By; Dr. Amrani-Hanchi, M.

4.) Dispelling an historical misunderstanding

From early times and up to the present, both; Christian fathers’ apologists and to a lesser degree Jewish Rabbi, each for entrenched and deep rooted reasons of its own, but all having much to do with the disparaging Quran’s assertions concerning both, as the following upsetting five verses {Surat (5) “Al-Ma’Idah” (The Table) {المائدة} (73-79)} hurled at the Trinitarian Christians show;

{73}لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلاثَةٍ وَمَا مِنْ إِلَهٍ إِلا إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَنْتَهُوا عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ لَيَمَسَّنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ

{73} They do blaspheme who say: Allah1 is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

[DOWNLOAD THIS ARTICLE]

{54}أَفَلا يَتُوبُونَ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَيَسْتَغْفِرُونَهُ وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

{74} Why turn they not to Allah, and seek His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

{75}مَا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ إِلا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ صِدِّيقَةٌ كَانَا يَأْكُلانِ الطَّعَامَ انْظُرْ كَيْفَ نُبَيِّنُ لَهُمُ الآيَاتِ ثُمَّ انْظُرْ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ

{75} Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!

{76}قُلْ أَتَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ مَا لا يَمْلِكُ لَكُمْ ضَرًّا وَلا نَفْعًا وَاللَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

{76} Say: "Will ye worship, besides Allah, something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you? But Allah, - He it is that heareth and knoweth all things."

{77}قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ غَيْرَ الْحَقِّ وَلا تَتَّبِعُوا أَهْوَاءَ قَوْمٍ قَدْ ضَلُّوا مِنْ قَبْلُ وَأَضَلُّوا كَثِيرًا وَضَلُّوا عَنْ سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ

{77} Say: "O people of the Book! Exceed not in your religion the bounds (of what is proper), trespassing beyond the truth,

Nor follow the vain desires of people who went wrong in times gone by, - who misled many and strayed (themselves) from the even way.

Which translated into no nonsense plane monotheistic language, means that the whole “Trinitarian theological system”, is no more than a “pagan raving insane madness”, a “silly apostasy”, a sort of “Mistress of error and falseness” (maîtresse d'erreur et de fausseté) and the “mad housewife” (la folle du logis) of monotheism as the French would depict it allegorically.

No wonder, that the Christian’s apologetics, being made aware through these verses, of the shaky dogmatic ground on which they stood, were not so much concerned with answering the Quran, but rather fretful that this critic may open the eyes of their unwary flock to the Quran’s awakening truth

And they found no better subterfuge to obviate this imminent danger in their eyes, save by devising their own misconceptions about Islam and its Prophet and then beat the drum on them till they become carved and engraved in their victim’s mind as in a rock!

This, they achieved by reaffirming their traditional dogmatic stances at nauseam to their innocent herd, trusting that the total ignorance, in which they had keep them for eons past, will do the rest !

A stratagem played in two acts;

a) Doubting Muhammad mission saying; he is no Prophet, but a mere fake and an Impostor, who wrote himself the Qur’an!

b) probing the Koran to find similarities with passages in biblical or semi-biblical sources (Talmud with regard to Judaism, and Gospels apocryphal books, with regard to Christianity) arguing, that the Prophet of Islam; Muhammad (P.B.U.H), copied verbatim from them!

And since neither objectivity nor probity and for that matter, logic itself, were ever the strong of these diehard Trinitarians, the pertinent and obvious corollary question;

How can a copy be made better than the pseudo inexistent original?

Just never crossed their mind!

They kept pandering so much to the ignorance and superstition of their gullible innocent people, in giving them a God created in the image of man, that they didn’t realize in their misappropriation and fraud that there is no way to make either;

1) “Trinity” compatible with the teaching of Jesus (P.B.U.J) himself as reported in the New Testament, nor

2) To square it with the First Commandment!

A line of attack still popular among Trinitarian apologists today, bent on hiding the truth from their unsuspicious followers, despite the fact that the issues were raised early in Islam and that the Qur’an itself has answered them early and convincingly as attested by the following verses;

- Surat (16); “An-Nahl” (The Bee) (النحل);

{101} وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَكَانَ آيَةٍ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لا يَعْلَمُونَ

{101} When We (GOD) substitute one revelation for another, - and Allah (God) knows best what He reveals (in stages), - they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

{102} قُلْ نَزَّلَهُ رُوحُ الْقُدُسِ مِنْ رَبِّكَ بِالْحَقِّ لِيُثَبِّتَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَهُدًى وَبُشْرَى لِلْمُسْلِمِينَ

{102}Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims.

وَلَقَدْ نَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُمْ يَقُولُونَ إِنَّمَا يُعَلِّمُهُ بَشَرٌ لِسَانُ الَّذِي يُلْحِدُونَ إِلَيْهِ أَعْجَمِيٌّ وَهَذَا لِسَانٌ عَرَبِيٌّ مُبِينٌ(103)

{103} We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

- Surat (46); “Al-Ahqaf”;

{8}أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ إِنِ افْتَرَيْتُهُ فَلا تَمْلِكُونَ لِي مِنَ اللَّهِ شَيْئًا هُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا تُفِيضُونَ فِيهِ كَفَى بِهِ شَهِيدًا بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ وَهُوَ الْغَفُورُ الرَّحِيمُ

{8} Or do they say, "He has forged it"? Say: "Had I forged it, then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah. He knows best of that whereof ye talk (so glibly)! Enough is He for a witness between me

and you! And he is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

{9} قُلْ مَا كُنْتُ بِدْعًا مِنَ الرُّسُلِ وَمَا أَدْرِي مَا يُفْعَلُ بِي وَلا بِكُمْ إِنْ أَتَّبِعُ إِلا مَا يُوحَى إِلَيَّ وَمَا أَنَا إِلا نَذِيرٌ مُبِينٌ

{9} Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear."

{10} قُلْ أَرَأَيْتُمْ إِنْ كَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ وَكَفَرْتُمْ بِهِ وَشَهِدَ شَاهِدٌ مِنْ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ عَلَى مِثْلِهِ فَآمَنَ وَاسْتَكْبَرْتُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

{10} Say: "See ye? If (this teaching) be from Allah, and ye reject it, and a witness from among the Children of Israel testifies to its similarity (with earlier scripture), and has believed while ye are arrogant, (how unjust ye are!) truly, Allah guides not a people unjust."

- Surat (87); “Al-Ala” (The Most High);

{18} إِنَّ هَذَا لَفِي الصُّحُفِ الأولَى

{18}And this is in the Books of the earliest (Revelation),-

{19} صُحُفِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَى

{19}The Books of Abraham and Moses.

- And Surat (2) (Al-Baqara) (البقرة) [The Cow] (136);

{136}قُولُوا آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ لا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ.

{136} Say ye: "We believe in Allah (God), and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)."

The informed reader may rightly ask at this point; what’s the point of the exercise? Given that the Qur’an asserts clearly, unequivocally and with a plethora of details its total adherence to the teaching of the scriptures?

The answer;

The Question, as we have seen did not lie at this; “plain as the nose on your face” level, but laid geologically deeper inside the Trinitarian’s Pandora box of vipers, up to the point where no Trinitarian apologist has ever had the wit or the courage to challenge this astray conventional wisdom from within the accepted paradigm, but satisfied themselves all, with being counted as numbers among the herd as well!

5.) The advent of Orientalism

While the above brand of apologetics, as reported by the Qur’an, were active early in Islam and manifested themselves during the Prophet’s lifetime and beyond, it is only recently, starting from the XIX th century onward that the discipline known as “Orientalism” took an apparently scientific character, with the attending learned societies such as; “the Asiatic Society of Bengal” created in 1786, “the Royal Asiatic Society” in London in 1823, “la Societé Asiatique” in Paris in 1822, “the Deutsche Morgenlandisch Gesellschaft” in 1845 and others, with their academic publications of specialized Journals, books, articles and essays,….etc.

And despite the fact that these societies, through their very names, betray the unmistakable colonial tint and impetus behind some of them, one can still divide these Orientalists, from the perspective of this essay, into four categories:

a) Orientalists with Christian affinities, the majority in the field, mostly Biblicists, mirror image of each other, when it comes to Islam and represented by active Christians missionaries, who were attracted to the field, not so much for the sake of acquiring positive knowledge about their subject’s matters or enriching their experience for an outreach with Muslims, but as an outgrowth of the old Trinitarian’s friars and monks, who have a grudge and ax to grind with Islam and its Prophet, and thought they could continue to wage their crusade with the pen instead of the glaive and get away with it, with shoddy pseudo scholarship under the garb of Orientalism!

b) Orientalists with Jewish affinities, mainly working under the Christian’s paradigm, with some rare exceptions, trying to impress their own Judaist worldview on some subjects of relevance to Islam.

c) Orientalists serving the colonial objectives of their respective countries.

d) Independent scholars, a minority, more or less neutral and impartial in their approach to Islam, depending on the scholar’s affinities and ideological background.

Not surprisingly though, it was through the efforts of this last group, irrespective of their motives, that Islam and its tenets have being made known to westerners.

And to their credit, it was among this group, that many scholars were led on their own, through their academic research proper, to know about Islam and embrace it as religion

This is the more extraordinary, since they achieved this monumental feat through a barrage of defaming anti-Islamic propaganda sponsored by the prevailing Trinitarian’s Paradigm, up to the point where; Even prospective European Jews, who wanted to specialize in oriental studies, had no other choice open to them at University level, save to work under the aegis of renown chauvinist Trinitarian’s scholars bent on implementing their prevailing paradigm.

The late Edward Said summarized neatly and masterly this field of enquiry with its inherently structural biases2;

From at least the end of the eighteenth century until our own day, modern Occidental reactions to Islam have been dominated by a type of thinking that may still be called Orientalist. The general basis of Orientalist thought is an imaginative geography dividing the word into two unequal parts, the larger and "different" one called the Orient, the other, also known as our world, called the Occident or the West. Such divisions always take place when one society or culture thinks about another one, different from it, but it is interesting that even when the Orient has uniformly been considered an inferior part of the world, it has always been endowed both with far greater size and with a greater potential for power than the West.

Insofar as Islam has always been seen as belonging to the Orient, its particular fate within the general structure of Orientalism has been to be looked at with a very special hostility and fear.

There are, of course, many obvious religious, psychological and political reasons for this, but all of these reasons derive from a sense that so far as the West is concerned,

Islam represents not only a formidable competitor but also a late-coming challenge to Christianity.

This insight goes a long way to explain; why early Trinitarian Christians as well as our modern following on their footsteps, devoted and still devote much of their effort and energy to the two major topic of study mentioned above;

a) the Qur'an and

b) the Prophet Muhammad,

which still constitute, even today, the fundamental themes in those leading ritualistic pseudo scientific Christian seminaries, which promote their preconceived ideas about Islam under the catch name of; “Islamic studies’!

These ritualistic gatherings, when looked at under closer scrutiny show that;

The patent dilemma posed by the Qur’an and Muhammad to the Trinitarian Christians stems from the fact, that they inherited a false pagan creed concocted by the Hellenistic mystery prone fathers of the Church in the fifth century, which down the centuries has so insisted on seeing God in Jesus Christ, that when they realized that;

a) The Qur’an, poured scorn unequivocally on such pagan blasphemy, and that ;

b) “trinity” as such could never find its justification in any book of the scriptures,

Felt at loss, being unable of apprehending the existence of God without associates.

ِAssociation, condemned vehemently by;

1) Moses through the first commandments of the Bible;

לֹא-יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים, עַל-פָּנָי

Thou shalt have no other gods before me3.

2) Jesus upholding and perpetuating the Torah (Law) and its commandments 4;

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled5.

3) The Qur’an6;

{48}إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ وَمَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ افْتَرَى إِثْمًا عَظِيمًا.

{48} Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.

And this last autographic scripture resumes it all and proves beyond the shadows of doubt, the incompatibility, incongruity and clash of “Trinity” with monotheism.

5.1.) Deconstructing the Trinitarian’s Tautology

Before embarking on this task, it will serve our purpose in this thesis, to first acquaint the reader with the imaginary image that renown Trinitarian’s historians, philosophers, sociologists and intellectuals….,etc. have constructed for themselves, either by hear-say or through their scanty readings about the Last Prophet of monotheism; Muhammad (P.B.U.H).

Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662), the Trinitarian’s French philosopher wrote in his “Pensées” (Thoughts)7;

595. Mahomet was without authority. His reasons then should have been very strong, having only their own force.

What does he say then, that we must believe him?   

596. The Psalms are chanted throughout the whole world.

14 Who renders testimony to Mahomet? Himself.

15

My Comment; One wonders how Pascal’s brain cells were working then! But knowing that regular teaching of Arabic began at the “Collège de France” in Paris only in 1587, i.e. 36 years only before Pascal’s birth, one cannot expect much of an insight, even from someone not as biased as he was.

Jesus Christ desires His own testimony to be as nothing.  15   The quality of witnesses necessitates their existence always and everywhere; and he, miserable creature, is alone.  16  

597. Against Mahomet.—The Koran is not more of Mahomet than the Gospel is of Saint Matthew, for it is cited by many authors from age to age. Even its very enemies, Celsus and Porphyry, never denied it.  17   

The Koran says Saint Matthew was an honest man. Therefore Mahomet was a false prophet for calling honest men wicked, or for not agreeing with what they have said of Jesus Christ.  18  

My Comment; the ignorance of Pascal here is pathetic and typical of his age. He didn’t have as yet any decent translation of the Qur’an to check that his Mathew is to be found nowhere in it! The first decent translation of the Qur’an will be made only years after his death by George Sale (1697-1736) in English not French, based on a recent Latin version of the Italian Lodovico Marracci. But his grudge against the Prophet of Islam, taking the best of his wit, didn’t prevent him, from building a false conclusion on a false premise!

598. It is not by that which is obscure in Mahomet, and which may be interpreted in a mysterious sense, that I would have him judged, but by what is clear, as his paradise and the rest. In that he is ridiculous. And since what is clear is ridiculous, it is not right to take his obscurities for mysteries. 

 19   It is not the same with the Scripture. I agree that there are in it obscurities as strange as those of Mahomet; but there are admirably clear passages, and the prophecies are manifestly fulfilled. The cases are therefore not on a par. We must not confound, and put on one level things which only resemble each other in their obscurity, and not in the clearness, which requires us to reverence the obscurities. 

My Comment; Pascal being ignorant of Arabic and having no translation of its Autographic texts, to pit them against their “look-like” was not the ideal way for making a comparison!

599. 20 the difference between Jesus Christ and Mahomet.

—Mahomet was not foretold; Jesus Christ was foretold.

My Comment; little did Pascal knew on this subject!

 — 21   Mahomet slew; Jesus Christ caused His own to be slain.

My Comment; this is the main fallacy contested by the Qur’an, upon which Trinitarians built their mystery Christology, not so different from other cultic mysteries of the orient.

— 22   Mahomet forbade reading!; the Apostles ordered reading.

My Comment; the ignorance of Pascal is at its zenith here! Knowing that one of the earliest Surat of Qur’an start with the injunction {Qur'an (96) (Al-Alaq) [The Clot, Read] (1)};

{1}اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ

{1} Proclaim! (Or read!) In the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created.

And that Moslems were the most cultured people on Earth.

—  23   In fact the two are so opposed!, that if Mahomet took the way to succeed from a worldly point of view,

Jesus Christ, from the same point of view, took the way to perish. And instead of concluding that, since Mahomet succeeded, Jesus Christ might well have succeeded; we ought to say that since Mahomet succeeded, Jesus Christ should have failed! 

My Comment; only a schizophrenic can make such comparison! Knowing how events unfolded in history.

600. 24 Any man can do what Mahomet has done!;

My Comment; Oh Really!

For he performed no miracles, he was not foretold.

No man can do what Christ has done.  

My Comment; the reader should note the repeated highlighting of; was not foretold, and the dying of Christ on the Cross. The dying itself never happened, as ascertained by the Qur’an, the sole absolute Judge concerning such matters.

601. The heathen religion has no foundation [at the present day. It is said once to have had a foundation by the oracles which spoke. But what are the books which assure us of this?

Are they so worthy of belief on account of the virtue of their authors? Have they been preserved with such care that we can be sure that they have not been meddled with?

My Comment; a good question, but unfortunately coming from a bad non consistent thinker! It didn’t cross his mind, blinded as he was by his chronic enmity with Islam, that the Qur’an was the only book claiming to fulfill exactly such exploit!

26   The Mohammedans religion has for a foundation the Koran and Mahomet.

But has this prophet, who was to be the last hope of the world, been foretold?

My Comment; This is exactly what  Muhammad proclaimed, and that we are bound to prove in this study.

- What sign has he that every other man has not, who chooses to call himself a prophet?

- What miracles does he himself say that he has done?

- What mysteries has he taught, even according to his own tradition?

- What was the morality, what the happiness held out by him?

My Comment; His main perpetual miracle and sign, which no other Prophet has ever had is his non falsifiable book, “Al-Qur’an”

  27   The Jewish religion must be differently regarded in the tradition of the Holy Bible, and in the tradition of the people. Its morality and happiness are absurd in the tradition of the people, but are admirable in that of the Holy Bible. (And all religion is the same; for the Christian religion is very different in the Holy Bible and in the casuists.) The foundation is admirable; it is the most ancient book in the world, and the most authentic; and whereas Mahomet, in order to make his own book continue in existence, forbade men to read it!, Moses, for the same reason, ordered every one to read his.

My Comment; It is with this kind of absurdities, falsehoods and denials of the basic truth, that Trinitarians have managed to keep and deceive their flock in the past and continue to do so at present, but fortunately the “rope of lies is short” as we are going to discover now.

Joseph White (1745-1814) professor of Arabic at Oxford, delivered a sermon entitled; “A comparison of Islam and Christianity in their history, their evidence and their effects”8

Being a Professor of Arabic, and coming one century after Pascal, Joseph White wrote concerning the Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H)9;

An extraordinary character [of] splendid talents and profound artifice . . . endowed with a greatness of mind which could brave the storms of adversity [by] . . . the sheer force of a bold and fertile genius.”

Edward Gibbon (1737–1794), the contemporary British historian of Joseph White, devoted the 50th chapter of his classic seminal work; “The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” published in 1776 to Muhammad (P.B.U.H) and Islam.

His description has an added worth for three reasons;

a) being himself a convert to the Roman Catholicism while studying at Oxford,

b) relapsing to Protestantism after a sojourn in Switzerland and;

c) by the time he wrote his masterwork, he had become so skeptical about Christianity, as to be counted among the apostates of the Trinitarian’s heretic Churches, beside being familiar with the writing of Pascal, and the Biblical critic; John lock (1632 – 1704) among many others.

It goes without saying that an apostate of a heretic Church is either a true believer, or at least closely related to the true faith, than the Church anathematizing him!

Moreover, one must also keep in mind that when Gibbon wrote his masterpiece, anyone denying the Dogma of the Trinitarian’s religion was liable to be punished for committing a state’s crime.

So skepticism has only to be implied and not flatly stated.

But Gibbon knowing what to expect, never gave the church an opportunity to get on his nerves on those sticky questions, to the extent that even such an authority as John Henry Cardinal Newman (1801 –1890) (photo) would say about him;

"It is melancholy to say it, but the chief, perhaps the only English writer who has any claim to be considered an ecclesiastical historian, is the unbeliever Gibbon."

And no wonder, that for almost a century, the only thing Trinitarians could see in his masterpiece, was apostasy!

A humorous anachronism, given the fact that “Trinity” measured by the standards of pure monotheism, vouchsafed to all the Prophets and attested by all the Noachide-Abrahamic’s scriptures, is the Ultimate heresy and mother of all heresies!

Gibbon Wrote10;

A pernicious tenet has been imputed to the Mohammedans, the duty of extirpating all other religions by the sword. This charge of ignorance and bigotry is refuted by the Koran, by the history of the Musulman conquerors, and by their public and legal toleration of the Christian worship.

Muhammad, he believes, had;

“An original and superior genius,”

The Qur’an of Muhammad is;

“A glorious testimony to the unity of God.”

The Qur’an expressed the idea of;

“an infinite and eternal being, without form or place, without issue or similitude, present to our most secret thoughts, existing by the necessity of his own nature, and deriving from himself all moral and intellectual perfection.”

“A creed too sublime, perhaps, for our present faculties”;

So, suffice for our purpose in the study to retain these fine remarks, concerning the two most abused topics by the Trinitarian’s forgers namely; the Qur’an and Muhammad.

Thus we retain concerning the Qur’an;

a) “It is a glorious testimony to the unity of God”

b) A creed too sublime, for our present faculties”

Which translate; that the Qur’an is the unchallenged standard for Monotheism.

And concerning Muhammad;

a) “An original and superior genius,”

This statement comes as close as is linguistically possible, to describe a Prophet with an original message, since Gibbon is counted among the skeptic, and not among those upholding the believer’s categories.

The reader should also keep in mind, that this portrayal came from someone who new about Islam, only through secondary translations and not, through the rich and sublime autographic Arabic Quranic text.

End of Part (III), to be followed by Part (IV)

Why the Trinitarians Rage?

1 The word "Allah" means "The God" or "God" with a capital "G", referring to "The One True God". The article; "AL" in Arabic means "The", example: Al-Qur'an = The Qur'an. It has the same roots in Hebrew, Chaldean and Syriac. “Allah” is used by Christian Arabs in their Bible when referring to “God”.

2 Edward W. Said, 1980 ; ” Islam Through Western Eyes”, “The Nation”, April 26, 1980 issue.

3 Exodus (20; 3)

4 Mathew (5; 17-18)

5Trinitarians have always abused the First Commandment by claiming that Jesus has freed them from the Law!

6 Qur'an (4) (An-Nisa) (النساء) [Women] (48)

7 Blaise Pascal; “Thoughts”. The Harvard Classics.  (1909–14). see the French original in this Link;

{http://sami.is.free.fr/Oeuvres/pascal_pensees.html}, Chapter ; XVII. « Contre Mahomet”}.

8 Sermons preached before the University of Oxford, in the year 1784, at the lecture founded by the Rev. John Bampton; by Joseph White. London : Printed for F. C. and J. Rivington, 1811. 

9 J. White, Ibid. 165ff.

10 chapter 58, paragraph 5