: It says, "For all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God." That just means that every human being has sinned. And I don’t believe that there is a person in here who thinks they haven’t. "Being justified freely by His Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus who God has sent forth to be a propitiation." That’s a way of reconciling, an atonement. "Through faith in his blood to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins of their past through the forbearance of God."

So the same system of atonement, the reason I’m saying this is because you said that the system of atonement is not worked out very clearly. The same system of atonement applies to the New Testament scripture as in the Old, that is blood sacrifice. That man has sinned and God demands blood in the Old Testament it is animal sacrifice; in the New Testament it’s the blood of Christ.

DR MILLER: Sorry, you had a hard time trying to get that out. I didn’t know that’s what you were getting at. The problem is that you should be arguing with the rabbi who’ll tell you that is not so. I’m always telling people that but they have no reason to believe me, I guess.

I had the good fortune a couple of years ago at Emory University in Atlanta when there was a rabbi in the front row. This same point came up and I mentioned the fact is the Jews have NEVER believed in blood sacrifice actually paying the penalty for sins. If you don’t believe me, ask the rabbi. He stood up, put his thumbs in his suspenders, he said, "The man is quite right!" They do not believe it, and I suggest as a reference in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, the article, "Redemption." It points out that what you’re talking about, the blood sacrifice actually paying for atonement, is a concept COMPLETELY UNKNOWN to the Jews.

That there were blood sacrifices, for sure, but what they were supposed to do is not the same kind of thing as orthodox Christian doctrine talks about. It relates to such places as the 31st chapter of Jeremiah. You find it in some of the Minor Prophets, the twelve so called Minor Prophets, where it is pointed out that, for example, and it was said that Israel was ransomed from Egypt. The point is made it doesn’t mean that they were paid for. Even though the language reads like that.

Instead of trying to convince you of all that, I would say go and ask the rabbi if that is so. Look it up in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia or any other reference, on Redemption, where it will show you that the Christian idea does not correspond to the Jewish idea, according to the Jews. They’ve been using the same books longer. It’s a point that the Quran makes, for that matter, it says that the Jews and Christians use some of the same material and yet they disagree. This exhibits a difficulty: At least one of them is mistaken on this issue or various other issues.

As to what these verses themselves may mean when blood sacrifice is talked about in a Christian portion of scripture, there’s room for disagreement on positions. The Universalists and others, for example, said Jesus spoke figuratively about an awful lot of things and it may be unjust to take him figuratively here and literally there. He said that unless a grain of corn dies it won’t grow, he didn’t really mean die, he means it goes into the ground. So maybe when he said I’m going to die he meant something like that and not literally die. It was Paul who said, "I die every day." He didn’t mean I really drop dead everyday and then I get up. He meant something else.

The possibility has been there, it’s not a popular Christian position, but the same words are open to other meanings by other people. I’m not even saying that they’re right but I’m saying this thing is not so unambiguous as it is sometimes portrayed. It is still very much an open issue.

QUESTIONER4: I certainly think that there’s a sense that you are right. Because there are scriptures that say God is not satisfied with the sacrifice of bulls, and the blood of bulls, and so the Messiah answers back, "that a body you have prepared for me."

DR MILLER: Now you see, that is precisely, I shouldn’t have even made it sound like an unkind comment when I was saying it. Sometimes, the suggestion is made that errors in the Bible do not relate to major doctrine, and that’s precisely the one I was thinking of that does. Because if you read in Hebrews the passage which says that a body was prepared for me, look up the Psalm that it’s quoting from, I thinks it’s the 40th Psalm, IT DOESN’T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT A BODY. It says God made an ear for me. Which relates to an old miscopying of a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures by whoever wrote Hebrews when he mistook two words that ran together that meant "God dubbed me an ear" to God prepared me a body. This major doctrine has been built upon what was a mistranslation by somebody centuries ago.

QUESTIONER4: Well, it’s just a matter of pointing and the Septuagint took it, ah, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scripture. Of course, took it as body, and so that’s what the writer of the Hebrew put down, and he took his quote straight out of Septuagint, as you say, a wrong translation of the Hebrew scriptures. I realize that is controversial, maybe I shouldn’t have even tried to use it…

DR MILLER: Yes, and I don’t mean to embarrass you, I appreciate your input and I want to give everybody else a chance as well. I don’t want to get into a harangue, anybody else?

QUESTIONER5: This is regarding your God-man dilemma. I was wondering why you chose to exclude any discussion of the physical resurrection of Jesus? That is one of the main bases of showing divinity.

DR MILLER: Why is the resurrection the basis of divinity? I hope I am raised up some day, what will that make me? Divine? Whether or not Jesus was raised up from the dead is another issue, but if I grant you that he was, what does that have to do with him being divine?

QUESTIONER5: It was a physical resurrection.

DR MILLER: I hope if I am raised up, that I look better than I do. I hope that it is a physical resurrection. I don’t really see what that has to do with divinity. It’s a case of show and tell, Jesus is divine: look he is raised up. It is not relevant to divinity.

QUESTIONER5: No body ever died and three days later came back to life.

DR MILLER: I know, suppose I told you no body or suppose I tell you many people. What does it prove? As a matter of fact, the documents that are passed down to us from the Roman empire of 2000 years ago report that this idea of that someone was killed and raised up again was a rather common notion. There’re lots of people making the same claim. There was a Mespheles who had already drawn popularity in an area of the Mediterranean 200 years before the time of Jesus, and it was said of various people. In fact I’ll bet you that you read in the next twelve months in the National Enquirer that somebody was raised from the dead. Reports of it were coming out all the time and these people didn’t think that makes somebody divine.

How many people did Jesus supposedly raise from the dead? I’ve always wondered myself what it was like at the second funeral of Lazarus. A man that was dead then alive again then one day he must have died again. I’d have very mixed feelings as a relative going to bury him again. His actual resurrection doesn’t establish the divinity of Jesus. And Elijah raised an individual from the dead according to 2nd Kings. The resurrection itself is all very interesting but it’s virtually like anything you can point to, how do you demonstrate an Infinite God by pointing to some finite thing?

There’s nothing a human being can EVER point to, that thing that proves the Infinite God. It establishes some power or ability beyond mortal men but to exhibit a thing that a man can look at with his eyes, and say that proves the Infinite Ability of God - It technically can not be done because of THE definition of the God they’re trying to prove. Some Christian theologians have experimented with the idea that God is FINITE, not infinite. That’s very interesting, that solves a lot these problems, I guess.

QUESTIONER6: Okay, now, some Christians claim that Jesus is God but Jesus never said that in the Bible that "I am God and worship me." On the other hand I would like to ask with so many interpretations of what Jesus said is that because nobody wrote it down when he said it? Or is it because it is written so after a long, long time?

DR MILLER: Well, maybe a little of both, I don’t know. There is not a whole lot that is reported that he said anyway. There was one newspaperman in my city, Toronto, he said if you took all the words of Jesus you could print them on the front page of a newspaper. There are not that many words to go on that have been handed down. That was a point that I touched on, there, which I was trying to explain to Muslims sometimes, take it easy.

When I travel around it very often happens that someone meets me at the airport. Somebody I never met before, and he picks up the bag and we head out for the car and before we get to the car, before we’re out of the parking lot, he says, "Does it say somewhere in the Bible that Jesus said he was God?"

The answer is, well, yes and no. It depends upon whether you are looking for precise words or are you looking to find out what did he mean when he said this thing? The Muslim has fallen into what is really an unfair kind of reply. The Christian says look here Jesus says I am THE Son of God. The Muslim says, "Ah, it must be a lie, somebody wrote that there!" When he, Jesus, may have well have said that but now let’s see who was he talking to and what were they talking about when he said that. And who says that "son" should have a capital "S" there and so on. Those are ideas of some of the people who have reproduced these things.

The episode, in particular, that I mentioned where the Jews said we are sons of God his reply was no you are sons of the devil, I am a son of God. When they said son of God they didn’t mean some kind of claim to divinity and when he said you are sons of the devil he didn’t literally mean your grandmother slept with the devil, I don’t think. But why is it that he MUST literally mean when he says, "I am the son of God, only when I say son of God, I mean SON of God, I mean capital ‘S’, Son!" Maybe he did or maybe he didn’t. It is unfair to insist that what he meant was this thing and not something like what the Jews meant when they were having this discussion.

As to whether or not people worshipped him, that is another one of these things that, it is a trick of language, that the Quran accuses some people of doing. Worship used to mean in English, what was WORTHY, worthyship. In Canada we still call the mayor of a city, Your Worship. It doesn’t mean I think he’s God. It’s just how you talk. It used to be in English, that if you stood up when someone came into the room they’d say you worshipped him.

It says in the Bible that a man came to Jesus one day and he worshipped him. If you look literally in the Greek the word there literally means, "he blew him a kiss." Now people have done that to me, I don’t like it, but I didn’t think they were worshipping me like I was God. (Audience laughter.) It’s just what was said. What I’m getting at here is that, I believe it’s the 2nd Chapter of Daniel, it says that Nebuchadnezzar came to Daniel and he worshipped him, in the King James Bible. You point to that and say doesn’t worship here sound more just kind of like a salute? Or he nodded his head toward him or shook his hand or something like that. So in most Modern English translations they changed that to something else. But THEY HAVE LEFT ALONE A VERSE THAT SAYS A MAN CAME TO JESUS AND HE WORSHIPPED HIM.

Today, at least in many English speaking countries, worship has a different flavor than it had long ago. Today it seems to carry a lot of baggage that it didn’t used to have. As I say, it still doesn’t in many British areas, you won’t find that argument cited by a Canadian generally will not point to the place where a man worshipped Jesus. That’s kind of silly. Even a little town of 500 people we call the mayor, Your Worship. It’s just a way of talking.

QUESTIONER4: May I do it again just for the sake of what the Christian scriptures say. It’s your day and I’m not meaning to take it away. You’ve done a good job too. But can I do it with Thomas and read that situation out here?

DR MILLER: I can probably quote it for you without reading it, if you’re talking about "My Lord and my God…"


DR MILLER: See that’s the same kind of…. I think everybody knows the passage…

QUESTIONER4: It’s how Jesus responded that I’m interested in.

DR MILLER: What? How did he respond? Like this, you got it, Thomas, right on the nose?

QUESTIONER4: "Then Jesus said to Thomas reach here your finger and look at my hand." He’s asking him to put his finger into the hole with his hands. "And put it into my side and don’t be faithless but believing. And Thomas answered and said to him, ‘My Lord and my God’." Jesus’ response is "Thomas because you have seen me you have believed. Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed." So Jesus, I think, is backing up what Thomas says. He has him put his hand in the hole in his side and when Thomas calls him my Lord and my God, he blesses Thomas for having seen and believed. He doesn’t say far be it from God that He should have a son.

DR MILLER: Well, the point is there are at least three ways that I know of that Thomas’ words can be taken. I don’t use it as a matter of course but it has happened to me that I’ve been surprised and I’ve said, "My God!" The man in front of me says yes, isn’t it terrible, such and such a thing is true. He didn’t say, no, what do you mean; I’m not God. It may have been an expletive.

He, Thomas, may have said, "My Lord, My God." What Jesus was then talking about was you Thomas didn’t think I was raised up. Now you’ve seen and you believe I’m raised up, so congratulations. Other people won’t get to see the evidence but they will believe. It’s not necessarily an endorsement of some theological statement by Thomas.

In any case, even if Thomas was addressing him, "My Lord, My God," that has precedent in Scripture. The Muslim may not like it but the precedent is there of other people who were addressed as God without being God. When Moses spoke to the angel in the burning bush he called the angel, God. Stephen explains later that it wasn’t actually God that was God’s angel. When God Sends an angel and you speak to him you might call him God.

Moses was told, "I’m sending you as god to Pharaoh and your brother Aaron will be your prophet." In fact the word "as" is added in Italics in most English translations, it is not there in the Hebrew. God says I am sending you to Pharaoh, you will be god, as far as Pharaoh is concerned. This and other cases, the precedent is there for a human being or some other being to be addressed as God without being God. Paul talked about Satan as being the god of the world, so there is a question of god as capital "G" or small "g".

There are various ways of looking at it but I‘m not arguing that your understanding is wrong, so much as trying to point out the case in not closed by that. Other things are possible. It is ambiguous. In a session like this it may sound like I’m trying to tell some people that they are wrong. My intention is more to say if you think you have proved something think again. Find something unambiguous or all-inclusive then wrap it up. If you can do that, then I will say, "Yes, you are right."

For now, what passes as proof is largely what is called SYNTHETIC reasoning. That is not a criticism. Synthetic reasoning is when you take a lot of things and you form what seems to be a sensible conclusion. IT IS NOT AN INEVITABLE CONCLUSION. That is analytic reasoning. Synthetic reasoning is when you say it is cloudy, the wind is blowing and the weatherman said rain – It’s gonna rain. That’s synthetic reasoning. You have not proved it’s going to rain.

Analytic reasoning is where you have said A and B makes C, there is no other possibility. That’s analytic reasoning.

These types of things are sold, in my opinion, as synthetic reasoning I’ve never seen it sold any other way. It is very coherent but it is not an inevitable conclusion that one arrives at, OTHER CONCLUSIONS ARE POSSIBLE BASED UPON THE SAME INPUT.

I want to give someone a turn who has not spoken; did I ask you before? (Miller addressing audience)

QUESTIONER7: Sir, we’ve talked about the Christian scriptures and their view of themselves, could you very quickly explain the Quran’s view of itself in relationship to Christian scripture? What validity does it give for its own superiority, if it claims that?

DR MILLER: Yes, to start with, it’s not so much a superior kind of a scripture, if that’s what you mean. That is largely a Muslim misrepresentation, which is an over enthusiastic patriotism.

The Quran does not claim superiority in the usual sense that people are talking about because the Bible and the Quran are different kinds of books. The Quran reads approximately like most of the so-called Minor Prophets and some of the pronouncements of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. It is not like most of the Bible, which are stories. That is, the book of Jonah begins by saying the Word of the Lord came to Jonah, the son of Amittai, saying, quote, what you are about to read came from God, through Jonah.

Whereas the book of Luke begins by saying, in effect, what you are about to read is what I have gathered and put together because it seemed like a good idea, saying, "It seemed the appropriate thing to do" to gather the evidence and write this story. He doesn’t say, what you are about to read are words God has handed to me and I’m now putting down on paper for you.

Those are two different kinds of things. The Quran is like the former. That is why it is really rather short, it is about 80% the size of the New Testament. It is pronouncements: if you read "I" it is God speaking, if you read "you" it is you, it is God talking to whoever is reading this. So they are different kinds of books, largely.

What it says of previous scriptures for one thing is that it says of itself that it confirms the truthfulness of WHAT IS IN previous scriptures. That is certain things that have fallen into debate, people were arguing about certain things, and if they were really important things the Quran touches on them. To say, it was correctly reported in that scripture on this matter that it really happened like that.

It confirms the truthfulness of previous scriptures, and this verse also in the 5th chapter, also says of itself that it is, and the Arabic word is MUHAYMIN, which maybe best translated by the words, quality control. It is kind of a test against other scriptures. That is, if somebody brings something and says this is scripture and it says such and such, it may well be the Quran says that specifically is NOT so, and the evidence is in that place, go and look. It is acting as quality control in that regard.

But, of course, it does not go step by step all the way through the Bible, the Hindu Gupta, and various other scriptures and say chapter 1 is correct, there one mistake in chapter 2, 3 in chapter 4 and so on. It doesn’t do that. It just talks about certain issues and the advice traditionally given to the Muslim right from the beginning was that if, for example, the Christian comes and he says such and such is true and it says so in my book, and you don’t have a reason to agree with him – then give him the benefit of the doubt. He might be right; he might be wrong but don’t insist he’s wrong. Leave him with it unless you evidence to the contrary.

And so it is, a lot of what Muslims commonly talk about are really things they may have picked up from the Christian or the Jew. Often to their detriment, I’m afraid, they pick up some of the fairytales and carry them over as well. That’s the key, it is confirming the truthfulness of key issues and it’s also setting the record straight on certain other things that people have misrepresented. A great deal else it does not comment on because it doesn’t really matter.

QUESTIONER7: It’s a man-made instrument to confirm or not confirm another supposedly man-made instrument?

DR MILLER: Oh, no, it doesn’t say of itself it is a man-made instrument. As I said, it’s the Speech of God’s commandments. When you read it, it says, "I" as God, and "you" the reader. It’s a pronouncement like as I said some of the 18 of the 66 books of the bible are like that, they don’t just tell the story of so and so, but they say, God told Hosea this, quote. It’s of that nature.

QUESTIONER7: The point I’m trying to make is that its validity is based on the fact that in part that it says it has a right to confirm or not confirm other books of scripture.

DR MILLER: Well, as to its validity, there are various approaches to that. But the one that is easiest to explain is that the Book by its physical existence, the paper and ink, demands an explanation of where did it come from? What it repeats many times is that if somebody says the origin of this Book is such and such, then ask him or her so and so to see if they still thinks that’s true. In another place, If they think this Book came from such and such, remind them of this. So a person is confronted with the Book and has to come up with an explanation of where did it come from, and the person pursuing that comes to the conclusion that that is not so easily answered. All of the usual ideas have probably already been discussed in the Book itself with an explanation of why that can’t be so. You’d better come up with another reason. It’s when you run out of options it becomes a proof by exhaustion. It comes down to either this man was deceived or was himself a deceiver, if you are going to explain all of the facts you need BOTH of those assumptions and the point is they eliminate each other. You cannot at one time think you are a prophet and lie to people about it. You cannot have it both ways. You can be neither a liar nor deceived; you might be one or the other, but you can’t be both. You’re left with still this paper and ink, unexplained – what is its origin?

That’s one way of looking at how does it establish that it deserves respect.

There’s also the influence that it has had. It has accomplished certain things that’s why historians of science, language, and philosophy will still point to the Quran that’s the reason why the Arabs were suddenly civilized after 10,000 years of NO preparation for civilization. Something in that book is a stimulus. I hesitate to mention that, I suppose, because Islam is not an Arabic sort of thing, don’t get that idea. 80% of Muslims don’t speak Arabic, anyway. The point is that it had a sudden impact. That needs an explanation, it calls for some kind of answer.

QUESTIONER8: Is there a difference between the word "gospel" and the word "bible" as it contributes to the scriptures?

DR MILLER: Oh, yes, that’s a point maybe I should have dealt with. He’s asking about words like bible, and gospel. The Quran when it talks about gospel it means Injeel, in Arabic, Injeel, which is related to the Greek, evangel, which is translated "gospel." A long time ago, it might have been better translated as "Good News." Injeel was a message it wasn’t a book some place. It was in the 2nd century that the collections of the accounts of the life of Jesus got the nickname, gospels.

When technically any Christian that makes that distinction to say well these are the four gospels but the gospel of Jesus is a message. It is not these four books. These four books have the gospel in them somewhere. So the Quran is talking about what was it Jesus said not what are those four injeels.

As to bible, that is just an English nickname. It just means library; it is a collection of writings. In other languages, they sometimes don’t call it that, the Germans call it "Helige Geschrift," holy writings. The "Bible" is just a convenient name. The Quran talks about people who use books, or use the book, or book people but it doesn’t say people that use THAT book, the Revised Standard of 1881. People who are in the habit of using a book to support their position are people of the book without spelling out bible or the gospel according to Matthew.