The lines below are the comments on the very first page of 1000mistakes.com. In sha Allah, this will be our first point for discussion.
“#…(Islam is the only of the big religions which not only accepts, but often advises the use of dishonesty – al-Taqiyya, Kitman, deceit and even broken words/oaths (see separate chapters in “1000+ Mistakes in the Quran) – to promote or defend “the Religion of Truth” (quite an ironic slogan for a religion partly relying on dishonesty)).”
The refutations to this false claim will, in sha Allah, foster two categories : Islamic Jurisprudence and Comparative approach.
We shall take the Islamic Jurisprudence perspective of the above claim from Sheikh Umar Paiko , while the comparative approach shall come from the desk of Academy of Islamic Propagation (ACADIP) with the later coming first.
We have carried out a thorough examination on verses in the Old Testament and New Testament on whether lying is allowed. The verses I encountered shows that deception and lying is permitted in certain situations. The circumstances in which the verses show that one can utter falsehood are the following:
– Lying in order to save innocent lives from being killed
– Using deception in war so as to get the upper hand
– Lying in order to conceal your motives
– Lying so one can escape persecution
– Deceiving so you don’t get harmed
– Advancing the Christian faith by means of deception
It is evident from reading the Bible that it does give permission for one to lie, to save innocent lives, to use deception in war and to shield people from being harmed, persecuted and other examples. We shall make a brief statement on the verses and provide Bible-commentaries to get a better understanding of the passages.
Example 1 : Jesus Deceive His Brothers – Taqiyya?
“Go to the feast yourselves; I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.” So saying, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also went up, not publicly but in private.” – John 7:8-10″
In the above verse, we read that Jesus tells his brothers (or companions) that he will not be going to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Tabernacles. However, as soon as the companions leave, he goes privately.
Is Jesus not lying here?
The first person to bring this to discussion was Porphyry, a pagan who brought this to the attention of the Church fathers. His argument was something along the lines that since Jesus lied, then he cannot be God.
The difficulty arose from the Church fathers as to how to make sense of the passage. How to explain or should I say, how to make it such that Jesus is not indicted with deception. The word, ‘yet’ was added to make it seem that Jesus was consistent and was not lying to his companions when he said he will not be going up [‘yet’].
However, although the word ‘yet’ was added, it did not escape Christian and non-Christian scholars eyes that the word was added later. The original reading of Jesus in the Gospel was that he will not go to the festival. There are many Christian Biblical-commentaries that attest, and say that the word ‘yet’ was added in order to protect Jesus.
Note: Those missionaries who claim that they have ‘ancient manuscripts’ which has the word ‘yet’ in there is not true. These are the same MSS Christian and non-Christian scholars who attest that they have been tampered with.
A Commentary, Critical, Expository And Practical On the Gospel Of John – John J. Owen, D.D.
S. Go ye up without waiting for me.
I go not up yet. The word translated yet, is not found in several of the oldest and most authoritative copies, and was perhaps added to shield our Lord from the charge of inconstancy of purpose, if not untruthfulness, in going up to the feast, after positively saying that he should not go up.
Also we found the following lines from the book of Ron Rhodes titled “Commonly Misunderstood Bible Verses: Clear Explanations for the Difficult passages”:
…scriptures indicate that under certain circumstances, lying is not condemned. The midwives found themselves in a moral dilemma. Would they obey God’s higher law of saving lives or the lesser obligation of submitting to the dictates of Pharaoh? The midwives chose to obey God’s higher law. The saving of innocent lives a higher obligation than obeying and telling the truth to the government. God thus did not hold the midwives responsible for what they did. In fact, the text tells us that God blessed them ‘because the midwives feared God’ (Exodus 1:21). Their fear of God caused them to obey the high law of saving lives….
No wonder Professor Robert W. McGee had no choice but to admit the reality of Taqiya. He wrote on page 155 of his book titled ” The Ethics of Tax Evasion: Perspectives in Theory and Practice ” :
Finally, the reader should realize that Jewish law considers the prohibition of lying as only relative iniquity. This means that under certain conditions one is allowed to lie in order to prevent a larger injustice from being perpetrated. For example, in regards to taxes, a person is allowed to lie regarding his/her income to an illegal government. Under this circumstance, he/she is not considered to have violated the Biblical prohibition of keeping away from falsehoods. Evidence that lying is permitted under this circumstance is found in Tractate Nadorim (62b). It is described how a Rabbi allows a congregant to say that he was a servant of a priest in order to avoid paying a tax which the government did not have a right to collect.
ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE REFUTATION BY SHEIKH UMAR PAIKO
Please read the Autobiography of Sheikh Umar Paiko by clicking on the link below:
The highly educative sermon delivered by Sheikh Umar Paiko on the issue of Al-Taqiyya is in audio format.
Please listen live to this and similar others live on ACADIP ONLINE RADIO every Saturday 9pm-11pm. The link to ACADIP radio is given below:
1090total visits,2visits today