بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ — In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Surat Maryam — Ayat 15–25 (15) And mention in the Book, Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East (16) And took a screen to themselves from them. Then We sent to her Our Spirit, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. (17) She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you should be fearing God.” (18) He said, “I am only the Messenger of your Lord to give you a pure boy.” (19) She said, “How can I be with you?” (20) He said, “Thus said your Lord: It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us, and it is a matter already decreed.” (21) So she conceived him and withdrew with him to a remote place. (22) Then the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm tree. She said, “Oh, I wish I had died before this and been able to bear children.” (23) And he called to her from beneath her, “Do not grieve; your Lord has provided beneath you a stream.” (24) And shake toward you the trunk of the palm tree; it will drop upon you ripe, fresh dates. (25)
Today, the enemies of Islam, including missionaries and atheists, claim that the story of Mary giving birth to Christ, peace and blessings be upon him, under a palm tree is a story taken from the apocryphal gospels. But the truth is the opposite, as anyone who follows the sources that they claim to quote from will find that they are:
Key Claim Sources that are later than Islam. The sources, or the only source that these people claim to quote from, is: the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew.
The Claim that It Was Copied from the Apocryphal Gospel of Matthew is Rejected for Two Reasons
Reason 1 — The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew Was Composed After Islam
Modern studies indicate that the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew was composed in the eighth or ninth century, i.e. one or two hundred years after the emergence of Islam.
The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature — David Edward Aune, p. 203 Similarly the Gospel of PS. Matthew (an 8th century combination of In JAm. and In Thomas with some independent material in chapters 18-24) several miracles are attributed to the child Jesus in addition to those taken over from In Thomas.
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary — Brandon W. Hawk, p. 3 Transmission of PS. MT was widespread and long lasting. The manuscript evidence ranges from the turn of the ninth century to the sixteenth century, with origins or provenances as far flung as modern day France.
The Apocryphal Jesus: Legends of the Early Church — J. K. Elliott A variation of the stories of the Protevangelium is to be seen in the later Gospel of Pseudo Matthew which in its present form may date from the eighth century, although it drew on much earlier material.
The Biblical Drama of Medieval Europe — Lynette R. Muir, p. 89 The material is drawn from the Protevangelium from which two successive texts developed: The Gospel of Pseudo Matthew (attributed to St Jerome but probably not composed before the eighth century; versions are extant in many languages).
THE INFANCY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST — John Gayford, p. 11 This work was better known in the West replacing the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. In fact it is made up from the beginning of the former and an edited version of the latter, Jesus as a child is projected in a less malevolent way. It has some material of its own and differences from the above works. In one edition we are told that Joseph had grandchildren who were older than Mary and that Mary stayed in the temple until she was 14. The work became popular in the Middle Ages and greatly influenced art. At the birth of Jesus the ox and the ass are said to be present and this has passed into modern nativity scenes and old carols. Elliott (1993, p. 84-85) tells us that it was most likely written in Latin possible in the eight or ninth centuries but the oldest manuscripts are not before the 14th century Mariae and Infantia Salvatoris.
Reason 2 — The Gospel Was Exclusively Latin and Unknown in the East
The apocryphal Gospel of Matthew was only written in Latin and was known only to the Western churches. The Eastern churches, including the churches of Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria and Iraq, did not know it. So, no attention should be paid to those who said that the Gospel was written in the sixth century because it was never known in the East.
The Apocryphal New Testament — J.K. Elliott, p. 84 Conversely, Pseudo Matthew as such seems not to have been known in the east or in the Eastern versions.
Catholic Encyclopedia This is a Latin composition of the fourth or fifth century. It pretends to have been written by St. Matthew and translated by St. Jerome. Pseudo-Matthew is in large part parallel to the “Protoevangelium Jacobi”, being based on the latter or its sources. It differs in some particulars always in the direction of the more marvelous. Some of its data have replaced in popular belief parallel ones of the older pseudograph. Such is the age of fourteen in which Mary was betrothed to Joseph. A narrative of the flight into Egypt is adorned with poetic wonders.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia A forged correspondence between Jerome and two Italian bishops supplied a substitute in the Gospel of the Pseudo-Matthew, which Jerome was falsely represented to have rendered in Latin from the original Hebrew of Mt. The gospel is known only in Latin and, as already indicated, is not earlier than the 5th century. The Protevangelium is freely used and supplemented from some unknown (probably Gnostic) source, and further miracles especially connected with the sojourn in Egypt have been wrought into it with others added from the Childhood Gospel of Thomas.
Critic William S. Abruzzi acknowledges the difficulty of the Qur’an quoting the story of Mary’s birth to Jesus, peace be upon him, from the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew, since this Gospel was composed late, and moreover, it was composed in Latin, and the story and this Gospel were known only to the Western Catholic Churches, apart from the Byzantine and Syriac Churches in the East.
For this reason, Abruzzi had to go far to prove the existence of any kind of quotation, as he adopted the critic Shoemaker’s idea that the source of the quotation is the ritual celebration of the birth of Jesus, peace be upon him, which was held in the Kathisma Church, which is located between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. In order to prove this quotation (since it is almost impossible to say that the Prophet, peace be upon him, who lived in Mecca in the Hejaz, was influenced by or learned of rituals held once a year in Palestine), Shoemaker — and after him Abruzzi — went on to say that Islam did not begin in the Hejaz, but rather in the Levant
The Birth of Jesus: The Evolution of Jesus in the Infancy — Abruzzi, pp. 16–17 According to Shoemaker (2001: 29-36), however, the story of the palm tree was widely dispersed throughout the Byzantine Near East and is contained in several Syriac fragments copied as early as the late 5th century narratives. He attributes the dispersal of this story to the Qur’an to the significance of the Kathisma Church in early Palestinian Christianity. According to Shoemaker (2003: 16), only two sources in Christianity contain reference to the holy family’s pausing in the desert north of Bethlehem: the Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of Ps-Matthew. However, the Gospel of Ps-Matthew was likely composed too late to have an impact on the nativity story in the Qur’an. Moreover, it was first composed in Latin in the Christian West and was completely unknown in the Christian East (ibid.: 19). The other principal source, according to Shoemaker, is the Kathisma Church where early celebrations of Jesus’ nativity took place. The significance of the Kathisma Church in the development of the Qur’anic version of Jesus’ birth is supported by current research that places the origin of Islam in the Levant rather than in the Hijaz, as is generally believed (see Nevo and Nevo 1994; Berg 1997; Sivers 2003; Shoemaker 2003: 13-14, including notes 3 & 4). “the Qur’an’s dependence on … local Jerusalemite traditions adds additional weight to revisionist arguments against the origin of Islam in the Hijaz.”
Dr. Hassan Aboud’s Response
Dr. Hassan Aboud, in her book The Virgin Mary in the Holy Quran, denies the possibility that the Quran was influenced by the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew, due to it being later than the Quran and also being written in Latin, which makes it difficult for Eastern churches to recognize.
The Virgin Mary in the Holy Quran — Dr. Hassan Abboud, Chapter Four, p. 122 In the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew (written in the late sixth century AD or early seventh century AD), we see a picture of Mary and her son Jesus with the palm tree in “the flight journey that Mary undertook with Joseph and the child to Egypt,” that is, the journey of the Holy Family. It is natural to assume that the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew, which is later than the Quran, cannot leave a trace in the Quranic text, as it was originally written in Latin. But this Gospel certainly relied in its references on many childhood stories and traditions, including the story of Mary and the palm tree. In this Gospel, we hear Jesus asking the palm tree to “bend down to feed his mother from its fruit,” which supports what I suggested that the one who “called to Mary from beneath it” was the child in her belly, based on our translation of “under Mary” as “her belly”: And waters spring from the earth, and Joseph, Mary, and Jesus rejoice and drink from it.
Footnote 1, same page — Dr. Hassan Abboud Shoemaker tried in vain to find historical evidence about a “literary motif,” and perhaps he wanted to deprive the Qur’an of any creative value. This is certainly to support Wansbrough’s thesis about the late formation of the Qur’an, contrary to the accepted account of the Uthmanic collection.
In Response to the Claim that Jerome Wrote a Preface to This Gospel
We say that this preface attributed to Jerome is a forgery by the author of the text himself, as critics have stated. The writing style is similar to that of the letter, and we do not find an echo of this preface in any of Jerome’s letters.
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary — John Hawk, p. 40 (margin note) …in Hebrew…Savior: The Latin phrasing used here to indicate the apocryphon’s contents is parallel to the titles of the apocryphon found in manuscripts (see the introduction). However, in this instance, the grammar does not seem to fit the context, since uirginis matris (“the Virgin Mother”) is in the genitive case. It is possible (and would explain the problematic Latin) that the author of this spurious letter relied on a titular ascription for this phrasing but did not alter the grammar to fit the sentence. The A-text represents a version of Ps.-Mt. closest to the original, though revised around the year 800 with some slight grammatical changes. The earliest manuscript of the A family was created just a few decades later: London, British Library, Add. 11880, copied around 820 in Regensburg, Germany.
The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations — Bart D. Ehrman and Zlatko Pleše, p. 75 The earliest surviving manuscripts of the Gospel date from the early ninth century (Gijsel’s A2a1 was written ca. 820; A3a1 and A1a2, ca. 850). Gijsel therefore dates the archetype of his family A to around 800 CE and sees the proliferation of manuscripts as deriving from the general reflection on and devotion to Mary during the Carolingian Age.
This was also a period that saw a revival of interest in the writings of the “great” church fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries, which accounts for the correspondence of Jerome forged, then, at this time, and appended to the Gospel. There continue to be debates concerning when the Gospel itself was composed. E. Amman produced one of the most influential studies nearly a century ago. Amman’s most significant argument was that one of the distinctive changes that Pseudo-Matthew made to the Protevangelium was the description of Mary’s ascetic existence in the Temple as a child, in which she is said to have devoted herself to prayer and work. This description, Amman argues, is dependent on the Rule of Benedict from the mid-sixth century. Amman, then, dates the Gospel to the end of that century. The problem is that the changes Amman notes could have been made at just about any date after the mid-sixth century. More recently, M. Berthold has argued that Pseudo-Matthew shows evidence of literary dependence on the Vita Agnetis of Pseudo-Ambrose, which itself was used in the De Virginitate of Aldhelm of Malmesbury in 690 CE. On these grounds, Pseudo-Matthew must obviously date to some time in the mid-seventh century, at the earliest.
In the most thorough analysis to date, Gijsel has maintained that even though direct literary dependence on the Rule of Benedict cannot be demonstrated, there are enough general similarities to suggest that the book was written when monastic orders were beginning to expand in the West, by someone invested in them. Largely on these grounds he makes a convincing argument that the text was produced in the first quarter of the seventh century, by a monk in the Latin-speaking West who was enchanted by the account of the Protevangelium and its potential for conveying homage to Mary as a model virgin embracing the monastic ideal.
The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations — Bart D. Ehrman and Zlatko Pleše, p. 116 Since the Gospel heavily utilizes Pseudo-Matthew, it must have been composed some time after the mid-seventh century and, obviously, before the end of the eighth century (the date of ms. M). Its place of origin is not known.
“From Hellenism to Christianity and Islam: The Origin of the Palm Tree Story” — Dr. Suleiman Murad, pp. 207–209 The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, on the other hand, was composed sometime between the middle of the sixth century — the date of Pope Gelasius’ decree to ban the Protevangelium of James — and the end of the eighth century — the earliest manuscript evidence. Jan Gisel suggests the first quarter of the seventh century as the most probable date. It is generally believed that Pseudo-Matthew was composed in order to recirculate, with some modification…
Clearly the story as it appears in the Qur’an is shorter than the one of Pseudo-Matthew, reflecting a stylistic system common in the Qur’an. In the Qur’an, the story takes place while Mary is in labor with Jesus, and the setting is identified only as a remote place. In Pseudo-Matthew, Jesus is already born, and the incident occurs during the flight to Egypt. It is very likely, then, that one is dealing here with two stories stemming from the same origin: one story places the palm tree incident in the context of Mary’s labor, and the other puts it in the context of the flight to Egypt. Common to both is the miracle which causes the palm tree to provide fruit and the appearance of water from its roots.
One might expect the tale told in Qur’an 19.22-26 to pre-date the version in Pseudo-Matthew 20.1-2. The need to circulate the birth story of Jesus reflects a time when the gospels’ assertion that Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Matthew 1.18-25 and Luke 2.1-7) was not yet accepted, or simply not widely known, as authoritative. Once it indisputably became the canonical birth story, it seems that the alternative birth story had either to be dropped or simply reworked to fit another aspect of the life of Mary and Jesus: namely Jesus’ childhood. After all, the canonical Gospels provide very little information about his early years.
Note on the Oral Tradition Dr. Suleiman Murad also points out that the wording of the story indicates a time or place in which the story of the birth of Christ, peace be upon him, mentioned in the Gospel of Luke, was not known, or at least reliable and famous. He then puts forward several possibilities for this, two of which concern us: the first is the early Christian communities and the second is the Gnostic sects. This means the possibility of the existence of an oral tradition for this story dating back to the first centuries of Christianity.
Dr. Suleiman Murad, pp. 214–215 The canonical gospels are almost silent about the circumstances of the birth of Jesus. All that is known comes from Luke 2.1-20, which mentions nothing about Mary’s labor other than the following: “While they were there in Bethlehem, the time came for her to deliver her child. And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.” It is not unlikely, then, that some early Christians, ignorant of the Gospel of Luke or unconvinced by it, circulated a story that was meant to describe the circumstances of Mary’s labor and delivery. Indeed, early Christian communities may well have done this. Mary/Jesus would have permitted them to keep part of their belief, yet give it a Christian tone. But the circulation of an account of Mary’s labor and Jesus’ birth could only have posed a challenge to the Christian.
The creation of Jesus, peace be upon him, from clay in the form of a bird by God’s permission
The story of Mary, peace be upon her, and her childhood
The story of the birth of Jesus, peace be upon him
The story of Jesus’ words, peace be upon him, in the cradle
Denying the crucifixion of Jesus, peace be upon him, and casting doubts
Part One: The Creation of Jesus from Clay in the Form of a Bird
Surat Al Imran — Ayah 49 And a messenger to the Children of Israel, [saying], ‘Indeed, I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay, [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s permission. And I heal the blind and the leper, and I bring the dead to life by Allah’s permission. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses.’ Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.
The missionaries and atheists among the enemies of Islam today claim that the story of the creation of Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, from clay in the form of a bird is a story taken from the apocryphal gospels.
The truth is the opposite, as anyone who follows the sources from which they claim to have quoted the Qur’an will find one of two things:
Sources after Islam (after the seventh century)
Sources dating back to the beginning of the second century that have an oral heritage dating back to the first century.
Sources they claim to quote from:
The Arabic Infancy Gospel
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas
First: The Arabic Infancy Gospel
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: The Text, Its Origins and Its Transmission — Dr. Tony Burke, p. 127 Arab Gos Inf is believed to have originated in the eighth or ninth century. The lengthy infancy gospel is a collection of at least three other works…
Cecily Neville and the Apocryphal Infantia Salvatoris — Dr. Mary Dzon, p. 265 This story is found in the Arabic infancy Gospel, which has been described as a “late compilation” that is likely to go back to a Syrian archetype.
Margin note, p. 265 (quoting Dr. Tony Burke) Elliot, Apocryphal New Testament 100; James, Apocryphal New Testament 80. The text may have been composed in the eighth or ninth century.
Supporting Evidence The above is supported by the fact that the first mention and quotation from this Gospel was in the ninth century by a Syriac monk in Merv named Ashudad. Even John of Damascus, who lived at the end of the seventh century and the beginning of the eighth century and was a contemporary of the Umayyad Caliphs, did not mention that the Qur’an quoted from this Gospel in his book The Heretics, in which he attacked the Qur’an and Islam and considered it a Christian heresy.
Dr. Tony Burke, margin note p. 128 83. The ninth century Syriac Father Isho’dad of Merv seems to refer to Arab Gos Inf in his commentary of Matthew.
The details of this Gospel are based on the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Infancy Gospel of James, the Gospel of Matthew, and the Gospel of Luke. It is therefore based on older sources dating back to the first century and the first half of the second century.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Some of its stories also appear in the Koran and in other Muslim writings.
Chapters 1 through 9 are based on the canonical Gospels of Matthew and Luke and on the Protevangelium of James, while chapters 26 to the end are derived from the Gospel of Thomas. The intermediate portion of the work is thoroughly oriental in character and reads like extracts from the Arabian Nights. It is not easy to treat seriously the proposal to set productions like these on anything approaching equality with the canonical Gospels. The gospel also has much to do with the growth of the veneration of the Virgin.
The claim of plagiarism is rejected for the following reasons:
Reason 1 — Dates to the Second Century with First-Century Oral Heritage
Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament — Bart Ehrman, p. 58 Most scholars believe that such “infancy Gospels” began to circulate during the first half of the second century. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas appears to have been one of the earliest.
The Other Gospels — Dr. Ron Cameron In his citation, Irenaeus first quotes a non-canonical story that circulated about the childhood of Jesus and then goes directly on to quote a passage from the infancy narrative of the Gospel of Luke (Luke 2:49). Since the Infancy Gospel of Thomas records both of these stories, in relative close proximity to one another, it is possible that the apocryphal writing cited by Irenaeus is, in fact, what is now known as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. Because of the complexities of the manuscript tradition, however, there is no certainty as to when the stories of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas began to be written down.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Next to the Protevangelium, the oldest and the most widely spread of the apocryphal gospels is the Gospel of Thomas. It is mentioned by Origen and Irenaeus and seems to have been used by a Gnostic sect of the Nachashenes in the middle of the 2nd century.
Reason 2 — Its Date Is Close to the Gospel of John
The date of writing the Gospel is very close to the date of writing the Gospel of John, as only a few years separate the date of writing each of them.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia — On the Gospel of John There is now a growing consensus of opinion that it arose at the end of the 1st century, or at the beginning of the 2nd century.
Reason 3 — Applying the Same Logic Requires Rejecting 2 Peter
The argument that the Gospel of the Infancy of Thomas was written late (beginning of the second century) in order to reject it requires Christians, first and foremost, to reject the canonical nature of some books of the New Testament, such as the Second Epistle of Peter, which was written in the first half of the second century.
Jesuit Monastic Translation, pp. 753–754 The opinion that the author of the epistle is Simon Peter is still a subject of discussion and raises many difficulties… It does not appear that the writer belongs to the first Christian generation that has ceased to exist (3/4). The epistle is later than the Epistle of Jude… it is permissible to suggest approximately the year 125 as the date for the composition of the letter, a date that negates its direct attribution to Peter.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia — On 2 Peter But Professor Chase himself, from the remains of the ancient literature, and from the internal evidence of the Epistle itself, arrives at the conclusion that 2 Peter is not at all an apostolic document, that it certainly was not written by Peter, nor in the 1st century of our era, but about the middle of the 2nd century, say 150 AD.
If this view is accepted, we must pronounce the Epistle a forgery, pseudonymous and pseudepigraphic, with no more right to be in the New Testament than has the Apocalypse of Peter or the romance of the Shepherd of Hermas.
Reason 4 — The Shepherd of Hermas Was Treated as Scripture
The Oldest Christian Texts, Part One — trans. Father George Nassour, pp. 79–80 Hermas, one of the parishioners of the Church of Rome, wrote his book known as “The Shepherd” in the years between 140 and 150, when his sister, Pope Pius I, was running the affairs of the Church… The book achieved great success and unprecedented popularity, to the point that Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen placed it on the same level as the Holy Books. In the early fourth century, Eusebius mentioned that The Shepherd was recited in some churches and used in teaching catechumens or those seeking baptism.
Reason 5 — The Prophet’s Illiteracy Invalidates the Claim
Quran — Surat Al-Ankabut 48–49 And you did not recite before it any scripture, nor did you inscribe it with your right hand. Then the falsifiers would have had doubts. (48) Rather, it is clear signs within the breasts of those who have been given knowledge. And none reject Our signs except the wrongdoers. (49)
Hadith — Sahih Al-Bukhari (Book of Fasting) The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: Show me its place. So he showed him its place, so he erased it and wrote Ibn Abdullah. [Indicating he could not write independently.]
Al-Sunan Al-Kubra — Al-Bayhaqi, Book of Marriage, No. 12916 On the authority of Abdullah bin Abbas — may Allah be pleased with them both — regarding His — the Most High — saying: “And you did not recite before it any book, nor did you inscribe it with your right hand.” He said: The Messenger of Allah — may Allah bless him and grant him peace — did not read, nor did he write.
Part Two: The Story of Mary, Peace Be upon Her, and Her Childhood
Surat Al-Imran — Ayat 35–37 When the wife of Imran said, “My Lord, indeed I have vowed to You what is in my womb, consecrated [for Your service], so accept this from me. Indeed, You are the Hearing, the Knowing.” (35) And when she delivered her, she said, “My Lord, indeed I have delivered a female.” And God is most knowing of what she delivered. And the male is not like the female. And indeed, I have named her Mary. And indeed, I seek refuge for her in You and for her offspring from Satan, the accursed.” (36) So her Lord accepted her with gracious acceptance and caused her to grow in a good manner and put her in the care of Zechariah. Every time Zechariah entered upon her in the sanctuary, he found with her provision. He said, “O Mary, from where did you get this?” She said, “It is from Allah. Indeed, Allah provides for whom He wills without account.” (37)
Surat Al-Imran — Ayah 44 This is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad], and you were not with them. When they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary, and you were not with them when they disputed. (44)
Sources claimed for quotation:
The Gospel of the Infancy of James
The Apocryphal Gospel of Matthew
First: The Gospel of the Infancy of James
Reason 1 — Dates to Mid-Second Century with First-Century Oral Heritage
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia It has been assigned (EB, I, 259) to the 1st century. Zahn and Kruger place it in the first decade, many scholars in the second half of the 2nd century… Good scholars (Sunday, The Gospels in the Second Century) admit references to it in Justin Martyr which would imply that possibly in some older form it was known in the first half of the 2nd century.
Lost Scriptures — Bart Ehrman, p. 63 Since the book was already known to the church father Origen in the early third century and probably to Clement of Alexandria at the end of the second, it must have been in circulation soon after 150 CE. The book was enormously popular in later centuries, and plays a significant role in pictorial art of the Middle Ages.
THE INFANCY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST — John Gayford, p. 5 The consensus of scholars do not think that the Protevangelium of James can have been written before 150 AD and most favored the end of the second century… Cullmann (1991, p. 424) suggests that the document was shaped by oral tradition but also possibly expands on early written material.
(See International Standard Bible Encyclopedia citation on John above.)
Reason 3 — The Same Logic Requires Rejecting 2 Peter
(See the citations above under the same heading in Part One.)
Reason 4 — The Shepherd of Hermas Was Treated as Scripture
(See citation above.)
Reason 5 — The Prophet’s Illiteracy Invalidates the Claim
Catholic Encyclopedia — On the Protevangelium The “Protoevangelium” exists in ancient Greek and Syriac generations. There are also Armenian and Latin translations.
The claim of plagiarism is rejected for two reasons:
The Gospel was based on the Gospel of the Infancy of James, whose oral tradition dates back to the first century.
The Gospel was written only in Latin and was known only in the Western Latin churches.
(See all Catholic Encyclopedia and International Standard Bible Encyclopedia citations above.)
Key Point As we explained previously, the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, was illiterate, so how could he quote from Latin sources that are only available in Western churches — taking into consideration that the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew dates back to the eighth or ninth century, i.e. after the emergence of Islam.
Part Three: The Story of the Birth of Jesus, Peace and Blessings Be upon Him
Surat Maryam — Ayat 15–25 (See opening Quranic passage above — same passage applies here.)
The sources, or the only source, that these people claim to quote from is: the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew.
(All two reasons and supporting citations are the same as presented above in the opening section and remain fully applicable here.)
Part Four: The Words of Jesus, Peace and Blessings Be upon Him, in the Cradle
Surat Maryam — Ayat 27–33 So she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented.” (27) O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste. (28) So she pointed to him. They said, “How can we speak to one who is in the cradle, a child?” (29) He said, “Indeed, I am the servant of God. He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. (30) And He has made me blessed wherever I am.” And He has enjoined upon me prayer and zakat as long as I live (31) and dutifulness to my mother, and He has not made me a wretched tyrant (32) and peace be upon me the day I was born and the day I die and the day I am raised alive. (33)
The source claimed for quotation: The Arabic Infancy Gospel
Reason 1 — The Arabic Infancy Gospel Is Post-Islamic
Jesus in the Quran — Dr. Geoffrey Parrinder, p. 27 This statement may be challenged because, while some of these infancy stories can be paralleled in the Quran, in part, the very ones that use the title Son of Mary have no counterpart in the Qur’an. The Arabic Infancy Gospel may itself be post Islamic and influenced by Muslim usage, though behind it is the older Syriac.
Part Five: Denying the Crucifixion of Jesus, Peace and Blessings Be upon Him, and Casting Doubt
Surat An-Nisa — Ayah 157 And their saying, “We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of God.” But they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it was made to appear to them. And indeed, those who differ about 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. (157)
Sources claimed for quotation:
The Revelation of Peter the Coptic Gnostic
A Gnostic book called the Second Treatise of the Great Seth
Lost Scriptures — Bart Ehrman, p. 78 Most scholars have dated this gnostic treatise to the third century.
Ancient Gnosticism — Berger Pearson, pp. 241–242 This implies a situation in which leaders of a growing catholic church are attempting to root out heresy, something that was happening in Alexandria, Egypt, during the episcopacy of Demetrius (189-232). So we can with great confidence assign the composition of our tractate to late second or early third-century Alexandria.
The text claimed to be quoted from the Apocalypse of Peter:
The Apocalypse of Peter — Nag Hammadi Library “He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me.”
The text claimed to be quoted from The Second Treatise of the Great Seth:
The Second Treatise of the Great Seth — Nag Hammadi Library For their Ennoias did not see me, for they were deaf and blind. But in doing these things, they condemned themselves. Yes, they saw me; they punished me. It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I. They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. I was another upon Whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory.
The Claim of Quoting from Both Sources Is Rejected
Reason 1 — The Idea of Denying the Crucifixion Dates Back to the First Century
On Docetism Although these two sources are later than the time of Christ, the idea of denying the crucifixion of Christ existed in previous centuries, and even dates back to the first century. The idea (in its various forms) was adopted — in the second and third centuries — by Gnostic sects, including the Docetists.
Father Abdel-Masih Basit, Mary Magdalene and Her Relationship with Christ, Chapter Six Docetism, as it came in Greek “Doketai - δοκεται”, from the expression “dokesis - δοκεσις” and “dokeo - δοκεο” which means “appears”, “appears”, “is seen”… a heresy that appeared in the first century, in the days of the apostles of Christ and his disciples. It came from outside Christianity, far from the divine revelation… St. Jerome (died in 420 AD) said about the beginning of their appearance and thought in a metaphorical manner that “while the apostles were alive and the blood of Christ was still fresh in Judea, it was said that his body was a mere imagination.”
Catholic Encyclopedia — Docetae A heretical sect dating back to Apostolic times. Their name is derived from dokesis, “appearance” or “semblance”, because they taught that Christ only “appeared” or “seemed” to be a man, to have been born, to have lived and suffered… This heresy, which destroyed the very meaning and purpose of the Incarnation, was combated even by the Apostles… Beyond doubt St. John (1 John 1:1-3, 4:1-3; 2 John 7) refers to this heresy.
Encyclopedia Britannica — Docetism Docetism, (from Greek dokein, “to seem”), Christian heresy and one of the earliest Christian sectarian doctrines, affirming that Christ did not have a real or natural body during his life on earth but only an apparent or phantom one. Though its incipient forms are alluded to in the New Testament, such as in the Letters of John (e.g., 1 John 4:1–3; 2 John 7), Docetism became more fully developed as an important doctrinal position of Gnosticism.
Irenaeus — one of the Church Fathers in the second half of the second century — mentioned the Docetists in his book Against Heresies and described their belief in denying the crucifixion and casting suspicion on Simon of Cyrene:
Irenaeus, Against Heresies — Book One, Chapter Twenty-Four, Part Four Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead; so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them. For since he was an incorporeal power, and the Nous (mind) of the unborn father, he transfigured himself as he pleased, and thus ascended to him who had sent him, deriding them, inasmuch as he could not be laid hold of, and was invisible to all.
Reason 2 — Gnosticism Had Disappeared Before the Time of the Prophet
Orientalist Rodwell — Introduction to His Translation of the Qur’an It has been supposed that Muhammad derived many of his notions concerning Christianity from Gnosticism… But for Muhammad thus to have confounded Gnosticism with Christianity itself, its prevalence in Arabia must have been far more universal than we have any reason to believe it really was. In fact, we have no historical authority for supposing that the doctrines of these heretics were taught or professed in Arabia at all. It is certain, on the other hand, that the Basilidans, Valentinians, and other gnostic sects had either died out, or been reabsorbed into the orthodox Church, towards the middle of the fifth century, and had disappeared from Egypt before the sixth.
Reason 3 — The Gnostic Gospels Were in Greek with No Arabic Translation
The Gnostic Gospels were all written in Greek, and there is no Arabic translation or Arabic writing for any Gnostic Gospel or book. So how could the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, quote from them, as he was an unlettered Arab? It is sufficient that John of Damascus — one of the Church Fathers in the seventh century — when he attacked Islam in his book One Hundred Heresies, did not mention that the Prophet quoted from the Gospels or Gnostic writings.
A Note on the Casting of Likeness — Ibn Abbas
Important Distinction The issue of casting doubt on Simon of Cyrene or Judas Iscariot was not mentioned in the Qur’an or in the authentic Sunnah attributed to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. Rather, it was attributed to Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with him, as Ibn Abi Hatim transmitted from him in his interpretation, and Ibn Kathir authenticated its chain of transmission.
Tafsir Ibn Kathir — On Surat An-Nisa Ibn Abi Hatim said: Ahmad bin Sinan told us… on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said: When God wanted to raise Jesus to heaven, he came out to his companions — and in the house there were twelve men from the disciples… Then he said: Which of you will have my likeness cast upon him, so that he will be killed in my place and be with me in my degree? A young man, one of the youngest of them, stood up… So the likeness of Jesus was cast upon him, and Jesus was raised from a window in the house to heaven… This is a sound chain of transmission going back to Ibn Abbas. This is an effort by Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with him, that can be accepted or rejected, but it is not binding.
Al-Tabarani’s Great Lexicon — Hadith No. 11780 There is no one whose words are not accepted and left out, except for the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace.
Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with him, agreed with some commentators, while others, such as Ibn Hazm, may God have mercy on him, disagreed with him.
Al-Fasl fi al-Milal — Ibn Hazm, Part One This is the meaning of the Almighty’s saying: “But it was made to appear to them.” What Almighty God meant was that those wicked people who plotted this falsehood and conspired to commit it made it appear to those who imitated them, so they informed them that they had crucified and killed him, while they were lying about that, knowing that they were lying.
Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanwir — Ibn Ashour, Part Six, Tafsir of Surat An-Nisa What must be believed based on the text of the Qur’an is that Christ was not killed, nor crucified, and that God raised him up to Himself and saved him from those who sought him. As for anything other than that, the matter is open to interpretation.
Addition: Critics’ Statements on the Existence of Ancient Oral Traditions
1. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas
“The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: A Study of the Textual and Literary Problems” — Stephen Gero, Novum Testamentum Vol. 13, Fasc. 1 (Jan., 1971), p. 73 The original logion, in the first stage of oral transmission (1st–2nd century) developed into a concise controversy apophthegm. The apophthegm was written down in the second century (Epistula Apostolorum, Marcosians, Irenaeus), but not thereby removed from oral circulation. In the next “tunnel period” of oral transmission, from the second to the sixth century, the narrative material was significantly expanded, but the saying itself was preserved unchanged.
“Cursing in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas” — Daniel Eastman, Vigiliae Christianae Vol. 69, No. 2 (2015), p. 188 From the wide variety of the Greek variants and the other versions, both geographically and in terms of content, it seems likely that the stories of Jesus’ childhood enjoyed a broad circulation around the Mediterranean, though primarily in the East. It also seems likely, as some scholars have pointed out, that the stories underwent a rather long period of oral transmission before they were written down.
2. The Infancy Gospel of James
A Christological Catechism: New Testament Answers — Joseph A. Fitzmyer, p. 15 Protevangelium Jacobi, or proto gospel of James dating from the end of the second century. It fills in details that may come from a primitive, authentic tradition, but more likely supplies such details from imaginative speculation. In this work we learn about the life of Mary, the mother of Jesus, the names of her parents (Ann and Joachim), her presentation in the temple, her marriage to Joseph, her elderly husband who already had children, by an earlier marriage, etc.
Conclusion
Praise be to God, by whose grace good deeds are accomplished, and who is exalted in degrees. Praise be to God abundantly, who has enabled me to complete this blessed series, God willing. If I am right, it is from God Almighty, and if I am wrong, it is from myself and Satan.
This, and may God’s blessings and peace be upon our master Muhammad, his family, and his companions.