Apostate prophet viewpoint confusion; Quran says Sun sets in muddy spring?

In answer to the video "The Quran and the Sun Setting in Muddy Spring"

The Quran in that passage relates Dhul Qarnayn's perspective.

18:86,90 relate some of Dhul Qarnayn's journeys across the Earth. The Quran describes, as a third party observer, what he and the people he met experienced and saw in these places. 18:90 describes his arrival at the place of the rising sun, where HE saw it rising. matliAAa alshshams/maghrib alshshams do not have a fixed meaning in classical Arabic. It all depends on the context of its use. It can be rising of the sun/setting of the sun, it can be ‘the land of the rising sun’/land of the setting sun, it can be farthest east/farthest west. The scene is being described after the event had happened, and as perceived by one person. It is not making a general statement of fact as regards the cosmic path of the sun, as it does in 21:33. 

Dhul Qarnayn travelled the land and at one point during his expedition saw the sun rising from where he was standing. This is how he knew he had reached the rising place of the sun, not because he had arrived at the flat earth's edges or to a place with a hole in the ground from where the sun came up. Wajadaha, means subjective perception of any of the senses. As is amply used in Arabic, the word doesnt imply that what is perceived corresponds to actual reality. It could be, just as it could not be. Again the passage relates Dhul Qarnayn's perspective, not necessarily a phenomenon physically occuring. This is seen a few verses later. It says Dhul Qarnayn "wajada" the sun rising on a people. It specifies the location of rising just as it does for the setting. No commentator argued that wajada here entails physical sunrise on a people, literally above them, because they did not think that the word indicates a literal location of sunset a few verses back. Had the word wajada, or any of the other words used indicate literal sunset, and that the early commentators endorsed such a view, then they would have stated the same as regards the location of sunrise. The fact that both Dhul Qarnayn and these people were in the same place, but yet only the locals were harmed by the rising sun proves that wajada cannot mean literal sunrise, just as it cannot mean literal sunset in a water source. 

This location of sunrise was not unique, as the Quran speaks of mashaariq and maghaarib. But it was worth mentioning for the point of the story. He met a particular people there, whom the Quran says Dhul Qarnayn found the sun rising upon. The reason for singling out a group from among those standing there and saying the sun was on them from Dhul Qarnayn's view, was to illustrate how they were, contrary to himself 

"a people to whom We had given no shelter from It". 

The blazing sun was affecting them only as a primitive people who did not cover themselves or know how to build proper protection against it, contrary to Dhul Qarnayn and his men who were standing at the same location, and who were obviously equally under the same sun. Dhul Qarnayn's finding the rising sun has thus nothing to do with a scientific observation or general statement of fact, rather temporary perspective from Dhul Qarnayn's angle.  

Similarly in 18:86, no civilisation ever believed, including the pre-Islamic Arabs, that the sun would sink in the water at night. People instead thought the sun rose and set at the flat Earth's edges. Had the Quran been merely reflecting its contemporaries' understanding of astronomy, it should have said something along the line of "he found it setting behind the water" had it meant Dhul Qarnayn reached a spot of physical sunset. But it says "in" the water. This description is appropriate to Dhul Qarnayn's location. He reached the westernmost spot of his journey, where he stopped his progress because of a water source/aynin. At this spot where he met a people, from his perspective, he saw the sun setting in the water. Al gharb as a side note means to disappear, not simply setting as in entering into another entity.

Ibn kathir, much before the scientific era and while the consensus on astronomy was geocentric, stated that this setting in a spring was from Dhul Qarnayn's perspective.

Tafsir literature as a side note is a literary genre open to reinterpretation even today, using exactly the same tools (linguistic, ahadith, fiqh) that are preserved and were available to the earliest generations of mufassirun. So to say that one tafsir says something and another more ancient, using exactly the same tools, says another is no proof of anything. Even the earliest works reported, discussed, selected, discarded previous views, as Attabari does for instance. As a further note on a particular angle of interpretation; the meaning of the Quran is not dependant on a commentator's projection of his own understanding of nature. Science is a field in constant reevaluation, and thus is not part of the exegetical tools of a mufassir. If however a commentator chooses to integrate it in his reading of a passage, then a commentator today, using the same tools available to his predecessors, added with current knowledge of nature, can supersede older interpretations in which the commentator projects his outdated scientific knowledge.

All the references in at Tabari to the sun setting in a spring allude to what Dhul Qarnayn saw. None of the views reported say that the setting place of the sun is in a spring, independently of Dhul Qarnayn's perspective. In fact Attabari, commenting on 21:33 states that the sun floats in a heavenly orbit. How could he then argue that it enters the earth to sink in a pond? Al Baghawi, al Mawrudi, Makki ibn abi Talib, Al Tusi, all of them much prior to ibn Kathir, and Al Tabarani who was a contemporary of Attabari and even ibn Qutayba who preceded Attabari all spoke of the metaphorical meaning of the verse, as a subjective perception from Dhul Qarnayn.

These verses speak from Dhul Qarnayn's perspective, what he saw on his expeditions, more specifically the people he met. That is why it speaks of several of his journeys including one inside a valley where his sight was blocked by the mountains and couldnt therefore see the sun rising nor setting 18:93. In short, Dhul Qarnayn probably saw many sunsets and sunrises on his journeys. But some of those where he saw sunrises and sunsets at the horizon were worth mentionning, because he met in them particular people whose characteristics are given in the verses 18:86-90. At the setting of the sun, it was disbelievers deserving punishement, at the rising of the sun it was very primitive people. Keeping in mind that the Quran repeatedly says there are countless rising and setting places for the sun. Finally, there is an expression used in 43:38 by the disbelievers on the day of judgement, to signify an infinite distance 

"Oh, I wish there was between me and you the distance of two sunrises/mashriqayn – how wretched a companion". 

The implicit meaning is that no matter how much one may pursue the physical rising place of the sun, one will never reached that spot. But even that unfathomable distance is not enough to express the disbeliever's loathing of his evil earthly companion, hence his wish to have him twice as far. This type of phraseology meant at expressing something with no qualitative or quantitative ending is found in other places, such as when depicts God's infinite knowledge and wisdom should it be put into writing 

31:27"And if whatever trees upon the earth were pens and the sea [was ink], replenished thereafter by seven [more] seas, the words of Allah would not be exhausted. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise".

The Quran, it is to be kept in mind, repeatedly says there are countless rising and setting places for the sun 37:5,70:40. There isnt one single place of sunrise or sunset but each of those ephemeral sunrises and sunset spots where one can see the sun rising or setting when looking at the horizon must be referred to with a definite article when spoken of on their own 18:86,90. Mashaariq literally means "the places where the sun rises". The east can be implicit depending on one's position on Earth however "the places where the sun rises" can also include the south or the north as happens in certain Arctic/Antarctic times of the year.

Thats how accurate and consistent the Quran truly is contrary to other similarily ancient religious scriptures, such as the Hebrew Bible from where it is claimed the Quran finds inspiration. The HB, contrary to the Quran reflects the faulty cosmic understanding of the people that penned it, speaking of

Isa45:6,Ps113:3"the rising of the sun to the place where it sets".

It speaks of the sun traveling across the heaven from one end to another Ps19:7, circling the earth Ecc1:5. A salvific figure will be coming

Isa41:25"from the rising of the sun".

When daylight was miraculously prolonged for an additional 24 hours, it was because the sun stood still, instead of the earth Josh10:12-14. The end of a day was understood as when

"the sun descended very much"

until it set

"near Gibeah" Judges19:11-14.

There is a "dwelling" God has created for the setting sun, somewhere in the heavens Ps19:5, the place where both the sun and moon stand still in the face of God's might Hab3:11. There is also mention of times where

1Sam11:9"the sun is hot"

which implies that there are others where it cools down. What the ancients who wrote the Bible didnt know is that during this cooling off time, the opposite side of the round Earth was still receiving the Sun's warmth. The Sun was moving backwards in relation to the Earth during the miraculous extending of daytime Isa38:8.

Of course, the words of the Talmudic rabbis traditionaly considered God-given to Moses at Sinai, reflect all these faulty notions. In order to move from daylight to night (and vice versa) the sun had to go through the solid firmament, a dome sitting on top of the shallow flat earth. This passage happens twice a day, in the morning and the evening. As it goes through the firmament's width, the sun appears to be setting. This apparent time it takes for the sun to pierce through the firmament (approx 70min) is included until today by religious Jews as part of the daylight cycle.

It is perfectly expected for a human work, the Bible, to reflect every faulty notion of its human writers. What is astonishing is that all these erroneous views and others were equally believed by the ancient Arabs yet we do not find even as much as the remotest resemblance of any of these concepts with verses from the Quran depicting some natural phenomena.

Allah is the Lord of the mashaariq and maghaarib, the Creator and Ultimate Cause of all phenomenons in the universe, making the sun rise and set at different spots of the horizon throughout the solar year. God causes the movements in the universe making the sun rise at different spots in the horizon. Sometimes the Quran, when discribing a thing positionned far on the horizon, describes its position in terms of altitude as opposed to longitude which would have been the case had it thought the earth was flat 53:7.

Apostate prophet in search of the lost king; Who was Dhul Qarnayn?

In answer to the video "The Quran and the Sun Setting in Muddy Spring"

Dhul Qarnayn's story is that of a mighty, pious, divinely chosen and inspired King. He was known for his high morality even among his enemies, remaining just and fair towards a newly conquered people even when they are at his entire mercy 18:84-8. He was a monotheist selected and spiritually guided by God as well as facilitated in his worldly endeavors, battles, adventures and extensive journeys.

This was Cyrus the Great as described both in the HB and the Quran, sometimes with strikingly similar wording and imageries.

He was so revered by one among many of those nations that looked up to him, ie the Jews, that he is referred to as God's messiah Isa45. Despite his monumental achievements and conquests, he remained humble and attributed his

"being established in the land"

to God's mercy, just like the prophet King Solomon and other righteous and great humans attributed their wisdom, spiritual uprightness, powers and other worldly advantages to God. In fact Dhul Qarnayn's name itself, in the classical Arabic, encapsulates all these aforementionned lofty attributes. Dhul also means "full of" while Qarnayn stands for wisdom and power.

Historically, it is the Jews living on the outskirts of Mecca that instigated the Arab pagans to question the prophet on Dhul Qarnayn. It was a question meant at ensnaring the prophet, just as they had the habit of doing with previous prophets including Jesus as reported in the NT. He had to know the hidden symbolisms of Daniel 8's prophecy of the 2 horned ram and how they relate to the book of Isaiah that speaks of Cyrus.

In the prophecy, the 2 horns stand for the kingdoms of Persia and Media while the ram itself stands for the Medo-Persian kingdom effectively founded and united by Cyrus the Great. The Persian kingdom, younger and eventually greater, is symbolized by the higher horn that sprouted last, while Media, older and eventually lesser, is symbolized by the smaller and older horn. The kingdom of Media was the more ancient and prominent while Persia was of little account until Cyrus gave it its glory, conquering Media and maintaining the ascendant over it.

It is only natural then that Cyrus would be symbolically connected to the 2 horned ram. He founded and embodied the Medo-Persian kingdom greatness until the fall of his empire under his successor Darius III.

The Jews wanted to verify Muhammad's claim to prophethood in light of his knowledge of scriptures, they werent asking for random information about non-religious matters, or about an issue known to everyone and which could easily be replied to. More than merely repeating the apparent scriptural information about Cyrus as related in the books of Isaiah or Ezra, they needed confirmation that his knowledge was "advanced", covering subtle knowledge unknown to the common folk. The cryptic symbolism of the 2 horned ram, in reference to Cyrus, was to them the perfect test. In addition, Cyrus is never explicitly given the "two horned" epithet in scriptures which is all the more relevant in raising the difficulty level of their question to the prophet.

This incident is similar to the challenge by the rabbi ibn Salam to Muhammad, prior to his conversion to Islam. He asked him several questions as a falsification test of prophethood; among them, what would be the first meal in heaven, the first sign of the end of times and the reason a child resembles one of the parents. Ibn Salam was a leading scholar of the Jewish community and teacher. He knew what was accessible of scriptural and traditional knowledge to the layman and what was restricted. He therefore asked Muhammad questions which no layman could know, let alone an Arab unschooled in scriptural knowledge, except through revelation. Nor is there indication of any of the information requested circulating orally in the region and among the common folk. Nor were the source scriptures alluding to the themes in those answers translated into Arabic. As to the meal, the prophet replied it would be the caudate lobe of the liver of a sea creature, followed by the meat of a bull that grazed from the vegetation of heaven. The Talmud states in Bava Batra 75a-b that in the next world, the righteous will be rewarded with a meal consisting of shor ha-bor and livyatan – wild ox and leviathan, a sea creature, just as the prophet answered (Sahih-Muslim 315a). As to the notion of parental resemblance, it is similar to a passage in the Babylonian Talmud, Nidda 31a. The prophet's answers were comparable in their essence, not in their details, to what is found in Jewish tradition. From an Islamic perspective, the essential parallelisms between Islam and previous scriptures and traditions, are the truthfull parts which a third party independently revealed across time. As the prophet stated when he finished answering these and other questions 

"He asked me about such and such things of which I have had no knowledge till Allah gave me that". 

To further illustrate, a Jew once shared information with the Muslims while the prophet was present, and the latter recited from a Meccan sura (prior to Muslim-Jewish interaction) to demonstrate his defective knowledge 

"A (Jewish) Rabbi came to Allah's Messenger and he said, "O Muhammad! We learn that Allah will put all the heavens on one finger, and the earths on one finger, and the trees on one finger, and the water and the dust on one finger, and all the other created beings on one finger. Then He will say, 'I am the King.' Thereupon the Prophet smiled so that his pre-molar teeth became visible, and that was the confirmation of the Rabbi. Then Allah's Messenger recited: 'They made not a just estimate of Allah such as is due to Him. And on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth will be grasped by His Hand and the heavens will be rolled up in His Right Hand. Glorified is He, and High is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.' (39.67)".

The Quran plainly states, it will continuously provide the relevant information whenever an objection, similitude or question is put forward to the prophet 

25:33"And they do not come to you with a mathal/similitude except that We bring you the truth and the best explanation".

Returning to the hadith where the prophet was questioned, there are three possibilities to view the report;

- the incident really occured. The knowledgeable rabbi approached the prophet with inquiries he could not have known, as mentioned earlier.

- the information was in circulation to the extent that even non-Jews were familiar with it. Why didnt any of the numerous enemies of Islam, whether Jews, pagans or hypocrites expose this fact? Could the rabbi really be that oblivious of how common this knowledge he inquiried about was, to the point that the prophet's answers made him convert to Islam?

- the whole incident did not happen, making the background of Abdullah ibn Salam's conversion a mystery.

Cyrus was a messianic hero and extraordinary figure to them. In addition, these scattered and exiled Jews were in constant anticipation for a savior to come and bring them back to their position of honor among the nations, as almost achieved under Cyrus. Their chosen topic was certainly not random and was relevant to their psychological and scriptural context. The Quranic reply begins with

"i will recount upon you a remembrance of him".

The prophet was then inspired with an answer that was relevant to the questioners on 2 levels;

- it confirmed the apparent and hidden knowledge on Cyrus/Dhul Qarnayn in their scriptures

- it provided an affectionate reminder of some of that beloved figure's forgotten greatness, through worldly achievements connected to his spiritual worthiness

As a side note it was a common motif among kings and rulers in ancient times to be portrayed with 2 horns which symbolized power and rulership. It is the case with Cyrus who, besides the symbolism in Daniel's prophecy, is physically depicted as such in engravings.

As noted by Biblical scholars it was usual for persian kings to wear a decorated ram's head. Other ancient rulers were sometimes depicted with horns to symbolize their power, including Alexander the great who himself adopted the horns from the god Zeus-Ammon. He can be seen on a few marginal coin issues, among the vast variety of Alexander coins, from profile, with free flowing hair, with a small horn curling around his ear and his proper name stamped on. This can hardly be used as evidence for the unproven assertion that the Arabs nicknamed Alexander "two horned" prior to the revelation of sura kahf.

Throughout time, the exegetes and story tellers have proposed a vast range of potential candidates among the historical figures known to them, as possible references to the Quranic Dhul Qarnayn. Some have even suggested he was an angel.

Islam critiqued questions Quranic style; contradictory repetitions?

In answer to the video "Corruption: Third Response and "Misquoting Allah"

The harmonious, consistent repetitions of various topics in the Quran are primarly meant to stress some important pillars of belief

25:50"And certainly We have repeated this to them that they may be mindful, but the greater number of men do not consent to aught except denying".

The first objective of that literary feature is thus enhancing man's remembrance of Allah 39:23. It also is a way of explaining itself

17:41"We have explained (things) in various (ways) in this Quran".

According to the Quran therefore, its master exegetist is none but the Book itself, explaining itself 75:19,16:89. The Prophet is its second exegetist and interpreter 3:164,16:44,62:2. The Quran being primarily self-explanatory establishes from the onset 2 conditions for its proper understanding; the importance of considering the context of a verse and the fact that the Book is one integral whole; every verse and sentence has an intimate bearing on other verses and sentences, all of them clarifying and amplifying one another. Consequently, its real meaning can be grasped only if we correlate every one of its statements with what has been stated elsewhere in a different context. A full picture of its ideas can be appreciated by means of cross-references.

Allah warns the prophet, in the context of exposing the followers of previous scriptures for their transgressions, not to withhold anything of what he is commanded to convey, or else it would be as if he did not convey the entirety of the message from beginning to end 

5:67"O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people". 

This holistic approach was considered by the earliest Quran scholars, down to the contemporary ones. This means the Quran and its meaning isnt locked to the common man's comprehension, provided it is effectively pondered upon. 

Al-Tabari for example states that the Quran has 3 kinds of material: that which is only known to God, but irrelevant to hermeneutics, that which only the Prophet could explain, but extremely marginal, and that which any knowledgeable person of Arabic language can explain, practically all of the Quran. Al-Tabari included a chapter even refuting the position of those who claimed that only the Prophet can interpret the Quran. As a side note, the tafsir section in Bukhari includes many interpretations without isnad, and that are not even those of Muhammad, his Companions, or his Followers.

Some Quranic passages are repeated word for word, in the case of prayers or general pillars of faith but in story telling, the repetitions are rarely if ever the same. This is because in the Quran when it comes to reminding of past narratives and anectodes, the objective isnt dry storytelling and genealogies as in most of the Bible where one can easily and quickly lose track of names, places and other details. 

These little details, if omitted wouldn't make humanity miss out on anything in terms of guidance, and in fact confuse the reader and distract his attention to trivial matters. The Quran is not a historical record or dry, impartial document: it is argumentative and impactful to get people to believe and actively reform themselves and their environement. Its powerful statements are in an intellectual, spiritual and emotional language that every culture across time and space can appreciate. 

The Quran's objective isnt story telling, but "message telling" and maximizing its audience's attention to the precept(s) of the story. Muslims will not be asked on the Day of Judgment the details of the people of the cave or how Noah's flood occured, how many generations passed between a person and another, the names in a genealogy or whether they memorized the names of people in the Quran. They will be questioned as to how they responded to the lessons from the different incidents and stories related in the Quran. 

Thus to focus on the message, the Quran injects the passage of a well-known story, whenever the larger context a sura requires it. And when it does so, it only puts the details of that story that are relevant to that specific context. That is why one sees variations in repetitions, but never contradictions. The only exception to that style of narrative is the story of the prophet Joseph/Yusuf which takes the form of a beginning to end narrative in one place, and a highly eloquent, intricate one at that. 

Those unable to apreciate that Quranic style speak of contradictory, or incomplete repetitions. This is because first and foremost they approach the Quranic text with the above Biblical paradigm in mind; the Quran, instead of being read on its own is seen as a garbled version of multiple Judeo-Christian sources. If, however, the text is approached according to its own thematic unities, its lack of historical detail and absence of chronological order become unproblematic. And this is the prevalent approach among western scholarship nowadays. The second common problem for those reading the text occurs when they are unable to connect the different repetitions properly among one another and fail to grasp the manner in which each repetition fits in the context of a particular sura. This a side note isnt circular reasoning as it doesnt presume the notion of textual coherence. It is textual coherence that objectively establishes itself, through consistent repetitions, recurrence of similar themes and notions in different contexts. These repetitions always retain a core meaning, and are always thematically correlated with similar passages in other suras, like conversations and dialogues between the suras.

The brilliant pakistani scholar Islahi called the recurrence of themes in several suras "complementarity".

A topic which appears at a place reappears in another background and context where the initially hidden meaning becomes quite apparent because the meaning is suited to be developped in that particular context. Teachings, precepts, stories or anecdotes are mentioned in various styles and with different aspects in different contexts and in numerous backgrounds so that if at one place a reader is not fully able to understand something, he can grasp it fully at another place, and if at one place an argument is not fully appreciated, he can comprehend it in the background of a different context. If an element within a story is only meaningful in a specific context, and that in the course of revelation, that specific context does not reappear in a manner so as to necessitate the repetition of that element from within the story, then the element or detail is omitted. 

Sometimes an incident is repeated tersely or partly in order to remind the audience and reader of the overall message that is relevant to a particular context, without recalling it of every precise details. Sometimes an incident is repeated tersely or partly in order to remind the audience and/or reader of the overall message that is relevant to a particular context, without recalling it of every precise details. 

Sometimes a story is repeated by omitting some previously mentionned details in order to reveal some new elements, this way keeping the story brief and to the point, without communicating too much information at once. When it relates the same event at different places it sometimes quotes different dialogues between different protagonists hence the variation in wordings. As also said, this variation is also due to the importance of giving different angles to the same dialogue or incident that is relevant to the context within the sura. Sometimes the characters might also repeat themselves slightly differently from amazement or in the case of messengers quoted with variations it is because during their career they repeated themselves obviously differently at different times.

The Quran, using these literary devices and many others, explains itself

7:58"As such we manage the signs to people who are grateful"  

54:22"And certainly We have made the Quran easy for remembrance, but is there anyone who will mind?".

Another purpose of this style being to strengthen the Prophet in the face of various forms of denial and obstinacy from his opponents at different times. The form of the story would echo a situation similar to that which the Prophet was facing.

Some truths are repeated to emphasize their importance and fix them in the minds of the believers. Things such as the oneness of God, repeated more than 10 times in certain pages, or the unavoidable day of resurrection etc. These are things that even if repeated a million times, it still would not be a waste of time or words. The Quran constantly draws attention to those matters both explicitly or allusively because they are realities like the air we breath, which we always need and that require renewal, this way their reiterations becomes a Quranic grace.

What is remarkable from a linguistic perspective is that the Quran was uttered publicly, live and as a speech, which prevents any type of editing and yet it forms one incredibly well knit whole, from verse to verse, paragraph to pararaph, sura to sura. If we take the example of sura baqara, the longest of all and revealed over the course of 10 years while other suras were being simultaneously revealed, it is structured in an interconnected manner allowing it to be thematically structured in many different ways. 

This is a vast field of Quranic studies, with many sub-branches, studied by both Muslims and non-Muslim scholars; the interconnection between suras, passages, verses, words and even letters and how the whole thing remarkably fits together. The idea of the Quran being a dull, boring or incomprehensible repetitive book is a discredited proposition, not only by the scholars of Islam all throughout their exegetical works spanning centuries, but also more recently by non-Muslims who have been doing, and keep on doing, a remarkable job at unveiling the intricate connections of the text, from verse to another, paragraph to paragraph and sura to sura. See Norman Brown's work on sura 18 for instance. That weak assertion is only still circulating among uneducated critics of Islam, and missionaries. For most of modern Islamicists, the Quran has to be approached as a text on its own, with its own internal coherence to be properly understood. So long as explanations to its passages are sought from the perspective of its alleged, elusive and countless proposed sources, the Quran will remain an obscure book for those approaching it.

Here is just one of the thematical structuring of sura Baqara, in a symetrical construction called ring structure;

- 1st subject from v1-20 faith vs unbelief/Last subject v285-6 dua about belief-hypocrisy-disbelief.

- 2nd subject from v21-39 God's creation and knowledge/2nd subject from down God's creation and knowledge v254-284

- 3rd topic v40-103 the Israelites receive the law/3rd subject from down from down about the laws given to Muslims v178-253

- 4th subject Ibrahim faces tests v104-141/4th one from down Ibrahim's nation, the Ishmaelites are tested v153-177

- middle section culminates with the new direction of prayer, the Kaaba symbolizing that new nation and its new law

And all this symetrical ring structure leads to the statement of the Muslims having been made the ummatan wasata/balanced nation, a statement located in the center of a sura composed of 286 verses, at exactly verse 143. 

Every single Quranic sura on its own forms, like baqara, a cohesive argument.

Also, because many of its passages can be read through the lens of another passage from within the sura, other analysts have approached its structuring in a pericope. For example, the story of Adam in sura Baqara pericopes throughout the sura. The Israelites were told to enter a town and enjoy its sustenance v58 similarily to the instructions previously given to Adam and his spouse upon entering the garden v35. But just as Adam and his spouse werent content with what they were given, the Israelites began grumbling for the sustenance they had in captivity v61. And just as Adam and his spouse found their Lord forgiving once they repented, some of the Israelites were eventually forgiven for their worshipping the calf and desisting prior to Moses' return v54.

Islam critiqued explores an old incident; Allah confronts Iblis?

In answer to the video "Corruption: Third Response and "Misquoting Allah"

As said above, the repetitions in the Quran do not contradict one another, but instead complement and elaborate on different facets that are relevant to the direct context in which the story is recounted. If we merge the different accounts of Iblis for example, we get a complete picture of what occured. As he was about to leave, in his hatred for the human race that caused his loss of glory, he requested a time of respite until the day of resurrection to show God that He was mistaken in honoring this new creation, and the request was granted

7:14-15,38:79-81,15:36-8,17:62"Tell me, is this he whom Thou hast honored above me? If Thou shouldst respite me to the day of resurrection, I will most certainly cause his progeny to perish except a few".

Seeing that his demand was accepted, Iblis now laid out his detailed plan. He will lie in wait on the straight path, ensnaring those upon it from every possible angle, making their evil deeds alluring to them, all of them except God's purified servants 7:16-17,15:39-40,38:82-3. When he had finished stating his intentions, God, Who had previously demonstrated mankind's potential and Who created it with the inner ability to rise spiritualy, accepted, stating that his authority will be limited to those who follow him of the deviators, not His servants, and that hell will be his abode and that of those who follow him while those that remain God-conscious will enter the secure and pleasurable dwelling place for eternity 38:84-5,15:41-8.

The matter was now closed, God definately marked Iblis as one of lowly character and ordered him out once more and violently, augmenting the tone of His address while summing up the area of authority granted to him, the consequences for those he might succesfully deceive, and restricted means at his disposal for doing so

7:18"Get out of her, despised, driven away; whoever of them will follow you, I will certainly fill hell with you all"  

17:63-5"And beguile whomsoever of them you can with your voice, and collect against them your forces riding and on foot, and share with them in wealth and children, and hold out promises to them; and the Shaitan makes not promises to them but to deceive. Surely (as for) My servants, you have no authority over them; and your Lord is sufficient as a Protector".

On the day of Judgement, Iblis will recognize exactly that, he had no autority other than within the area granted to him by God, ie whispering, as a means of attracting into him the deviators

14:22"Surely Allah promised you the promise of truth, and I gave you promises, then failed to keep them to you, and I had no authority over you, except that I called you and you obeyed me, therefore do not blame me but blame yourselves: I cannot be your aider (now) nor can you be my aiders; surely I disbelieved in your associating me with Allah before; surely it is the unjust that shall have the painful punishment."

CIRA international find odditiy; why Quran speaks of one Gospel?

In answer to the video "Defending the Bible, Part 5 - Using the Quran: Between the time of Christ & before Muhammad"

Injil, usually render Gospel, is what is called in Arabic Taarib. This is a phenomenon common to all languages, when a foreign word is converted and adopted, without necessarily retaining the original meaning. Injil is thus the Arabized form of the Syro-Aramaeic ewwangelion which is itself borrowed from the Greek evangelion/good news. Koin Greek was the lingua franca around Jesus' time and thus many words crossed from it, into local languages including Syriac, Aramaic, Hebrew. Although, like his contemporaries Jesus could certainly speak the Koine Greek, his language according to scholarship was one of the aforementioned 3.

The Quran only recognizes one among several -canonical or not- gospels as it speaks of "Injil" in the singular. It is described as a revelation stamped into Jesus's heart since his infancy 3:3,48,19:30 a source of guidance, admonition, light and wisdom 3:48,5:44,46 verifying the Torah that precedes it 3:50,5:46 while abolishing to the Jews the self imposed restrictions of their man-made soulless traditions, as well as giving glad tidings of a prophet to come after Jesus 61:6.

Jesus either put himself into writing or asked his followers to eventually write down what was revealed to him since infancy of wisdom, teachings, prophecies, warnings and admonitions 7:157. This writing process was most probably done in his lifetime. As stated earlier, Koine Greek was the language of education. The Septuagint Greek translation of the Torah was more popular among Jews than the Hebrew text. It would have taken someone highly literate in Greek to write down Jesus' teachings. Jesus himself preached his revelation in Aramaic and/or Hebrew. These teachings were translated into Greek and written, as confirmed in standard scholarship. This original compilation was named ewangelion/Injil. The process was done under Jesus' watch as the Quran says he was given and taught this singular Injil. Greek however wasn't Jesus' language so it was necessary to ensure he would not overlook a mistake in the translation process. Hence Allah's repeated statements that He will teach Jesus the Injil. Interestingly, when Jesus speaks as an infant about the revelation he was inspired with, he called it scripture 19:30. This is because the Greek Injil was still not compiled. Jesus therefore was taught the scripture and its wisdom, which he preached in the language of his people, as well as taught the Torah, and the Injil compiled in Greek 

3:48"And He will teach him the Book, and [the] wisdom, and the Taurat, and the Injeel".

The previous Israelite prophets followed the same pattern of committing the revelation to writing, including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel or Habakkuk, Iddo and others 2Chr11:2,12:5,15,13:22. Solomon had his wise utterings, that were either put into writing in his lifetime or later, compiled from scattered supports under the reign of Hezekiah Prov25:1.

It thus certainly is an established trend within the line of the prophets of Israel, of which Jesus fully adhered to, to commit to writing, whether themselves or by others, in their lifetime or later, the revelation bestowed upon them. That reality hasnt escaped the rabbinical commentaries, see for example Rashi on Iddo.

While part of Jesus' scripture, or what his first followers remembered and compiled, made it in its uncorrupted form into the current Greek compilation of writings called in English the "New Testament", another part did not make it. This could have either been due to negligence, forgetfulness, or some was discarded and worse yet obscured and tampered with as it did not fit the message, ideas and bias of the unknown Greek writers and later compilers and editors

5:14-15"..those who say, We are Christians, We made a covenant, but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of..".  

That corruption occurred very early on following Jesus' departure, with a big part of his close disciples failing the test of remaining steadfast on the path prescribed by a prophet, similarly to what happened to Moses' 40 days absence. Part of that inner circle, together with the new converts of the pagan Roman world, retrospectively painted their own interpretations and biases into Jesus' original teachings which could have been available to them in written and/or oral form. Textual criticism has generally accepted the existence of texts predating the current gospels and which inspired the anonymous evangelists

"In the interval between the death of Jesus (c. 30 CE) and the composition of the first gospel (Mark, around 70 CE), the sayings of Jesus, like those of other holy men and philosophers, were remembered, rendered into Greek retold, revised and recast in such common forms as chreiai (also termed aphorism, pronouncement stories, and apophthegmata,), parables, logia (sayings), apokalypseis (revelations), prophecies, macarisms and woes and gnomai (maxims).  A similar process took place with narratives about Jesus, including stories of controversy with his contemporaries (now told in the light of the early church’s own contentious encounters with its neighbors) and accounts of miracle working." (Margaret M. Mitchell – Professor Birmingham).

The current NT is in great majority a compilation of writings about Jesus, not of Jesus, and while containing some elements of what was revealed to him, the Injil, is in great majority a combination of texts compiled during great political and religious turmoil, reflecting the bias of its writers. The victorious sect, among many other early conflicting christian sects, that thus became "orthodoxy" did not let any competing texts it could lay hands on to survive, either by physically destroying it or discrediting it and leaving it to disappear with time. During this gradual process, what was viewed as authoritative was separated from a much larger body of early Christian literature.

This period was most important in shaping and spreading official Christian thought, yet almost nothing is known as to how, when, and by whom this process was brought about. The result is that although early Christianity was composed of various sects in Paul's days, we have not a single text from them. Instead, the vast bulk of surviving material is solely what was approved by the victorious "orthodoxy" who did not win because of being more truthful or closer to Jesus' teachings, but their more effective convincing capacity especially among the gentile elite.

Thus in the earliest centuries after Jesus’ death it was possible for any Christian group to produce its own gospel, which it deemed represented a more accurate understanding of Jesus and his life.

That is why the Quran refers to the Book in the hands of its Christian addressees as Injil in the singular; it only recognizes whatever remains from Jesus' revelation among other multiple canonized scriptures in Christian hands, as true. And for Christians to know which part of this compilation of books in their hands is the pristine truth, they have to discard any aspect of it that disagrees with what the Quran teaches concerning Jesus.

The Quran similarly alludes to the suhuf/pages of Abraham and to some of the divine verities they contain and share with both the Quran and the Torah 53:36-38,87:18-19. It is also interesting to note that rabbinical tradition attributes the authorship of the book of Psalms to 9 different others besides David, including Adam (Although not a prophet in Judaism), Malchizedek and Abraham. For the guidance of all mankind, God sent down revelation to chosen individuals who put into writing -not necessarily in the form of a book- the teachings, wisdom and principles revealed to them. Some of these writings are explicitly mentioned in the Quran, like the aforementioned Suhuf/pages of Nuh and Ibrahim, or the Torah as well as the writings of Moses. The Torah is a revelation 5:44 but is not explicitly named in the Quran as given to Moses. This is because the Torah is in reality a compilation of writings and traditions, some revealed to Moses, some to other prophets. The writing given to Moses is distinctively referred to as a set of tablets, in which the necessary religious instructions were inscribed

 7:145"And We ordained for him in the tablets admonition of every kind and clear explanation of all things; so take hold of them with firmness and enjoin your people to take hold of what is best thereof".

This is well established in modern academia that Moses could not have authored the totality of the 5 books that currently constitute the Torah. The Quran describes the Torah as a scripture containing guidance and spiritual light, as well as laws for the prophets of Israel to judge by 5:43-44. Moses or someone after him, a prophet or pious individual, compiled both the revelation to Moses and the revelations that preceded him, as the Torah. There is indication that what the Quran refers to as Torah/Tawrat excludes the writings and traditions of the prophets that came after Moses. The Torah came after Abraham and Jacob 3:65,93 and the prophets of Israel were bound by it as stated earlier. The only scripture that the Quran mentions after these prophets, is the Injil given to Jesus 5:46.

The Quran further speaks of the Zabur (psalms, az‑Zabur from the root al‑mazbur means 'the written') of David, the aforementioned Injil of Jesus, and the Quran of Muhammad. Not all revealed books are listed in the Quran just as it makes it clear that there are many more prophets than those it chose to highlight. The Quran does explain that the writings of the Muslims and the people of the book are portions of the complete book that is with Allah.

CIRA international find Quran prophecy; destruction of Jesus' rejecters?

In answer to the video "Defending the Bible, Part 5 - Using the Quran: Between the time of Christ & before Muhammad"

Physical destruction and abasement came on Jesus' rejecters soon after his departure. In the years 69-73, the Temple of Jerusalem was razed to the ground as Jesus predicted in Matt23,24,Mk13,Lk23 (Quran 17:7,3:56), their priesthood was destroyed, the Israelites were slaughtered in large numbers women and children included, by the Romans.

Many more were enslaved and sold in the markets, as Jesus prophesied lk21:24, deported throughout the Roman empire and colonies for hard labor. Some were boarded on prison ships and sent to Corinth for the digging of an isthmus. Soonafter in the years 114-135 they suffered further destruction and enslavement by the tens of thousands, impovrishment and scattering throughout the earth.

The greatest abasement was that for the next 1900 years they would have no authority in this land that was divinely granted to them. Following Jesus, Judea would be wrecked and destroyed several times by pagan forces, in accordance with Jesus' prophecy that not a stone would be left standing on another, for the Israelites' rejection of him Luke21.

The predictions as reported in the NT however seem to be retrospectively written. The Temple was destroyed in 70CE. The Gospels were written after that time. If the Prophecy of the Temple's destruction was made by Jesus in the 30s as is suggested in the Gospels, then one needs to explain why earlier NT books seem uninformed of it. We're not talking about the tearing down of a place of worship in some remote location, but of Jerusalem's Temple, known throughout the empire and beyond, a place of particular significance to the authors' own religion. Yet the book of Hebrews, written in the 60s describes it as a reality which is in competition with the nascent Jesus sect because it epitomises rabbinic Judaism.

Previous prophecies, in their own books warned them that should they turn away from the commands of God, as was the case with their rejection of Jesus, God Himself will uproot them from the land they were settled in. They were not settled in it to enjoy it as an unrestricted holiday resort but to assert therein true faith and righteousness.

Failure to do so would instead turn their sacred shrine into an object of ridicule among the nations 2Chronicles7:19-22. Eusebius the early church father notes that

"stones from the Temple itself, and from its ancient sanctuary and holy place, were used for the building of idol temples, and of theatres for the populace".

The Romans, led by Hadrian sought to build upon its ruins their new city "Aelia Capitolina". To achieve that vast project, the erasure of the previous city of the Jews had to be complete. In the process, their oppression was so intense, their expulsion so effective following their repeated rebellions and the 3 years of vicious warfare led by their messiah Simon bar Kochba, that by the 4th century the exact location of the temple edifice was beyond recall

"Rabbi Yermiah, son of Babylonia came to the Land of Israel and could not find the site of the Temple" (Tractate Shevuot 1 4b).

If 4th century Christian historian Eusebius is to be believed, the new city that Emperor Hadrian built upon the ruins of Jerusalem was colonized by a

"new race of Gentiles"

after

"a total destruction of its ancient inhabitants".

The whole province of Judea was even renamed Philisti as a further humiliation, after the ancient inhabitants of the land and bitterest enemies of the Israelites, the Philistines.

The new laws forbid Jews to live in the city or anywhere between Jerusalem and Hebron. Capital punishment faced any Jew who so much as stepped foot in the city. The harshness went so far as imposing penalties on any Jews caught laying eyes on the city on their "day of mourning". A day of mourning is one where they would remember the calamities that befell them. In Josephus' words

"Jerusalem ..was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited".

The scarcity of achaeological evidences for the biblical stories attests to this.

As 4th century churchman Jerome tells us, a statue of Hadrian, seated on horseback, was erected on the levelled platform of Jerusalem's Temple Mount after the crushing of the bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD. The Roman Emperor despised the Jews for their insularity and arrogant claims for a single concept of the divine. Just as Hadrian had erected a Temple to Zeus on the top of Mt Gerizim close to which the Samaritan Temple stood, it isnt inconceivable that he had erected a similar temple in Jerusalem, more precisely a temple dedicated to Jupiter, next to his imperial statue, as some scholars suggest.

It was not until the Christianization of the Roman empire late in the 4th century that these pagan "abominations" were eventually torn down. Stones from the ruined sanctuary were looted for use in later Christian structures. On the neglected esplanade the Byzantine emperor Justinian built a church to Mary Mother of God but little else.

When Jerusalem became Christianity's holy city, the Christian authorities would allow entry to some exiled Jews once a year to mourn the destruction of their Temple. One cannot but notice the cynicism of the Christians who viewed in the desecrated ruins, the triumph of their religion, the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy and thus satisfactorily left it as it is. In the Quran, besides them being subdued up to this day to the Christians, God warns them of further chastisement 17:8 whenever they return or persist in their wrong ways. Their known long and painful history in Christian lands bears testimony to this. The Quran further condemned them to have their security fully in the hands of others

3:112"Abasement is made to cleave to them wherever they are found, except under a covenant with Allah and a covenant with men".

It isnt God Himself who would repel their numerous enemies and Who would give them the upper hand on more powerful foes as he did in the times of Moses. Such security could either come from some Muslim states (of the past and today) in the name of Allah or from some non-Muslim states for other reasons. This is because

3:112"they have become deserving of wrath from Allah, and humiliation is made to cleave to them; this is because they disbelieved in the communications of Allah and slew the prophets unjustly; this is because they disobeyed and exceeded the limits".

Here the Quran plays on the concept of shade, the comfort provided by the pillars of clouds during their lengthy exodus, telling them they are now under the shadow of humiliation and oppression instead of the shadow of peace, comfort, protection, sustenance. 

In its usual pattern of drawing a line and not generalizing, the Noble Quran continues

3:113"They are not all alike; of the followers of the Book there is an upright party.."

Their own books speak of their cursed state, made to hang upon them, and destined to expire only at what they call "the end of days", which in their terminology refers to the Messianic era of bliss and utopia

Zech8:13"And it shall come to pass that [just] as you were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so will I save you-and you shall be a blessing. Fear not; may your hands be strengthened".

By the year 638, Muslim troops led by the Caliph Umar entered Jerusalem and as they cleared the garbage on the Temple mount and uncovered scattered jumble of architectural elements, they identified the ruins as those of Solomon's Temple, instead of Hadrian's, and decided to clear an area of around 35 acres. It was covered in garbage and debris of all sorts that were cynically left to be accumulated by the Christians as a reminder of Jesus' vindication, then a small prayer house was built on the site. The whole area of the mount that was cleared is what is known today as Masjid Al-Aqsa, sometimes also referred to as Haram Al-Sharif.

Umar also uncovered what is suspected to be the Foundation Stone; the Rock from where it is speculated the prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven on the Night Journey 17:1, and which is believed by the Jews to be the first part of the Earth to come into existence and from where Adam, Cain, Abel, and Noah offered sacrifices to God. Umar, contrary to the islamophobic rant, did not steal temple mount, he restored this area that was abandoned by both Jews and Christians, to its purpose, dignifying and honoring it.

It would be interesting to mention here the passage of Genesis 49. The writer promises that rulership over Israel will stay in the house of Judah and that the law will remain studied and kept. Historically neither were fulfilled. Then it mentions shiloh and how nations will gather around that figure, followed by metaphors of abundance. This isnt the concept of an end times figure that shall reestablish Jewish glory and law. As assumed earlier by the author, both are supposed to remain uninterrupted, up to the point of the arrival of "shiloh". Christians claim Jesus is this shiloh.

But assuming Jesus is traced to Judah, despite it being a violation of Jewish law due to him not having a biological father, how can he be the shiloh when it says the scepter shall not depart from Judah UNTIL shiloh comes? It implies that kingship rights will be removed from Judah at some future point and then given to shiloh (which etymologically means "the one to whom it belongs"). For Jesus to be shiloh in that sentence, he needs to be from other than Judah, which doesnt fit the Christian position. Further, neither shiloh nor Jesus appeared when Jewish self-government was over with the capture of the last king from the tribe of Judah, Zedekiah, in about 586 B.C.E. And even when Jesus did appear, he did not do so as a ruler over the Jews. To preserve the integrity of their text, the rabbis are now forced to reinterpret the promise and project it to the long haul, as Christians do with Jesus' second coming as ruler. To the rabbis, "the scepter not departing from Judah" became an allusion to right of governance instead of actual rulership and "the one to whom it belongs" (shiloh) a future ruler who shall establish it. Yet this still doesn't solve the problem of the removal of Judah when shiloh appears. The solution for them is elsewhere. Up to the arrival of the Ishmaelite prophet and the establishment of the Muslim nation as the new torch bearers of the truth to the world, the Jews could have potentially returned to their former glory, provided they repented and returned to the straight path; abiding by their covenant and accepting the last messenger sent to them, Jesus. When shiloh "the one to whom it belongs" appeared, that door was shut and will remain so until the day of resurrection 

Ps132:12"If your sons keep My covenant, and this, My testimony, which I shall teach them, also their sons will sit on your throne forever".

The current state of Israel is illegitimate, ethically, legally, let alone scripturally. That is why it is a deeply fractured, majoritarly secular society and that despite the apparent independence, is actually living under humiliating subjugation to other nations on whose support its survival depends, as the Quran even tells them (as referenced earlier).

The Jews, until now and as corroborated by their rabbis and their books, have still not been given the divine authority to rebuild their destroyed temple on its previous location, in order to re-dedicate it to their religious rituals. Per the Torah it is God that must give them the right to do so, when a Jewish king and prophet is among them, to indicate the now lost original dimensions, the location of the altar, let alone get the Jews out of several insurmountable ritualistic difficulties such as sacrificing a red heifer, complicated purity requirements, identifying the priests, the specificities of their clothings. Jews cannot just decide to go and build the temple arbitrarily.

So they're waiting, and will keep on waiting, for their promised messiah to come and do the job. In the meantime, another nation has been raised in their stead as the torch bearers of the truth among the nations, with its own divinely restored Temple and its altar.

Some 50 years later, the Caliph Abdul Malik ibn Marwan constructed within this area of masjid al aqsa, the Dome of the Rock (with the golden roof) or Masjid As-Sakhrah, covering the Foundation Stone much to the Jews' dismay who find it difficult to believe that non-Jews could effectively build a place of worship on the spot of the "Holy of Holies". So they attempt to find other possible locations to the historic foundation stone (Even haShetiya).

CIRA international find approval; Quran confirms Christian missionary power?

In answer to the video "Defending the Bible, Part 5 - Using the Quran: Between the time of Christ & before Muhammad"

After Jesus' salvation from his enemies, the Quran outlined the punishment to his rejectors, in line with the sunna of Allah on the destruction of the rejectors of His messengers sent with clear signs. A similar hypothetical scenario is given in 43:41 where the prophet is told that should he be taken away or even eventually martyred as happened to previous prophets 36:26-32 the divine law of retribution against a rejecting nation will still be applied, however Allah has desired otherwise with the prophet Muhammad

43:42"We will certainly show you that which We have promised them; for surely We are the possessors of full power over them".

Among the punishments the Israelites had to face in this very world 3:56, they were subdued to the followers of Jesus until the Day of Resurrection

61:14,3:55"and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection".

Allah is addressing Jesus and is speaking of the dominion of those who follow him over his enemies. It isnt speaking in terms of proselytising success, as is alluded to in Acts with Jesus posthumously telling his missionaries they will have the power to disseminate Christianity in all corners of the world. The early gentile converts from around the region had no enmity towards Jesus nor his followers. The verse is speaking in terms of dominion of one group above another, through subduing them, not assimilation

"So a party of the children of Israel believed and another party disbelieved; then We aided those who believed against their enemy, and they became uppermost".

This dominance is granted to all those who claim to be his followers, whether they are from those who call themselves Christians, or from those ascribing to the beliefs of the earlier sects that believed in Jesus. The common denominator between all of them being, believing in Jesus and in Allah. Besides prevailing in a worldly sense, the followers of Jesus have also been granted spiritual victory. His teachings, despite the very few original adherents to them, regardless of the amount of falsehood that later were grafted unto them, were successfully disseminated, against the will of Jesus' enemies, whether contemporaries to him or those that still hate him today.

This favor of God is an obvious reality of our times. The Israelites are condemned to the humiliating reality of being entirely dependant on Christian whims for their survival, reluctantly accepting "bribe" money and deceitful "love" from the followers of the one they bitterly rejected. All this for the sake of maintaining a state that is the shadow of what was once God's conditional favor upon them.

Today, the evangelical zionist movement that finds its inspiration in Paul deceptive missionary methods, masks its real intentions towards the Jewish people by corrupting their audience with money. Probably no nation needs this money more than Israel for its survival, exactly as God prophecised when He stated in the Quran that the Israelites, those who were Jesus' enemies, will be under the Christians' dominion until the Resurrection. This bribe money serves the purpose of gathering Jews from all over the world so that a massive slaughter begins.

Christian eschatology reveals the anti semitism of its gentile Greek writers to the fullest. Towards the end of days, 2/3 of Israel will be destroyed and damned for rejecting the man/god of the trinity. Their Armageddon theology is detailed in the book of Revelation -a Book not even considered God inspired until very late in Church history-.

Those damned Jews, the Jews of the "flesh", labelled as such because of lacking spirituality and rejecting Jesus Rom2:28-9, those sons of Satan Jn8:44, worshipping in their satanic synagogues Rev2:9 will be made to bow down at the feet of the true Jews, meaning the Christians Rev3:9. This way Jesus’ beloved church is vindicated. After that humiliation they will be sent for eternal damnation.

It is these kinds of satanic association that helped produce a portrait for faithful Christians throughout the centuries of the “evil” Jew representing satan on earth. By persecuting those satanic Jews, the church and its faithful followers were in a way hastening the day when Jesus would fulfill his promise to

“make them [the synagogue of Satan] come and bow down at your feet”.

What is ironic is that the contrary is depicted in the HB, with the non-Jews, including Christians, coming at the Jews' feet. Although the messianic prophecies in the HB agree that there will be mass slaughter of those that do not believe in the Jewish God, this war shall occur prior to the messiah's arrival and universal recognition Isa59:19-20. None will be required to "believe" in the Jewish messiah because his universal rule will be an undeniable fact.

An utopic era will be ushered, where only one truth reigns supreme, that of the Hebrew Bible. Every other belief system will be abolished and erased, its people destroyed, by natural calamity or others means like God's jealous and furious fire of destruction. God is often likened in the HB as a smith selecting through fire the trash from the precious metal, concretely resulting in "purifying" the people's hearts and lips. Once purified, all those surviving non-Jews will prostrate to the One true God

Zeph3:8-9,Zech14:9-17"And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one". 

Some modern apologists have attempted to negate that idea of universal forceful conversion using Micah4:5. It is ironic that this same verse is used in rabbinic commentaries to prove the opposite. The context itself speaks of the streaming of nations into Jerusalem to learn Judaism, God's judgement of nations afar, in a time where

"all peoples shall go, each one in the name of his god, but we will go in the name of the Lord, our God, forever and ever".

The non-Jews "going" to their false gods implies "going for destruction" in contrast to the Jews who will go on "forever". This will usher a time not only of religious monopoly but of forcible, physical subjugation of all non-Jewish peoples, made to crawl like abject creatures to the Jews' feet, in fear of

Micah7:17"our God",

transferring in addition all their riches to their new masters

Isa66:12"like a flooding stream",

or be destroyed

Zech14,Isa45:22"Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other"  

Isa49:23"And kings shall be your nursing fathers and their princesses your wet nurses; they shall prostrate themselves to you with their face on the ground, and they shall lick the dust of your feet, and you shall know that I am the Lord, for those who wait for Me shall not be ashamed"  

Isa60:"..And foreigners shall build your walls, and their kings shall serve you..For the nation and the kingdom that shall not serve you shall perish, and the nations shall be destroyed...And the children of your oppressors shall go to you bent over, and those who despised you shall prostrate themselves at the soles of your feet..".

The end of the book of Isaiah is replete with such references of "glad-tidings" to the Jews towards the end of times, the messianic era, a time where

Isa66:23"all flesh shall come to prostrate themselves before Me"

and where the remaining lucky survivors will see all around them

"the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh".

This represents, according to Zech13:8-9 roughly 2/3 of the world population, exterminated, with 1/3 remaining for having converted to Judaism. Following their subjugation and destruction, the wicked will be sentenced to gehinnom (see Rashi on Ps6:11).

But God's favoring of the current Christians above the disbelieving Jews does not mean they are absolved of their deviations in faith. It is for this reason that the very next verse addresses those same favored Christians, telling them

3:57"And as to those who believe and do good deeds, He will pay them fully their rewards; and Allah does not love the unjust".

It firstly clarifies that correct belief, joined with good deeds, are the only means for salvation in the hereafter. It separates between

"those who follow you"

and

"those who believe and do good deeds",

emphasizing that among Jesus' followers from his contemporaries to present-day christians, Allah will pay fully their reward only to those of them who hold the correct belief and do good deeds. The unusual ending of this type of verse with

"Allah does not love the unjust"

is clearly directed at those followers of Jesus who strayed from the correct belief of their ancestors

5:77"O followers of the Book, be not unduly immoderate in your religion, and do not follow the low desires of people who went astray before and led many astray and went astray from the right path".

Verses with promises of mercy and paradise usually end with Divine Names of mercy and forgiveness, or on praises of those addressed in the verse but in this case it ends with a stern warning to the followers of Jesus who have deviated, they are being unjust to their own souls.