• Note and Alert
• The Biblical Genealogy Argument
• The Five Women Mentioned in the Biblical Genealogy Discussion
• Ruth the Moabite and the Line of Lot
• Scan Evidence on the Genealogy of Jesus
• The Missionary Claim About Tamar
• The Claim That Tamar Symbolizes the Acceptance of the Gentiles
• Christ Was Sent to the Lost Sheep of Israel
• The Source Used Against the Prophet’s Lineage
• First Did the Source Mention Tamar or Judah in the Prophet’s Lineage
• Second Does the Name Zerah Necessarily Mean Zerah Son of Judah
• The Bible Dictionary on Zerah
• Final Refutation
• Counter Links

According to the Islamic faith, the lineage of Christ, peace be upon him, is noble, pure, and spotless as crystal. He is innocent of what the lying pen of the scribes attributed to him, as innocent as a wolf is of the blood of Jacob’s son.

What is written below is only a transfer of what was documented by the Christian books and the Holy Bible specifically, and it is necessary to inform and peace.

“What I have, you have. Do not reproach me, and I will not reproach you!”

They are actually 5 grandmothers of Jesus in the Biblical genealogy discussion:

And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine tonight also; and go in, lie with him, that we may preserve seed from our father.”

And the firstborn bore a son, and called his name Moab; and he is the father of the Moabites to this day.

So they took two Moabite wives, the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other was Ruth.

And they stayed there for about ten years.

This scan is fromTafsir al-Kitab al-Muqaddas lil-Mu’min, covering the Gospel of Matthew. The highlighted Arabic text explains that women in the genealogy were not usually mentioned unless they were of special importance, then comments on the women mentioned in the genealogy of Christ. It says that two of them were Gentiles and three were connected to sexual scandal: Tamar, Rahab, and the wife of Uriah. The page is being used to show that Christian commentaries themselves acknowledge unusual and problematic women in the genealogy recorded in Matthew.

This scan is fromAl-Mawsu‘ah al-Kanisiyyah li Tafsir al-‘Ahd al-Jadid, on the Gospel of Matthew. The highlighted section discusses Matthew 1:1–17 and explains the genealogy of Christ. It notes that the genealogy does not mention women except in notable cases and specifically highlights names such as Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and the wife of Uriah. The explanation says their presence has theological meaning in Christian interpretation, including the inclusion of sinners and Gentiles. The scan is used here to show that Christian interpretive sources themselves discuss these names as unusual elements in the genealogy.

This scan is fromAl-Tafsir al-Tatbiqi lil-Kitab al-Muqaddas, in the section on Matthew’s genealogy. The highlighted section discusses the women included in the genealogy of Jesus and says that some of them had reputations connected with scandal or moral wrongdoing. It mentions that Tamar and Rahab were associated with prostitution, Ruth was a Moabite, and Bathsheba committed adultery with David. The commentary then frames this theologically by saying Christ came for sinners. The scan is used as evidence that Christian commentaries openly acknowledge these difficult elements in the Biblical genealogy.

This scan is fromTafsir al-‘Ahd al-Jadid by Father Tadros Yacoub Malaty. The highlighted section says that the genealogy mentions certain women and names Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba, and Mary. It explains that Tamar and Rahab are associated with moral scandal, Ruth was a Gentile Moabite, and Bathsheba was involved in the sin of David. The commentary uses this within Christian theology to emphasize grace and the inclusion of sinners and Gentiles. The scan is relevant because it confirms from Christian sources that these figures are part of the genealogy discussion.

This Arabic scan presents the missionary argument. It says that the presence of Gentile women in the genealogy points to the acceptance of nations in the Messianic kingdom, because Jews allegedly considered Gentiles unacceptable, and women in Biblical symbolism may represent peoples. The highlighted section then claims that one of Tamar’s sons is namedZerah and that a Zerah appears in the lineage of the Prophet of Islam. The scan also cites Al-Rahiq al-Makhtum and lists a genealogy ending with Zerah bin Sami. This is the exact claim being refuted: the missionary moves from the presence of a name “Zerah” to the claim that the Prophet ﷺ descends from Tamar’s son.

This scan is an English rendering of the same missionary claim. It says that Gentile women in the lineage symbolize the acceptance of nations in the Messianic kingdom. Then it highlights the claim that one of Tamar’s sons was calledZerah, and that a person named Zerah appears in the lineage of the Prophet in Islam. The scan cites The Sealed Nectar and lists the genealogy through Adnan down to Zerah bin Sami. The problem is obvious: the scan only proves that the name Zerah appears in the Prophet’s lineage; it does not prove that this Zerah is Zerah son of Judah and Tamar.

Then Jesus went out from there and withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.

And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and cried out to him, saying, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is grievously possessed by a demon.”

But he did not answer her a word. Then his disciples came and begged him, saying, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

He answered and said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

So they came and worshiped him, saying, “Lord, help me!”

But he answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”

This passage is used here to challenge the claim that Tamar’s story is simply about the acceptance of the Gentiles in Christ’s kingdom, because the Gospel itself has Christ declaring that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

“Woe to those who pray!”

First: Did the source cited by the missionary mention the names Tamar or Judah in the noble genealogy of the Noble Messenger ﷺ?

This Arabic scan shows the genealogy passage being cited. The highlighted line containsZerah bin Sami, not Zerah son of Judah. The red box below also gives additional information about Sami and his descendants. The important point is that the source does not say Zerah son of Judah, nor does it mention Tamar. It says Zerah bin Sami in the line of Ishmael and Abraham. Therefore, using this scan to connect the Prophet ﷺ to Tamar is a false identification based on a shared name only.

Therefore, Adnan, the grandfather of the Noble Messenger ﷺ, was not a “Zerahite,” that is, a descendant of Zerah son of Judah.

Second: Does mentioning a person named Zerah in the noble genealogy mean that he is referring to Zerah, the brother of Perez, the son of Tamar and Judah?

1. An Edomite descended from Ishmael, the grandson of Esau, and the son of Reuel (Genesis 36:3, 4, 13, 17, 33; 1 Chronicles 1:37, 44).

2. One of the twins born to Tamar by her father-in-law Judah, and the founder of the Zerahite clan in the tribe of Judah (Numbers 26:20). Achan, son of Carmi, belonged to this clan (Joshua 7:1, 17, 18, 24), as did two of David’s commanders (1 Chronicles 27:11, 13).

3. One of the sons of Simeon, and the founder of the Zerahite clan in the tribe of Simeon (Numbers 26:12, 13; 1 Chronicles 4:24). Also called Zohar (Genesis 46:10; Exodus 6:15).

4. A Levite from the sons of Gershom (1 Chronicles 6:21, 41).

5. A Cushite king who marched with a huge army of one million men to fight Judah in the days of King Asa and was defeated at Mareshah in the Valley of Zephathah (2 Chronicles 14:9). Some believe he is Osorkon I or II of the Twenty-second Dynasty that ruled Egypt. Others believe that the word Cushite has an Arabic origin, and according to this belief, King Zerah and his army were Bedouins.

This Arabic scan is from a Bible dictionary entry for the nameZerah. It explains that the name means something like rising of light and that several different Old Testament figures carried this name. It lists more than one Zerah: an Edomite connected to Esau, Zerah son of Judah and Tamar, a son of Simeon, a Levite from Gershom, and a Cushite king. This scan directly refutes the missionary assumption that every mention of the name Zerah must refer to Zerah son of Judah and Tamar. The name is not exclusive to Tamar’s son.

Here ends the claim.

1. The genealogy source cited for the Prophet ﷺ does not mention Tamar or Judah.
2. The Zerah mentioned in the Prophet’s lineage is Zerah bin Sami, not Zerah son of Judah and Tamar.

Therefore, the attempt to connect the Noble Messenger ﷺ to Tamar through the name Zerah is a false argument based on selective quotation and name confusion.