The bogus claim that prophet Quthm aka Abul Qasim aka Ahmad aka Muhammad is mentioned in Isiah 42

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Aug 31, 2020 at 16:48

You wrote:

>But now the jump to the other curiosity; of the contention that Isaiah 42 somehow having a reading that a second fulfillment of that part of Isaiah could have happened when the first fulfillment was a few hundred years earlier. Your observation that they cannot have been correct leads to some reasons of misinterpretation of the Hebrew Holy Writ in Aramaic as it transitioned to the Arabic translation, which comes into view again as we observe, once more, something 'lost in translation.'

There is a huge bogus claim by tablighees (Indian and Pakistani Muslims) that we kuffar can find "Muhammad" mentioned in Isiah 42. This can be refuted with great ease as follows:

1. How come Allah has the time, ink, and papers to tell us about Arabic speaking ants and the flying carpet of Sulayman but not a single word about his favorite prophet being mentioned in Isiah 42 as in: ستجدوا اسم محمد مكتوب في سفر اشعياء ٤٢ or "You will find the name of Muhammad written in Isiah 42" Could it be because Allah did not know and a bunch of Indian and Pakistani Muslims know more than Allah?

2. And how come we cannot find any mention of this silly claim in the foundational books of Islam that ستجدوا اسم محمد مكتوب في سفر اشعياء ٤٢ Or we will find the name of Muhammad mentioned in the book of Isiah? Were al-Tabari, ibn Kathir, al-Qurtubi a bunch of liars or were they ignorant and had no clue that the name of Muhammad is mentioned in Isiah 42? The Islamic literary sources are totally silent about it and now a bunch of tablighees that cannot read Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek know more than al-mufasereen?

3. Allah says the Bible is a "corrupted" book so my question to these geniuses "quoting a corrupted book is not very smart unless you believe that the Bible is not corrupted so is the Bible not a corrupted book? The answer I get sometimes is: But brother some parts of the Bible are corrupted! Or the "Argument from half pregnant"

It is a big fat lie however the Arabs have a wonderful saying: The ultimate lie is when one believes his own lie

Just google it and laugh. Oh there are other lies as in claiming that Allah says that the earth is like the egg of an ostrich when the Qur'an (79:30) clearly say that the earth is flat.

Last, The Miracle of Number 19 in the Qur'an is another big fat lie. Why does Allah like number 19? Who knows

Here is the Basmala in Arabic

بسم الله الرحّمن الرحّيم

If you add up the number of letter the total count is 19

However, this is far from the truth.

1. بسم or Bism (this is loan word from Syriac) is a misspelling of the correct Arabic or بإسم and even if you do not count the hamza below the missing Alif we have 4 letters instead of 3 letters in the Quanic basmala

2. الله or Allah and notice that there is a Shadda above the second letter Lam as well as an Alif because they are missing in the rasm and now we have a total of 6 letters

3. This is the third disaster: الرحمن is wrong spelling of the word. You will find it fixed in today's Qur'an by adding a small Alif after the letter meem and a shadda (double consonant) above the letter Ra and here is the edited word in today's Quran الرّحمان or الررحمان or a total of 8 letters

4. This is the third disaster: الرحيم (which is a Syriac word in Arabic it should be الراحم) and this word is edited in today's Qur'an by adding a shadda (double consonant) about the letter Ra or الرّحيم or الررحيم or a total of 7 letter

So here is the total: 4+6+8+7=25 letters and the big fat lie of number 19 is refuted

And I'm being kind by not counting the other short vowels added to the formula and here we go:

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحمانِ الرَّحِيْمِ

So we have a total of: 8 short vowels and therefore the total is: 25+8=33

The moral of the story: Never believe Muslims from India and Pakistan and another big fat lie refuted.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".