Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 2: Chapter 32



MUHAMMAD IN THE BIBLE?

The Quran clearly states that Muhammad is foretold and easy to find in the Bible (f.x. 7/157e). That he is easy to find there is no reason to debate - he simply is not easy to find, and Muslims seldom debate this point. But the claim that he is found in both OT and NT in the Bible according to the Quran, means that they HAVE to find him, because if not there are serious mistakes in the Quran, and mistakes do not exist in a work from an omniscient god = if there are mistakes in the Quran, the book is not from a god and Islam is a made up, pagan religion. This is impossible for Islam and for most Muslims to face, and they go to long lengths to find Muhammad in that book - by honest or dishonest arguments and cherry-picking and twisting of texts. One of the standard claims is that the Bible is falsified (even though both science and Islam strongly have proved that the claim is wrong, by being unable to find even one proved falsification, and by the fact that even the oldest relevant scriptures and fragments are the same as the corresponding texts in the present Bible, except for minor mistakes normal in hand copied texts), and that Muhammad has been partly falsified out of the book. (This even though there was no reason to falsify him out of the book before the Jews and the Christians learnt that he preached a very different religion = after 610 AD.

The claims you normally meets:

In OT it is that where Moses in a speech to the Jews (5. Mos., 18/15 and 18/18) used the expression "your brothers" (meaning their fellow Jews), Muslims claim he meant the Arabs, "because the Arabs are the brothers of the Jews". In addition to that the context clearly tells he meant the fellow Jews, both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that Jews and Arabs far from reckoned the opposite part to be brothers at any time during history or prehistory.

In NT there is the Greek word "Parakletos" which they twist, and claim it really must mean another Greek word "Periklytos". A short explanation of the words "Parakletos" and "Periklytos": 1):Parakletos (helper, counselor): This word in the Greek Gospel (the Gospels originally were written in Greek) after John, is what they use as an explanation. Muslims say it must be misspelled, because if you take another word, 2): “Periklytos” ("the glorious one" or "the praised one") which looks rather similar, and translate it to Aramaic, you get a word that in Arab can be interpreted as Mohammad (or Ahmad, which both may mean "the praised one" (61/6, 7/157 (no name) - but ONLY claimed in the Quran)). Very convincing (but remember that Arabs since prehistoric times have lived in cultures where conspiracy theories have been rife - perhaps because they never have had information they could rely on (because of al-Taqiyya, etc.?), and then they have made guesses and made up theories. The situation actually to a large degree is the same in modern Muslim countries - and even more so in the ones which still are not much modern. Go to most of the Muslim countries and you can immerse yourself in conspiracy stories and theories). Also see verse 61/6e-f and see the chapters about Muhammad in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". And: To claim that words may have been misunderstood is natural for Muslims, as the old Arab alphabet lacked the vowels and signs, and one had to guess them. But not so in Greek.

The next “explanation” one meets is that the man who translated the NT from Hebrew (Aramaic) to Greek made a mistake and used the wrong word. But the NT never was translated – it was written originally in Greek, and the Greek alphabet was complete, so this source for misunderstanding did not exist. (This is a fact also modern Muslim scholars know, but never mention - on the contrary we have seen them using the argument about mistake when the Gospels were (claimed) translated from Aramaic to Greek!!

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 2/75b: “- - - seeing that a party of them (the Jews and/or Christians*) heard the word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it - - -.” Wrong. Science have shown very clearly that the Bible is not falsified – and consequently that it has never been something like the Quran, which here is claimed or indicated. If Islam means something else, they will have to bring proofs, not only loose claims and even looser statements. If Islam had had even a small proof, the world had been forced to hear it every two hours or more – at least. (The fact is, however, that Islam has proved even stronger than science that the claims about falsification of the Bible is wrong, by for one thing being unable to explain how it would be technically possible to falsify may be a few hundred thousand (some 44ooo has survived till today, and there must have been many more) manuscripts on 3 continents in exactly the same ways, for another how it was possible to do it so perfect that modern science is unable to find traces from the falsifications, for a third how it was possible to make Jews, Christians, and different sects to agree on making exactly the same falsifications (f.x. about Jesus), and for the fourth there is no credible claims for when all these falsifications should have been made, and for the fifth - and very essential; by the fact that Islam - and science - has been unable to find even one single proved falsification of a relevant manuscript. And not least: ##How was it possible to find absolutely all manuscripts and (get permission from the owners) to falsify them? - not one "unfalsified" manuscript has ever been found, compared to some 44ooo which agree to the present Bible.

By the way: No copy or fragment from the Quran older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his mission) has ever been found. How is this possible if it is true that such copies of "the Mother of the Book" have been sent down by tens of thousands through all times and to all prophets (124ooo?) for all people all over the world, like Islam claims? 44ooo from the Bible and 0 from the Quran. 44ooo : 0 tell something.

As for "when", Muslims for NT often mention the council on Nicaea in 325 AD. But even if that had been true, that council could not falsify all the older manuscripts. Even more essential: This council represented only the mainstream Christians - no Jews and no sects - so that only the mainstream Christians in case could agree to which falsifications to make. Still more essential: The agenda for the council is well known. There is not anything about "correcting" texts in the Bible. And finally may be the most essential: It is just as easy to make mainstream bishops change texts in the Bible, as it is to make ayatollahs change texts in the Quran - and for the same reason.

We f.x. have seen on Internet men with imposing titles blasting headlines like "57 points falsified in the Bible in Nicaea". At best it is al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) - and besides 57 falsifications is far - far - too little to make the Bible similar to the Quran. At least a few thousand points would have to be falsified to change a book similar to the Quran into the Bible, like Islam claims is the case. (Actually the Quran is so different from the Bible, that only a few points and even fewer details are the same - and also the literally style is totally different - it had had to be total rewriting, not falsification. (There only is one short sentence - 6 words in the Psalm 37/29 - which is identical to one in the Quran.)

*We may add that Islam and Muslims here try to use the Bible to prove their words – f.x. Jeremiah 23/36: “Ye have perverted the words of the living God.” This one is dishonesty on at least two levels:

  1. Level 1:It is for one thing quoted out of context, and - level 2 - for another thing it is twisted. Jeremiah tells: “If a prophet or a priest or anyone else (incorrectly*) claims, ‘This is the oracle of the LORD (Yahweh*), I (Yahweh*) will punish that man and his household. - - - But you must not mention ‘the oracle of the LORD’ again because (if you do*) every man’s word becomes his oracle and so you distort (pervert*) the words of the living God”. (NIV). There is an abyss between this meaning and the meaning Islam put into the above slightly twisted cherry-picked quotation from the Bible. Dishonest and slightly disgusting – and quite revealing about some Muslim methods and lacks of real facts and arguments.
  2. #Muhammad lived to lose all his children except one daughter (Fatima - who died some months later) - a punishment for claiming to represent Yahweh alias Allah?
  3. Even if it had been true – even if Jeremiah had said that the Jews had perverted (though “perverted” is a stronger word than “distorted”) this did not tell one millimeter about distorting claimed old Quranic texts, like here is indicated - only Biblical ones.

Knowing that this is taken from the widely distributed and highly praised “The Message of the Quran”, canonized or at least certified by the foremost Islamic intellectual institutions in the world (Al Azar University in Egypt), cases like this gives us a bad taste on their behalf: To resort to intellectual dishonesty of this kind is distasteful - and it is humiliating for Islam when found out.

And for what reason? Just in order to be right, instead of to try to find out what is right. #####This in spite of the fact that the price if they are wrong, is the loss of the soul of each and every Muslim if there is a Hell in the perhaps next life. Also see 2/130a, 3/24d and 3/77a below.

002 2/75c: "- - - (the Jews and Christians*) perverted it (the Quran Muhammad claimed they had received from their god, but which he claimed they had perverted into the Bible*) after they understood it". This is what Muhammad claimed about the Bible - to claim the Bible was falsified, was his only way out to "explain" the differences between what he had told the Bible said, and what it really said, if he wanted to save his religion and thus his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish?

003 2/75d: “- - - seeing that a party of them (the Jews and/or Christians*) heard the word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it - - -.” Contradicted by the Bible (which both science and Islam have proved is not falsified) by the fact that it tells exactly what most Christians (and Jews for OT) tell it says. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

####004 2/76b: "- - - what Allah hath revealed to you - - -". This rather obscure sentence many Muslim scholar claims refer to the Islamic claim that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible, here likely referred to 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18 (and conveniently omitting f.x. 18/1-2 and 18/20-21). The Quran clearly states that Muhammad is mentioned on both the OT and in the Gospels (NT) and easy to find there, and then Islam HAS to find him there, because if not the Quran is wrong and a book from a god cannot be wrong - so if there is a mistake, this proves it is not from a god.

What is absolutely sure, is that Muhammad is not easy to find anywhere in the Bible - he is nowhere openly mentioned. Then Islam has to look for him in hidden places, in spite of the Quran's claim that he is easy to find both in OT and in NT. And the most frequent claim in OT is 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, where Moses in a speech to Jews tells them that once there shall come a prophet like himself "from among their brothers". It is clear from the context that he meant from among the Jews, but Islam - the religion of the truth and the religion which claims you cannot understand the Quran unless you see the verses in context - drops the contexts and claims: "The Arabs are the brothers of the Jews - this is about Muhammad!"

We may add that they also drop a few other facts:

  1. The word "brother" or similar is used figuratively far more than 300 times in the Bible (at least 351 times according to our latest leafing through the book), and not one of these in connection to Arabs - practically always about members of a closed group (mainly Jews in OT - a few times including their recognized relatives the Edomites - and mainly fellow Christians in NT, though in NT a few times meaning all humanity as potential Christians).
  2. Of these the word at least is used at least 99 times in OT (see below in this comment) - also here mainly about members of a closed group: The Jews, sometimes included the Edomites as mentioned just above - and not a word about Arabs in such connections. Except for 1 reference to Lot (Abraham talking to his nephew - a very closed group) and 6 references to Edomites, which the Jews reckoned to be (distant) relatives as they were descendants of Esau, brother of Jacob and son of Isaac and thus inside the extended group, there are 5 exceptions from the rule that "brother" is about Jews in OT: The nomad Jacob talking to some shepherds (a closed group as he too was a shepherd and intended to mean "good friends"), 3 cases of one king talking to a fellow king (a very closed group) where the word means "good friends", and the sons of Ishmael who after all at that time were so closely related to the sons of Isaac, that they made a closed group (this relationship later was dismissed by the Jews for several reasons, the main of which may have been the enmity the sons of Ishmael showed towards their relatives, but also the fact that they were 3/4 Egyptian - both Ishmael's mother, Hagar (1. Mos. 16/1), and his wife (1. Mos. 20/20) were from Egypt - and thus not Jews, not to forget they were outside the covenant Yahweh made with Isaac which were to be the lasting covenant with Yahweh (1. Mos. 21/12), and also not to forget the fact that they lived so far off - near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) - that the connection for natural reasons (strengthened by their enmity) was severed and forgotten. But not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs - this even more so as it is highly unlikely the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael, as his descendants as mentioned settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) and not in Arabia. (Also science tells "it is practically sure Abraham never came to Mecca" - and then Ishmael had no connection there). In addition modern DNA science has shown that what we call Arabs, was - and is - not a coherent tribe, but a mixture of people from neighboring countries who drifted into Arabia and its desert and settled there when the domestication of the camel around 3500-2ooo BC made life for humans possible there, and later on. Before that only a few tribes lived in the coastal areas and hardly any in the desert in inland Arabia. (The coastal areas were settled in the same way may be around 7ooo BC). Plus there were f.x. all the females slaves who were forced to sex, and thus making children - and mixing up the blood even more.
  3. 5. Mos. is a speech Moses made to and about his fellow Jews included some about their future. He used the words "brother/brothers" at least 31 times in his speech. With 2 exceptions (2/4 and 2/8) it is about members of the closed group the Jews - in spite of the wishful claims from Islam. Also the 2 exceptions are from a closed group including the Jews, but a somewhat extended one, as they include Edomites - descendants of Esau, the brother of Jacob (Esau also was called Edom). Esau was within the linage of the covenant which according to the Bible was promised by Yahweh, as he was the son of Isaac, through whom Yahweh according to the Bible said that linage should go (1. Mos. 21/12) and thus recognized as distant relatives of the Jews. Ishmael, from which the Arabs claim (most likely wrongly, as Ishmael and his descendants like mentioned settled near the border of Egypt and not in Arabia according to the Bible 1. Mos.25/18 - and in addition was outside this linage, and once more in addition, placed themselves outside the group/family (1. Mos. 25/18)) they were and even more so became members of the outside. And not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs in all the speech or anywhere else in the entire Bible - and also nowhere in the Quran. And not least: According to modern DNA tests Arabs are a mixed race - descendants of people drifting into the peninsula from all directions when it was settled + from millions of imported slaves from all around, included lots and lots from Africa.(DNA f.x. shows measurable amounts of Negro blood/DNA in Arabs.)
  4. The word is used 3 times in 5. Mos. 18, the short chapter Islam takes its quotes from (verses 2, 15 and 18), each time clearly meaning "your fellow Jews" like nearly all the other places in his speech. Not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs.
  5. Worse: Arabs and Arabia are mentioned something like 15 times (see below in this comment) in OT according to our latest leafing through the book. Without exception the connection is neutral or negative or even very negative (enemies) - not one single positive connection, not to mention any close relationship, let alone brotherhood.
  6. Even worse: The words "brother" "brethren", and "brothers" also are used figuratively at least 33 times in the Quran (see further down in this comment) - not one time linking Jews and Arabs. (There is one after a fashion exception: Hypocrites and Jews are linked - but that is something else). Also here the word is used within closed groups - like in the Bible. And not one word in all the Quran about Jews and Arabs being brothers. Not even a whisper.
  7. Worst: Moses in his speech said "a prophet like me". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet was a person who could see at least parts of the unseen, and thus a person who:
    1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
    2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
    3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.

Besides: Even if we pretend Muhammad was a real prophet, he was extremely different from Moses.

A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for any person saying many things through many years – but most of what he said which did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). But he did not guess the future correctly often - actually he statistically and according to the laws of probability should have "hit the mark" far more often by sheer chance than he did - there just are a few cases where Muslims will claim he foretold something correctly, and few if any of them are "perfect hits". But then the Quran makes it pretty clear that even though he was intelligent, Muhammad had little fantasy and he also was nearly unable to make innovative thinking. (Nearly all his tales and his ideas in reality were "borrowed" ones - though often twisted to fit his new religion. Definitely not a problem any omniscient god would have had).

The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, that he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 above), and finally that both he and Islam said and says that Muhammad was unable to see the unseen (extra revealing here is that the old Biblical title for a prophet, was "a seer" - one who saw the unseen (see further down)) and also that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” (prophesying is a kind of miracle - seeing what has not yet happened). (This fact that Islam admits there were no miracle connected to Muhammad "except the revelation of the Quran" also is a solid proof for that all the claimed miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths and in other legends, are made up stories). We also should add that his favorite wife (and infamous child wife) Aisha, according to Hadiths (f.x. Al-Bukhari) states that anyone saying Muhammad could foresee things, were wrong.

Verse 7/188b also is very relevant here: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen (= what is hidden and what has not happened yet*), I should have - - -". IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MUHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE THE PROPHETS' ABILITY TO SEE "THE UNSEEN" - he was no real prophet.

Also relevant here is as said that the original title of the Jewish prophets was not "prophet", but "seer" - one who saw at least parts of the unseen. (F.x. 1. Sam. #9/9, 1. Sam. 9/11, 1. Sam. 9/18, 1. Sam. 9/19, 2. Kings. 17/13, 1. Chr. 9/22, 1. Chr. 26/28, 1. Chr. 29/29, 2. Chr. 9/29, 2. Chr. 16/7, 2. Chr.16/10, 2. Chr. 19/2, 2. Chr. 29/25, Amos 7/12, Mic. 3/7 - some places the two titles even are used side by side in transition periods). Muhammad thus so definitely was no seer - prophet - even according to his own words; he had no "knowledge of the unseen".

####Many liked - and like - the title prophet , and there have been made other definitions for this title - the most common of these are "one who brings messages from a god", or "one who represents a god", or "one who acts/talks on behalf of a god". But the fact remains: Without being able to prophesy, he or she is no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something or himself - ok. An apostle - ok. But not a real prophet.

***This is a fact no Muslim will admit: Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet or seer. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why. It also is anybody's guess why he more often used the far less imposing title "Messenger" - a messenger boy is something far smaller than a prophet. Did he know or suspect that it was not true, and that explanations for the lack of prophesies from a self proclaimed prophet would be difficult to explain? Like the reason why he so seldom claims he is found in the Bible, may have been that he knew or suspected it was not true?

Besides: To belong in a special line of prophets, the teachings and the prophesies of course must be in line with the other prophets in that line, because a god follows a steady course and teaching (one of the proofs for that something is wrong with the Quran - Allah changes too much back and forth in his claimed teachings, and especially so if he had been identical to Yahweh: From rather harsh up to Jesus, then mild under the new covenant, then harsher, but reasonably mild under Muhammad in Mecca, and finally a full and partly immoral and unjust war god in Medina from ca. 622 - 624 AD when Muhammad started to need warriors to gain riches (mainly for bribes) and power). If not, one either belongs to another line - another god with another teaching/religion - or one simply is a false prophet (there have been many more false prophets than real ones through the times). Muhammad's religion was far from both the OT and even much further from NT, and in addition he was unable to make prophesies - even if he had been a prophet, he is far too far from the teaching of Yahweh and Yahweh’s Jewish prophets. He is not in that line of prophets and not speaking for the same god - too much is different. The Quran simply may be one of the many apocryphal - made up - manuscripts/books more or less loosely built on biblical traditions and "adjusted" to fit the religious teaching of sects more or less distant from the mother religion - the Quran in case is one of the more distant ones.

Also see 30/40h below.

The claim in reality is logical rubbish and taken far out of the context. But it is the only "real" claim they try to cling to (there are some others, but they are even more far out) - they have to, because if not the Quran is wrong and thus not from a god, and Islam a made up religion. Also see the chapter "Muhammad in the Bible" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - https://www.1000mistakes.com - and 2/77a and 7/157e below.

If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others.

The word "brother", "brothers", "brotherhood" used figuratively in OT:

  1. 1. Mos. 13/8: Abraham said so to Lot, his nephew. A much closed group.
  2. 1. Mos. 25/18: Ishmael’s sons lived in hostility to "all their brothers". This may mean they fought each other or that they were hostile to the Jews - in both cases they at this time were members of a much closed group: Close relatives Ishmael was the brother of Isaac. From the context we think the latter meaning is intended. But this relationship for several reasons over time drifted into nothing. It also is highly unlikely the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael, as the only somewhat reliable source about these - the Bible - tells they settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) and not in Arabia (not to mention in Mecca). #####Also science says "it is practically sure that Abraham never was in Mecca" - so Ishmael had no connection that way, too. And not least: Ishmael and his descendant were outside the covenant between the Jews and Yahweh - a covenant made to Isaac (1. Mos.21/12). At the time the Books of Moses were written - at least 1000 years before Muhammad - there also was no reason for the writer to place Ishmael and his sons a wrong place.
  3. 1. Mos. 29/4: Here in the meaning "dear friends" indicating peaceful intention. The nomad Jacob to some fellow shepherds.
  4. 3. Mos. 21/10: Fellow Jews - fellow priests even.
  5. 4. Mos. 20/3: Fellow Jews.
  6. 4. Mos. 20/14: Moses to the Edomites (= fellow descendants of Isaac and reckoned to be (distant) relatives of the Jews).
  7. 5. Mos. 1/16: Fellow Jews.
  8. 5. Mos. 1/16: Fellow Jews ("brother Israelites").
  9. 5. Mos. 1/28: Fellow Jews (the spies into Canaan).
  10. 5. Mos. 2/4: Edomites - fellow descendants of Isaac.
  11. 5. Mos. 2/8: Edomites - fellow descendants of Isaac.
  12. 5. Mos. 3.18: Fellow Jews ("brother Israelites").
  13. 5. Mos. 3/20: Fellow Jews.
  14. 5. Mos. 10/9: Fellow Jews - the 11 other tribes of Jews are the brothers of the Levites (12. tribe).
  15. 5. Mos. 15/2: Fellow Jew "- - - fellow Israelite or brother - - -" = fellow Jew = brother.
  16. 5. Mos. 15/7: Fellow Jews ("your (Jewish*) brothers").
  17. 5. Mos. 15/7: Fellow Jews ("your poor brother (Jew*)").
  18. 5. Mos. 15/9: Fellow Jews (your needy (Jewish*) brother).
  19. 5. Mos. 15/11: Fellow Jews.
  20. 5. Mos. 17/15: Fellow Jew (their king had to be "from among your own brothers" = a Jew. Just the same expression as he used in 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, and you may bet big money on that Moses did not mean they should choose an Arab for their king!).
  21. 5. Mos. 17/15: Fellow Jew (take no king who is not a Jew - "not a brother Israelite").
  22. 5. Mos. 18/2: Fellow Jews (Levites "shall have no inheritance among their brothers" - among the 11 other Jewish tribes).
  23. 5. Mos. 18/15: Fellow Jew ("a prophet like me (Moses*) from among your own brothers" - note the similarity of the expression with f.x. 17/15 and 18/2 - also see the texts of the two under 17/15).
  24. 5. Mos. 18/18: Fellow Jew ("a prophet like you (Moses*) from among their own brothers". Identical to 18/15, except here Yahweh is speaking.
  25. 5. Mos. 19/18: Fellow Jew - this is from Moses' speech to and about his Jews like all in 5. Mos.
  26. 5. Mos. 19/19: Fellow Jew - see 19/18 just above.
  27. 5. Mos. 20/8: Fellow Jew.
  28. 5. Mos. 22/1: Fellow Jew.
  29. 5. Mos. 22/2: Fellow Jew.
  30. 5. Mos. 22/3: Fellow Jew.
  31. 5. Mos. 22/4: Fellow Jew.
  32. 5. Mos. 23/7: Edomites - see 4.Mos 20/14 above.
  33. 5. Mos. 23/19: Fellow Jew.
  34. 5. Mos. 23/20: Fellow Jew ("a brother Israelite").
  35. 5. Mos. 24/7: Fellow Jew ("his brother Israelite").
  36. 5. Mos. 25/3: Fellow Jew.

  37. 5. Mos. 33/16: Fellow Jews ("Joseph" here means the tribe - actually the 2 half-tribes Manasseh and Ephraim - and thus figurative meaning).
  38. 5. Mos. 33/24: Fellow Jews - the other 11 Jewish tribes.
  39. Joshua 1/14: Fellow Jews - ahead of the other Jews.
  40. Joshua 1/14: Fellow Jews - help other Jews.
  41. Joshua 14/8: Fellow Jews - the other spies to Canaan.
  42. Joshua 22/3: Fellow Jews.
  43. Joshua 22/4: Fellow Jews.
  44. Joshua 22/7: Fellow Jews.
  45. Joshua 22/8: Fellow Jews.
  46. Judges 1/3: Fellow Jews (the tribe of Simonites were the "brothers" of the tribe of Judah.
  47. Judges 1/17: Fellow Jews - see Judges 1/3 just above.
  48. Judges 9/3: Fellow Jews - Abimelech was the "brother" of the people in Shechem.
  49. Judges 9/18: Fellow Jews - see Judges 9/3 just above.
  50. Judges 18/8: Fellow Jews - other members of the Jewish tribe Dan.
  51. Judges 18/14: Fellow Jews - see Judges 18/8 just above.
  52. Judges 20/23: Fellow Jews - Benjaminites were the brothers of the other 11 Jewish tribes.
  53. Judges 20/28: Fellow Jews - see Judges 20/23 just above.
  54. Judges 21/6: Fellow Jews - see Judges 20/23 above.
  55. 1. Sam. 30/23: Fellow Jews - David's men.
  56. 2. Sam. 1/26: Fellow Jew - a close Jewish friend of David.
  57. 2. Sam. 2/26: Fellow Jews.
  58. 2. Sam. 2/27: Fellow Jews.
  59. 2. Sam. 19/12: Fellow Jews.
  60. 2. Sam. 19/41: Fellow Jews - the Judah tribe was the brother of the other Jewish tribes.
  61. 2. Sam. 20/9: Fellow Jew.
  62. 1. Kings 9/13: An exception: Greetings between 2 kings - but a closed group: Kings.
  63. 1. Kings 12/24: Fellow Jews.
  64. 1. Kings 13/30: Fellow Jew.
  65. 1. Kings 20/32: Similar to 1. Kings 9/13.
  66. 1. Kings 20/32: Similar to 1. Kings 9/13.
  67. 1. Chr. 13/2: Fellow Jews.
  68. 1. Chr. 15/16: Fellow Jews - fellow Levites actually.
  69. 1. Chr. 15/17: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
  70. 1. Chr. 15/17: Fellow Jews - the Merarites of Levi.
  71. 1. Chr. 15/18: Fellow Jews.
  72. 1. Chr. 23/30: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
  73. 1. Chr. 24/31: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
  74. 1. Chr. 24/31: Fellow Jew (fellow Levite).
  75. 1. Chr. 28/2: Fellow Jews - David's men and underlings.
  76. 2. Chr. 11/4: Fellow Jews.
  77. 2. Chr. 19/10: Fellow Jews.
  78. 2. Chr. 29/15: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
  79. 2. Chr. 30/7: Fellow Jews.
  80. Ezra 3/8: Fellow Jews.
  81. Ezra 6/20: Fellow Jews (the priests).
  82. Ezra 7/18: Fellow Jews ("your brother Jews").
  83. Ezra 8/24: Fellow Jews.
  84. Nehemiah 5/1: Fellow Jews ("their Jewish brothers").
  85. Nehemiah 5/8: Fellow Jews ("our Jewish brothers").
  86. Nehemiah 5/8: Fellow Jews.
  87. Nehemiah 10/29: Fellow Jews.
  88. Nehemiah 13/13: Fellow Jews.
  89. Isaiah 66/5: Fellow Jews (must be Jews as believing in Yahweh, at least officially).
  90. Isaiah 66/20: Fellow Jews - bringing them from other countries they have lived.
  91. Jeremiah 7/15: Fellow Jews - from the Jewish tribe Ephraim.
  92. Jeremiah 22/18: Fellow Jews.
  93. Ezekiel 11/14: Fellow Jews - your brothers included all Israel.
  94. Hosea 2/1: Fellow Jews.
  95. 96 Amos 1/11: Edom (descendants of Esau - see 4. Mos. 20/14 above) will be punished for sins against Jews.
  96. Obadiah 1/12: Similar to Amos 1/11 just above.

  97. Micah 5/5: Fellow Jews.
  98. Zech. 10/14: Fellow Jews - Judah and Israel (the southern and the northern Jewish country).

There may be a few more. For one thing we may have overlooked one or a few, and for another there are a number of cases where it is not clear whether it is meant literary or figuratively, and these cases we have omitted if we were not pretty sure it was meant figuratively.

Also worth noticing here is that the few times - f.x. only 2 in Moses' speech = 5. Mos. - when Jews are not intended, the intended group always are named or clearly indicated. No Arab are named or intended anywhere in his speech - or anywhere else neither in the Bible nor in the Quran in such connection.

Are anybody able to find Arab brothers of the Jews here? - especially when you know there are no such ones also in the Quran, and that the some 15 times Arabs and Arabia are mentioned in OT, they either are mentioned in neutral words, in negative words, or as enemies, and never as friends, not to mention close friends or relatives.


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".