Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 1" (1)

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 1"(1)

Allah is in a constant state of praise by the angels and all that is in the heavens and earth, animate or inanimate, conscious of their state of worship or not, even though we do not perceive it 2:58,13:13-15,16:48-50,17:44,22:18,24:41,45:37,55:6,29,62:1,64:1. 

That universal glorification of God spoken of in the Quran had reached particular beauty in the times of the prophet David whom most of creation joined in his praise of God 21:79,34:10,38:17-9, who was known according to Jewish scriptures and oral tradition for his talent for music and divinely inspired poetry very early on 1Sam16:16-23. David is often quoted refering to that universal and unfathomable glorification of God in the Hebrew Bible in 

Psalms19,148,69:35"Heaven and earth will praise Him, the seas and everything that moves therein". 

Other passages allude to this glorification too, including Job38:7.

In the Quran, whenever attention is directed to a natural phenomenon, it is to propound a higher spiritual implication. Lightning has always and will always inspire people with both fear and hope. Fear because it sometimes causes death and destruction, hope because it also heralds relieving rain. The heavy clouds that most often come with lightning are similarly perceived both ways; they might bring the much needed rain or cause disasters, floods and death 

13:12-13"He it is who shows you the lightning causing fear and hope, and brings up the heavy cloud. And the thunder declares His glory with His praise, and the angels too for awe of Him. And He sends the thunderbolts, striking with them whom He pleases". 

Now of course, anyone hearing or reading these passages already knows these physical realities but what the Quran is doing, as it always does, is drawing a parallel between observable reality and the spiritual realm. Dark clouds and thunder are a metaphor for the hardships one might have to pass through in this life as a result of pursuing the right course. As he tries overcoming these hardships with God-consciousness, the believer is instilled with hope for Allah's pleasure, and fear of His just retribution. The believer never feels complacent and self-righteous in the face of divine perfection. But the one shallow in faith has little hope during these difficulties, he will be debilitated by the fear of having to go through them 

2:19-20"like abundant rain from the cloud in which is utter darkness and thunder and lightning; they put their fingers in their ears because of the thunder peal, for fear of death...the lightning almost takes away their sight. Whenever it shines on them they walk in it, and when it darkens they stand still". 

The believer sees a metaphor of the higher realities in all aspects of nature, is constantly reminded and increased in God-consciousness the more he looks around and ponders 

2:115"so whichever way you turn, there is the Face of Allah".

The hadith, as a side note, in which ibn Abbas quotes the prophet as saying that thunder 

"is one of Allah's angels in charge of the clouds" 

has been criticized by the scholars on several counts, including that its chain does not reach the prophet. Assuming it is authentic, it still does not conflict with science. Believers in God accept that every aspect of existence is maintained by Allah, whether its is the rain that falls, cloud that moves or wind that blows.

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 2"

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 2"

From the earth, the observable cosmic occurences all float in their own orbit 21:33. 

In reference to the night, the day, the sun and the moon, it says that Kullun/all (for more than two) yasbahun/swim in their own separate paths. The word falak means here a circular motion. Its indefinite form indicates a plurality, not a specific, or unique, circular path. The Quran in this instance, omits the relation of each phenomenon and celestial object to oneanother. IT does not say what orbits what. This is again meant so as to not confirm nor negate the scientific notions of peoples of all times. Its object being to concentrate the reader on the spiritual portent of the statement and leaving open to interpretation the side issues. 

Read with our current knowledge, nothing negates that the path of the night and the day is due to the movement of the earth, that the sun's path is its orbit around the galaxy and that the path of the moon is around both the earth and the sun 

21:33"And He it is Who created the night and the day and the Sun and the Moon. All swim/float in their orbit". 

The earth is figuratively called a cradle in 20:53, again a very appropriate image and comparison; just as the movement of the cradle is meant at creating comfort to the infant, so is the motion of the earth causing it to be a comfortable receptacle for life. That subtle and eloquent use of words creates an understanding adapted to people of all times in a manner that keeps the focus on the spiritual message. Ancient people had no means by which to observe the earth's movements so it would have been counter productive from an argumentative standpoint for the Quran to refer bluntly to a physical reality impossible for the audience to verify. That is why the matter of the whether the earth is in motion or stationary isnt explicit, although there are hints as mentioned earlier. Elsewhere the Quran states about Allah, that He is the One in Whose entire power is the accessibility and manageability (dhalul) of the Earth's resources, who made it provide for us and be hospitable for human life. Everything we see around us cannot be an accident 67:15-16. The word dhalul was used by the Arabs to describe an animal that is submitted to the rider, it does not violently shake and throw him away. Similarly the earth, although apparently motionless is moving, allowing humanity to ride upon it smoothly. The imagery at play is beautiful and full of spiritual implications, including gratefulness to the Creator Who has submitted part of creation so as to allow life to flourish.

When the Quran speaks of the perceived movements of the sun and moon in the sky 14:33 it again stops short from saying which body is orbiting which one. This tacit silence allows that in the sun's case, the perceived movement is due to the Earth's rotation around itself and that in the moon's case, the perceived movement is due to the moon's orbit around the Earth. 

When the Quran refers to the cosmic bodies moving on to their appointed term/ajalin musamma 13:2,31:29,35:13,39:5 it is referring -as is clear from the contexts- to the Day of Resurrection where all the universe will be destroyed and created anew 

"and He made the sun and the moon subservient (to you); each one pursues its course to an appointed time/ajalin musamma; He regulates the affair, making clear the signs that you may be certain of meeting your Lord". 

Ajalin musamma refers to the appointed end of a thing 6:2,40:67. In 36:38 it speaks of the sun "running", which is a perfect description of the sun's movement across the galaxy in case one looks at the verse "scientifically". To the ancients hearing the verse, they would equally understand that the word depicting the motion of the sun denotes rapid movement, contrary to what is perceived from observation. So it cannot be speaking of sunrise and sunset, which certainly arent rapid motions. The sun is "running" to its place of rest, its end point. And the end of its rapid course will be, as with allthings, the day of resurrection. The variant reading attributed to both ibn Abbas and ibn Masud in which they recited 36:38 LAmustaqarrin/no resting place, instead of LImustaqarrin/to its resting place is inauthentic.

Further In 37:5,70:40 the Quran speaks of the mashaariq/places of sunrise (plural), and maghaarib/places of sunset (plural). It also speaks of the maghribayn/mashriqayn, the two places of sunset/two places of sunrise 43:38,55:17 obviously refering to the fact that when the sun sets on one hemisphere, it rises on the other, hence hinting to the roundness of the Earth. 

Another interesting fact is that the Quran speaks of the darkening of the stars, sun and the moon, on a single day, the Day of Resurrection 81:1-2,75:8,77:8. Besides happening on the same day, the Quran says it will come unexpectedly 7:187. The stars, the sun and the moon cannot all be seen at the same time which means that certain people will witness the Day of Resurrection in daytime while others are living it simultaneously in nighttime. This negates the flat earth position, implying that there are people simultaneously living on the dark side, as well as the bright side of the earth.

The Quran speaks of day and night as a phenomena independant from the sun's movement. 79:29 says the sky itself is what brightens (indicating presence of atmosphere) and 91:3-4 says daylight exposes the sun. This is because the reflection of sunlight on the atmosphere dims the lights of all other celestial objects, until they are relatively insignificant to the sun, thus "revealing" it. On the moon, due to the absence of atmosphere, the Sun is not "revealed" as one would say when viewed from the earth. Other celestial objects are seen shining next to it, including the earth that may appear even more evidently than the Sun.

What causes nighttime is the obstruction of the sun. That is where the notion of "veiling" is important 7:54. The word is very well suited to the situation because it is the sun's veiling by the earth itself that causes darkness to fall on the opposite side of the earth. Without a "veil" nighttime would not occur on earth. One could try saying that this doesnt negate geocentricism, with the sun travelling beneath the earth so as to cause nighttime on the opposite side. However 7:54 disconnects the subservience of the sun to that phenomenon. What is further remarkable is that it doesnt say the day veils the night, but the opposite. This reinforces what has been said about the appropriateness of comparing veiling/obstructing. Nighttime is the absence of direct sunlight, which would be impossible without veiling/obstructing since the sun does not orbit the earth. Somewhere else it uses the image of daylight being skinned off, revealing the darkness of night. Skinning is done with force. The sun is mentioned in the same passage without any hint at it being the cause. Rather it is an imperceptible force caused by Allah and which we now know is the movement of the earth 

36:37"We withdraw/peel off from it the day".

Another interesting statement is that Allah upholds al samawat/the entities above, including the sky without any visible supports 13:2,31:10. In the flat earth model, the dome shaped sky rests on the earth's edges, which are visible supports. But according to the verses, the entities above the earth must encompass and circle it, enclosing the earth within a larger sphere. 

From a spiritual perspective, this statement highlights the necessity of Allah's might and mercy, maintaining the complex order of things above at all times without relying on any supports. Scientifically, as in all verses putting God at the forefront in natural processes, one may understand it as God doing so through His decreed laws of nature. None of these processes function by themselves and need constant sustaining by the One who decreed them 32:5,65:12 making both heavens and earth to subsist by His command 30:25, these laws through which He prevents both heaven and earth from ceasing to function 

22:65,35:41"upholds the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught". 

Allah therefore upholds/yumsik both heavens and earth, not only the heavens or what is above the earth. This gives an additional dimension to the word "upholding", giving it the sense of "sustaining" as well. 

This passage also demonstrates the delicate balance the Quran makes in its use of general but appropriate words, so as to not confirm nor deny the views of nature of its reader, focusing instead on the spiritual message. By upholding both heavens and earth, the Quran does not depict the earth as "the bottom" of the universe for just as the heavens are upheld, the earth too is upheld by Allah. If one wishes to find "indications" on whether the earth is stationary or not, then one can as well reflect the Quranic depiction of the general motion of all celestial bodies floating in their independent trajectories, as applying to the earth too which is floating in space. A modern reader could then also assume, since this upholding is done without any visible supports, then it must be done through God establishing an equilibrium between the repelling and attractive forces at play in the universe. These forces by the way are known to be on the thinnest of razor edges, where the slightest variation will throw the entire system into disarray 

54:49"Surely We have created everything according to a measure".

Finally 35:13,39:5,3:27 explain that the phenomena of night and day are perpetually merging, as if flowing into one another. This imagery only makes sense in a round earth model, where daytime still exists when nighttime arrives and viceversa, as related in the hadith on 3:133 further below. In a flat-earth model the entire earth is either plunged into darkness or lit up in daytime. We understand today that the roundness of the earth, together with its revolution around its axis and orbit around the sun, are what allow this continuous flowing phenomenon of night into day and day into night.

In a narration, the prophet was asked to comment on 

3:133"a Garden, the extensiveness of which is (as) the heavens and the earth, it is prepared for those who guard (against evil)". 

A man asked him 

"So where is the Fire?" the prophet replied "Have you seen when night comes, it overtakes everything. So where is the day?" the man said "where Allah wants it to be" and the prophet said "likewise with the Fire". 

So although daylight overtakes everything and yet nighttime is a phenomenon that keeps existing, even if it is beyond perception, so does hellfire exist beyond perception although the vastness of paradise overtakes everything. The Quran makes it clear that both heaven and hell exists currently in the unseen and encompass us. Grammatically, the WAW used in 3:133 is that of inclusion, making the earth included within the more encompassing entity of the heavens. Had the Quran applied a strict modern perspective of astronomy and said that the vastness of paradise is as wide as the heavens, without mentionning the earth, the statement would have remained incomplete to its addressees who understood heaven and earth as separate entities. It would have seemed that paradise is limited, which is against the verse's intent. On the other hand, had it specified that heaven encompasses the earth, then followed by describing the vastness of paradise, it would have deviated its audience's attention into trivial matters from a spiritual viewpoint. The Quran thus uses a grammatical construction that neither affirms nor denies its addressees' understanding of nature, as it does in many places, so as to keep the focus on its intended message.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 2"

Islam Critiqued trusts his Bible; True location of Paran?

Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!"

Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!"

This articles answers Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!"

The Name of God

The Name of God

The fear, awe and reverence to God is so deeply rooted in the teachings of Judaism that they may not pronounce what they have construed as His actual proper name 

Deut28:58"fear this glorious and awesome name, the Lord, your God". 

God Himself, throughout the HB, does not identify any word as His unique, proper name. It is the Jews that have identified these 4 consonantal letters YHWH (the Tetragammaton) as such. The instruction to fear the name YHWH creates difficulties within the text and its interpretation. For example HaShem, Elohim or Adonai replace these 4 consonants whenever they appear in the text. When describing the sacred Ark of the Jews, and speaking of the inscription on it representing these 4 letters, the author of 2Sam6:2 refers to "the name" so as to avoid pronouncing the word.

The biblical instruction of making God's name known to the world is reinterpreted in the sense of making His fame, reputation known. Knowing "about" God is achieved by showing the manner in which His attributes manifested in the world and throughout history. The text however shows that the name was known in ancient times, without any restrictions Gen4:1, just as was the case in the times of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob Gen15:7,17:1,22:14,28:3,13,35:11. 

Later however, due to the high awe, and reverence towards the name, the priests forbade the laymen from uttering it, and preserved it among their own descendants. This of course is an unfounded traditional claim, since nobody today can claim to known the correct spelling of the 4 letters, even among those who trace their lineage to the priestly clan. Legend says that the mystery shrouding the correct spelling of the name will continue until the Messianic era where the 4 consonants will be made known to all, and without any restriction.

In Lev24:10-16 there is the story of someone who attempted to pronounce it 

"..the son of the Israelite woman pronounced the [Divine] Name and cursed it.. Any man who curses his God shall bear his sin.  And one who NOKEV the Name of the Lord, shall be put to death; the entire community shall stone him; convert and resident alike if he NOKVO the [Divine] Name, he shall be put to death."

The verb NAKAV appears in many instances, including Gen30:28,Num1:17,Isa62:2 and never means to blaspheme or curse but is equivalent to "saying" or "calling". It is purposefully mistranslated as "blaspheme" in Christian Bibles that seek to bypass the total restriction concerning the uttering of God's name. In fact the very plain reading of the verse reveals the important fact that the person committed not 1, but 2 sins, and that he was not actually executed for cursing God's name, but for pronouncing it. The person pronounced, then cursed the name. For the cursing, the sentence was that he shall "bear his sin" meaning that no atonement would be possible for him and he will carry the burden all throughout his life until it is dealt with by God after his death. For the sin of pronouncing the name, the sentence was that he should be put to death.

In addition to due reverence, there are other pragmatic reasons to avoid pronouncing the 4 letters. It only consists of consonants, which can only result in an incorrect pronunciation to anyone who tries. There is nothing more insulting than mispronouncing someone's name, let alone one used for God. 

The pronunciation "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" is based on that used by some of the Church Fathers but even among biblical scholars there is no certainty at all in this matter which is why most prefer to render it simply as YHWH without the vowels. In fact the pronounciation "Yahweh" is a Christians blunder, who took the vowelization which Jews use for ADNY (The aleph has the vowel "ah", the daled has "o", the nun has "ah" and it ends with a yud = AhDoNahY) and applied it to YHWH (They gave the first "ah" to the Y, then the "o" to the H, and finally the last "ah" to the letter vav = YaHoVah, regularily pronounced Yahweh or Jehovah).

Seeing God's name as so sacred that it shouldn't be mentioned is condemned as a great injustice in the Quran 2:114. The remembrance of God, praising Him by His name and attributes is an important part of a worshiper's rituals, continuously commanded in the Quran 

87:1"Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High". 

See here how the Quran immidiately corrects and elevates Judaism's defective monotheism. And this is why Muslims do not call Allah their "father". There is no exclusivist relationship between the God of all creation, and the Muslims. 

Another forceful way the Quran does so is when it revisits the events at the "burning bush". 

In the Quran God reveals Himself to Moses, with words evoking universal, indiscriminate Lordship, words which Moses would later communicate throughout his prophetic career whether in his confrontation with the Egyptian elite, or the Israelites; He is the One Lord besides Whom there are none, the Lord of all worlds/aalamin, a word encompassing in its meaning all human beings in all ages. He will gather and judge every soul indiscriminately based on its individual merit 20:12-16,28:30. The version of the HB again reveals the deep inclination pervasive throughout the Jewish writings, for monolatry and its depiction of an ethno-centred tribal deity

 Ex3:6"I am the God of your Father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob". 

Similarly in contrast to Ex34:14 neither did Moses report God's name as "the jealous One" nor did he call Him a jealous God (in Numbers 5:14 the same word is used for human jealousy between spouses). Moses instead said that 

14:8"if you disbelieve, you and whoever (is) in the earth together, then indeed, God is Self-sufficient, Praiseworthy".

God is Omnipotent and is not in any need of His servants or their worship. This is a major Quranic theme, again in contrast with the pervasive Biblical depiction of God as the jealous husband, going after a treacherous Israelite bride that prostitutes itself to other gods. The Quran makes it clear, it is His servants that need Him. Therefore, He has absolutely no requirement to be jealous. Further, all beautiful and best names belong to Him 

7:180,20:8"Allah, there is not god but He. His are the very best names". 

The best name is one that possesses the pure and sheer reality of perfection without any mix of its opposite. For example life without death or dominance without defeat 

17:110"Call upon Allah or call upon the Beneficient, whichever you call upon, He has the best names". 

"HE" refers to the divine Essence, which is not restricted to any name, like Allah or al Rahman/the Beneficient, so long as such a name is the most superior and perfect like the 2 names given in the verse to illustrate -Allah, and al Rahman/the Beneficient-. Also, each and every one of those names refers exclusively to the same Divine Essence. Whether the Essence is addressed as Allah, al Rahman, al Athim, al Ghafur etc. it is still one and the same Being worthy of worship that is being called upon. This is how the Quran intricately and comprehensively restores mankind's original monotheism.

Fear of God, awareness of the seriousness of His threats avoids one from falling into self-complacency, makes one feel obliged at all times to act upon Divine Commands and regard the righteous good deeds as insignificant in the face of divine perfection 7:99,70:24-8. This state of mind further frees one from any tinge of idolatry as it makes one aware that no protector ultimately exists outside of Allah 

6:14,51,70,17:111"Praise to Allah, who has not taken a son and has had no partner in [His] dominion and has no [need of a] protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with [great] glorification" 33:17"Say, "Who is it that can protect you from Allah if He intends for you an ill or intends for you a mercy?" And they will not find for themselves besides Allah any protector or any helper".

 That notion is such a crucial component of faith that after introducing His identity through His observable attributes, God describes His servants as those who, among other lofty characteristics, fear the seriousness of His threats more than they desire His reward 25:60-77. 

Fear however can never be the sole constituent of belief, it must be balanced with 2 other elements; hope 12:87 and love for God 

32:16"call upon their Sustainer in fear and in hope" 

21:90"These people exerted their utmost in righteous deeds and called upon Us with love and fear and they remained humble before Us". 

From a philosophical viewpoint, fear,  whether in the natural or spiritual world, is an asset without which survival is impossible. But it must be balanced and controlled or else it leads to stagnation and even death. As is taught to us by the Creator, spiritually, fear must be balanced with love and trust.

The correct attitude is to never fall into either extreme, becoming self-complacent or hopeless of God's mercy. This upright perspective leads one to continuously strive to increase safety/iman in Allah. 

This balanced attitude is reflected in the saying of the prophet 

“If the believer knew what was with Allah of punishment, no one would hope for Paradise; and if the disbeliever knew what was with Allah of Mercy, no one would despair of attaining Paradise".

Elsewhere the Quran describes the successful as those who "hope" to meet their Lord and "hope" for His forgiveness 2:218,18:110. This is a sign of humility, when even within the same verse, those people are reassured that Allah is surely forgiving and merciful, they still keep in mind that salvation is ultimately in God's hands 

2:218"Surely those who believed and those who fled (their home) and strove hard in the way of Allah these hope for the mercy of Allah and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".

 The believer in those concepts, the one who knows what God demands of Him and what not, what His Sustainer loves in His servant and what not, continuously toils in the path of truth, without pride and self content. Contrary to the scripturally indefensible concept of an unconditionally loving God, which leads to conceit and self-righteousness, the one striving to meet God's explicit criteria of approval, constantly remains God-conscious. He remains humble, never thinking he is beyond reproach, fearing the seriousness of God's threats as well as hoping for His mercy, until he meets his Creator. 

39:23"Allah has sent down the best statement: a consistent Book wherein is reiteration. The skins shiver therefrom of those who fear their Lord; then their skins and their hearts relax at the remembrance of Allah. That is the guidance of Allah by which He guides whom He wills".

The Love is evident in the word IMAN that denotes profound and sincere feeling of safety implying that one is in complete trust of a protective entity, that is, God. One cannot feel safe in an entity without having love for that entity, and knowing in turn that the entity is loving. This is where the Quran explains that this love isnt reciprocal, but more intense when coming from God. He is as al-rahman, the intensification of rahma. The root R-H-M means WOMB. 

Therefore in order to imagine what this word actually means one has to picture the womb and what it does to the fetus. It nurtures, protects, provides warmth, love etc. without even the fetus being aware of it. 

Allah is the only true deity 2:255,23:116-117,37:95-96,59:22-24,112:1-4. As shown earlier, He can be named by absolutely any name, so long as it is the "best of names", which includes among others, Allah. He isnt restricted to any name or any number of names and all the scholars agree that Allah's names are unlimited so long as they are the best. 

There is a prayer by the prophet in which he calls upon Allah by the name He has chosen to reveal to mankind, and those He kept in the unseen 

"I ask You by every name belonging to You which You named Yourself with, or revealed in Your Book, or You taught to any of Your creation, or You have preserved in the knowledge of the unseen with You..".

99 out of these names are special in the way they affect our existence. 

When the prophet urged the people to pay heed to those names, he said those who ahsaa ha/assimilates and applies them -not merely memorize them, see Quran 18:12- in the worship and in everyday life is deserving of a great reward. These Divine Names, which punctuate so many Quran verses inform us about the moral quality that human beings must strive to embody. The believer becomes a vessel of mercy, justice, etc.  Naming Allah doesnt imply knowing Allah, or encompassing Him, or giving Him a similitude. Humans exist, but nothing like Allah, who ever-exists. Anyone has experienced mercy or existence, but not to perfection and infinity. The names of Allah dont describe the reality of His attributes, but tell us that He possesses a particular attribute to perfection. To clarify further, the name "all merciful" doesnt describe the reality, the essence of Allah's infinite mercy. It tells us that He possesses the concept of mercy, which we have experience of, to perfection, which we cannot fathom.

To limit God's names would be in effect a restriction on His majesty and God can never be contained, neither physically nor linguistically 

17:110"Call upon Allah or call upon, Al-Rahman; whichever you call upon, He has the best names". 

The most obvious of these attributes is His attribute of Rahma, or mercy. Al rahman is the most intensive form of rahma. This is because Allah is the most merciful and this is why the attribute of mercy is the only one said to be "written" upon God 

6:12,54"your Lord has written mercy on Himself". 

The Hebrew equivalent of "rhm", is also found in the Hebrew Bible Deut4:31,Ps86:15 again to stress an important attribute of God from a human perspective. The name was known in the prophetic history

 19:58,27:30,43:45"And ask those We sent before you of Our messengers; have We made besides the Most Merciful/Al Rahman deities to be worshipped?" 

including by Abraham 19:44, as well as Mary the mother of Jesus, who was inspired 

19:26"if you see from among humanity anyone, say, 'Indeed, I have vowed to the Most Merciful/Al Rahman abstention, so I will not speak today to [any] man".

In fact the Quran condemns the Christian contemporaries of the prophet for their outrageous religious deviations in attributing a son to Al Rahman 19:88-95.

In Hymiar around the 380s, the form of worship appears to have undergone a fundamental change, observable not only in Marib and Zafar but also throughout South Arabia. The gods ceased to be worshipped and their shrines, including the huge Awam temple were abandoned. The inscriptions were no longer addressed to the ancient astral gods such as Almaqah, but to a single deity, called the 

“Lord of Heaven” 

or the 

“Lord of Heaven and earth” 

who is also called Rahmanan. 

Other descriptions are 

“God, the Lord of Heaven” 

as well as Rahmanan with these attributes. These Inscriptions dated to the end of the 4th century show that the title was first associated with Judaism. But the establishment of a Jewish community there must have occurred much earlier. When the Ethiopian king Abraha invaded Yemen we find inscriptions beginning with the formula, 

“with the help of Rahmanan and his Christ,” 

which is sometimes extended to a trinity: 

“with the help of Rahmanan and his Christ and the Holy spirit ”.

After the rise of Islam, a man from Yamama called Musaylimah renounced his Christian faith and began preaching his own monotheistic religion, claiming to be a messenger of God. He had retained the Christian divine epithet al-Rahman and applied it to himself. He became known by those who followed him, as well as the Arab pagans to whom he preached his religion by "al Rahman". The prophet Muhammad didnt give him any importance, calling him "al-kadhab"/the liar instead, as he is still known today. He was fought and defeated under the caliphate of Abu Bakr, against whom he had rebelled with a force outnumbering those of the Muslims. It is interesting that in contrast, the Quran describes the prophet as rahim/merciful 9:128. It does not name him rahim, as it would entail, just like Musaylimah intended, that the prophet embodied that quality in an absolute sense. The Quran instead stresses that no other god except the One God possesses the attribute of rahman and rahim to perfection 2:163,23:109,59:22 as well as commands the prophet himself to proclaim that reality 

21:112,23:118"And, [O Muhammad], say, "My Lord, forgive and have mercy, and You are the best of the merciful."

Most pagans were not aware of "Rahman" as an epithet for the supreme God. Effectively, all religious epigraphic material surveyed until now dated to the 6th century until the rise of Islam in the Mecca area call upon Allah, the name of the supreme God. So when the Quran tells them to

25:60"Prostrate to al-Rahman! they say: And what is al-Rahman? Are we to prostrate to whatever you command us? And it increases their aversion". 

Some of them even thought the name indicated a god besides Allah.

It is interesting noting how God, in answer to the derogatory demand to know "what" al rahman is, after giving a glimpse of His identity through the observable mercy pervasive in His creation, cites His servants as being the worldly ambassadors reflecting that attribute of mercy, physically and spiritually sincere and humble, benevolent towards their fellow men, patiently forbearing especially when confronted by the ignorant 25:60-77.

Although this attitude represented the mainstream opposition, we read in some marginal pre-Islamic poems echoes of the Abrahamic legacy. In the invective poem by al A'sha, al-rahman and Allah alternate in consecutive verses. The Quran echoes these beliefs 

43:20"And they said, "If the Most Merciful/Al Rahman had willed, we would not have worshipped them".

The word ALLAH was used since pre-islamic times, by the Hanif, the Arab polytheists, and both Arab Jews and Christians. The verse 22:40 states that all people in whose temples Allah's name is mentioned, were encouraged to stand up and defend their sites and rights to worship in them, including churches and synagogues. Elsewhere we read how the pagans recognized Allah as the supreme Creator despite having associated interceding deities to Him 29:60-65,46:28,39:3.  

The difference between each group however lies in the attributes they give Him and the manner they describe His interaction with the universe. That is why the Quran in sura kafirun does not negate who/man the disbelievers worship, rather what/ma 

109:2"You do not serve what I serve". 

The characteristics of the "Allah" of each group are different. What Muslims worship is not the deity of a chosen race, does not rest or slumber after creation, nor enters it. He does not have sons and daughters, nor a consort, and He did not detach Himself from creation after giving it the initial push. More descriptive points can be enumerated showing the monotheistic deficiency of every thought system claiming to worship One Creator with a common name, in contrast to Islam's supreme tawhid. The word "Allah" in itself however, "Who" is meant by it, is not exclusive to Islam. 

Up to this day, Arab Jews refer to God as "Allah". The Torah prohibits Jews from pronouncing another god's name

Ex23:13"and the name of the gods of others you shall not mention; it shall not be heard through your mouth". 

If Allah was a name unknown to them and the name of another God that the unpronounceable Tetragammaton, they would have never repeated it, much less in prayer. A Jew can even go as far as praying inside a mosque but is forbidden of entering a church under any circumstances. The Arabic "Allah" could thus simply be the contraction of al ilah/the God. The word was so persistently and exclusively used to describe the supreme God that stood above the hundreds of interceding deities that it gradually became equivalent to His proper name among the Arabs, whether the pagans, the hanif, the Jews or Christians. 

YHWH, instead of being God's unique, proper name is one of Allah's best names, describing one of His perfect attributes, like al Rahman and endless others, although its correct pronunciation is now forgotten. What strongly corroborates this is that the HB states in Ex6:2-3 that the patriarchs did not known God by the name of YHWH. Yet, as stated earlier, we do read throughout Genesis that from the first humans, down to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, all knew the name YHWH. The way this contradiction is harmonized is by saying that, although previous people knew the name, they did not know its meaning. In Western languages, a name is a label of identification. In Semitic languages, shem (Hebrew) or ism (Arabic) is meant to reveal something of the essence of the entity. Hence the non-exhaustive "names" of Allah given in the Quran and traditions, each evoking an aspect by which His essence manifests. To further corroborate that what is traditionally construed as a mere label of identification of God in Hebrew, is in fact a description of one of God's attributes is seen in 

Ex3:13-14"And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" 

God here doesnt answer Moses' question with a word, but with a definition, an expression entailing eternity past and future. That notion is found in many Quranic passages 2:255,3:2,28:88,40:65,57:3,55:27. Once God clearly defined the meaning of the label by which Moses was to identify Him, He finally spelled out His "shem" 

v15"And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'YHWH elohe/the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation". 

Moses is thus told to make God known to the Israelites by a label which in the Hebrew language denotes eternity YHWH ELOHE. The Quran conveys in Arabic the same meaning with ALLAHU SAMAD, which Muslims recite in their daily prayers. The traditions also list ALBAQI among the names of Allah, denoting everlastingness. Similarly in the Greek of the New Testament, we find the phrase aioniou theou/the eternal God Rom16:26. Just like the Arabic Quran, the Greek of the New Testament doesnt use the Hebrew tetragammaton YHWH. Nobody will claim that the God John and Jesus spoke of in the NT is other than the God of Moses in the Torah. Writing the tetragammaton is allowed in Jewish tradition, as is done throughout the HB. It is the vowelization and attempted pronunciation that are forbidden. Further, no passage within the NT hints at an awareness of the prohibition to utter the tetragammaton. The NT goes as far as saying that Jesus' name is greater than all names Phil2:9.

We even read that just as Allah was known prior to Islam, the Semitic tribes inhabiting the land of Canaan much earlier than the Israelites also knew YHWH. The very reason, per the Torah, For God deciding to uproot and exterminate those nations, then settling the Israelites instead, was not because of the Abrahamic covenant, but because these nations had become sinners, unworthy to reside in a land previously declared sacred Gen15:16,Deut9,1Sam4:7. The Canaanite were relatives of the Israelites. They were Abrahamic descendants, such as the Moabites descendants of Lot and Edomites whose father is Esau. There is no reason to assume that these Abrahamic tribes did not emulate their common forefather by worshiping YHWH. 

But as the generations passed they corrupted that worship until God sent another Abrahamic branch, the Israelites, to uproot and replace them. Similarly Jethro was a Midianite-Kenite. Midian was the son of Abraham, and Kenite in reference to Adam's son, Cain whose descendants lived among all the people of the Levant. Jethro was thus a non Israelite Semite, descendant of Abraham, who had kept the Abrahamic legacy. He proclaims to Moses that YHWH is greater than all false deities Ex18:7-12. 

Sam Shamoun "How Allah Stumped Muhammad and His Followers"

Sam Shamoun "How Allah Stumped Muhammad and His Followers"

These articles answer Sam Shamoun "How Allah Stumped Muhammad and His Followers"

- CIRA International find trinity in Quran; The eternal RUH/spirit of Allah?

- Acts17apologetics looks for logos; Jesus is the kalima of Allah?

- Reason for Ambiguous verses in the Quran

- Acts17apologetics superior to the Quran; Muslims should seek approval from Christians and Jews 10:94?

Sam Shamoun "How the One Becomes the Many: The Quran’s Affirmation of Plurality within Unity"

Sam Shamoun "How the One Becomes the Many: The Quran’s Affirmation of Plurality within Unity"

These articles answer Sam Shamoun "How the One Becomes the Many: The Quran’s Affirmation of Plurality within Unity"

Islam critiqued evaluates literary eloquence; The royal plural?

CIRA International find trinity in Quran; The eternal RUH/spirit of Allah?

Sam Shamoun "More Islamic Fairytales: The Consequences of Not Saying Insha Allah!"

Sam Shamoun "More Islamic Fairytales: The Consequences of Not Saying Insha Allah!"

The ahadith report a vow made by Solomon, that he would sleep with several of his wives in one night, with the various reports numbering them as much as 60, 90, 99 or even 100. In hadith science, when multiple versions of a report having the same narrator chain give different numbers everytime, the understanding is that the number was remembered differently by the narrators because of it being insignificant to the purports of the prophetic saying. 

Abu Hurairah is the sole narrator of this hadith and there is no suggestion that he heard it from the Prophet on multiple occasions, meaning the latter cannot be the reason of the contradiction. What might have happened is the prophet spoke on one occasion of Solomon's vow to sleep with an unspecified large number of his wives in one night, as well as the number of wives he had in total. The narrators might have mixed the 2 statements. 

I will go round in the night to my ninety wives, and every one of them will give birth to a child (who will grow up) as a horseman and fight in the cause of Allah His companions said to him: Say" Insha' Allah." but he did not say Inshii' Allah. He went round all of them but none of them became pregnant but one, and she gave birth to a premature child. And by Him in Whose hand is the life of Muhammad, if he had said, Insha' Allah (his wives would have given birth to the children who would all have grown up into horsemen and fought in the way of Allah).

The hadith speaks of Solomon desiring to have many male children so as to serve in war for God's cause. He vowed sleeping with a large number of wives for that purpose in a single night, but forgot the angel's inspiring him with expressing his reliance on Allah (other versions mention the angel). Despite his wish, none of the wives he slept with was able to conceive, except for one who gave birth to a premature child that probably died in infancy. The Arabs referred to them as split/divided/half children because of incomplete growth. 

Not every failed endeavour is a sign of divine disapproval. Neither does the hadith say that his failure was caused by God so as to punish him. God may either allow the natural flow of causality to follow its course, or alter it as He deems fit. In this case, had Solomon initially relied on God, then God could have rewarded him with success in his objective by altering the course of causality. Practically speaking, most healthy men are able to have sex with a very large number of women in a short time if they interrupt the act with one partner then switch to another. This might have been the reason for Solomon's failure to impregnate his wives. 

As to the hadith quoted in some books of tafsir saying that the revelation of sura kahf came much later than the day following the challenge, because the prophet did not utter the phrase "if God wills", presents several internal incoherences, besides it being rejected for having unreliable and unknown narrators in its chain. 

It says for instance that once revelation came 15 days later, it contained a rebuke to the prophet. No such reproach exists in sura kahf. Nor are there any traces in any tradition, authentic or else, of the supposed rumors due to the prophet's incapacity to answer the following day as he had promised. Furthermore no link exists between the verse upon which the tafsir and narration are based (18:23-4) and the question asked later on concerning Dhul Qarnayn 18:83. 

The verse teaching to never plan anything before relying on God 18:23-4 and upon which the narration is based, is a parenthetical statement inserted in the flow of the discourse about the youths of the cave. It is connected to the previous verse which is about refraining to research into things known only to God, so in the same way one should not make plans for the future without acknowledging that certainty in all matters only belongs to God.

Finally, the narration says sura Kahf came in answer to 3 questions by the Jews (the youths of the cave, the "ruh" and the powerful traveller/Dhul Qarnayn) whereas the sura cites only one question related to one topic, Dhul Qarnayn and then proceeds with the answer. 

In contrast there is no link between a question and the story of the youths (a Christian story, irrelevant to the Jews who supposedly asked the question) and neither does the sura respond to the 3rd supposed question about the "ruh". That question was uttered on another occasion and answered in 17:85 which is a much earlier sura than sura kahf.

Sam Shamoun "The Third Caliph’s Abuse of the Quran’s Greatest Compiler"

Sam Shamoun "The Third Caliph’s Abuse of the Quran’s Greatest Compiler"

Zayd ibn Thabit was the main scribe along with several other prominent Qurayshis tasked by Uthman to compile the Quran in book form. 

The same Zaid Ibn Thabit was involved with the collection during Abu Bakr's time as well, collecting the revelation in the form of suhuf or loose pages, from both oral as well as written sources that were in the prophet's house. Zayd remembered how 

"the prophet was taken from this life while the Quran had not yet been gathered into a book". 

The use of "gathered" instead of "written" is significant as it proves its existence in written form, although scattered on different supports. Zaid, after gathering all that was physically available, then demanded two witnesses for each piece, attesting to its oral transmission. Here Zaid was just following the prophet's dual authentication method, oral/textual. It is to be noted, none, not even the prophet himself as attested in the traditions, is able to recite flawlessly from memory each and every time. That is why the Quran was transmitted through massive consensus, with reciters and laymen checking one another for errors, in addition strengthening the transmission process using their physical copies. 

To corroborate this great care in performing the task entrusted to him, there are at least 2 recorded incidents where Zayd would not validate a verse despite knowing it by heart from the prophet's mouth, until he found it in written form between the hands of a reliable believer. This was the case concerning the last 2 verses of sura tawba/bara'a, known and cross checked through the memory of several reciters including Zayd, and yet he would not include it in the text unless corroborated by a written copy. Once the unique hard copy of 9:128-129 was found between the hands Abu Khuzaimah al-Ansari it confirmed what the comitee of compilers, including  Umar, Uthman, Zaid and Ubay bin Kaab had already memorized and were looking for in the first place. There has never been any doubt accross the spectrum of Islamic sects as to the authenticity of these 2 verses.

This authentication process was even more stringent than the one the other religious texts (hadith, tafsir, fiqh etc.) would later be put through, which already is in itself a method unsurpassed in the world for any other document, let alone religious. This is how serious, meticulous and careful Zayd was in accomplishing his mission 

"By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur’an". 

Zayd is here speaking retrospectively and implying how the succesfully completed task was a heavy duty obviously hard to accomplish considering the level of care he had imposed upon himself. 

This highly noble assignment, entrusted to the young Zayd, did cause resentment among some of the older companions, the most vocal of whom was Abdullah ibn Masud. That resentment was further fueled by the fact ibn Masud had to give up his own personal mushaf. The early Muslims held their Quran writings in high esteem, and ibn Masud compiled his own in greater part based on the recitation learned from the prophet in person. But he now had to give it up in favor of Zayd's approved standardized rasm/orthography. Zayd's compilation was superior to ibn Masud in that its rasm could absorb many potential qiraat while the scripts of the individual copies held by Muslims could not be read in all qiraat. 

It is only natural that he, out of pride, who hold on to his "superior" mushaf and by the same token try and discredit Zayd 

"'O you Muslim people! I am removed from recording the transcription of the Mushaf and it is overseen by a man, by Allah, when I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them. For indeed Allah said: And whoever conceals something, he shall come with what he concealed on the Day of Judgement (3:161). So meet Allah with the Musahif.'" Az-Zuhri said: "It was conveyed to me that some men amongst the most virtuous of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah disliked that view of Ibn Mas'ud". 

In this correct rendition of Az-Zuhri's report in Jami' al Tirmidhi, not the misleading translation often used among Islam critics ("Avoid copying the Mushaf and the recitation of this man") several important things transpire. Firstly, the leading companions disapproved of that selfish, prideful stand from ibn Masud. Second, what ibn Masud really resented was not Zayd's capabilities. Rather it was Uthman's decision not to appoint him instead of Zaid as leader of the 2nd committee for the compilation. Al Asqalani discusses that particular point, saying ibn Masud simply was absent from Medina when Uthman urgently appointed the committee. He was in Kufah. Furthermore, because Uthman did nothing more than reproduce the pages compiled under Abu Bakr into one mushaf, and that Zayd Ibn Thabit had already been among the top scribes charged of that compilation, then it was natural to designate him to lead that 2nd compilation. 

The other issue ibn Masud had was in giving up his precious mushaf, which he was emotionally attached to 

"whenever the prophet and Jibril finished reciting to eachother, i would recite to the prophet as well and he would inform me that my recitation was eloquent". 

As already pointed, Zayd was already entrusted with a similar task under Abu Bakr and ibn Masud didnt voice any objection then, as he was now doing under Uthman. Uthman chose Zayd for his experience under Abu Bakr. Despite his initial opposition, ibn Masud eventually understood Uthman's plan and agreed with his effort, surrendering his personal mushaf. As later attested by ibn Qurazi, the mushaf of ibn Masud which he used for recitation and teaching was no different, including in its sura sequence, than the ones of Ubayy and Zaid ibn Thabit. The names of his most illustrious pupils and their transmission of the entire 114 suras of the Quran is also known, names like Alqama, al Aswad, Masruq and many others. 

The spurious reports by the historians, saying Uthman ordered the beating of ibn Masud are "fabrications" according to ibn al Arabi and some of the "most well known lies" according to al Dhahabi. The reality is that despite temporary tensions, Uthman and ibn Masud had high regard for one another, with Uthman even leading the funeral prayer at ibn Masud's death in Medina (ibn Saad/Tabaqat).

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "The Third Caliph’s Abuse of the Quran’s Greatest Compiler"

CIRA International unveil Islamic scandal; Uthman burns different Qurans? 

CIRA International unearth early Quran; Uthmanic rasm?

Islam Critiqued accuses the caliph; Uthman destroyed competing manuscripts?

Islam Critiqued wont humble himself; Hudhayfa reports different Qurans? 

Acts17apologetics blinded by the light of a saint; Paul didn't compromise Jesus' message?

Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"(2)

Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"(2)

When Abel pointed to the rejection of Cain's offering, he said it was due to his sinfulness or lack of piety. Cain should thus focus on his inner self, reassessing his spirituality and mend his ways instead of being envious 5:27. The nature of the offering in itself is not important, so long as it is done with sincerity and God-consciousness, hence the Quran's silence on the things both brothers offered

 22:37"There does not reach Allah their flesh nor their blood, but to Him is acceptable the guarding (against evil) on your part; thus has He made them subservient to you, that you may magnify Allah because He has guided you aright; and give good news to those who do good (to others)".

This is a major point driven through by the Quran. In the HB, God disdainfully rejects Cain's offering for no other reason that 

Gen4:3"Cain brought the fruit of the soil" 

while Abel 

"brought the firstborn of his flocks and the fattest, and the Lord turned to Abel and to his offering"

This sacrificial rite is no more than a symbol of a conscious, selfless offering in God's name of something one cherishes as necessary and valuable. It is not an attempt to "appease" Him who is far above anything that resembles human emotion, nothing of His creation can disturb Him 35:44. Ultimately anything offered to Allah in God consciousness counts as of equal value and merit than a blood offering as stated in 22:37 above. The primary issue is to remain aware of Allah during this universal rite

 22:34"To every people did We appoint rites, that they might celebrate the name of God over the sustenance He gave them" 

The Quran recognizes the universality of this rite, and then restores it to the right, original course; glorifying God alone, first and foremost.

It is when one loses Allah's pleasure from sight in the process, such as by having one's intentions polluted with sinfulness as occurred to Cain, or by having other deities or motives in mind, that the offering is invalidated. The merit does not lie in the intrinsic value or nature of the offering. Even fasting for Allah's sake by the one who cannot afford an offering is a valid substitute 2:196.  

Although the HB echoes that reality when it says 

Ps50:8-14"..Will I eat the flesh of bulls or do I drink the blood of he-goats? Slaughter for God a confession and pay the Most High your vows". 

Yet in other places, YHWH is depicted as physically delecting with the offering 

Lev1:9"Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord". 

This is reminiscent of ancient mythologies, more particularly Babylonian, where the gods would partake in the offering together with the offerer. In the HB numbers18 the priests making the offering are the only ones allowed to eat from the dead animal. Gods do not sit on the same table as the laymen. The Quran in sharp contrast allows to 

22:28-36"eat of them and feed the poor man who is contented and the beggar; thus have We made them subservient to you, that you may be grateful".

Further reading on Abel and Cain

Sam Shamoun "Do They Bear Another’s Burdens Or Not?"

Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"(1)

Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler" 

In the Quran angels are distinct among one another, created in different grades 35:1 and assigned tasks according to their ranks 2:97,81:19-21. Regardless of their ranks and tasks assigned in the heavens and the earth, angels are in complete awe and submission to their Creator 

21:19-20,37:164-6"There is none of us except that he has a specific station; it is we who are filled in ranks; it is we who glorify Allah".

 They only act according to Allah's commands 19:64, without exceeding or falling short of their task, never deliberatly rebelling or disobeying 

16:48-50,66:6,21:27"They do not exceed Him in speech and they act only according to His command". 

They thus all possess a high, unfliching, unwavering spirituality level. The Quran illustrates that reality through a linguistic subtility. It calls the angels barar 80:16 while the righteous humans are called abrar 82:13etc. Both words stem from b-r-r and implies the same thing, to be firmly grounded, ie in one's dutifulness and love for God. The subtle difference lies in that the intensive plural/jamaa kuthra is used for the angels while the lesser plural/jamaa qilla is used for the humans. This is because humans may rebel and sin, while this potentiality is completely ruled out for the angels. 

Their tasks include the transmission of a message to prophets or regular people, performance of miracles, fierce guardianship of certain places such as the 19 angels above hell 40:49-50,74:30-31. One of those is named Malik, possibly the leader of those angelic wardens of Hell 43:77. In Semitic languages names have a meaning and Malik, which entails mastership, is here used as a proper name. Had the common word "master" been intended it should have been followed by a qualification as in sura Fatiha describing Allah as "malik yawm eddin". Even if one were to argue that the qualification of mastership over hell is implicitly understood from context, then it would mean that the common word "malik" is a title applicable to each of the 19 masters of Hell. Whether it is the title or the proper noun that is meant, none of those angels, including the most prominent among them, have any authority other than what Allah has granted them. Nor do they have a say as to the fate of the dwellers of hell. This is seen from their cry of help, asking Malik to seek authorization from Allah to end their suffering.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"

Islam critiqued refuses paying for others' sins; Ransoming Muslims from hell?