Dear Brother:
I was reading one of the online books you have on your web page "Muhammad
the Natural Successor to Jesus". Towards the end of this particular book I
found this verse
"And he (Moses) said, the Lord came from Sinai, and rose from Seir unto
them; he shined Forth from Mount Paran (that is in Arabia), and he (Muhammad)
came with Ten Thousand Saints: from his right hand went a fiery law For them.
(HOLY BIBLE) Deuteronomy 33: 2"
I always look up verses that are quoted and upon looking up this particular
verse "Deuteronomy 33:2" what I found was not like that which was stated
which goes like this " He said: "The Lord came from Sinai and dawned over
them from Seir; he shone forth from Mount Paran. He came with a myriads of
holy ones from the south, from his mountain slopes. " now this was from the
"New International Version"...
and again the same verse this time from the "Scofield Reference Bible" goes
as follows...." And he said, The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir
unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands
of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them."
Here is my dilemma, in my ignorance of this part of the bible, even though I
read more I cannot figure out how they realized that "Muhammad" should be
inserted into the spot of "he"... if you could please enlighten me in this I
would be of great appreciation......
Thanks for your time in which you might spend on this answer for me...
JazakAllah....
Your Sister in Islam
Maria Mahmood....
Assallamu Allaikum Sister
You know, three years ago I faced a similar dilemma when this verse sprung up. This is because
I've noticed Muslim writers tend to give a brief elaboration on it, thinking the
verse speaks for itself. But will give so much explanation on the "Prophet like Moses" (Deut. 18:18) and the comforter or Paraclete that was to come after Jesus, Isaiah's prophecies etc. It only led me to doing more research on the issue, using
Judeo-Christian and Muslim sources.
As early as the 12th century, a Muslim scholar and geographer commented that this related to the
Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). And many Jews who converted to Islam during in the past centuries, was because of such Prophecies of Muhammed by Moses (Peace be upon them both). I'm only assuming that the verse in question could have been one of them.
But to the issue at hand, lets dissect this verse, and look at it keyword by keyword.
And he (Moses) said, the Lord came from Sinai, and rose from Seir unto
them; he shined Forth from Mount Paran, and he came with Ten Thousand
Saints: from his right hand went a fiery law For them.
(HOLY BIBLE) Deuteronomy 33: 2
Remember the verse (Deut, 18:18) about Moses speaking of a Prophet of that would arise like himself. If you've read
Sheikh Deedats book, you'll see that this refers to the Prophet of Islam, and not Jesus (Peace be upon them).
In this statement by Moses, he is making a prophecy about the Prophet who would be like him. He only mentioned one Prophecy of a Prophet that was to come, and it's fair to say that this Deut 33:2 can be linked with Deut 18:18.
This is subject to debate, and its only a possible interpretation.
"THE LORD CAME FROM SINAI, AND ROSE FROM SEIR UNTO THEM ; HE SHINED FORTH FROM MOUNT PARAN..."
According to traditional Biblical atlases, Sinai, Seir and Paran are placed in the Sinai Peninsula. This is incorrect for obvious reasons, this verse makes mention of three distinct entities. It does not make sense for someone to come from one area, rise from that same area, and shine from that very same area. Its needless repetition and self-contradictory. Placing it in a more modern understanding, Does it make sense for someone to say
"I came out of California, then went to Los Angeles, to make an appearance in San Francisco"
I know its confusing, but to scholars (all Christian), these places have been placed in their proper geographical landscape.
SEIR if you look at a map today, it is the Arabic ASIR (a region in western
Saudi Arabia). Kamal Salibi, a Lebanese Christian scholar in his book
"The Bible came from Arabia" says in regards to Seir on page 204
"..The name Asir ('sr, or 'syr') denotes the tribal highlands around Abha.. The name appers to be a survival, by metathesis of the Biblical 'Seir', or 'Mount Seir'"
and it became applied (although the author does not indicate when) to the administrated (south of Makkah) Western borderland. While the Hejaz became the administrated north of Makkah.
Mount Paran, these are the mountain or series of mountains, that exist just east of Makkah.
In Arabic, it's pronounced F'aran. This is only a difference of linguistcs; as the Jews
pronounced Palestine with a 'P'. We pronounce it as Philistine, the beginning having an 'F' vocal sound. In the Douay (Catholic) version,
the Deuteronomy 33:2 verse is written as
"..he hath appeared from mount Pharan.."
Which leans more towards the Arabic/Aramaic way of pronouncing it.
The mention of Paran is significant, as it rules out any Jewish or Christian claim to this verse, unless they want to contend that their Prophets dwellings where in Arabia, especially on the outskirts of Makkah. Who else supports this fact?, the Book of
Genesis does. Remember the story when Hagar and her son Ishmael are banished to a wilderness. Where was this wilderness?
And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.
Genesis 21:21
And Arab and Islamic history and tradition shows that Ishmael dwelt in the
Western Arabia (particularly around the area of Makkah), and him and his father built the
Kaaba. And in due time, the descendants dwelt in this region, and the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) sprang also from the very same region. It would be ludicrous to say that the Arabs dwelt in the Sinai peninsula, especially when their is no Biblical
or anthropological support for this notion. And who would know their own origins better, the Jews of Canaan, or the Arabs themselves. I don't think the Hebrews were in the game of recording the traditions and wars, trades etc of the Arabian people.
What we have established here is that this verse is to take place in this specific region of the Middle east; Seir and Paran which is in Western Arabia. Not in the
Sinai peninsula.
This verse is very explicit in terms of historical context and geography as you can see. Now if you know your Islamic history pretty well, you'll remember that the Prophet of
Islam's triumphant march onto Makka in 630 C.E. In which he smashed the idols that adorned the Kaaba. On this event, he was accompanied by 10 000 sahabas
(companians). All Islamic sources seem to be unanimous on this number. Biblical history does not have any recording of 10 000 persons of any physical/historical
event in Paran and Seir.
Have you ever came across the Biblical verse in which the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) is mentioned by name?.
His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely (MAHAMADIMM). This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of
Jerusalem.
SONG OF SOLOMON 5:16
A few verses earlier in verse 10-11 in which Solomon is giving a description of the Prophet.
My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand.
His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven.
Again, we see the "ten thousand" mentioned. And the Prophet of Islam is the Chief or head of the ten thousand believers.
Sister, I've also realised the same problem with this verse in different versions of the Bible.
There seems to be an inconsistency of translation. For example, read how the Basic English Bible translates this verse
He said, The Lord came from Sinai, dawning on them from Seir; shining out from Mount Paran, coming from Meribath Kadesh: from his right hand went flames of fire: his wrath made waste the peoples.
(BASIC ENGLISH BIBLE)
See the deception here for example. They put Meribath Kadesh, an area that is far placed from Arabia. And not only that, this place is not even mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures. All this is for the "convenience" of the modern reader, this is not translation, but biased interpretation. This applies to the other verses you quoted me,
especially in reference to the words "myriads" and "from the south", incidentally
the latter adds weight to the verse in regards to Arabia. As it is south of the
Sinai after all. The word r@babah is in the Hebrew originals, and it means ten thousand. Just like you might say that century means one hundred. Myriad means "innumerable or countless
number", thus it only makes the verse more general than specific, but it no ways cancels out the
prophecy of Muhammed (PBUH) for the obvious geographical reasons we have looked upon.
Sister, I would like you to perform a simple exercise, go to this specific url (the Blue Letter Bible site) below
http://www.khouse.org/blueletter/tmp_dir/conc/952199790.html
in which it will show you the verse in question in Hebrew, with pronunciations and all.
In case anyone disputes this verse with you, show them this url (or better still
print it out) in which it will strengthen the argument for the Muslim position.
Finally "from his right hand went a fiery law For them." statement is in regards to the Sharia (Islamic Law) that replaced the pagan customs and rituals of the unbelievers in Makkah in 630 C.E.. It was fiery in the sense of revolutionary, it upturned everything the pagans believed in, and replaced it with God's Law. Just like Moses brought a fiery law, he foresaw his long distant successor, doing the same.
As you can see sister, geographical, linguistic and historical factors support this position for it being in reference to the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). I'll start to write up an essay on this verse, I'll also be scanning
various historical maps etc Insh'allah. Jazak'allah sister for asking the question, as I'm
now more motivated to start on this research essay that I have put on hold for such a long time. I hope I have answered your question, if not, please ask me again with deeper clarification. And I'll answer it
Insh'allah.
Jazak'allah
Malik Ali