> You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews and those who associate others with Allah; and you will find the nearest of them in affection to the believers those who say, "We are Christians." That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant. According to this ayah, Jews and idol worshippers (e.g., Hindus) will be the staunchest enemies of Muslims. On the other hand, practicing Christians (of any denomination) will be in favor of Muslims. If we consider the current world politics and domestic politics of various countries, this seems to be 50% true and 50% untrue. For example, according to the Pew Research 2019 survey, Eastern European Catholic countries are overwhelmingly anti-Muslim. Also, American evangelical Christians are overwhelmingly anti-Muslim. **So, how is this ayah justified?**

As this question has been asked previously, or rather, it has been asked in a different, more simple way; There is no clear or sufficient answer that I can find. Let me premise this by saying, I have no hostility towards Muslims. Or Christians. I was a student of 'Philosphy and Religion' (not 'of' Religion) and focused on Islam and Christianity primarily. I'm self-taught Arabic with English as my first language, being born in America. Debate is just a pastime for me. I enjoy it. Some people like video games, debate is my video game. No more, no less. With that being said, I also need to add that my question is not simply that the representation of the Trinity is incorrect, that's only a portion. This is a three part problem that I'm curious how Muslims will, or would, answer. **Surah 5:116** >"وَإِذْ قَالَ ٱللَّهُ يَـٰعِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ ءَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ ٱتَّخِذُونِى وَأُمِّىَ إِلَـٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ سُبْحَـٰنَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِىٓ أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِى بِحَقٍّ ۚ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُۥ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُۥ ۚ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِى نَفْسِى وَلَآ أَعْلَمُ مَا فِى نَفْسِكَ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلَّـٰمُ ٱلْغُيُوبِ" **English Translation** - *I use a combination of Pickthall and Saheeh International as they seem to be the most accurate to the Arabic we can get when combined, as well as some direct translations where it makes sense in English)* >And when Allah said: O Jesus, son of Maryam! Did you ever say to the people: Take me and my mother (as) **two gods** (إِلَـٰهَيْنِ 'ilāhayni') beside Allah? He said: Glory be to you! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). If I had said it, then surely You would have known it. You know what is (hidden) in myself (nafsī), and I know not what is (hidden) in Yourself (nafsika). Indeed, you are the All-Knower ('allāmu) of the unseen I'm going to address the two main issues I can see clearly through the time I've speant studying and hopefully a sufficient response could be given to interact with, which would be excellent, as that is the goal. - The first issue would be the one addressed most often. Here we can see that part of the 'Trinitarian belief' is, as in other ayah, being questioned and 'falsified.' However, we also know that the Trinitarian belief is not, 'Allah, The Son, and Mary.' I don't think I need to explain the makeup of the Christian's Trinity for anyone here, but of course this is incorrect. I have seen some Muslims argue that it is possible that there was a time where some Christians actually were taking Jesus and Mary as gods along with Allah. This is incorrect for a couple reasons. First, if people were worshiping Mary and Jesus as gods with Allah, then they wouldn't be Christians. Christianity, the term Christian, was defined a long time before Muhammad. Regardless, Allah *should* know the Christian belief at that time. Secondly, any people who take Jesus and Mary as gods would also not be considered Christian because in Christianity, whether or not any Muslim or other religions understands it or agree with it, is a monotheistic Religion by definition. Therefore, no one saying something akin to even Jesus and The Father being two gods would be Christian whatsoever. Or the Holy Spirit (Ruh Al Qudus) - The next main issue I see, besides Allah not knowing the Trinity there, is Allah asking Jesus if he took himself and Mary as gods alongside him. There's a couple problems here. First, even **if** the Trinitarian belief replaced the Holy Spirit with Mary, and Allah said Ruh Al Qudus instead, Jesus would not be lying by saying he did not. Again going back to the 'two gods' issue. The Trinitarian belief, Christianity, again, is one God. Then, as the ayah says, Allah is the 'allāmu,' the All-Knower, and of course he is also named so in the Qur'an. The other two ayah about the Trinity simply have Allah telling them to desist from saying 'three' or no 'two-thirds, as statements rather than questions or questioning anyone. So, the All-Knower, asking Jesus if he did 'some thing' seems odd when surely his statement alone would be enough. Such as, rather than making a point to question Jesus, he would say, he told Jesus of what his followers claim, then having Jesus state that is not what he taught. That would be simple enough and end the debate. Yet it would still lack any meaning unless Mary and 'two gods' was changed. Immediately afterwards, in ayah 117, he tells Allah that he only said what Allah ordered him to say. This is something the 'allāmu would surely know. Now it becomes that we have no answer from the Qur'an whether or not Jesus confessed to not teaching that he, the father, and Holy Spirit **are God.** The common argument against this is that it is for narrative purposes to specifically show Jesus denying it. I ask that we don't get bogged down on this one specific aspect of 117, but to take it in its entirety. This is why I prefaced with Jesus saying 'no,' would not oppose the Trinitarian belief. Of course Jesus did not tell people to take him **and** his mother as two gods with Allah. He did not teach that himself and The Father were two gods, or himself and the Holy Spirit were two gods. Therefore, what is the purpose of this ayah? I want to add some more evidence to my points before fully concluding so that any response can get directly to the point and hopefully a straight answer. For Christians, they would argue and show documentation that the belief of the Trinity was being preached as early as 1CE. This could be refuted, so we can simply go with what cannot be refuted in context to the ayah. We can at least say, as a matter of fact, that the doctrine of the Trinity was finalized at the First Council of Nicaea in 325CE. Therefore showing that the doctrine was well-established long before the time of Muhammad. This is irrelevant to an all-knowing God, however, this is just evidence to show that the doctrine was with the Christians long before, and totally established by, the time of Muhammad. Now to conclude with points, my opinion, and another common refutation, as well as sources. Another refutation that I have, surprisingly, heard, is that this ayah, 116, isn't even talking about the the Trinity, and is talking about some group that believed this. That is an obvious problem. The people who followed Christ, Jesus, are Christians. If people believed that Jesus and Mary were gods, and Jesus is just saying, no I didn't say this, and whatever niche group Allah could be talking about, would mean that this ayah actually serves no purpose as nobody believes this is what Jesus taught. Besides the fact that scholars agree, tafsirs explain, that it is talking about this belief, I'd rather want to believe that **all** ayah in the Holy Qur'an actually have meaning behind them, some purpose for being told. In the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, he in fact does state that this is not about Allah not having the knowledge, but about admonishing his people who call themselves **Christians** and the one who they call 'God' (Jesus) is himself admitting to the contrary. Now he has established this is speaking about Christians, followers of Christ and his teachings, not some niche group of people who worship Jesus and Mary as two gods. Ibn Kathir, however, seems to leave out Mary altogether while also changing the implication from them being 'two gods' to simply the correct Christian belief that they say Jesus is God. This is not at all what the ayah is saying and I see Ibn Kathir as either being completely dishonest or refusing to address the ayah properly, although I have not read his tafsir in Arabic, and while I could be missing something (I'll double check) I highly doubt it would lend strength to a refutation. Again, even if Jesus denies this here and says that is not what he taught people, it remains true and says nothing, as no Christian, now or at the time of Muhammad or prior, believes/d Christianity teaches that Jesus, and any other person's in the Trinity, are more than one God. Once more, the doctrine of the Trinity, One God, three hypostatic unions, was already well-established. As for my opinion, for this ayah to be a clear, and detailed explanation of all things, it should directly refute the actual doctrine of the Trinity. To say, Jesus, did you say/teach that you, the Holy Spirit, and I *are God?* Or even replacing Maryam with ruh Al Qudus would suffice but the word 'ilāhayni' has to be removed from the text either way. **Sources For Context** *'The Qur'an is a detailed explanation of all things (in the revelation) - Quran, Surah 12:111* *Allah addressing to falsify the Trinity, the other ayah about the Trinity - Quran, Surah 5:73, 4:171, and 5:116 (this ayah) is directly referenced in multiple sources as one of the three ayah referencing the Trinity* **Finalization of the doctrine of the Trinity at the First Council of Nicaea** - *Kauffman, Timothy F. (May–June 2016). "Nicæa and the Roman Precedent" (PDF). The Trinity Review (334, 335). Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 August 2016. Retrieved 22 June 2016* *"Trinity: The role of Constantine in the Nicene creed". www.bible.ca. Retrieved 29 September 2021* *Fairbairn, Donald (2009), "Life in the Trinity, Downers Grove:" InterVarsity Press, ISBN 978-0-8308-3873-8, retrieved 24 February 2014* **Earliest existing reference of the Trinity** - *Theophilus of Antioch (AD 115–181) ref. "Philip Schaff: Fathers of the Second Century: 0107=101 – Christian Classics Ethereal Library". ccel.org. Retrieved 27 April 2023.*

Since childhood, I have been taught about the Satan. Satan is a creature of the unseen and its task is to tempt humans to deny Allah. They're the real enemy to all humans. But when I read Surah Al-Maidah verse 5:90, it mentions among the deeds of Satan, drinking alcohol, gambling, idol worship, and seeking omens. These are all actions performed by humans, not by unseen beings, let alone those whose specific task is to tempt the mankind. So is that mean the Satan is actually referred to real humans physically, and the actual meaning of the clear enemy (mubeen) is the visible enemy in front of our eyes, which humans can clearly and distinctly recognize?

Below are two translations of Qur'an 5:69 from IslamAwakened : > Indeed, those who have believed [in Prophet Muhammad] and **those [before Him] who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians** - those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness - no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.
> Qur'an 5:69; Sahih International > > Rest assured that the believers (Muslims), **the Jews, the Sabians and the Christians** - whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous deeds - will have nothing to fear or to regret.
> Qur'an 5:69; Farook Malik The Sahih International translation applies only to believers prior to the Prophet Muhammad. The Farook Malik translation applies to Jews, Sabians and Christians in general. I'm not sure which of these is accurate. **Question**: Do modern-day Jews, Sabians and Christians have "nothing to fear or to regret" (Qur'an 5:69)?

I have a question about these ayat (5:51 and 3:28 ): > O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as > allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an > ally to them among you - **then indeed, he is [one] of them**. Indeed, > Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. > > Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. > And whoever [of you] **does that has nothing with Allah**, except when > taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of > Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination. > Do they mean that whoever does this *literally* becomes a disbeliever and is expunged from Islam? Or does it mean that this action is very grievous but not real kufr?

The Islam page on RationalWiki seems to be in a state where it's simultaneously edited by people who have a pro-Islam bias and people who have an anti-Islam bias. It's current form has a section entitled "Muslims apologetic obfuscation", and quotes the Qur'an: > Because of that, **We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.** And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors. > Qur'an 5:32 RationalWiki then writes: > So [the] Qur'an is referring to a verse in Jewish scripture, which is not the same as ordaining something to Muslims. My opinion is that this is an obtuse interpretation, but let's give this some consideration. **Question**: Is there a concrete reason that Qur'an 5:32 applies to modern-day Muslims, and not only to the "Children of Israel"? I've read various news articles quoting scholars quote this ayah as applying to all Muslims (perhaps after some terrorist atrocity). I'm also aware that there's other verses that prohibit specific kinds of murder (4:93 and 6:151 ).

The Qur'an contains the following: > ... and [prohibited is] that you seek decision through divining arrows** ... -- Qur'an 5:3 > > O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah ], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful. -- Qur'an 5:90 I'm curious as to precisely what "divining arrows" is referring to. **Question**: What are "divining arrows" in Qur'an 5:3 and Qur'an 5:90? Google suggests it's some kind of magic, fortune telling, or witchcraft. This post gives an example of someone throwing arrows into the air, and where they land resulting in a decision being made. But I'm still not sure what this "divining arrows" is about.

Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 54: > يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَن يَرْتَدَّ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ > فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ أَذِلَّةٍ > عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ... > >O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion (Islam), Allah will bring a people whom He will love and they will love >Him; humble towards the believers, stern towards the disbelievers... So if اعز means stern and اذل means humble according to the Qur'an ayah, shouldn't we be asking the opposite? But we usually ask dua as, > اللهم أعز الإسلام والمسلمين، وأذل الشرك والمشركين

Qur'an 5:44 describes the Torah (as revealed to Prophet Musa ), and the Jews are to be judged by it. Qur'an 5:47 describes the Gospel (as revealed to Prophet Isa ) and the "People of the Gospel" (presumably this means Christians) are to be judged by it. Then we have: > And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth ... **To each of you We prescribed a law and a method**. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. ... -- Qur'an 5:48 My reading of this is that Jews are meant to follow the Torah, and Christians are meant to follow the Gospel. Moreover, they should do so instead of following the Qur'an. The first part of this is confirmed by tafsir, e.g.: > To every one of you O communities We have appointed a divine law and a way a clear path in religion for them to proceed along. -- Tafsir al-Jalalayn But I'm unsure about the second part... **Question**: Does Qur'an 5:48 imply that Allah wants Jews to follow the Torah and Christians to follow the Gospel, instead of the Qur'an?

What is the context of 5:101-102 ? > O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are > shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the > Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has > pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing.A people asked such [questions] before you; then they became thereby disbelievers. A brief *tafseer* says, the *sahabas* were simply asking too many questions. But what type of questions where they asking that if answered would turn them into disbelievers?

My question is regarding the ayah: > **And the Jews say, "The hand of Allah is chained."** Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills. ...
> Qur'an 5:64 It's expanded upon in the tafsir: > The **Jews said when their circumstances became straitened on account of their denial of the Prophet s after having been the wealthiest of people ‘God’s hand is fettered’ withholding the sending forth of provision upon us** — this was their metaphor for niggardliness — may God be exalted above this. ...
> Tafsir al-Jalalayn It feels like there's a hidden background story here: how the Jews became wealthy, but somehow lost their wealth, thereby getting frustrated at Allah. **Question**: What is the background to Jews saying "the hand of Allah is chained" in Qur'an 5:64?

In an English translation of [3:49](https://quran.com/3/49) and [5:110](https://quran.com/5/110) it says that 'Isa ( عليه السلام) cured a man, with permission of Allah (swa), who was a leper (which is a long-term infection either on a part of the body or on the whole body by the bacterium Mycobacterium leprae or Mycobacterium lepromatosis). But in my Dutch translation I see that the translator used the term Vitiligo ( which is a skin condition characterized by patches of the skin losing their pigment). So which disease did the man have, Leprosy or vitiligo? Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprosy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitiligo

I just read this surat and I came across some ayats I didn't understand. So I hope I can get a clear answer from you. > *The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded.* Who is meant by "they"(christians?)? The first thought that crossed my mind was Maryam (A.S.) and 'Isa (A.S.) but that can't be right because that wouldn't make any sense whatsoever. So does "they" refer to the disbelievers? In ayat 73 of this surah non-believers were mentioned and that would be the most reasonable explanation for the reference but I'm not sure. Can someone confirm or defend their own view of this ayat?

In verse (5:105 ) Allah says: > O you who have believed, upon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. **Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided**. To Allah is you return all together; then He will inform you of what you used to do. based on Qur'an one could assume that "those who have gone astray" may refer to people who have changed their faith, or done wrong, one could even point or conclude that the people meant here are from among people of the book. The sunni traditions on this verse however seem to reject this last conclusion (see for example in Jami' at-Tirmidhi ). I'd like to know the Shi'a interpretation: Who are meant by "Those who have gone astray" in this verse?

Some politicians in Indonesia tell muslims that Al Maidah 51 tell them to only vote for muslim governors. Are those politicians lying? This is probably a bit of semantic. What about if the muslim governor that the politicians favor is corrupt and plan to steal people money, and the politicians know it, and they tell the people to pick that muslim governor anyway by using Al Maidah 51. > ۞ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا الْيَهُودَ > وَالنَّصَارَىٰ أَوْلِيَاءَ ۘ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءُ بَعْضٍ ۚ وَمَنْ > يَتَوَلَّهُمْ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْهُمْ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِي > الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ > > O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as > allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an > ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, > Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. > > (Quran 5:51 ) Would it be correct to say that some people have been lied to by using Al Maidah 51?

> You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews and those who associate others with Allah; and you will find the nearest of them in affection to the believers those who say, "We are Christians." That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant.
> Qur'an 5:82 **Question**: Does Qur'an 5:82 only apply at the time of the Prophet? A tafsir explains it was revealed for specific circumstances at the time: > These verses were revealed about the Negus and his followers.
> Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi However, this does not necessarily imply it no longer applies.

> O you who have believed, Allah will surely **test you through something of the game that your hands and spears [can] reach**, that Allah may make evident those who fear Him unseen. And whoever transgresses after that - for him is a painful punishment.
> Qur'an 5:94 I'm struggling to understand this. Judging from other translations , it seems the word game is used in the sense of animals hunted for food (and not in the sense of Monopoly). I don't own a spear, nor hunt for food. **Question**: What does "test you through something of the game that your hands and spears [can] reach" mean? I found this tafsir: > Then Allah revealed the unlawfulness of game in the year of al-Hudaybiyyah, saying: (O ye who believe) in Muhammad and the Qur'an! (Allah will surely try you somewhat (in the matter) of the game) **He will test you regarding the game you pursue on land (which ye take) of their eggs and little ones (with your hands and your spears) to catch wild animals in the year of al-Hudaybiyyah, (that Allah may know) that Allah may see (him who feareth Him in secret) and thus leave the game.** (Whoso transgresseth) intentionally (after this) after Allah has decreed the requital and ruling of this, (for him there is a painful doom) a painful beating which will extend to his back and belly.
> Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs This seems to be implying that hunting is haram, which I'm not sure is correct (e.g. Islam Q&A say "If you shoot the deer with the rifle and mention the name of Allaah, and hit the deer, and it dies from that shot, then it is halaal and it is permissible to eat it.").

Qur'an 3:112 describes the murder of prophets (see also https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/45394/17163) : > They have been put under humiliation [by Allah ] wherever they are overtaken, except for a covenant from Allah and a rope from the Muslims. And they have drawn upon themselves anger from Allah and have been put under destitution. That is because **they disbelieved in the verses of Allah and killed the prophets without right**. That is because they disobeyed and [habitually] transgressed.
> Qur'an 3:112 Also, the Prophet Muhammad is reported as being poisoned by a Jewess in hadith Sahih al-Bukhari 2617 . However, this seems at odds with the following Qur'an verse: > O you who have believed, upon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. **Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided.** To Allah is your return all together; then He will inform you of what you used to do.
> Qur'an 5:105 **Question**: Given that prophets were harmed, what does "those who have gone astray will not harm you" mean?

> Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah ] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. **And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.** And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. **And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.**
> Qur'an 5:44-45 I'm wondering who this applies to specifically. As far as I'm aware, qisas punishment goes through a Sharia court. So, I would expect it's not your average Joe Muslim who is "judging" in this verse, but rather judges or qadi , or people who are qualified to judge in some way. However, this might also be interpreted as meaning a kind of "personal judgment", such as a belief that "a life for a life", etc., is fair and just, as ordained by Allah. **Question**: Does "whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed" only apply to judges (qadi)? I found this tafsir: > ... whoever does not show what the Qur'an has shown nor act according to it: (such are wrong-doers) who harm themselves with punishment.
> Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs This suggests that qisas might be the "tip of the iceberg", referring to judging by all Muslims in all ways. It's not too clear to me, though.

> O you who have believed, upon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. **Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided.** To Allah is your return all together; then He will inform you of what you used to do. -- Qur'an 5:105 I feel I'm misunderstanding the sentence in bold. Several Islamic Prophets seem to have been harmed by those who have gone astray; as a few examples: - Prophet Yusuf was thrown down a well, was sold as a slave, and was imprisoned for many years. - Prophet Nuh 's and Prophet Lut 's wives "...were under two of Our righteous servants but betrayed them" (Qur'an 66:10 ). - Prophet Yunus was thrown off a ship, to be consumed by a fish (Qur'an 37:142 ). Presumably, it's safe to consider that these Prophets were guided, yet harm came to them. **Question**: If those who have gone astray will not harm the guided, why were many Prophets harmed?