Watch “Was Quran copied from Alexander Romance? Refuting The Masked Arab” on YouTube

Another excellent refutation by Muslim Allegation Hunters, alhamdulillah! This time, the victim is another pseudo-scholar by the name of “The Masked Arab”. MAH destroys his argument that the Quran copied from the Alexander Romance.

 

31 thoughts on “Watch “Was Quran copied from Alexander Romance? Refuting The Masked Arab” on YouTube

  1. stewjo004

    But, but QB “Agnostic,” said we’re just religious fundamentalists who are blind by our faith. I mean he quoted a “scholar” and everything!!! How can this be huh?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004

        @ QB

        There’s only one small thing left to refute and that’s Josephus Jewish War 7.244-51 and Jerome Letter 77. Do you know any good refutations of these two sources?

        Like

      2. Hmm, I suppose its possible that Josephus mistakenly applied the building of a wall to Alexander when in actual fact it was Dhul Qarnayn. Josephus seems to be the earliest source to attribute this to Alexander. There’s also the possibility that this was a later addition like with the Testimonium Flavianum. There are no early manuscripts of Josephus’ works.

        Like

  2. assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and Ramadan kareem to all. mr. healthcliff you’re question was not addressed to me but i felt compelled to contribute. Th issue of Isa(a.s) creating in a “similar” manner to Allah(S.W.T) can be refuted by simply looking at jewish sources. In the talmud it is stated-

    אמר רבא אי בעו צדיקי ברו עלמא שנאמר כי עונותיכם היו מבדילים וגו’ Rava says: If the righteous wish to do so, they can create a world, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God.” In other words, there is no distinction between God and a righteous person who has no sins, and just as God created the world, so can the righteous.

    רבא ברא גברא שדריה לקמיה דר’ זירא הוה קא משתעי בהדיה ולא הוה קא מהדר ליה אמר ליה מן חבריא את הדר לעפריך
    Indeed, Rava created a man, a golem, using forces of sanctity. Rava sent his creation before Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira would speak to him but he would not reply. Rabbi Zeira said to him: You were created by one of the members of the group, one of the Sages. Return to your dust.

    רב חנינא ורב אושעיא הוו יתבי כל מעלי שבתא ועסקי בספר יצירה ומיברו להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה
    The Gemara relates another fact substantiating the statement that the righteous could create a world if they so desired: Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya would sit every Shabbat eve and engage in the study of Sefer Yetzira, and a third-born calf [igla tilta] would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.

    https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.65b.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

    the reference to studying Sefer Yetzirah, or Book of Creation is also important. Sefer Yetzirah is said to be the divine revelation given to Abraham(a.s) about how the universe was created. In other words by studying How God creates the rabbi’s were able to make golems (men and even calf) as a symbol of them being learned in scripture and the nature of God.

    This shows what Isa(a.s) was doing. proving his prophethood by preforming a miracle that only someone said to have knowledge of scripture and God could do. After all it is known that prophets are given miracles according to their culture. for more information you can see these links

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefer_Yetzirah

    https://folklore.livejournal.com/36003.html

    or just google golems or golems in the talmud ect. the christian may retort back that he doesn’t believe that the rabbi’s ever had such knowledge or power but that doesn’t matter. what matters is that the notion that they could existed for some time. in other words the true meaning of Isa(a.s) miracle would have been understood by some of people of his time or near his time.

    The issue of Isa(a.s) being called the word is also simple to refute. He is given this title because of his creation by Allah(S.W.T) direct command “BE!” like with Adam(a.s). The question that Christians then ask is why wasn’t Adam given the tittle of word to reflect his creation?

    The answers are 1) Prophets are given unique titles all the time, that doesn’t mean that other prophets completely lack the qualities of said title. Abraham(a.s) is called friend of God does that mean all other prophets are strangers to God?

    2) Moreover the reason Isa(a.s) is called the word and not Adam(a.s) is because he already has title that describes his creation. he is someone who “God created with his hand”/ with his two hands. this yaqueen institute article discussing the islamic view of evolution has an entire section discussing Adams titles.

    while I think the whole article and collection of articles on evolution is great and iman boosting, the portion relevant to my point is under the Theological Implications for Human Evolution part in this article.
    https://yaqeeninstitute.org/dr-david-solomon-jalajel/tawaqquf-and-acceptance-of-human-evolution/#.XOA918hKhPY

    3) Christians don’t seem to realize that when they make this argument they inadvertently shoot their own theology in the foot. The trinity claims that the father, son, and holy spirit are all fully god sharing the same essence. the word-logos is described as an attribute of God, of his creative power and reason.

    Yet ONLY the son is given the title of logos. The father and spirit are, as far as i’m aware, never referred to as logos. This begs an important question to Christians. If the son alone is given /emphasized with the title of logos, does that mean the father and holy spirit do not have that divine attribute? If the answer is no then they have no argument or room to talk. If the answer is yes then that means the father and holy spirit are not fully God and deficient compared to the son with the logos.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. mr.heathcliff

      thanks for the reply bro, i already , hours ago posted a reply . it is sad that not many muslims post at the yourpharisee forum, people like that guy post negative stuff about islam and the jews buy into it. we need more muslims at the forum debating these missionaries .

      Like

    2. stewjo004

      Walakum salam wa rahma tu lahi wa barakatu. Ramadan Mubarak. Fantastic post regarding Isa(as) and the Jewish understanding of life and death. I will inshaAllah definitely check it out as this would explain him(as) and the clay bird (its basically a tiny golem). The rabbis may have only believed it theoretical so when he (as) does it this is proof against them like Musa(as) and the magicians and their “magic”.

      Like

    3. mr.heathcliff

      “Christians don’t seem to realize that when they mke this argument they inadvertently shoot their own theology in the foot. The trinity cla”ims that the father, son, and holy spirit are all fully god sharing the same essence. the word-logos is described as an attribute of God, of his creative power and reason.”

      isn’t this them imaging god as three different persons and then quickly switching to some form of unitarianism where son is just an attribute?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. kind of. It’s like a type of partialism or modalism. you can see this whenever you press Christians on what Jesus(a.s) being the word(logos) actually means. Almost every encounter i’ve seen this happen they utter something along the lines “Jesus is God because he’s the word of God. The word of God is one of his divine attributes and because Jesus was/has that particular divine attribute, he is therefore God.” its a kind of “logical” conclusion they make. It’d be like be if a new religion started claiming that the each of the 99 names of Allah(S.W.T) should individually be considered God by virtue of the fact they possessed/were that particular divine attribute. Regardless if they possess the other attributes or not.(its actually pretty similar to Hinduism, to me least)

        A good way to see what i mean is take john 1: 1 replace every instance of “the Word” with any other divine attribute and you can see how weird that verse is from an islamic perspective.

        Liked by 2 people

    4. mr.heathcliff

      Brother Vaqas, are you still around ?

      first question, does the gospel of mark have a deistic view of God?

      for example:

      God is just a “trigger,” but he does not have absolute control over everything, for this reason he can give his powers to others to control storms, sea , sun and moon?

      second question, did gods TRANSFER their powers to created beings?

      Is there a difference between UNLIMITED power and authority ?

      According to Mark, what actually gets you the miracle? FAITH or Jesus?

      quote :

      35 On that day, when evening had come, he said to them, “Let us go across to the other side.” 36 And leaving the crowd behind, they took him with them in the boat, just as he was. Other boats were with him. 37 A great windstorm arose, and the waves beat into the boat, so that the boat was already being swamped. 38 But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion; and they woke him up and said to him, “Teacher, do you not care that we are perishing?” 39 He woke up and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Peace! Be still!” Then the wind ceased, and there was a dead calm. 40 He said to them, “Why are you afraid? Have you still no faith?” 41 And they were filled with great awe and said to one another, “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?”

      1. They clearly did not see Jesus as Yhwh when they woke him up.

      2. They are worried that they would drown and Jesus would drown, not that Jesus has ability to calm storm.

      “have you STILL no faith?”

      this question implies that if they had FAITH, they would not need to wake up Jesus to calm the storm, they could have done it themselves.

      Mark 11:23 (NRSV)

      20 In the morning as they passed by, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. 21 Then Peter remembered and said to him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree that you cursed has withered.” 22 Jesus answered them, “Have[b] faith in God. 23 Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ and if you do not doubt in your heart, but believe that what you say will come to pass, it will be done for you. 24 So I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received[c] it, and it will be yours.

      compare this to the verse about calming the storm. Jesus says something to the storm, in Mark 11:23 he tells Peter to say something to the mountain .

      I do not see that Mark is identifying Jesus as Yhwh.

      Moses:

      For, since God judged him worthy to appear as a partner of His own possessions, He gave into his hands the whole world as a portion well fitted for His heir. Therefore, each element obeyed him as its master, changed its natural properties and submitted to his command… (Vit Mos 1.155-156)

      QUOTE :

      Compare the similar language in Mk 4.41: ‘Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?’ I’d use Greek, Alan, but it’s a bit of a hassle right now. Nevertheless, the linguistic similarities are there if you check. Another text (sometimes noted) is the description of the anointed figure in 4Q521: ‘[for the heav]ens and the earth will listen to his anointed one…’

      ….

      this sounds like deistic concept of God.

      I have realized that when debating these pagan missionaries, one has to clarify what CONCEPT of God are they reading into the TEXT before a dialogue can even get started.

      Like

      1. Vaqas Rehman

        Salam Bro I’m still around I just tend not to comment unless I feel i can contribute to the conversation in some way, or am personally mentioned. So I’m usually just lurking in the background and reading the discussions. I should admit that my personal opinions on Deism(that its at times redundant) may cloud my judgement on this topic. With that out of the way I would argue that the gospel of “mark” and any Christian scripture at their core are not deistic. But I think an argument can be made that it has some deistic elements. Like the father relegating his creative word to the son, or even satan being the “god of this world.”
        An interesting thing to note is the similarity of markan passages you quoted with Jewish mysticism. Only in this case knowledge of scripture is replaced by faith. Which plays into what i mentioned before about God’s permission in relation to miracles. It’s also why i find it so odd when i see people cite “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?” as evidence of divinity. Since we know that Mosses(a.s) and even satan could do just that!
        https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/parallel/paral12.cfm
        https://www.gotquestions.org/weather-Satan.html
        its like an owner of a house allowing the people renting portions of it certain privileges. all the while knowing the owner really owns the house and being subservient to the owners laws. And then other people come along and interpret it like the “i made this” meme. Anyway that’s just my 2 cents on the topic. And of course any error is my own while any good comes from Allah(S.W.T)
        “I have realized that when debating these pagan missionaries, one has to clarify what CONCEPT of God are they reading into the TEXT before a dialogue can even get started.”
        Ain’t that the truth! lol

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Vaqas Rehman

        oh yeah i can’t believe i forgot to include this

        “The second beast was permitted to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship it to be killed” Revelation 13:15

        so the next time someone says Isa(a.s) miracle proves his divinity i guess we know which side they’ll be on according to the bible lol. And before anyone asks, yes the book of revelation is filled to the brim with symbolism and has been subject to numerous interpretations. including in recent times that the image of the beast is a hologram or a product of cloning. This doesn’t change the fact that the interpretation of the second beast giving life to an idol is a valid and literal reading of the text held back then and to this day.

        https://www.gotquestions.org/image-of-the-beast.html

        Like

      3. mr.heathcliff

        in this world view the giver (god) is not being given anything, as williams demonstrated the object who has been given something is an anthropos. this is funny,

        1. either a gods judging powers is merged with a mans (acts has no problem in this deistic model)
        2. god is handing over to created object and is sitting back and watching

        Like

  3. stewjo004

    @ QB

    Yeah I considered Christian redaction as well. Because Jerome obviously copied Josephus so all we need to figure out Jospehus’s source. I have to find the paper bu I read that Alexander was obsessed with Cyrus of Persia (another candidate and the one I favor as of right now) so it may be Cyrus is Dhul Qarnain, Alexander being obssed copies him which then legends get conflated. Jospehus (or a Christian redactor thinking he was mistaken) cites the conflated tale and then all the other sources form. We only need to find this tale earlier than Jospehus or pre helenistic petiod to confirm this theory.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004

        @ QB

        Also Daniel seems to refrence dhul Qarnayn and the rams horn represents Persia and Mede couple that with the Jews thought he was a good guy taking them back from Exile and their is a little bit of a case.

        Like

  4. stewjo004

    @ QB

    Of course I’m not going to fight you in the hallway about it lol if you have some potential candidates I’d like to hear them.

    Like

    1. Not a fight at all 😂. Honestly, I don’t have any candidates. An Arab king might be the best candidate. And I think the best method is to avoid speculating and just leave it. If it was important to know his identity, the Quran or the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would have clarified it.

      Like

  5. stewjo004

    @ QB

    I think it depends on context as I was never a fan of the “avoid speculation”. Allah makes many refrences to past nations and their history. When we know these things:

    1. Its not some Fable. These were real people and this was the mark they left.

    2. It helps get a better understanding of what Allah is talking about. For example, the people of Kahf makes a lot more sense if one knows the sleepers of Ephesus in Turkey and you’re able to draw a lot more lessons from what was going on.

    Opression
    They are small minority holding onto their faith in a Greek pagan society.

    They are almost killed and Allah saves them by putting them to sleep

    Heresy
    Hundreds of years later the Christians denied resurrection them waking up serves as its proof.

    The story emulates two dangers the Message has as a minority and society level. Integration into kufr and if the believers are strong kufr ideology spreading.

    You get all this by simply knowing what Allah is refrencing in history.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yeah, there was probably a prophet Daniel, but I have never been a fan of using the Bible to support Islam. We don’t need it. We have the Quran and the Sunnah. If something agrees with those two, then we accept it but if there is something ambiguous, then we should be cautious.

      Like

      1. stewjo004

        @ QB

        I agree 110% this obviously we are not contradicting what is established or saying something is definitely this thing, but its them trying to “cut” us from the Abrahamic tradition and its like no we have the proper understanding of these concepts “like the word”. Allah does mention subjects in their books like for example I was reading Surah Baqarah it mentiins baptism and uses a play on the Jews saying their hearts are uncircumcised. Translators miss this and translate it like our heatrs are wrapped or something. This comes from us being unfamiliar with their text not the Quran.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. so for some reason the blog where you guys are discussing with concerned reader won’t let me sign in with my google account. and since i refuse to sign in with my facebook(personal reasons) i’ll just type my response here and you guys can take from it to use at your pleasure.

    First
    “Just think of the absurdity of your justifications. You pulled a text from Sanhedrin about how the rabbis can make a Golem! That is allegory, it is story, it is for moral lessons it is not literal”!

    this is not entirely true. while yes some believed these to be allegorical-

    ” The golem appears in other places in the Talmud as well. One legend says the prophet Jeremiah made a golem However, some mystics believe the creation of a golem has symbolic meaning only, like a spiritual experience following a religious rite.”

    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-golem

    clearly not everyone did. This can be seen via even a cursory investigation of the golem discussions. Such as whether destroying a golem would be considered murder.

    https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4285513/jewish/From-Golems-to-AI.htm

    In fact some said Abraham(a.s) used the same method to create the calf prepared for the three angels at Genesis 18:7

    “The Kabbalists speculated that the calf that Abraham served to his angelic guests was created through the use of Sefer Yetzirah. This would place the calf beyond the law and make it parve [neutral]. In this way, Abraham would avoid the sin of serving milk with meat. Return”

    https://folklore.livejournal.com/36003.html

    I am willing to concede that some interpreted these accounts of golems as allegorical. Are you willing to concede that some interpreted these as very literal?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. second

    the entire reason this was brought into the discussion was because you claimed that

    “No prophet in the Torah has ever created living matter from non living matter by fashioning something and then breathing on it. Nobody!”

    “Now sure, the Quran says Jesus did this by Allah’s permission, but put yourself in Israel in the first century actually watching that happen for a moment. If you see a guy do this, has any prophet in the history of humanity done this before? What about the fact of the Primacy of Moses’ revelation? The only antecedent to this miracle in world history would be God making something.”

    “Something I’m not sure you know about the Christian Bible’s usage of the Tanakh: its that when Jesus does miracles, it’s usually a miracle that God Alone has done in the past. Ie Jesus calms the storm, and the New Testament author uses a text as proof where Hashem Stills the storm and walks on the water.”

    Exo 14:21 “And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.”

    Exo 14:26-27 And the LORD said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand over the sea, that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots, and upon their horsemen. And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the LORD overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.”

    Job 1:12 “Very well,” said the LORD to Satan. “Everything he has is in your hands, but you must not lay a hand on the man himself.” Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD ”

    Job 1:18-19 While he was still speaking, another messenger came and reported: “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, when suddenly a mighty wind swept in from the desert and struck the four corners of the house. It collapsed on the young people and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you!”

    The argument you made was that someone doing something miraculous that only God can do is absent from the jewish mind. that the Quran is inadvertently deifying Jesus(a.s) and attempting to rectify its mistake. The materials you used to prove your point were Jewish sources and your own reason. I feel like i addressed the Jewish sources. The prophets Abraham Jeremiah Mosses(a.s them all), the rabbi’s, apostle peter, and even satan are able to have control over things that only God should have because he allowed it. I do not see any meaningful difference between biblical and islamic references on this matter. and I find your attempts to distinguish them to be left wanting.

    As for your personal opinion on the matter, with all due respect its not relevant. Don’t get me wrong i get where your coming from. worshiping an idol while giving blasphemous reasons as to why, should be called out. the issue is determining what is and isn’t idolatry and how. otherwise anyone can say anything is idolatry. like the concept of angels, temples, or priestly blessing ect.

    both traditions don’t have an problem with prophets preforming miracles like these. this isn’t even something unique to Isa(a.s) in the quran. The prophet salih(a.s) causes a she camel to emerge from a rock and prophet solomon(a.s) has the wind subjugated for him. so the quran is quite consistent on this matter. if you want to argue its idolatry anyway then we can have that discussion. but i hope you see how that is a issue affecting all religions and a different issue than if the quran is confused on this matter.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. mr.heathcliff

      “No prophet in the Torah has ever created living matter from non living matter by fashioning something and then breathing on it. Nobody!”

      he seems to assume that the Quran would follow the standard set by the ot when it comes to miracles.

      even after presenting the following explanations:

      The word ITHNI carries the meaning of knowledge and approval. It means that Jesus would have not been able to do any of this except for God’s knowledge and approval or God’s license. This keeps the power only in God’s hands and means that the power that made the miracles happen came from God and not from Jesus.

      the guy still doesn’t agree.
      i kept on asking him show me evidence that Allahs command “kun” is transferred to jesus or that His creative power is shared with created objects, because he initially try to spin the verse like that. he still is unable to, he just repeating himself.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s