Mr.

Johnsons Bias & Islams Critique

By Christian Anarchist

In todays world of Islamic apologists, it

seems even those who dont adhere to the
Muslim faith will adhere to the call of defense.
However, whats worse is that when you have
somebody who is a non-muslim and not even
an orientalist scholar defending Islam or its
sacred writings, you tend to display ignorance
or just a sense of social justice warrior
hatred. Henry Johnson, a user on YouTube,
commented on my video Muhammad Is Not In
Isaiah 42 (Refuting EFDawah) and left some
interesting critiques. However, he seemed to
be interesting in being much more of one who
was looking to agitate if anything. So I am going
to take the time to respond to his remarks since
he claims: You are not a scholar and you have
no idea about the Quran nor Islam. I'm
personally not a Muslim, I followed my Mother
but my Father is a Sheikh and has taught me so
don't try tell me I'm wrong about the Quran
because I know I'm not wrong. I may not be a
scholar, but while your knowledge of Islam
seems to come from a Sheikh who is your
father (which you never said if he was a Sunni
or Shiite), my sources come from Islamic
scholars as well. Such as Yasir Qadhi, Ibn Kathir,
and many others. Plus, I actually have a Quran
software that gives me multiple translations of
the Quran in English as well as both Sahih
Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. So my knowledge of
the Quran is not just hear say. Also, I have a
copy of the Study Quran, a scholarly translation
and commentary by four Islamic Scholars of
various schools of Islam.
The first thing to reply to be the following:
You say the Quran is a book of falsehoods and
I'd imagine you think Muhammad is a false
Prophet. For one, the Quran declares to the
Muslims: The Jews and the Christians will
never approve of you unless you follow their
Religion. [2:120]. You are a living example of
this 'timeless prophecy', if you will. Also,
according to the Bible, the way to identify a
false Prophet is in Deuteronomy 18:21-22: If
what a Prophet proclaims in the name of the
Lord does not take place or come true, that is a
message the Lord has not spoken. You can
believe whatever you want, be arrogant I'm
cool with it but at least we know that by the
Bible standards, Muhammad was a Man of
Truth. He told many Prophecies of the Day of
Judgement. Well, if we are to measure
Muhammad by the standard of Deuteronomy
18, then lets do just that. [30:2-4] is a prophecy
from Muhammad in his revelation from Allah
where he says that the Byzantines would defeat
the Persians within three to nine years after the
Persians first defeated them. The Byzantines
have been defeated. In the nearest land. But
they, after their defeat, will overcome. Within
three to nine years (fi bidi sinina). To Allah
belongs the command before and after. And
that day the believers will rejoice. It is agreed
upon by Islamic Scholars such as Abdullah Yusuf
Ali (in his own Quran notes) and Abdul Mannan
Omar (in Dictionary of the Holy Quran) that
the Arabic phrase here means three to nine
years. In fact, Allama Shabir Ahmad Usmani,
an Islamic scholar, even notes not just the
lexical support for this meaning or range, but
that Islamic tradition even gives this as the
reading for the Arabic: in lexicon and in the
Tradition, the word bid I is applied to a period
ranging from three to nine years (1). However,
in Irfan Shahids Byzantium and the Arabs in
the Sixth Century, the Orientalist scholar notes
that in 614 AD, one of Muhammads claimed
prophecies had potential to come true. The
Persians conquered Jerusalem and defeated
the Byzantines. The Byzantines were led by
Emperor Heraclius (2). Of course, these
Byzantines would defeat the Persians later, but
as historical sources show, especially in The
Oxford History of Byzantium, we see this
happens thirteen years later in 627 AD (3). I did
briefly mention this to Mr. Johnson, but what
was his response? Um, he predicted it
correctly actually but miscalculated a few
years, ooohh what a big deal. Actually it is a
pretty big deal. If you as a non-Muslim are
going to defend Islam, then the first mistake is
when you say he miscalculated. Because either
youre saying a prophet of Allah did not receive
divine revelation, but instead try to naturally
predict an event, or you are saying that Allah
made a mistake in the Quran. Which according
to Islamic doctrine, this would not be possible
especially in reference to the doctrine of Qadar,
which is the Arabic word for fate. In fact,
Qadar is actually one of the six articles of faith
in Islam as mentioned in Book One of Sahih
Muslim. What does Qadar teach in the Quran?
If you read [3:145], [4:88], [7:188], [9:51] and
other verses in the Quran, you will read that it
teaches that whatever Allah wills to happen will
happen. So if Allah wanted three to nine years,
he wouldve wanted and have done just that
and not miscalculate at all. In fact, to sum up
the doctrine, Islamic scholar Alfred Guillaume
notes the following: There are texts which
clearly assert that man is responsible for his
own actions, though the majority of texts seem
to assert that they are definitely decreed. The
Mutazila dealt with these passages as best as
they could by softening the language of
predestination, but still it could not be denied
that the orthodox party had the Quran on
their side when they asserted that God's
predestination was absolute. This view is borne
out by the chapter on predestination in the
books of canonical tradition which do not
contain a single saying of Muhammads which
leaves freedom of action to man. Everything is
predestined from the first and a mans fate is
fixed before he is born (4). So here, Henry
Johnson slipped up and made a mistake by
admitting that the date was note accurate.
Since after all, if whatever Allah decrees in the
Quran comes true, it will happen how he wants.
And the Quran clearly says within three to nine
years. Not thirteen. Therefore, according to
Deuteronomy 18, Muhammad was a false
prophet.
Secondly, Henry Johnson says: The Quran
does not give divine attributes ANYTHING else
other than God Almighty alone. It holds Jesus in
high esteem, he was born of a Virgin by God's
command, not because he wanted to **** his
own creation and have his own child, he gave
Jesus miracles to prove he was the Messiah as
the Quran affirms. The Quran says "Far exalted
is God to have a Son." While he is not a Muslim,
he sure can argue like one. However, again he
is in error. The Christians do not believe that
YHWH in the bible had sex with anybody. The
term Son of God is in reference to the
relationship between Jesus and The Father. We
as Christians believe Jesus existed eternally
with the Father and that he did not have a
beginning. For more about an Old Testament
understanding of a physical being that beared
the same name as YHWH, look up the concept
up of The Shekhinah. However, going to what
the Quran says, the Study Quran actually makes
a statement that Islamic scholars make out to
be interesting: His creating live birds out of
clay birds, healing the blind and the leper, and
raising the dead are likewise recounted in 3:49
(for blind and leper, see 3:49c). These last three
miraculous powers attributed to Jesus are
extraordinary in that they suggest powers
usually reserved for God; God is the one who
heals (26:8 [sic]); He is the raiser of the dead
throughout the Quran: and the creation of birds
from clay and bringing them to life by breathing
upon them is exactly parallel to Gods creation
of the human being (15:26-29; 32:7-9; 38:71-
72) (5). Interesting indeed that even the Study
Quran admits this. A Quran with study notes
done by Islamic Scholars. How then does Henry
argue with these people he tries to defend
here?
Thirdly, he claims Paul was the false apostle
who created Christianitys doctrines: Paul is
the false apostle. He put in his own doctrine
based upon the world he lived in. I have
already refuted this claim in my article, A Case
For Paul, where I even went and left a section
showing that early Muslims viewed Paul as a
follower of Jesus who taught the same
teachings that Peter and the other disciples
taught. If one were to actually examine the
historical evidence, they would not make the
same claims Henry Johnson is making on this
issue, which are only claims that are made
today and not by early Muslims and skeptics.
He also claims that Christianity was a result of
paganism influence. To which I ask the same
tired question: Where is your evidence for such
a claim?
 I honestly dont care if Henry Johnson
responds to this article or not. I only hope that
those who read these arguments be prepared
for what the future holds in regards to the
defending our faith. Shalom.

Sources & Citations

1.) Allama Usmani, Tafseer-E-Usmani,

Vol. 3, [Islamic Book Service, 2004], p.
1768 n. 2).

2.) Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the

Arabs in the Sixth Century, [Dumbarton
Oaks, 2002], p. 232
3.) Cyril Mango, The Oxford History of
Byzantium, [Oxford University Press,
2002], p. 308

4.) Guillaume, Alfred, Islam, Whitefish,

MT: Literary Licensing, 2011. p. 131

5.) Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, Caner K. Dagli,

Maria Massi Dakake, Joseph E. B.
Lumbard, and Mohammed Rustom, eds.
The Study Quran: A New Translation and
Commentary, New York, NY: HarperOne,
An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers,
2015. p. 334