Verses 155-156 seem to be an abbreviation of Exodus 24:1-11 and Numbers 11:16-30. There are distinct disagreements, however, between the Biblical text and the Quran. The phrase they were seized with a violent earthquake in v. 155 is uniformly interpreted by Islamic scholars to mean that the 70 elders were killed by an earthquake. The back-story seems to be hinted at in 2:55 ~ the 70 elders are the individuals who demanded to see Allah. So Allah appeared to them and killed them (they were seized with a thunderbolt in 2:55). The account here in surah 7 would make better sense, I think, and would harmonize with surah 2 more easily, if it said that Allah then resurrected the 70 elders, but it does not seem to do so.
This account which parallels Muhammads situation in Mecca, when the leaders of the city insisted that he show them Allah, or some confirming sign cannot be squared with Exodus 24, which emphasizes that the 70 elders survived their close encounter with God. It seems possible that a rabbinical tradition that the 70 elders survived Gods presence by dying, and then entering Gods presence, and were afterwards brought back to life, may have been encountered by Muhammad.
Moses protest in v. 155 closely resembles his protest in Exodus 32:12-13. Likewise part of v. 156 resembles Exodus 33:19 (and to an even greater degree, Romans 9:18).
I think it is fair to say that the Quran depicts Allah telling Moses about the future arrival of Muhammad in v. 157. If Muhammad had just identified himself in the same terms that describe The Prophet in Deuteronomy 18, he might have been more credible. As it is, verse 157 bristles with self-endorsement, and anachronistically refers to the Injil, which was not yet written at the time of Moses. Just as his opponents were promised retribution, those who assist him are promised success. The Quran consistently teaches that ones eternal destiny depends on whether or not one accepts Muhammad as Allah's prophet.
The narrative about Moses breaks off abruptly at the end of v. 157. It almost looks like Muhammad realized that he was pressing the limits of plausibility as he depicted the sides of Sinai echoing with complimentary descriptions of himself. In v. 158 Muhammad resumes speaking directly, re-affirming that he is the prophet Moses predicted The Prophet who can neither read nor write, according to the Hilali-Khan translation. (Also, v. 158 says, referring to Allah, There is none to worship but He! It is He who gives life and causes death. -- a loose quotation of the first part of Deuteronomy 32:39.)
Is the Hilali-Khan rendering accurate? There is some debate about that. At www.quran.org/library/art...gatut.html , which seems to be part of a Khalifite website, an author by the name of Dr. G. Adisoma attempts to make a case that Muhammad could read and write. Another page at the same site (at www.quran.org/ap28.htm ) insists that the Quran was "written down with his [Muhammads] own hand" (which is, frankly, quite a fictitious claim). Rodwell expresses a suspicion that Muhammad was adopting a term which some Jews had used to describe him when the Jews used it, they meant to refer to him as the heathen prophet. Muhammad may have adapted it to mean something like The peoples prophet or The Non-professional Prophet, and that might be the intended meaning here in 7:158. So this verse is not necessarily a claim that he was illiterate.
There's a more direct statement, though, in 29:48 ~ Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted. In surah 29 Muhammad seems to state that he was illiterate, perhaps to discourage the idea that he had the ability to produce the Quran through natural means.
Another idea worth thinking about is that Muhammad, who believed, a la v. 157, that the Torah and Injil tell about him, had somewhere heard a reading of Isaiah 29:11-12, and believed that it was a prophetic description of his initial experience in the Cave of Mount Hira -- an experience in which, according to Muhammad, Gabriel told him to recite something, and Muhammad replied that he could not recite it (or, read it). Its also possible that Muhammad had developed this misinterpretation before his revelations began. (More on that later, I hope.)
Lets pause to take a look at Muhammads claim that the Torah and Injil make references to him. It seems plain enough that Muhammad believed that he was the Prophet described in Deuteronomy 18, and that he was the Paraclete described in the Gospel of John (or, more accurately, in the Diatessaron). However, these claims do not survive close examination. Some other writers have done my work for me; here are some links to articles which display the weaknesses of Muhammads claims and the claims that Islamic apologists make regarding the passages of Scripture which are cited by Muslims as references to Muhammad. Bear in mind, if/when you examine these sites, that theres a safety-net for the Islamic claims: Muslims can always claim that a Bible-passage originally prophesied about Muhammad perspicuously, but that it has been corrupted.
www.apologeticspress.org/...s0311a.htm Dr. Dave Miller examines a few passages which Muslims treat as prophecies about Muhammad.
debate.org.uk/topics/isam.../bible.htm a brief essay examining the claims that Deut. 33:2, Deut. 18:15, and John 14:16 are about Muhammad.
www.answering-islam.org/G...l2/9b.html John Gilchrists thorough take on the subject.
In v. 159 Muhammad begins to return to the subject of the history of Moses and the Israelites. But his statement here is about Jews in his own era. This is probably a reference to helpful people Muhammad had known in his days as a merchant and caravan-driver.
Verses 160-162 mostly echo material found in 2:60, 2:58, 4:154, and 2:59. The statement that the Jews, when told to say forgiveness, (hittah) said, instead, a grain-seed or wheat (hintah), and were subsequently tormented by Allah, creates a parallel with Muhammads own situation. Some Jews who visited Muhammad used puns to subtly insult him, as stated in 2:104 and 4:46. The Jews used the word Raina in such a way that they could tell Muhammad that it meant (in Arabic) Lets be attentive, or "Take heed," while telling one another that it meant (in Hebrew) Our bad one.
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
This account which parallels Muhammads situation in Mecca, when the leaders of the city insisted that he show them Allah, or some confirming sign cannot be squared with Exodus 24, which emphasizes that the 70 elders survived their close encounter with God. It seems possible that a rabbinical tradition that the 70 elders survived Gods presence by dying, and then entering Gods presence, and were afterwards brought back to life, may have been encountered by Muhammad.
Moses protest in v. 155 closely resembles his protest in Exodus 32:12-13. Likewise part of v. 156 resembles Exodus 33:19 (and to an even greater degree, Romans 9:18).
I think it is fair to say that the Quran depicts Allah telling Moses about the future arrival of Muhammad in v. 157. If Muhammad had just identified himself in the same terms that describe The Prophet in Deuteronomy 18, he might have been more credible. As it is, verse 157 bristles with self-endorsement, and anachronistically refers to the Injil, which was not yet written at the time of Moses. Just as his opponents were promised retribution, those who assist him are promised success. The Quran consistently teaches that ones eternal destiny depends on whether or not one accepts Muhammad as Allah's prophet.
The narrative about Moses breaks off abruptly at the end of v. 157. It almost looks like Muhammad realized that he was pressing the limits of plausibility as he depicted the sides of Sinai echoing with complimentary descriptions of himself. In v. 158 Muhammad resumes speaking directly, re-affirming that he is the prophet Moses predicted The Prophet who can neither read nor write, according to the Hilali-Khan translation. (Also, v. 158 says, referring to Allah, There is none to worship but He! It is He who gives life and causes death. -- a loose quotation of the first part of Deuteronomy 32:39.)
Is the Hilali-Khan rendering accurate? There is some debate about that. At www.quran.org/library/art...gatut.html , which seems to be part of a Khalifite website, an author by the name of Dr. G. Adisoma attempts to make a case that Muhammad could read and write. Another page at the same site (at www.quran.org/ap28.htm ) insists that the Quran was "written down with his [Muhammads] own hand" (which is, frankly, quite a fictitious claim). Rodwell expresses a suspicion that Muhammad was adopting a term which some Jews had used to describe him when the Jews used it, they meant to refer to him as the heathen prophet. Muhammad may have adapted it to mean something like The peoples prophet or The Non-professional Prophet, and that might be the intended meaning here in 7:158. So this verse is not necessarily a claim that he was illiterate.
There's a more direct statement, though, in 29:48 ~ Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted. In surah 29 Muhammad seems to state that he was illiterate, perhaps to discourage the idea that he had the ability to produce the Quran through natural means.
Another idea worth thinking about is that Muhammad, who believed, a la v. 157, that the Torah and Injil tell about him, had somewhere heard a reading of Isaiah 29:11-12, and believed that it was a prophetic description of his initial experience in the Cave of Mount Hira -- an experience in which, according to Muhammad, Gabriel told him to recite something, and Muhammad replied that he could not recite it (or, read it). Its also possible that Muhammad had developed this misinterpretation before his revelations began. (More on that later, I hope.)
Lets pause to take a look at Muhammads claim that the Torah and Injil make references to him. It seems plain enough that Muhammad believed that he was the Prophet described in Deuteronomy 18, and that he was the Paraclete described in the Gospel of John (or, more accurately, in the Diatessaron). However, these claims do not survive close examination. Some other writers have done my work for me; here are some links to articles which display the weaknesses of Muhammads claims and the claims that Islamic apologists make regarding the passages of Scripture which are cited by Muslims as references to Muhammad. Bear in mind, if/when you examine these sites, that theres a safety-net for the Islamic claims: Muslims can always claim that a Bible-passage originally prophesied about Muhammad perspicuously, but that it has been corrupted.
www.apologeticspress.org/...s0311a.htm Dr. Dave Miller examines a few passages which Muslims treat as prophecies about Muhammad.
debate.org.uk/topics/isam.../bible.htm a brief essay examining the claims that Deut. 33:2, Deut. 18:15, and John 14:16 are about Muhammad.
www.answering-islam.org/G...l2/9b.html John Gilchrists thorough take on the subject.
In v. 159 Muhammad begins to return to the subject of the history of Moses and the Israelites. But his statement here is about Jews in his own era. This is probably a reference to helpful people Muhammad had known in his days as a merchant and caravan-driver.
Verses 160-162 mostly echo material found in 2:60, 2:58, 4:154, and 2:59. The statement that the Jews, when told to say forgiveness, (hittah) said, instead, a grain-seed or wheat (hintah), and were subsequently tormented by Allah, creates a parallel with Muhammads own situation. Some Jews who visited Muhammad used puns to subtly insult him, as stated in 2:104 and 4:46. The Jews used the word Raina in such a way that they could tell Muhammad that it meant (in Arabic) Lets be attentive, or "Take heed," while telling one another that it meant (in Hebrew) Our bad one.
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
