Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted - Are there any forgeries in the New Testament

Extract from Bart Erhman's book - Jesus Interrupted

Of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, only eight almost certainly go back to the author whose name they bear: the seven undisputed letters of Paul (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon) and the Revelation of John (although we aren’t sure who this John was).

The other nineteen books fall into three groups.

• Misattributed writings
As we have already seen, the Gospels are probably misattributed. John the disciple did not write John, and Matthew did not write Matthew. Other anonymous books have been wrongly attributed to someone famous. The book of Hebrews does not name Paul as its author, and it almost certainly was not written by Paul. But it was eventually admitted into the canon of Scripture (see chapter 7) because church fathers came to think it was written by Paul.

• Homonymous writings
The term “homonymy” means “having the same name.” A “homonymous writing” is one that is  written by someone who has the same name as someone who is famous. For example, the book of James was no doubt written by someone named James, but the author does not claim to be any particular James. It was an extraordinarily common name. Later church fathers accepted the book as part of Scripture because they claimed that this James was James the brother of Jesus. In the book itself there is no such claim.

• Pseudepigraphic writings
Some books of the New Testament were written in the names of people who did not actually write them. Scholars have known this for well over a century. The term for this phenomenon is “pseudepigraphy”—literally, “writing that goes under a false name.” Scholars have not been overly precise in their use of this term and tend to use it because it avoids the negative connotations associated with the term “forgery.” Whichever term they use, biblical scholars have argued for a long time that there are New Testament books whose authors knowingly claimed to be someone other than who they were.

(Jesus Interrupted - Pages 112-113)
 
Bart Ehrman said on a radio broadcast that about 75 percent of the New Testament documents are supposedly forged. He has written a separate book on it - Forged.

Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted - Contrasting accounts of Jesus's Death in Gospels of Mark and Luke

Extracts from Bart Ehrman's book - Jesus Interrupted

Below is a brief extract from Bart Ehrman's book - Jesus Interrupted, regarding the death of Jesus Christ.

We will be analysing two Gospel narratives regarding the death of Jesus - Mark and Luke.

Mark's Gospel

The death narrative can be found in the Gospel of Mark Chapter 15, Verses 16 through to 39.

In Mark’s version of the story (Mark 15:16–39), Jesus is condemned  to death by Pontius Pilate, mocked and beaten by the Roman soldiers, and taken off to be crucified. Simon of Cyrene carries his cross. Jesus says nothing the entire time. The soldiers crucify Jesus, and he still says nothing. Both of the robbers being crucified with him mock him. Those passing by mock him. The Jewish leaders mock him. Jesus is silent until the very end, when he utters the wretched cry, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani,” which Mark translates from the Aramaic for his readers as, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 65)

The point is that Jesus has been rejected by everyone: betrayed by one of his own, denied three times by his closest follower, abandoned by all his disciples, rejected by the Jewish leaders, condemned by the Roman authorities, mocked by the priests, the passersby, and even by the two others being crucified with him. At the end he even feels forsaken by God Himself. Jesus is absolutely in the depths of despair and heart-wrenching anguish, and that’s how he dies. Mark is trying to say something by this portrayal. He doesn’t want his readers to take solace in the fact that God was really there providing Jesus with physical comfort. He dies in agony, unsure of the reason he must die.
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 66)

Luke's Gospel

The death narrative can be found in the Gospel of Luke Chapter 23, Verses 26 through to 49.

In Luke, Jesus is taken off to be executed, and Simon of Cyrene is compelled to carry his cross. But Jesus is not silent on the way to his crucifixion. En route he sees a number of women wailing over what is happening to him, and he turns to them and says, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children” (Luke 23:28). He goes on to prophesy the coming destruction that they will face. Jesus does not appear to be in shock over what is happening to him. He is more concerned with others  around him than with his own fate.
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 67)

Moreover, Jesus is not silent while being nailed to the cross, as in Mark. Instead he prays, “Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34) Jesus appears to have close communion with God and is concerned more for those who
are doing this to him than for himself. Jesus is mocked by the Jewish leaders and the Roman soldiers, but explicitly not by both men being crucified with him, unlike in Mark. Instead, one of them mocks Jesus but the other rebukes the first for doing so, insisting
that whereas they deserve what they are getting, Jesus has done nothing wrong  (remember that Luke stresses Jesus’ complete innocence). He then asks of Jesus, “Remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And Jesus gives the compelling reply, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise” (23:42–43). In this account Jesus is not at all confused about what is happening to him or why. He is completely calm and in control of the situation; he knows what is about to occur, and he knows what will happen afterward: he will wake up in God’s paradise, and this criminal will be there with him. This is a far cry from the Jesus of Mark, who felt forsaken to the end. 
 (Jesus Interrupted - Page 67-68)

Most significant of all, rather than uttering a cry expressing his sense of total abandonment at the end (“Why have you forsaken me?”), in Luke, Jesus prays to God in a loud voice, saying, “Father into your hands I commend my spirit.” He then breathes his last and dies (23:46). This is not a Jesus who feels forsaken by God and wonders why he is going through this pain of desertion and death. It is a Jesus who feels God’s presence with him and is comforted by the fact that God is on his side. He is fully cognizant of what is happening to him and why, and he commits himself to the loving care of his heavenly Father, confident of what is to happen next. 
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 68)

Conclusion 

It is clear from the above 2 narratives that there are contrasting differences between the accounts. Since Mark was the first Gospel to be written, Bart Ehrman is trying to point out how the story is now changed and edited by Luke.

Is there any way to reconcile these 2 narratives?

Mark is saying Jesus died in agony,felt forsaken by God and not sure of his death. Luke is saying Jesus willfully offered himself to God, in complete control of the situation.  

Which is which? You decide.

The Only and True God of Jesus's Answer to this Problem

And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
 Quran (4:157) 


As I have mentioned elsewhere before, one word to sum up 2000 years of Christianity and there is absolutely no difficulty in accepting this word even from a Christian point of view. Assumption. As they are still arguing even in their own denominations about theology and other crucial aspects of Christian creed.


This view that Jesus was not killed and not crucified saves Jesus from the humiliation of dying the death of a blasphemer. Saves him from the cruelties of the Jews. The Jews believe Jesus was the worst Jew to ever live (Heard from a Rabbi's lecture). It elevates Jesus to being a mighty Messenger of God, which is in total conformity with the Old Testament and the Prophets of old.
 

Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted - Paul vs Jesus

Bart Ehrman's book - Jesus Interrupted

We have long come to know that a large portion of the brand of Christianity in our midst today is more from the teachings of Apostle Paul rather then the teachings of Jesus Christ himself.

St Paul's teachings directly contradict what Jesus Christ came to preach. 

Paul's View of "Justification"

'But certainly Paul was concerned with how persons—those he was trying to convert, for example—could be put into a right relationship with God, and he was convinced this could happen only through trusting in the death and resurrection of Jesus, not by following the requirements of the Jewish law.'

'His best-known and arguably most pervasive view (which is found in his other letters as well) is that a person is “justified by faith” in Christ’s death and resurrection, not by observing the works of the Jewish law.'

(Jesus Interrupted - Page 86)

Paul's View of the Jewish Law and salvation 

''All of this means that keeping the Jewish law can have no place in salvation. Even Jews who keep the law to the nth degree cannot be right with God through the law.'

The only way to be justified is by having faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus. In Galatians 2:15, Paul says, “We have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law.” 

'Getting circumcised, keeping kosher, observing Sabbath and other Jewish festivals—none of this was necessary for salvation, and if you thought (and acted) otherwise, you were in danger of losing your salvation (Galatians 5:4) "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace".'

(Jesus Interrupted - Page 88-89)

Interesting to read what Bart Ehrman thinks of how contrasting the teachings of Matthew and Paul were in keeping the law and commandments. He goes as far as to visualize both of them locked in a battle if locked in a room debating about the law of the Jews.

Paul and Matthew on the Law and Salvation

"I have often wondered what would have happened if Paul and Matthew had been locked up in a room together and told they could not come out until they had hammered out a consensus statement on how followers of Jesus were to deal with the Jewish law. Would they ever have emerged, or would they still be there, two skeletons locked  in a death grip?"

(Jesus Interrupted - Page 89)

Matthew on the Law and Salvation

'Matthew thinks that the followers of Jesus need to keep the law. In fact, they need to keep it better even than the most religious Jews, the scribes, and the Pharisees. In Matthew, Jesus is recorded as saying:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of heaven.
(Matthew 5:17–20)'

(Jesus Interrupted - Page 90)

'A rich man comes up to Jesus and asks him, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” Jesus tells him, “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” When asked, “Which ones?” Jesus lists as examples some of the Ten Commandments. The man insists he has already done all these—what else is needed? Jesus replies that he should give up everything he owns, “and you will have treasure in heaven” (Matthew 19:16–22). Jesus then says, “And come, follow me”—but note: following Jesus comes only after the man will have inherited heavenly treasure by giving all away. '
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 92)

 Irreconcilable views between Matthew and Paul

Paul thought that followers of Jesus who tried to keep the law were in danger of losing their salvation. Matthew thought that followers of Jesus who did not keep the law, and do so even better than the most religious Jews, would never attain salvation. Theologians and interpreters over the years have tried to reconcile these two views, which is perfectly understandable, since both of them are in the canon. But anyone who reads the Gospel of Matthew and then reads the letter to the Galatians would never suspect that there was a reason, or a way, to reconcile these two statements.

(Jesus Interrupted - Page 90)

Where to after this??

It is evident then that Paul had a completely different view to what Jesus preached. Jesus told his people to keep the commandments and be better then the Jews in practicing these laws. Anyone who breaks the commandments will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. It is also important to note that Paul never walked, talked, ate, prayed or lived with Jesus. He only saw him on a vision to Damascus. And all his ministry is from that vision. In addition to that, Jesus never prophesized St Paul. On the contrary he said there will be many false prophets and false Christs who will prophesize in my name (Matthew 7:22-23)

But Matthew is giving us the words of Jesus himself. Who should we trust more? Ask yourselves sincerely brothers and sisters. Jesus is telling you 'black'. Paul is telling you 'white'. I'm not sure who you are going to trust more. Or are you cornered with nowhere to turn to.

Seek the Truth and the Truth shall free you.

The Quran tells us "Truth has arrived and falsehood perished. For falsehood is by it's nature bound to perish" (Surah 17:81). It also tells us the Christians only follow 'Conjecture'. One word to sum up 2000 years of Christianity. Can you think of any better word that what the Quran came up with?

In contrast 1.5 billion Muslims (Arabic term for a person who submits peacefully to the will of God) on this earth believe in Jesus as a man who came to give God's message to the Jewish people and he was a Nazarene. The Jews reject him and according to them he died the death of a blasphemer. As for us - No conjecture. No skepticism. No questions asked. No second thoughts. Jesus is a MIGHTY MESSENGER OF God. Simply because we believe God revealed the truth about him.

It is because we have the truth. And we don't doubt in it one bit. Explore it for yourself. Don't listen to BBC CNN or what your Islam bashing neighbour, friend or colleague tells you about Islam. Read just one page of the Quran and find out for yourself if this can be from anyone else other that the God of Moses Jesus and Muhammad peace be upon them all.

You owe this to yourselves. Peace.

Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted - The Difference Between John's Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels

From an extract of Bart Ehrman's book titled 

Jesus Interrupted 

I heard in a talk recently from Brother Shabir Ally that the Gospels had evolved over time especially John's. I see what he meant when I read Bart Ehrman's interpretation of what actually happened. As John was the last of the Gospels to be written (scholars set a range of maybe 90 to 100 A.D.) i.e. 70 odd years after Jesus's departure. It is not difficult to understand that how stories would have circulated and then reached the epic proportions that are visible in John's Gospel.

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to specifically as the Synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in the same sequence, and similar wording.

John is considered out of the synoptics because of the very same reason as above - that is has different content then the other 3 gospels.

John's Gospel Different to the Synoptics

"Although many casual readers of the New Testament have not noticed it, the Gospel of John is a different kettle of fish altogether. With the exception of the Passion Narratives, most of the stories found in John are not found in the Synoptics, and most of the stories in the Synoptic Gospels are not found in John. And when they do cover similar territory, John’s stories are strikingly different from the others. This can be seen by doing a kind of global comparison of John and the Synoptics." (Page 70)

"Much more could be said about the unique features of John; my point is not simply that there are discrepancies between John and the Synoptics but that the portrayals of Jesus are very different. Certainly the three Synoptics are not identical, but the differences between any one of the Synoptics and John are especially striking, as can be seen by considering some of their various thematic emphases." (Page 73)

 Some of the items that make John's Gospel different

"It is striking that virtually none of these stories that form the skeleton of the narratives of the Synoptics can be found in John. There is no reference to Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem and no mention of his mother being a virgin. He is not explicitly said to be baptized and does not undergo his temptations in the wilderness. Jesus does not preach the coming kingdom of God, and he never tells a parable. He never casts out a demon. There is no account of the Transfiguration. He does not cleanse the Temple when coming to Jerusalem (he did that already in John 2). He does not institute the Lord’s supper (instead he washes the disciples feet), and he does not have any kind of official trial before the Jewish council." (Page 72) 

Jesus divinity only in John's Gospel

"John starts with a prologue that mysteriously describes the Word of God that was in the very beginning with God, that was itself God, and through which God created the universe. This Word, we are told, became a human being, and that’s who Jesus Christ is: the Word of God made flesh. There is nothing like that in the Synoptics." (Page 72)

"In John, Jesus usually speaks in long discourses rather than in memorable aphoristic sayings as in the other Gospels. There is the long speech to Nicodemus in chapter 3, the speech to the Samaritan woman in chapter 4, and the very long speech to his disciples that covers four entire chapters (13–16), before he launches into a prayer that takes the entire next chapter. None of these discourses or any of the “I am” sayings can be found in the Synoptics." (Page 73)

Jesus Being a Pre-Existent Divine Being

 "The orthodox Christian doctrine about Christ’s coming into the world that has been accepted for centuries is that he was a preexistent divine being, equal with but not identical to God the Father, and that he became “incarnate,” became a human being, through the Virgin Mary. But this doctrine is not set forth in any of the Gospels of the New Testament. The idea that Jesus preexisted his birth and that he was a divine being who became human is found only in the Gospel of John." (Page 73)

"So Matthew and Luke appear to have different interpretations of why Jesus was born of a virgin, but, more important, in neither Matthew nor Luke is there any sense that this one born to the virgin existed prior to his birth. For these authors, Jesus came into existence when he was born. There is not a word in either Gospel about the preexistence of Jesus. That idea comes from John, and only from John." (Page 75)

"The prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1–18) is one of the most elevated and powerful passages of the entire Bible. It is also one of the most discussed, controverted, and differently interpreted. John begins (1:1–3) with an elevated view of the “Word of God,” a being that is independent of God (he was “with God”) but that is in some sense equal with God (he “was God”). This being existed in the beginning with God and is the one through whom the entire universe was created (“all things came into being through him, and apart from him not one thing came into being”)." (Page 75)

One begs to ask the question then, why was John so different? Who was John and who was his audience. I hope to cover that in another post.

Thanks for Reading :)

Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted - The 4 Canonical Gospels in light of one another

I am still concentrating my subject matter on the authority of Bart Ehrman's book - Jesus Interrupted.

This page intends to illustrate the scholarly consensus and a bit of a summary on this historicity, nature, and textual analysis of the gospels.

"Since the nineteenth century, scholars have recognized that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, around 65–70 CE. Both Matthew and Luke, writing fifteen or twenty years later, used Mark as one of their sources for much of their own accounts. That is why almost all of Mark’s stories can be found in Matthew or Luke, and it is also why sometimes all three of these Gospels agree word for word in the way they tell the stories. Sometimes just two agree and the third doesn’t, because occasionally only one of the later Gospels changed Mark. This means that if we have the same story in Mark and Luke, say, and there are differences, these differences exist precisely because Luke has actually modified the words of his source, sometimes deleting words and phrases, sometimes adding material, even entire episodes, and sometimes altering the way a sentence is worded. It is probably safe to assume that if Luke modified what Mark had to say, it was because he wanted to say it differently. Sometimes these differences are just minor changes in wording, but sometimes they affect in highly significant ways the way the entire story is told." 
(Jesus Interrupted - Page 65) 

So according to the scholars,

Mark's Gospel - 65 -70 AD
Matthew and Luke - 80-85 AD
John - 90-100 AD
St Paul's letters - 50-55 AD

Just to illustrate the point further, we take an example of Jesus's death and Bart Ehrman's views.

"When readers then throw both Matthew and John into the mix, they get an even more confused and conflated portrayal of Jesus, imagining wrongly that they have constructed the events as they really happened. To approach the stories in this way is to rob each author of his own integrity as an author and to deprive him of the meaning that he conveys in his story.
This is how readers over the years have come up with the famous "seven last words of the dying Jesus”—by taking what he says at his death in all four Gospels, mixing them together, and imagining that in their combination they now have the full story. This interpretive move does not give the full story. It gives a fifth story, a story that is completely unlike any of the canonical four, a fifth story that in effect rewrites the Gospels, producing a fifth Gospel. This is perfectly fine to do if that’s what you want—it’s a free country, and no one can stop you. But for historical critics, this is not the best way to approach the Gospels.
My overarching point is that the Gospels, and all the books of the Bible, are distinct and should not be read as if they are all saying the same thing. They are decidedly not saying the same thing—even when talking about the same subject (say, Jesus’ death). Mark is different from Luke, and Matthew is different from John, as you can see by doing your own horizontal reading of their respective stories of the crucifixion. The historical approach to the Gospels allows each author’s voice to be heard and refuses to conflate them into some kind of mega-Gospel that flattens the emphases of each one." 
 (Jesus Interrupted - Page 70)

Scientific 3 kinds of rocks and Quranic 3 kinds of rocks in Surah 2:74

Assalamalaikum

I was reading through Quran Surah 2:74 today and came across something very interesting.

The translation of the Ayah is:

Then your hearts hardened like rock; or even harder. For among rocks there are some from which rivers gush forth; and out of rocks there are those that crack open and water is found; and others which fall for fear of Allah. And Allah is not unmindful of what ye do. (surah 2 :74)

There is a talk given by Bro Nouman Ali Khan on the 3 types of rocks and 3 levels of faith. It is very enlightening and I wanted to read more on it to try to understand further why Allah SubhanawaTaala mentioned these 3 kinds of rocks.

I googled '3 kinds of rocks' and interestingly enough, the search brought me to a link showing me 3 kinds of rocks in scientific terminology.

Hence I wondered what is there, if any, between these 3 kinds of rocks in the Quran i.e.

i. rivers gush forth
ii. Rocks that are cracked open and water is found
iii. Rocks that fall out of the fear of Allah.

And the 3 kinds of scientific rocks i.e.

The three main types, or classes, of rock are
i. sedimentary,
ii. metamorphic, and
iii. igneous
and the differences among them have to do with how they are formed.

I fully understand that the Quran is not a book of science but has verses alluding to modern scientific discoveries and there are great linkages between the 2.

I was wondering if some learned alim would explain the meaning of these verses or maybe shed some light if at all possible and if there's any connection between the scienctific and Quranic rocks.

JazakAllah Khair

Assalamalaikum Warehmatullah

Great Passages in the Quran - Creation of the Violent Human Being

Assalamalaikum

One of the common questions that comes into every human's mind is why the need for bloodshed and evil on earth. Why did God create a being that brings so much harm and destruction?

I was listening to a lecture of revert to Islam and teacher Jeffrey Lang the other day and I came across a truly educational passage in the Quran. Jeffrey Lang mentioned that he had these constant questions in his mind about life and existence. And how God would allow for all the suffering and evil on earth brought forth by the hands of men. He stated that by reading the Quran and particularly this passage,it became clearer to him of all the questions he had about man being a voilent being.

The passage is a conversation between Allah the Almighty and the angels with regards to the beginning of creation and existense of man.

The passage is from Ayah number 30 to Ayah number 33 of Surah Al Baqarah.

Ayah 30 - Note that occasion, when your Lord said to the angels: I am going to place a vicegerent on earth. They said: "Will You place there one who will make mischief and shed blood while we sing Your praises and glorify Your name?" Allah said: "I know
what you know not."

In this passage, Allah is conversing with the angels. The Jinns were already in existence before mankind, and from the information we have from Quran and Hadith, Jinns are very much like mankind, they have the good and the evil, they live in communities like us etc etc. So when the angels spoke about this Vicegerent that God would place on earth as one who would shed blood and make mischief, they obviously had certain knowledge - I gather from the existence of Jinn or from what Allah had already told them - and Allah knows best-They were not questioning the decree of Allah but rather just making an enquiry accepting Allah's decree that why not just make them  - Angels - because we sing your praises and glorify your name. What is the use of creating a being that will shed blood and make mischief? Why the need for all this? Allah then says 'I know what you know not' Indicating that there is supreme wisdom in the creation of man and the good outweighs the bad. It teaches us the Wisdom of Allah is the supreme wisdom and whatever He does is for a greater good. His knowledge encompasses everything. Even if we see something that might be harmful, Allah is telling us that He knows better. Allah is also telling us that the question of man being a violent creature being developed in our mind is not a new concept. It was there before and it was a question politely asked by the angels.

Ayah 31 - He taught Adam the names of all things; then He presented the things to the angels and said: "Tell Me the names of these if what you say is true?"

In this Ayah it is evident that Man is a more intellectual being than the angels. Man was given more knowledge of things then the angels. In another sense - being violent is one of the attributes of man and Allah has given him knowledge to determine right from wrong. Also note that Allah ordered the Angels to prostrate to Adam and they did. 

Ayah 32 - "Glory to You," they replied, "we have no knowledge except what You have taught us: in fact You are the One who is perfect in knowledge and wisdom.

The angels testify that they do not know the names of things that Allah put in front of them. Allah is the Master and does what He pleases. He wished to teach man the names of all things and not the angels. The angels having understood - that they only have knowledge of what Allah wanted them to know - Adam has greater knowledge then them. And ultimately Allah has the Greatest of knowledge. They Glorify Allah accepting wholeheartedly Allah's response.

Ayah 33 - Allah said: "O Adam! Tell them the names." When Adam told them the names, Allah said: "Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of the heavens and the earth and I know what you reveal and what you conceal?"

And Adam told them the names. We can assume that what they reveal and what they conceal is the question about man being violent and his placement on earth. Allah announces that He has knowledge of all Seen and Unseen. Indicating He has knowledge of why He created man and that man being a violent being is a decree of Allah and the way He chose this existence to be. We will not be able to know the real wisdom until the Day of Judgement where we will face our Creator and all matters will be revealed. We have to accept that Allah is Master and Owner of all Wisdom. We - were given only this much knowledge about this question. 

What we learn in this passage is that -

- Man is a superior creation to Angels
- Man is given knowledge of things that angels were not
- Allah is owner of Ultimate Wisdom and All Wisdom
- Man's knowledge is limited and hence cannot grasp the Wisdom behind Allah's decree
- Angels fully submitted to Allah and accepted wholeheartedly that Allah does things as He wills and what is best for his Creation - Likewise should man

AND ALLAH KNOWS BEST

There are infinite things in the creation which we have no knowledge about. It's only within the last 100 or so years with the technological revolution and change the world has seen, that we have been exposed to things our ancestors would not have the slightest clue about.

The depths of the oceans?
What's beyond the stars, galaxies, Milky Ways, Nebulae?
What's beyond the sky?

and on and on and on.

Being an engineer and born in the technical age - I always think of it this way. Allah configured a hard drive of say - 80 GB in man (his brain). You can't exceed that - if you do and try to - it will cause problems. The secrets of the Seen and Unseen lie with Allah. All these questions which we don't have clear answers of - are exceeding that 80 GB. May Allah guide us all through the Noor and Light of His Glorious Quran.

Thank you for reading :)

All that I have said wrong is from the evils of my own self. All good that has come out of this is from Allah Subhanawataala the Exalted, the Glorified, the Owner of all Praise and Perfection.

If there is anything wrong that I have said, please correct me Brothers and Sisters.

Assalam alaikum Warehmatullahi Wabarakatuhu