🔊 Listen to this

𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐩 𝐦𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟏𝟔 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝟏𝟐-𝟏𝟒?

Mohamad Mostafa Nassar
Twitter:@NassarMohamadMR

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐌𝐚𝐧 𝐈𝐧 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐅𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲:

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐃𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲 𝟏𝟖:𝟏𝟖 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐚 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡. 𝐌𝐲 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭, 𝐬𝐨 𝐛𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐦𝐞. 𝐈𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞, 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠: “𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 (𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬) 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬; 𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐩𝐮𝐭 𝐦𝐲 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐈 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦.”

𝐀 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭, 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬. 𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬? 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐜, 𝐀𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐡𝐚𝐦’𝐬 𝟐𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐨𝐧, 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐬, 𝐨𝐫 𝐈𝐬𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐡𝐚𝐦’𝐬 𝟏𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐧, 𝐈𝐬𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐞𝐥. (𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐬𝐤.)

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐚𝐬𝐤𝐞𝐝, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐈 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬. 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛, 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐬𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐞𝐥? 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭, 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐈𝐬𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐞𝐥.

𝐒𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬, 𝐢𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬? 𝐀𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐥𝐥, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬, “…𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 (𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬)” 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭 𝐚 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫, 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐢𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬.

𝐈𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 “𝐃𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞” 𝐛𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐃𝐨𝐰, 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 “𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬” 𝐰𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠:

“𝐀𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐰𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞. 𝐇𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞, 𝐧𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐦 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐚 𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐯𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐇𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.

𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐧 𝐛𝐲 𝐚 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐌𝐨𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐚 𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐮𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞.” -𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐩𝐩. 𝟒𝟎𝟐-𝟒𝟎𝟑.

𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭? 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐬𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭? 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐧? 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐬𝐚𝐲, “𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤, 𝐩𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐞 𝐧𝐨 𝐨𝐢𝐥!” -𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲? 𝐍𝐨. 𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐃𝐨𝐰, 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐢𝐭, 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬). 𝐍𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧…𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬).

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐖𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝

𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭? 𝐎𝐫 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬? 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐢𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧, 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟏, 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝟏𝟗-𝟐𝟏, 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐚 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬’ (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬:

“𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧’𝐬 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐋𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬. 𝐇𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐲, ‘𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭.’ 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐬𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦, “𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮? 𝐀𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐡?” 𝐇𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝, “𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐧𝐨𝐭.” “𝐀𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭?” 𝐇𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝, “𝐍𝐨.”
𝐖𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐧 𝟑 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐂𝐓 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄. 𝟏. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐡, 𝟐. 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐡, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟑. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭. 𝐈𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝟐𝟒 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟐𝟓: “𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦, “𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐛𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐢𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 (𝟏)𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭, (𝟐)𝐧𝐨𝐫 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐡, (𝟑)𝐧𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭?” (𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐦𝐞.)

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 “𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭” 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐃𝐃𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐎 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐡, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐡 (𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬).

𝐍𝐨𝐰, 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐌𝐎𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐆𝐔𝐍, 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐦𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟.

𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐞𝐬 𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐓𝐨 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐀𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐇𝐢𝐦

𝐖𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬), 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧, 𝐚𝐬 𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲: “𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫— 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐦, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐧𝐨𝐫 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐡𝐢𝐦.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐡𝐢𝐦, 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮.”(𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟒:𝟏𝟔-𝟏𝟕) 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐠𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲: “𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐫, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭, 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞, 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐈 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮.” (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟒:𝟐𝟔), 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫: “𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞, 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐦 𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, [𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧] 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐞” (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟓:𝟐𝟔) 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐅𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫:

“𝐍𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐈 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡; 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈 𝐠𝐨 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲: 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐟 𝐈 𝐠𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮; 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐟 𝐈 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭, 𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞, 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐢𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭: 𝐎𝐟 𝐬𝐢𝐧, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐦𝐞; 𝐎𝐟 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐈 𝐠𝐨 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐲 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐲𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐦𝐞 𝐧𝐨 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞; 𝐎𝐟 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐝. 𝐈 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐲𝐞𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐲𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐧𝐨𝐰.

𝐇𝐨𝐰𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡, 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞, 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡: 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐦𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟; 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐬𝐨𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐫, [𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭] 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤: 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐰 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞. 𝐇𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐥𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐦𝐞: 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐰 [𝐢𝐭] 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮.”(𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟕-𝟏𝟒).

𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫, 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 “𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐫” 𝐨𝐫 𝐚 “𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐫.” -𝐁𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 “𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞.”

‘𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞’ = ‘𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐝’!!!

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐨/𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐬, 𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭. 𝐇𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐠𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞.

𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞, 𝐃𝐨𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐚𝐲 & 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐲, 𝐈𝐧𝐜, 𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝟐𝟗𝐀, 𝐩. 𝟏𝟏𝟑𝟓 𝐰𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞: “…𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐚, 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐟𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐞, 𝐖𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡, 𝐒𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞, 𝐁𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐞𝐭𝐳 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐮𝐛𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐯𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐮𝐫𝐞, 𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭.”

𝐒𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐀 𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐚 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭. 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠! 𝐁𝐮𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬! 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐠𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 “𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞.”

𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐑𝐨𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐤𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐨𝐬. 𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞, 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐥𝐲𝐭𝐨𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬, “𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞.” 𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 “𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞” 𝐢𝐬? 𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐠𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 “𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝” 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭!

𝐍𝐨𝐰, 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐬 “𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐫” 𝐨𝐫 “𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫.” -𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐚 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐪𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡, 𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐭, 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐭𝐞𝐱𝐭.

𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐰𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐜 (𝐀 𝐒𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐇𝐞𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐰) 𝐈𝐍𝐓𝐎 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤, 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐚 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞, 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐛𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞.

𝐍𝐨𝐰, 𝐈 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐥 𝐆𝐢𝐛𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐦. 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐦 𝐢𝐬, 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞, 𝐌𝐞𝐥 𝐆𝐢𝐛𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐢𝐧 𝐒𝐲𝐫𝐢𝐨-𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐜, 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐜 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭. 𝐈.𝐄. 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭 𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤, 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐒𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞.

(𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜, 𝐇𝐞𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐰, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐜, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝟑 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬). 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐦, 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝟏𝟔:𝟕 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬: “𝐀𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐤𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞, 𝐡𝐞𝐞𝐟𝐞 𝐌𝐔𝐍𝐀𝐇𝐌𝐀…”

𝐀𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬, 𝐌𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐡𝐦𝐚 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚 𝐒𝐲𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐜 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐇𝐌𝐄𝐃, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐲𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐜 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝, 𝐌𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐡𝐦𝐚, 𝐚𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐜 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐇𝐌𝐃 (𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐇𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐝). 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 “𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐑𝐨𝐨𝐭.”

𝐓𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟕 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐜, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐤, 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐞 𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐝. 𝐈.𝐄. 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬: “𝐍𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐈 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡; 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈 𝐠𝐨 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲: 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐟 𝐈 𝐠𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲, 𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮.”

𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐭?

𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐟𝐥𝐲 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐢𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝.

𝟏. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐡𝐢𝐦, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐡𝐢𝐦. (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟒:𝟏𝟔) 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝𝐬 𝟐𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐧-𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝. 𝐈.𝐄. 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝, 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐦, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐡𝐢𝐦. 𝐘𝐞𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐞, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐬. (𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 “𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐆𝐨𝐝.”)

𝟐. 𝐇𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦. (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟒:𝟐𝟔) 𝐎𝐛𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐲 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐄 𝐦𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐝, 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐞𝐭, 𝐧𝐞𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐇𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐮𝐬 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐚𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐚 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬.

𝟑. 𝐇𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟓:𝟐𝟔). 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐝, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐐𝐮’𝐫𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝.

𝟒. 𝐇𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐀𝐅𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟕) 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝟔𝟎𝟎 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬.

𝟓. 𝐇𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟏𝟑) 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐨 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐦𝐲 𝐛𝐥𝐨𝐠 “𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐨𝐝” 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐢𝐧 𝐈 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐡𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐬 𝐜𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝟏𝟎𝟎% 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

𝟔. 𝐇𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐦𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐆𝐨𝐝. (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟏𝟑) 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥, 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬) 𝐢𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐐𝐮’𝐫𝐚𝐧 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐢𝐦, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐐𝐮’𝐫𝐚𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐢𝐬 𝟏𝟎𝟎% 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧, 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐡, 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐤𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞, 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐬.

𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧: 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 = 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭

𝐅𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞, 𝐰𝐞 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 “𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞” 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐥 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲. (𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟏𝟔:𝟕) 𝐘𝐞𝐭, 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬. (𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 “𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭” 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 “𝐰𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲” 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬: (𝟏 𝐒𝐚𝐦𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝟏𝟎:𝟏𝟎, 𝐈𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐚𝐡 𝟔𝟑:𝟏𝟏, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟏:𝟏𝟓, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟏:𝟑𝟓, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟏:𝟒𝟏, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟏:𝟔𝟕, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟐:𝟐𝟓, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟐:𝟐𝟔, 𝐋𝐮𝐤𝐞 𝟑:𝟐𝟐, 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧 𝟐𝟎:𝟐𝟏-𝟐𝟐)

𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐦: 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐖𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐨𝐫 ‘𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐝’

𝐀𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭, 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 “𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬” 𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲 𝟏𝟖:𝟏𝟖 𝐀𝐅𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 [𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬] 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐚𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝. 𝐖𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟑 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐏𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫, 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭, 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞, 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧. 𝐏𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 [𝐬𝐚𝐚𝐬] 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐃𝐮𝐞𝐭. 𝟏𝟖:𝟏𝟖, 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐲𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞. 𝐇𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟑 𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬:

“𝐇𝐞 (𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬) 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐬 𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐠𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐬. 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝, ‘𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐦𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞; 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐲𝐨𝐮. 𝐀𝐧𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐟𝐟 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞.”

𝐈𝐧 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐧 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐭𝐨 ‘𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠’, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐬 “𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠” 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐥 𝐃𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲 𝟏𝟖:𝟏𝟖 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝. 𝐀𝐧𝐝, 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐛𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐬, 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐱𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭, 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐝, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐇𝐢𝐦𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞.

𝐀𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐡 𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐬𝐭.

𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬:

The Quran (61:6) indicates that Prophet Jesus prophesied about a coming Prophet, Muhammed. What are these Biblical Prophecies?

THE COMFORTER

Who is Paraclete Whose Name is Mentioned in the Bible?

Evidence from the Bible Prophet Muhammed ‘PBUH’ is (The Paraclete=The Comforter= Comforting Advocate)

New Testament Prophecy John 14:16

Foretelling of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in the Bible

Evidence From The Bible – Jesus Did Not Die On The Cross!

Paul the False Apostle of Satan

Atheism

𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞: 𝐌𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐚𝐡

🔊 Listen to this

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐍𝐨 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝐚𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐘𝐚𝐡̣𝐲𝐚 (= 𝐉𝐨𝐡𝐧?) 𝐁𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞: 𝐀 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜 & 𝐄𝐱𝐞𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐐𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧 (𝟏𝟗:𝟕)

Mohamad Mostafa Nassar
Twitter:@NassarMohamadMR

1. Introduction

In the chapter of the Qur’an that carries the name Mary (Surat Maryam), the story of the miraculous birth of Jesus (19:16-34) is immediately preceded by the story of the miraculous birth of the Yaḥya to the aged Zechariah and his old and barren wife (19:1-15). Yaḥya has been traditionally identified as being none other than John the Baptist. The Christian missionaries have pointed to a difficulty arising at verse 19:7 where the birth of the Yaḥya is announced:

“O Zakariya! We give thee good news of a son: His name shall be Yaḥya: on none by that name have We conferred distinction before.” [Qur’an 19:7]

They claim that this verse is in error. According to their understanding of verse 19:7, the name Yaḥya (John)  is unique, and no human being prior to the birth of Yaḥya (John) ever had such a name, yet in the Old Testament there are more than twenty-five references to the name John:

In fact, there are 27 instances of the name “Johanan” mentioned in the Old Testament.

Thus the name John (Yaḥya) is neither unique nor exceptional and the Qur’anic error is clearly apparent. It seems that the original source of this controversy is Abraham Geiger who wrote the book entitled Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen?:

He [i.e., Muḥammad] actually asserts that before John the Baptist no one had borne the name of John. Had he known anything of Jewish history he would have been aware that, apart from some historically unimportant people of the name mentioned in Chronicles, the father and the son of the celebrated Maccabean priest, Mattathias, were both called John.

This mistake must have been obvious to the Arabic commentators, for they try to give another meaning to the clear and unmistakable words.^[1]

Geiger did not cite any Muslim commentators to support his claims, and, as will be demonstrated in the sections below, one has to wonder whether the claim that “this mistake must have been obvious to the Arabic commentators” is purely his own invention.

As the missionaries are unable to shed any further light on this issue, it is left to us to investigate and supply the essential missing information. Are the names Yaḥya and John one and the same? Does the ayah (verse) actually means what the translation says? This paper will examine the various issues surrounding the name Yaḥya.

2. Is The Name John Linguistically Equivalent To Yaḥya?

According to the Christian Missionaries the name Yaḥya is the Arabic form of John:

John: Hebrew: Johanan, Arabic: Yaḥya. Greek: Ioannes

The fact is that the Arabic equivalent of John of the New Testament is Yuḥanna not Yaḥya.  And similarly, the Arabic equivalent of John of the Hebrew Bible is Yuḥanan not Yaḥya.Anyone who possesses a basic knowledge of Semitic languages will straight away point out that the names Yaḥya and John (Yuḥanan or Yuḥanna) are two entirely different names. One do not need to be an expert in Semitic languages to verify this claim; a simple Arabic translation of the Bible will suffice.

The name John of the Hebrew Bible as listed in Strong’s Concordance is Yowchanan in Hebrew:

	Yowchanan {yo-khaw-nawn’} a form of 3076; n pr mAV – Johanan 24; 24Johanan = “Jehovah has graced”
	A priest during the high priesthood of Joiakim who returned with ZerubbabelA Jewish captain after the fall of JerusalemThe eldest son of king JosiahA post-exilic prince of the line of DavidFather of Azariah, priest in Solomon’s timeA Benjamite, one of David’s mighty warriorsA Gadite, one of David’s mighty warriorsA returning exile

In Arabic Bibles this name is rendered as Yuḥanan as shown in the texts below

I Kings 25:23

I Chronicles 3:15

I Chronicles 3:24

Ezra 8:12

Let us now take examples from the New Testament. The name John (the Baptist) in Greek is Ioannes according to Strong’s Concordance :

	Ioannes {ee-o-an’-nace} of Hebrew origin 3110; n pr m. AV – John (the Baptist) 92, John (the apostle) 36, John (Mark) 4, John (the chief priest) 1; 133 John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver”
	John the Baptist was the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth, the forerunner of Christ. By order of Herod Antipas he was cast into prison and afterwards beheaded.John the apostle, the writer of the Fourth Gospel, son of Zebedee and Salome, brother of James the elder. He is that disciple who (without mention by name) is spoken of in the Fourth Gospel as especially dear to Jesus and according to the traditional opinion is the author of the book of Revelation.John surnamed Mark, the companion of Barnabas and Paul. Acts 12:12John a certain man, a member of the Sanhedrin Acts 5:6

In Arabic Bibles the name John, as used in the Maccabees and the New Testament, is Yuḥanna:

1 Maccabees 2:2

John 1:6

 Needless to say, the Gospel according to John, is also Yuḥanna:

Gospel according to Yuḥanna (John)

Thus the Arabic equivalent of John (Yowchanan) of the Hebrew Bible is Yuḥanan not Yaḥya, and the Arabic equivalent of John (Ioannes) of the New Testament is Yuḥanna not Yaḥya.By blindly following every cheap anti-Islamic polemic, such as those of Abraham Geiger, the Christian missionaries have been lead astray.3. The Meaning Of The Name Yaḥya

The names “Yaḥya” and “John” (Yuḥanan or Yuḥanna) are entirely different names. The Qur’an speaks of Zechariah’s son as Yaḥya not John. The Qur’an does not mention the name John whether Yuḥanna or Yuḥanan. 

Biblical scholars stress that the names Yuḥanna and Yuḥanan are one and the same. In the Hebraic translation of the Gospels they do not make use of Yuḥanna but they revert it to the original Yuḥanan. They also give both names the same meaning. Both names contain “Yu“, the short form of Jehovah, the Hebraic name of God. As for ḥanan or ḥanna, both derive from the Aramaic root ḥanan (the same as the Arabic root for ḥanna) which means “tenderness / indulgence of God” exactly like the Hebraic name Ḥanania.

Is the name Yaḥya Arabic or foreign? In Arabic, the present form Yaḥya is the third person of the Arabic root ḥaya. The Arabic root ḥaya (which could be written with a lean alif or an upright alif in both the present and past form) has two meanings: 

• The first is derived from al-ḥayah, i.e., life which is the opposite of death like when it is said: lan ansa laka hadha as-saniʿa ma hayit, i.e., “I won’t forget this favour of yours as long as I live” meaning as long as I am alive and did not die. 
  
• The second meaning of the Arabic root ḥaya is derived from al-ḥaya’ ending with a hamzah meaning shyness/chastity. In this second sense it is said: ḥayitu minhu meaning that one is shy or confused from someone. The origin of al-ḥaya’comes from al-inqibadandal-inziwa’, i.e., introversion. This is why the snake is called ḥayyah since it gathers its body around itself in the shape of a disc. 

However, there seems to be a difference of opinion among the Muslim scholars concerning the origin of this name. Al-Suyuṭi states in his Al-Itqan fi ʿUlum al-Qur’an:

Yaḥya: The son of Zakariyya, the first one to bear that name according to the Qur’an. He was born six months before Jesus, and was given prophethood while young, and was killed unjustly. God moved Nobukhod Nosor and his armies against his murderers. Yaḥya is a non-Arabic name, but it is also said [by some] to be of Arabic origin. According to al-Wahidi: In both cases the name does not permit nunation.

Al-Kirmani stated: In the second case [i.e., the name is Arabic in origin], it has been said that: he was so-called because God made him live with faith, that the womb of his mother became alive with him, and that he was martyred, because martyrs are alive[bal ahya’un ʿinda rabbihim yurzaqun]. 

It was also said that its meaning is “yamut”, i.e., “he dies” like when we use “mafazah” to mean “mahlakah” and “salim” to mean “ladigh”.^[2]

The name Yaḥya has also perplexed many orientalists. Paul Casanova is of the opinion that Yaḥya is an “error” which needs to be “corrected”:

Therefore I hesitated for a long time to suggest the corrections that seemed more likely to me. What decides me today to do so is, I must note, that the Western scholars tend more and more to free themselves of the superstitious respect they had for the absolute integrity of the Qur’an, and that a “semitizing” German scholar, Barth has also suggested fairly important corrections among which one interests me particularly, since I have been thinking about it for a long time and I am happy to see it presented as I have imagined it myself.

It is the correction Youḥanna for Yaḥya, Youḥanna instead of Yaḥya, the name of Saint John the Baptist. I did not dare to publish it, firstly for the general reason stated earlier, because it leads to an odd coincidence. Indeed, the Mandaeans or pseudo-Christians of Saint John, identified with the Sabians of the Qur’an, have a book where their principal Prophet is called Yahio [sic!].

If that name was due to a misreading of the writers of the Qur’an, the book would necessarily be older than the diffusion of the canonical Qur’an and all the theories built on that identification would fall apart.^[3]

Mingana, following the footsteps of Margoliouth^[4], believed that the pre-Islamic poetry is a post-Islamic forgery (a theory which has now been well-refuted by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike). Therefore, for Mingana, the Qur’an is the first book in Arabic whose “author” had:

… immense difficulties. He had to adapt new words and new expressions to fresh ideas, in a language that was not yet fixed by any grammar or lexicography.^[5]

Mingana resorted to heavy application of Syriac in order to understand the “origin” of word Yaḥya: He states:

To express “John” the Kur’an of our days has the strange form Yaḥya. I believe with Margoliouth^[6], that the name is almost certainly the Syriac Yoḥannan.^[7]

He also makes a rather strange pronouncement that in the early and undotted Qur’anic manuscripts, the Arabic letters y-ḥ-y of the name Yaḥya could be read as:

Yoḥanna, Yoḥannan, or Yaḥya, and the Muslim kurra’ who knew no other language besides Arabic adopted the erroneous form Yaḥya.^[8]

Arthur Jeffery believes that the above suggestion^[9] is worthy of endorsement but at the same time he informs us that:

… there appears to be no trace of the name [i.e., Yaḥya] in the early literature [of the Arabs].^[10]

A rhetorical question should be asked: If there is no trace of the name Yaḥya in the pre-Islamic Arabic literature, then why should the undotted textbe read as Yaḥya (y-ḥ-y)? Why can it not be read as something else, such as t-ḥ-t? C. C. Torrey, like Casanova and Jeffery, also believes that the Qur’anic Yaḥya is a misreading of Yuḥanna,^[11] but all the qira’at are unanimous in stating that the undotted y-ḥ-y can only be read as Yaḥya and not as Yuḥanna or Yuḥanan. 

Furthermore, these Orientalists whose opinions are cited above also believe Yaḥya to be of foreign (i.e., non-Arabic) origin, but their suggestions that the name Yaḥya is an “error” is stated without any proof what-so-ever! Although most Western scholars (unlike Geiger or Christian missionaries) are aware that the names Yaḥya and John (Yuḥanan or Yuḥanna) are two entirely different names derived from two different rootst, they can only conjecture at the origin of the name. 

4. The Mandaeans – “The Christians Of St. John”

Has John the Baptist ever been known as Yaḥya by any group of people?

The Mandaeans are a community that live in Iraq and Iran, and speak a dialect of Aramaic (or Mandaic as it is usually referred to in the literature). They claim to be the followers of John the Baptist and are sometimes (wrongly) referred to as “Christians of St. John” a title first used  by Portuguese Christian missionaries. They are colloquially known as Ṣubba (singular Ṣubbi). The appellation Ṣubba is accepted as referring to their principal religious ritual – Baptism by immersion. The name used by themselves to described their religion and race is Mandai, or Mandaeans.^[12]

Before we go further, let us deal briefly with the identification of Sabians or Ṣabi’un. There has been a great deal of speculation about the identification of Ṣabi’un, a religious group, mentioned thrice in the Qur’an. The Qur’anic commentators had theorized about the possible identity of this group. We will only sum up the various viewpoints. Interested readers may consult this subject that has been dealt with at length by Jane Dammen McAuliffe.^[13]

Some of the Qur’anic commentators have credited Ṣabi’un with worshipping angels and some with monotheism; the Ṣabi’un praying towards the qibla, and they are different from Jews, Christians and Magians. They were usually identified with a group of people from Iraq.

The Western scholarship on the identification of Ṣabi’un of the Qur’an perhaps began with the encyclopaedic work of Daniel Chwolson.^[14] A brief summation of Chwolson’s view was done by John Pederson.^[15] Chwolson postulated a two fold identification of Ṣabi’un.^[16] Mandaeans, who are monotheists, was one such group and the other was thought to be the pagan star-worshippers in Ḥarran whom Muslim historians claimed to have adopted the name Ṣabi’un in order to be included in the category of People of the Book.

Pederson, however, took an exception to Chwolson’s two-fold identification. He says that Ṣabi’un should be identified with the hanifs as

They too are people who believe in God, neither Jews nor Christians; the nearest model for the believers, as Abraham himself was ḥanif.^[17]

This identification by Pederson came about by equating hanif and gnostic. The result of this is that he harmonizes between the common designation of Mandaeans and Ḥarranians as Ṣabi’un.

Pederson’s harmonization is also supported by E. S. Drower; but she recognizes within the latter community a division between the the priestly class, known as Naṣoraeans, and the ignorant or semi-ignorant laity who are called Mandaeans.^[18] Bayard Dodge’s position is that there is insufficient evidence for this identification. He is quite comfortable with the correlation of Ṣabi’un and the Mandaeans, but beyond that he is not willing to go by admitting that

… we do not know how their originated or what groups might have been Sabians.^[19]

Mandaeans call their teacher John the Baptist Yahia Yuhana.^[20] In their canonical prayer book one can read:

King Yahia-Yuhana,

Healing and victory be thine;^[21]

One of their holy books is called Drasha d. Yahia or The Book of Yahia. Examples of the presence of the name Yahia can be found in The Book of John (see chapter 3 and chapter 4). 

A Mandaic Dictionary throws further light on the names “iahia” and “iuhana” as used in their holy books:^[22]

Note the absence of the emphatic “ḥ” in Yahia Yuhana (the “h” sound in Yahia Yuhana is soft) unlike its Arabic and Aramaic counterparts. In the Aramaic dialect of Mandaeans, the emphatic “ḥ” did exist at one time; but its vocalisation now has vanished.^[23]

The name Yahia in Yahia Yuhana has puzzled many Western scholars. According to them, Yahia is not an Aramaic name but rather an Arabic one but as we have already discussed, there is a difference of opinion among Arab linguists concerning the origin and meaning of the name Yaḥya. The Arabic word haya, has its counterpart in Aramaic and Hebrew, and are certainly cognates, identical in origin.^[24,25]  

In Syriac, the verb hy, (that’s the past tense) is “to live; recover; lighten (of pain)”; the present/future tense third person singular being nehhe. And in many other forms of Aramaic it is yeḥye or yaḥye;^[26] the latter is similar to the Arabic Yaḥya and with imalah (in Arabic) it is read Yaḥyei.^[27] We present the various Qiraa’aat of verse 19:7 as audio files in the Real Audio format.

 In the qira’at of Ḥafṣ, it is read as Yaḥya without imalah.

 In the qira’at of Warsh, it is read as Yaḥyei with imalah.

 In the qira’at of Ḥamzah, it is read as Yaḥyei with imalah.

Coming back to Aramaic, adjective ḥayya is”alive, raw (uncooked), pure (unmixed), flowing (water)”,  ḥayye is “life, salvation”, ḥayutha “life”, ḥaywtha “animal”, ḥaytha “midwife”, etc.

In order to resolve this puzzle (i.e. the presence of the name Yahia in Yahia Yuhana) Western scholars have suggested various explanations ranging from the name Yahia being inserted into the scriptures at a later date to Muslims forcing its use upon Mandaeans!^[28]  None of these theories are supported by any historical evidence.

This is perhaps the right time to discuss the significance of name Yahia in Mandaic literature. Every Mandaean has two names, his malwasha, or Zodaical name, and his laqab or the worldly name. E. S. Drower explains the difference between the malwasha and laqab names.

The latter is usually a Muhammadan name and is used for all lay purposes, the former[i.e., malwasha]is his real and spiritual name and is used on all religious and magic occasions.^[29]

So, in Yahia Yuhana, Yahia is a malwasha name or the real name and Yuhana is a laqab or a lay name as one can see from the entry in the Mandaic dictionary. What is interesting here is that the Qur’an uses only the real and spiritual name, i.e., Yaḥya; but what about Yuḥanna?

5. Wa ḥananan min ladunna…. : Attributes Of Yaḥya As Mentioned In The Qur’an 19:13

The Mandaean use of Yahia Yuhana for John the Baptist is quite interesting as we have seen in the earlier section. Here we will briefly digress and discuss some of the attributes of Yaḥya as mentioned in the Qur’an. The Qur’an mentions Yaḥya but what about Yowchanan/Yuḥanna? We know that Yowchanan/Yuḥanna means tenderness of God or Jehovah (the Hebraic name of God) is a gracious giver. It is composed of two words “Yu”, short form of Jehovah in the Hebrew Bible and ḥanna, derived from ḥanan. Incidently God says in the Qur’an:

wa ḥananan min ladunna wa zakatan wa kana taqiyya, i.e., “And tenderness [ḥananan] from Us and purity, he was devout.” [Qur’an 19:13]

In other words, Yaḥya was a ḥananan from God; this is nothing but a paraphrase of what Yowchanan/Yuḥanna actually means, i.e., Jehovah [or God] is a gracious giver! What is even more interesting is that the word ḥananan occurs only once in the Qur’an,^[30] i.e., in connexion with Yaḥya in the above verse (19:13). It is to be reminded that the root word ḥanan has a similar meaning in Aramaic, Hebrew and Arabic.

Attention should also drawn to the name Yuḥanna. Etymologically speaking, “Yu” in Arabic does not mean God unlike in Hebrew; hence making the word “Yuḥanna” quite meaningless. The Arabic word for the God is “Allah”. It appears that Yuḥanna was borrowed into Arabic either from Syriac or Hebrew for the sake of usage.^[31]

Let us now see what the tafsirs say concerning verse 19:13. Below is an excerpt from Tafsir of Ibn Kathir about verse 19:13.

wa ḥananan min ladunna wa zakatan wa kana taqiyya, i.e., “And tenderness from Us and purity, he was devout,”

“And tenderness from Us”: `Ali Ibn Abi Ṭalḥah narrated from Ibn `Abbas his saying wa ḥananan min ladunna means “mercy [Arabic: raḥmah] from Us” and similarly spoke `Ikrimah and Qatadah and al-Dahhak and he added “None is capable of such [mercy] except Us”. Qatadah added “a mercy from God to Zakariyya”. Mujahid said wa ḥananan min ladunna means “a pity from his Lord towards [English??] him”.

`Ikrimah said wa ḥananan min ladunna means “love upon him”. Ibn Zayd said: As for “ḥanan” it means love. `Aṭa’ Ibn Abi Rabaḥ said: wa ḥananan min ladunna means “exaltation/elevation from Us” [Arabic: ta`dhim]. Ibn Jurayj told us, `Amr Ibn Dinar told me that he heard `Ikrimah narrate from Ibn `Abbas his saying: “Nay, by Allah, I don’t know what hanan means”.

Ibn Jarir said: Ibn Ḥumayd told us, Jarir narrated to us from Manṣur: I asked Sa`id Ibn Jubayr about wa ḥananan min ladunna, he said: I asked Ibn `Abbas about it and he did not know much about it. […]^[32]

Many Islamic references like Tafsir of al-Qurṭubi and Al-Itqan by al-Suyuṭi and others narrated similar reports from Ibn `Abbas concerning “ḥanan”.

6. Exegesis Of Verse 19:7

… lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya.
… on none by that name have We conferred distinction before.
[Qur’an 19:7]

Ibn Kathir said in his tafsir concerning this verse:

The translation of which is:

And Mujahid said:

lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya,
[samiyya means] shabihan – someone like him. 

He drove this meaning from God’s speech [verse 19:65]

… fa`budhu wastabir liʿibadatihi hal taʿlamu lahu samiyya, 
…so worship Him, and be constant and patient in His worship: knowest thou of any who [qualifies to be] His samiyya? 

Meaning [of samiyya is] shabihan – someone like him. 

ʿAli Ibn Abi Ṭalḥah narrated from Ibn ʿAbbas that it means: No barren woman gave birth to someone like him before.

This also proves that Zakariyya was sterile^[33] as was his wife [who was sterile from the beginning of her life] unlike Abraham and Sarah. The reason for their [Abraham and Sarah’s] amazement at the glad tidings of Isaac was due to their old age and not to infertility. This is why Abraham said [in amazement]: 

abashshartumuni ʿala an massaniya al-kibaru fabima tubashshirun, 
i.e., Do ye give me glad tidings even though old age has seized me? Of what, then, is your good news? [verse 15:54]

even though had Ismaʿil 13 years earlier. 

Likewise, his wife said: 

ya waylata a’alidu wa ana ʿajuzun wa hadha baʿli shaykhan inna hadha lashay’un ʿajib. Qalu ataʿjabina min amrillahi raḥmatullahi wa barakatuhu ʿalaykum ahla al-bayti innahu ḥamidun majid, 
i.e., She said: “Alas for me! shall I bear a child, seeing I am an old woman, and my husband here is an old man? That would indeed be a wonderful thing!”. They said: “Dost thou wonder at Allah’s decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on you, o ye people of the house! For He is indeed worthy of all praise, full of all glory! [verses 11:72-73].^[34]

The key word here is samiyya and a detailed analysis of this word is given in the Appendix A below

The word samiyya occurs only twice in the  Qur’an:^[35] at verse 19:7 in connection with Yaḥya and in 19:65 in reference to Allah.

Using the method of using the Qur’an to explain the Qur’an, Ibn Kathir drives home the point that the birth of Yaḥya was unlike the birth of any other. This explanation is also supported by the hadith from Ibn Abbas. Ibn ʿAbbas said that what is meant here is that there had never been a boy similar to Yaḥya in the sense of being born to an aged father and a barren mother.

Although Isaac was born to parents who were also old, neither of them were infertile. It is for this reason that  Isaac was unlike Yaḥya in his birth.

And al-Suyuṭi says the following in his tafsir:

The translation of which is:

Narrated al-Faryabi and Ibn Abi Shaybah and ʿAbd Ibn Ḥumayd and Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Ḥatim and al-Ḥakim who declared it Sahih that Ibn ʿAbbas said:  lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya. 

Narrated ʿAbd ar-Razzaq and Aḥmad in Al-Zuhd and ʿAbd Ibn Ḥumayd that Qatadah said concerning lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya. 

Aḥmad narrated the same report in Al-Zuhd from the way of ʿIkrimah. Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Ḥatim narrated that Ibn ʿAbbas said concerning lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya: “No barren woman gave birth to child like him”. 

Narrated Aḥmad in Al-Zuhd and ʿAbd Ibn Ḥumayd and Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Ḥatim that Sa`id Ibn Jubayr said concerning lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya: He said: [samiyya means] shabihan – someone like him.  

ʿAbd Ibn Ḥumayd narrated a similar report from the way of ʿAṭa’. Al-Bukhari narrated in his Tarikh from Yaḥya Ibn Khallad al-Zarqi that when he [Yaḥya] was born, he was brought to the Prophet who fed him a chewed date and said: “I shall give him a name that was never given [to anyone] before: Yaḥya Ibn Zakariyya” and so he called him Yaḥya.^[36]

From the above discussion, we see that scholars hold  two opinions concerning the verse lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya:

1. Samiyy, means shabihan or mithlan, i.e., someone like him.  The verse is interpreted to mean that the birth of Yaḥya was unlike the birth of others, as he was born to an aged father and a barren mother.
   
2. No one prior to the birth of Yaḥya was ever given that name by God.

Al-Ṭabari provides reports for both interpretations, but opines that the latter seems to be more correct. Al-Qurṭubi mentions both opinions but did not express a preference. And Ibn Kathir, who cites al-Ṭabari’s opinion (see above), also does not express any preference.7. Conclusions

Geiger and the Christian missionaries have pointed to a difficulty arising at verse 19:7 where the birth of the Yaḥya is announced. According to their understanding, the name Yaḥya is the Arabic equivalent of the name John. They also understand that the name Yaḥya is unique, and no human being prior to the birth of Yaḥya ever possessed such a name.

However,  in the Old Testament there are more than twenty-five references to the name John, and it is for this reason that the Qur’an is in error. This study has shown conclusively that the names Yaḥya and John (Yuḥanan or Yuḥanna) are two entirely different names derived from two different roots. Geiger and the missionaries have failed to investigate the linguistic origins of the two names, and have wrongly concluded that the Qur’an is in error.

The verse at 19:7 which reads lam najʿal lahu min qablu samiyya may be interpreted in two ways:

1. Samiyy, means shabihan or mithlan, i.e., someone like him.  The verse is interpreted to mean that the birth of Yaḥya was unlike the birth of others, as he was born to an aged father and a barren mother.
   
2. The name Yaḥya is unique, and no one prior to the birth of Yaḥya was ever given such a name by God, a point conveniently overlooked by the missionaries. 

Was Yaḥya also called Yowchanan [or Yuḥanna]? It appears to be so, and God knows best. It is through the Mandaeans we get the dual name Yahia Yuhana. According to Mandaic literature Yahia is a malwasha name or the real name and Yuhana is a laqab or a lay name.

The Qur’an uses only the real and spiritual name, i.e., Yaḥya; Yuḥanna is expressed as a paraphrase in the verse 19:13 perhaps due to the fact that “Yu” in Arabic does not mean God, hence making the word “Yuḥanna” etymologically meaningless. Presumably, “Yuḥanna” was borrowed into Arabic through Hebrew or Syriac sources.

Interestingly, the Encyclopaedia Judaica under the entry ‘John the Baptist’^[37] mentions only the Arabic name: Yaḥya ibn Zakariyya. There follows no discussion concerning the name, unlike the entries for Moses, Jesus, etc.

The use of the name Yahia Yuhana among the Mandaeans is certainly interesting. It should also be noted that much of their surviving literature is relatively late. There do exist Mandaean incantation bowls that are dated from pre-Islamic period.^[38] Further research and discoveries would throw more light on the origins of Mandaic literature, insha’allah.

Once again the Christian missionaries have failed to show a “historical” contradiction in the Qur’an. Had they bothered to probe this controversy, even slightly, they would never have made such blunders. But as it stands, there is a preference among Christian missionaries to blindly follow each and every cheap polemic, and had this “contradiction” not been so widely circulated, we would not have bothered with its response.

And as always Allah knows best!

Acknowledgements

One of the authors (MSMS) would like to thank Professor Robert Hoberman, Dr. Geoffery Khan and Mr. Shibli Zaman for stimulating discussions on comparative linguistics. Professor Robert Hoberman and Dr. Geoffery Khan are not associated with Islam compass

Appendix A

The note made by al-Ṭabari in his tafsir regarding the pattern of samiyy being faʿil pushed us to look up its root in an Arabic lexicon. Below are some interesting excerpts from the famous Arabic lexicon Lisan al-`Arab. We do not quote it in its entirety, due to unnecessary length:^[39]

The translation of which is:

Sama: “as-sumuww” means elevation and highness.
You say: “samawtu” and “samaytu” [i.e., I rose] in the same pattern of “`alawtu” and “`alaytu” and “salawtu” and “salaytu”, according to Tha`lab. 

And “sama ash-shay’u” [i.e., something rose] “yasmu” [i.e., it rises] “sumuwwan” [i.e., raising] fahuwa “samin” [i.e., it is elevated]. And [you say] “sama bihi” and “asmahu” meaning: made someone or something high. And you say to the noble: “qad sama”. 

And when you raise your eyes to something, you say: “sama ilayhi baṣari” [i.e., my eyes rose to it]. And when a remote thing is elevated for you so that you see it distinctly, you say: “sama li shay’un”. 

And [you say] “sama li shakhsu fulan” [literally: the person of someone rose to me] meaning that he rose until I saw him distinctly. And [you say] “sama baṣaruh” [i.e., his eyes rose] meaning that they went up.

Further we read:

The translation of which is:

Something’s “ism” [i.e., its name], and its “sam”, “sim”, “sum” and “sama” is its [distinctive] sign. 

In Al-Tahdhib: the alif of “ism” is classified as “alif wasl” [i.e., it does not belong to the root] and the proof is that its diminutive form is “sumayy”. 

The Arabs say “hadha-smun mawṣul” and “hadha [???]”. 

Al-Zajjaj said: The meaning of the word “ism” [i.e., its name] is derived from “as-sumuww” which is highness. He said: it’s origin is “simw” [i.e., the third letter of the word is an omitted waw] like the word “qinw” and [the plural] “aqna'”. 

Al-Jawhari said: “ism” [i.e., its name] is derived from “samawtu” because it denotes highness and it’s pattern is “if`”, and the omitted letter is a waw because it’s plural is “asma'” and its diminutive form is “sumayy”. There was disagreement on the pattern of its origin.

Some said: “fi`l” and others said “fu`l” and the plural “asma'” is possible for this pattern also illustrated in “jidh`” and “ajdha`” and “qufl” and “aqfal” and this could not be settled except through listening [to the native Arabs] and it has four ways: “ism” and “usm” with an u, and “sim” and “sum”.

And going further we see:

And your “samiyy”: the one who bears your name. You say: He is the “samiyy” of someone when their names match like when you say his “kaniyy” [to the one who has the same nickname]. 

And in the Holy Scripture: lam naj`al lahu min qablu samiyya: None before him was his ‘samiyy’; 

Ibn `Abbas said: None before him was given the name Yaḥya. It was also said: It means none before him was equivalent to him or like him. It was also said: He was called Yaḥya because he “ḥaya” lived with knowledge and wisdom. With regard to Almighty’s speech: hal ta`lamu lahu samiyya, i.e., “knowest thou of any who [qualifies to be] His samiyy?” meaning “nadhir” [i.e., equivalent] who deserves the same name.

From the above quotations, we learn that samiyy is derived from the root “sin+mim+waw” which refers to highness and elevation. Besides all the linguistic details, when we get to the root, we learn that the word samiyy has two meanings. It means “namesake” and it can also refers to a like or someone equivalent. Both these meanings are discussed in tafsir literature.

---

References

[1] A. Geiger, Judaism And Islam (English Translation Of Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen?), 1970, Ktav Publishing House Inc.: New York, pp. 19.

[2] Jalaluddin `Abd ar-Raḥman al-Suyuṭi, Al-Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur’an, 1987, Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah: Beirut, First Edition, Volume 2, Section 69: “The Names, Surnames and Titles that Occur in the Qur’an”, pp. 304-305.

[3] P. Casanova, “Idris et Ouzaïr”, Journal Asiatique, 1924, Volume CCV, p. 357. Since ours in not the official translation, we publish the original.

Aussi ai-je hésité longtemps à proposer les corrections qui me paraissaient vraisemblables. Ce qui me décide aujourd’hui, c’est que, je dois le constater, les érudits occidentaux tendent de plus en plus à s’affranchir du respect superstitieux qu’ils avaient jusqu’alors pour l’intégrité absolue du Coran, et qu’un savant sémitisant allemand, feu Barth a proposé à son tour des corrections assez importantes, entre autres une qui m’intéresse particulièrement, car il y a longtemps que j’y avais pensé et je suis heureux de la voir présentée, tells que je l’avais imaginée moi-même. C’est la correction Youḥanna pour Yaḥya Youhanna au lieu de Yaḥya, nom de saint Jean-Baptiste.

Je n’osais pas la publier, d’abord pour la raison générale énoncée plus haut, ensuite parce qu’elle entraine une curieuse conséquence. En effet, les Mandaïtes ou pseudo-Chrétiens de saint Jean, qu’on identifie aux Sabiens du Coran, ont un livre où leur principal prophète est appelé Yahio.

Si ce nom est du à une erreur de lecture des rédacteurs du Coran, le livre est nécessairement postérieur à la diffusion du Coran canonique et toutes les théories édifiées sur cette identification s’écroulent.

[4] D. Margoliouth, “The Origins Of Arabic Poetry”, Journal Of The Royal Asiatic Society, 1925, pp. 417-449.

[5] A. Mingana, “Syriac Influences On The Style Of The Kur’an”, Bulletin Of The John Rylands Library Manchester, 1927, Volume II, p. 78.

[6] D. Margoliouth, “Textual Variations Of The Koran”, The Moslem World, 1925, Volume XV, p. 343.

[7] A. Mingana, “Syriac Influences On The Style Of The Kur’an”, Bulletin Of The John Rylands Library Manchester, 1927, op. cit., p. 84.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Arthur Jeffery, The Foreign Vocabulary Of The Qur’an, 1938, Oriental Institute: Baroda, p. 290.

[10] Ibid., p. 291.

[11] C. C. Torrey, The Jewish Foundation Of Islam, 1967, Ktav Publishing House, Inc.: New York, pp. 50-51.

[12] Further details concerning this community can be found in Encyclopaedia Britannica under Mandaeanism. And information concerning their beliefs can be found here.

[13] J. D. McAuliffe, “Exegetical Identification Of The Ṣabi’un”, The Muslim World, 1982, Volume LXXII, pp. 95-106.

[14] D. A. Chwolson, Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus (In two volumes), 1856, St. Petersburg.

[15] J. Pedersen, “The Sabians” in T. W. Arnold & R. A Nicholson (editors), A Volume Of Oriental Studies Presented To Edward G. Browne On His 60th Birthday, 1922, Cambridge At The University Press, pp. 383-391.

[16] See also Vaux’s article for some support to this hypothesis. B. Carra De Vaux, “Al-Sabi’a”, Encyclopaedia Of Islam (Old Edition), 1934, E. J. Brill Publishers: Leyden & Luzac & Co.: London, p. 387.

[17] J. Pedersen, “The Sabians”, in T. W. Arnold & R. A Nicholson (editors), A Volume Of Oriental Studies Presented To Edward G. Browne On His 60th Birthday, 1922, op. cit., p. 387.

[18] E. S. Drower, The Secret Adam: A Study Of Naṣoraean Gnosis, 1960, Oxford At The Clarendon Press, p. ix.

[19] B. Dodge, “The Sabians Of Ḥarran” in Fu’ad Sarruf & Suha Tamim (Eds.), American University Of Beirut Festival Books, 1967, p. 63.

[20] E. S. Drower, The Mandaeans Of Iraq And Iran, 1962, E. J. Brill: Leiden, pp. 2-3.

[21] E. S. Drower, The Canonical Prayer Book Of The Mandaeans, 1959, E. J. Brill: Leiden, p. 106. See also p. 152.

[22] E. S. Drower & R. Macuch, A Mandaic Dictionary, 1963, Oxford At The Clarendon Press, see p. 185 for ‘iahia’ and p. 190 for ‘iuhana’.

[23] ibid., p. 171.

[24] C. Brockelmann, Lexicon Syriacum, 1928, Halix Saxonum, Sumptibus Max Niemeyer, pp. 228-229. See also p. 220.

[25] J. Payne Smith (ed.), A Compendious Syriac Dictionary, 1967, Oxford At The Clarendon Press, pp. 138-139.

[26] We are grateful to Professor Robert Hoberman for pointing this out.

[27] `Alawi Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Aḥmad Bilfaqih, Al-Qira’at al-`Ashr al-Mutawatir, 1994, Dar al-Muhajir, p. 305. In the Qiraa’aat, for example, of Ḥamzah, al-Kisa’i, Warsh and Khalaf, with imalah it is read Yaḥyei. In the Ḥafṣ Qiraa’aat, it is read as Yaḥya without imalah.

[28] E. M. Yamauchi, Gnostic Ethics And Mandaean Origins, 1970, Harvard University Press: Cambridge (MA), p. 5.

[29] E. S. Drower, The Mandaeans Of Iraq And Iran, 1962, op. cit., p. 81.

[30] Muḥammad Fu’ad `Abd al-Baqi, Al-Mu`ahjam al-Mufahris li al-Fadh al-Qur’an al-Karim, 1997, Dar al-Fikr: Beirut (Lebanon), p. 279.

[31] We are grateful to Professor Hoberman and Dr. Geoffery Khan for a detailed discussion on the etymological issues surrounding the word “Yuḥanna” in both Hebrew and Arabic.

[32] Tafsir Ibn Kathir, available online.

[33] This is a rather strange assertion by Ibn Kathir unsupported by any evidence.

[34] Tafsir Ibn Kathir, available online.

[35] Muḥammad Fu’ad `Abd al-Baqi, Al-Mu`ahjam al-Mufahris li al-Fadh al-Qur’an al-Karim, 1997, op. cit., p. 451.

[36] Jalaluddin `Abd ar-Raḥman al-Suyuṭi, Al-Durr al-Manthur, downloadable from al-Muhaddith website.

[37] Under “John the Baptist”, Encyclopaedia Judaica (CD-ROM Edition), 1997, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Limited.

[38] W. S. McCullough, Jewish And Mandaean Incantation Bowls In The Royal Ontario Museum, 1967, University Of Toronto Press. Five terracotta bowls are discussed in this book.

[39] Ibn Mandhur, Lisan al-`Arab, downloadable from al-Muhaddith website.