Does Quran 6:91 (Al-Anaam) really say that the Jews and Christians changed the Bible?

Some contend that Quran 6:91 (Al-Anaam) says that the Jews and Christians changed the Bible.  Let’s take a look at it and see if that is really what it is saying.

Quran 6:91 (Al-Anaam)

No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: "Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)" Say: "Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers." Say: "(Allah) (sent it down)": Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling.

Before we delve into this ayah, I would like to examine a similar passage.

Quran 15:90-93 (Al-Hijr)

Yusuf Ali Translation	Hafs	Ibn Kathir
(Of just such wrath) as We sent down on those who divided (Scripture into arbitrary parts),-	‏كَمَآ أَنزَلْنَا عَلَى ٱلْمُقْتَسِمِينَ	كَمَآ أَنزَلْنَا عَلَى ٱلْمُقْتَسِمِينَ
(So also on such) as have made Qur'an into shreds (as they please).	‏ٱلَّذِينَ جَعَلُوا۟ ٱلْقُرْءَانَ عِضِينَ	ٱلَّذِينَ جَعَلُوا۟ القُرَان  عِضِينَ
Therefore, by the Lord, We will, of a surety, call them to account,	‏فَوَرَبِّكَ لَنَسْـَٔلَنَّهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ	فَوَرَبِّكَ لَنَسْـَٔلَنَّهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ
For all their deeds.	‏عَمَّا كَانُوا۟ يَعْمَلُونَ	عَمَّا كَانُوا۟ يَعْمَلُونَ

Here, we can see that, just as people divided the Scripture (like in the ayah in question), they have also made the Qur’an into shreds.  So, if Quran 6:91 really is saying that the Bible itself was corrupted, then we must also conclude that the Qur’an was also corrupted. 

Not only that, but the Qur’an suffers a worse fate.  If Qur’an 6:91 is saying that the people literally divided the Bible up into separate sheets, then it can still be properly reassembled and read.  But, taking Qur'an 15:91 literally would mean that the people shredded the Qur’an.  Shredding a book renders it unreadable and useless. 

I think that most of the people who try to say that the Qur’an is perfectly preserved will instantly agree that Qur’an 15:90-93 is being figurative.  If Qur’an 15:90-93 is figurative, and it clearly links these activities with those described in Quran 6:91, then shouldn’t we also interpret Qur’an 6:91 figuratively?  If Quran 6:91 can only mean a literal destruction of the Biblical text, then Quran 15:90-93 must indicate that the Qur’anic text was destroyed.  But, since we all agree that Quran 15:90-93 is figurative, we must also agree that Quran 6:91 is figurative as well.

Now, let’s look at the context of Qur’an 6:91 and see if we can draw out the meaning instead of reading our preconceptions into it.

Qur’an 6:89-92

Qur’an 6:89

Yusuf Ali Translation	Hafs	Nafi`
These were the men to whom We gave the Book, and authority, and prophethood: if these (their descendants) reject them, Behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who reject them not.	‏أُو۟لَٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَهُمُ ٱلْكِتَبَ وَٱلْحُكْمَ وَٱلنُّبُوَّةَ ۚ فَإِن يَكْفُرْ بِهَا هَٓؤُلَآءِ فَقَدْ وَكَّلْنَا بِهَا قَوْمًۭا لَّيْسُوا۟ بِهَا بِكَفِرِينَ	أُو۟لَٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَهُمُ ٱلْكِتَبَ وَٱلْحُكْمَ والنبوءة فَإِن يَكْفُرْ بِهَا هَٓؤُلَآءِ فَقَدْ وَكَّلْنَا بِهَا قَوْمًۭا لَّيْسُوا۟ بِهَا بِكَفِرِينَ

The people rejected the former prophets.

Qur’an 6:90

Yusuf Ali Translation	Hafs	Ibn Kathir
Those were the (prophets) who received Allah.s guidance: Copy the guidance they received; Say: "No reward for this do I ask of you: This is no less than a message for the nations."	‏أُو۟لَٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَدَى ٱللَّهُ ۖ فَبِهُدَىٰهُمُ ٱقْتَدِهْ ۗ قُل لَّآ أَسْـَٔلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا ۖ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرَىٰ لِلْعَلَمِينَ	أُو۟لَٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَدَى ٱللَّهُ ۖ فَبِهُدَىٰهُمُ ٱقْتَدِهْ ۗ قُل لَّآ أَسْـَٔلُكُمْ عليهي أَجراً إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرَىٰ لِلْعَلَمِينَ

Muhammad receives the same guidance given to the former prophets, namely that he has a message for the nations.  Notice that Muhammad copied the guidance given to the former prophets and this guidance is a message for the nations.  This means that the former prophets also had a message for the nations.  This calls into question the common claim that Muhammad was the only prophet for all mankind.

Quran 6:91

Yusuf Ali Translation	Hafs	Ibn Kathir & Abu `Amr al-'Ala'
No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: "Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)" Say: "Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers." Say: "(Allah) (sent it down)": Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling.	‏وَمَا قَدَرُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِۦٓ إِذْ قَالُوا۟ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ بَشَرٍۢ مِّن شَىْءٍۢ ۗ قُلْ مَنْ أَنزَلَ ٱلْكِتَبَ ٱلَّذِى جَآءَ بِهِۦ مُوسَىٰ نُورًۭا وَهُدًۭى لِّلنَّاسِ ۖ تَجْعَلُونَهُۥ قَرَاطِيسَ تُبْدُونَهَا وَتُخْفُونَ كَثِيرًۭا ۖ وَعُلِّمْتُم مَّا لَمْ تَعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنتُمْ وَلَآ ءَابَآؤُكُمْ ۖ قُلِ ٱللَّهُ ۖ ثُمَّ ذَرْهُمْ فِى خَوْضِهِمْ يَلْعَبُونَ	‏وَمَا قَدَرُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِۦٓ إِذْ قَالُوا۟ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ بَشَرٍۢ مِّن شَىْءٍۢ ۗ قُلْ مَنْ أَنزَلَ ٱلْكِتَبَ ٱلَّذِى جَآءَ بِهِۦ مُوسَىٰ نُورًۭا وَهُدًۭى لِّلنَّاسِ ۖ يجعلونه قراطيس يبدونها ويخفون كَثِيرًۭا ۖ وَعُلِّمْتُم مَّا لَمْ تَعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنتُمْ وَلَآ ءَابَآؤُكُمْ ۖ قُلِ ٱللَّهُ ۖ ثُمَّ ذَرْهُمْ فِى خَوْضِهِمْ يَلْعَبُونَ

Notice that it is criticizing these people for doubting that God sent down the Book.  Does this really sound like it is trying to tell people that we should doubt the Bible.  It goes on to say that the people made the book into separate sheets and concealed much of it.  This doesn’t sound much like people changing the Bible, but rather removing quotes out of context and ignoring what else was written.  People do this all the time when they quote a few ayat from the Qur’an and say that it commands Muslims to kill all unbelievers.  Does this quoting out of context cause all copies of the Qur’an in the world to suddenly change to reflect this misquoting?  Of course not!  That would be a ridiculous assumption.

Qur’an 6:92

Yusuf Ali Translation	Hafs	Ibn Kathir	Shu‘bah	Warsh & Abu `Amr al-'Ala' & Abu Ja`far
And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her. Those who believe in the Hereafter believe in this (Book), and they are constant in guarding their prayers.	‏وَهَذَا كِتَبٌ أَنزَلْنَهُ مُبَارَكٌۭ مُّصَدِّقُ ٱلَّذِى بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَلِتُنذِرَ أُمَّ ٱلْقُرَىٰ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهَا ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱلْءَاخِرَةِ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِۦ ۖ وَهُمْ عَلَىٰ صَلَاتِهِمْ يُحَافِظُونَ	وَهَذَا كِتَبٌ أنزلناهو مبارك مُّصَدِّقُ ٱلَّذِى بَيْنَ يديهي ولتنذر أُمَّ ٱلْقُرَىٰ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهَا ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱلْءَاخِرَةِ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِۦ ۖ وَهُمْ عَلَىٰ صَلَاتِهِمْ يُحَافِظُونَ	وَهَذَا كِتَبٌ أَنزَلْنَهُ مُبَارَكٌۭ مُّصَدِّقُ ٱلَّذِى بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ ولينذر أُمَّ ٱلْقُرَىٰ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهَا ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱلْءَاخِرَةِ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِۦ ۖ وَهُمْ عَلَىٰ صَلَاتِهِمْ يُحَافِظُونَ	وَهَذَا كِتَبٌ أَنزَلْنَهُ مُبَارَكٌۭ مُّصَدِّقُ ٱلَّذِى بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَلِتُنذِرَ أُمَّ ٱلْقُرَىٰ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهَا ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ يومنون بِٱلْءَاخِرَةِ يومنون بِهِۦ ۖ وَهُمْ عَلَىٰ صَلَاتِهِمْ يُحَافِظُونَ

Notice that immediately after this supposed statement that the Bible has been changed, the Qur’an clearly states that it is a Book from God confirming the previous revelations.  And, no, it does not say “in their original form” or “whatever remains” or anything implying that it is talking about different version of the previous revelations.

Those who try to use ayah 91 to say that the Bible has been changed do so by making the ayat into separate sheets and concealing the plain statement of ayah 92, which confirms the truth of the Bible.

Does Quran 2:79 (al-Baqarah) actually say that the Bible has been changed?

This will be the first of a series of posts concerning what the Quran actually says about the Bible and whether or not the common claims of corruption are legitimate.  Let’s start with one of the most commonly quoted verses that supposedly proves that the Bible has been corrupted.

First, I would like to address the common belief that the Quran only addresses books given to the prophets and the Bible isn't directly mentioned.  The word Bible is the English pronunciation of the Greek word βιβλία, which translates into English as “book”.  In Arabic it is كتاب .  So, if the Quran refers to the Jews and Christians as having a “book” (كتاب in Arabic), then it is referring to the Bible, which is the “book” (كتاب) possessed by the Jews and Christians. 

Now, let’s look at the Quran.

Quran 2:79

Yusif Ali translation	Hafs	Ya`qub al-Hashimi	Hamzah
Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.	‏فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ	‏فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بأيديهُم ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أيديهُم وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ	‏فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بٍيَيْديهِم ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

We must look at this ayah and the surrounding ayat in order to see if it actually says that the Jews and Christians changed the Bible. 

First, if you look at this ayah, it does not mention changing an existing book.  Instead, it mentions writing a book and attributing it to God.  If I write a book and falsely claim that it is from God and Gabriel recited it to me, have I changed the Quran?  Are all of the copies of the Quran throughout the world now corrupted if I publish this false book?  No, of course not!!!  That would be a ridiculous claim.  And it would be no less ridiculous to make a similar claim about the Bible. 

Did Christians and/or Jews write books and falsely attribute their origin to God?  Most Christian theologians will say yes.  They reject many books such as the Gospel of Judas, the Gnostic Gospels, the Apocalypse of Peter, and so on.  They reject these books because most of the evidence indicates they were written long after the apostles died and they often contradict the writings of Moses and the other previous prophets.  No one denies that men wrote books and falsely attributed them to God.  But, this is a completely different thing from changing the existing Scriptures.

Now, let’s consider this ayah in the context of the previous ayah.

Quran 2:78-79

Yusuf Ali translation	Hafs	Ya`qub al-Hashimi	Hamzah	Abu Ja`far
And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.	‏وَمِنْهُمْ أُمِّيُّونَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ إِلَّآ أَمَانِىَّ وَإِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَظُنُّونَ			‏وَمِنْهُمْ أُمِّيُّونَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ إِلَّآ أمانِىَ وَإِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَظُنُّونَ
Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.	فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ	فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بأيديهُم ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أيديهُم وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ	فَوَيْلٌۭ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَبَ بٍيَيْديهِم ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًۭا قَلِيلًۭا ۖ فَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌۭ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

First, we can see from this that it is talking about a small group of people within Judaism and/or Christianity.  It is not talking about the People of the Book in general.  If I got a group of Muslims to agree to change the Quran, they would only be able to change the copies of the Quran they possessed.  It would not be possible for the copies of the Quran throughout the world to be changed without the consent of all Muslims.  Likewise, a group of Jews and/or Christians could only theoretically change the copies of the Bible they possessed.

But it goes on.  It says they are “illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.”  If they know nothing of the Book but conjecture, then it seems to be talking about a group that doesn't even have a copy of the Bible in their possession.  You can’t change a book you don’t have.  You can only create a fake book and try to pass it off as real.  This only reinforces the argument I presented above.

Let’s continue to examine the context.  The Quran continues for several ayat talking about the unbelief and evil deeds committed by the Jews and Christians, which nobody denies took place. 

Then, in ayah 89 it says something very interesting.

Quran 2:89

Yusuf Ali translation	Hafs
And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them,- although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith,- when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognised, they refuse to believe in it but the curse of Allah is on those without Faith.	‏وَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمْ كِتَبٌۭ مِّنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ مُصَدِّقٌۭ لِّمَا مَعَهُمْ وَكَانُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ يَسْتَفْتِحُونَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ فَلَمَّا جَآءَهُم مَّا عَرَفُوا۟ كَفَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ۚ فَلَعْنَةُ ٱللَّهِ عَلَى ٱلْكَفِرِينَ

The Quran says that it is a book from God “confirming what is with them”.  So, even after the events described in ayat 78-79, the Quran confirms the truth of the Bible still possessed by them.

Let’s summarize.  There were some, but not all, of the People of the Book who knew nothing but conjecture of the Bible, from which we can conclude that they probably didn't possess a copy of it.  They wrote fake Scriptures and tried to pass them off as genuinely from God.  God criticizes they unbelief and wickedness of the People of the Book and says that the Quran confirms the Bible they still possessed.

Nowhere does it actually mention changing the Bible, instead it says that the Quran confirms the Bible still possessed by the majority of them.  

Of course, there are other ayat used to try to say the Bible has been changed.  I will address those in later posts.

Quran on Son of God

Quran on Son of God

First, let’s see what the Bible says about the phrase “son of God”.

Luke 1:35

και αποκριθεις ο αγγελος ειπεν αυτη πνευμα αγιον επελευσεται επι σε και δυναμις υψιστου επισκιασει σοι διο και το γεννωμενον αγιον κληθησεται υιος θεου

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

The Bible also says this about Adam, who also had no human father. 

Luke 3:38

του ενως του σηθ του αδαμ του θεου

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

The Bible says this of God’s appointed kings. 

Psalms 2:6-7

  ואני נסכתי מלכי על־ציון הר־קדשׁי

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

אספרה אל חק יהוה אמר אלי בני אתה אני היום ילדתיך

7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

2 Samuel 7:14

אני אהיה־לו לאב והוא יהיה־לי לבן אשׁר בהעותו והכחתיו בשׁבט אנשׁים ובנגעי בני אדם

14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

The Bible quotes these verses when explaining Jesus’s position as the son of God.

Hebrews 1:5

τινι γαρ ειπεν ποτε των αγγελων υιος μου ει συ εγω σημερον γεγεννηκα σε και παλιν εγω εσομαι αυτω εις πατερα και αυτος εσται μοι εις υιον

5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

And look at Romans 1:4

του ορισθεντος υιου θεου εν δυναμει κατα πνευμα αγιωσυνης εξ αναστασεως νεκρων ιησου χριστου του κυριου ημων

4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

We can see that, when the Bible calls Jesus, God’s son, it is definitely NOT teaching that Jesus is the product of God taking a wife and having a son with her.  The Bible clearly explains that it is NOT teaching this.  There is nothing in the Bible to suggest this. 

The explanation given by the Bible in these passages is clearly metaphorical in nature. 

Most of the pre-Islamic Arabs were pagan.  Pagan gods are depicted as regularly taking wives and procreating with them. 

The Quran fights these pagan ideas, it is not fighting the Bible.  This can be seen by the fact that nearly all of the verses in the Quran that talk about this use the word “walad” or a word derived from “walad”, which indicates a child, infant, kid, product of a marriage.  The more general Arabic word for son, “ibn”, is rarely used in these verses.

The Quran clarifies that it is fighting these pagan ideas in these verses.

Quran 6:100-103

‏وَجَعَلُوا۟ لِلَّهِ شُرَكَآءَ ٱلْجِنَّ وَخَلَقَهُمْ ۖ وَخَرَقُوا۟ لَهُۥ بَنِينَ وَبَنَتٍۭ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍۢ ۚ سُبْحَنَهُۥ وَتَعَلَىٰ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ

100. Yet they make the Jinns equals with Allah, though Allah did create the Jinns; and they falsely, having no knowledge, attribute to Him sons and daughters. Praise and glory be to Him! (for He is) above what they attribute to Him!

‏بَدِيعُ ٱلسَّمَوَتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ ۖ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُۥ وَلَدٌۭ وَلَمْ تَكُن لَّهُۥ صَحِبَةٌۭ ۖ وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَىْءٍۢ ۖ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمٌۭ

101. To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: How can He have a son when He hath no consort? He created all things, and He hath full knowledge of all things.

‏ذَلِكُمُ ٱللَّهُ رَبُّكُمْ ۖ لَآ إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۖ خَلِقُ كُلِّ شَىْءٍۢ فَٱعْبُدُوهُ ۚ وَهُوَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍۢ وَكِيلٌۭ

102. That is Allah, your Lord! there is no god but He, the Creator of all things: then worship ye Him: and He hath power to dispose of all affairs.

 ‏لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ ٱلْأَبْصَرُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ ٱلْأَبْصَرَ ۖ وَهُوَ ٱللَّطِيفُ ٱلْخَبِيرُ

103. No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things

Al-Mawrid: A Modern Arabic-English Dictionary, 7^th edition, defines certain key words this way:

Walada (seen in these quotes in the form Yalid): to beget, sire, procreate, generate

Wulida (seen in these quotes in the form Yulid):  to be born; to come into existence, come into being, see the light, originate

Walad: child, kid; baby, infant; descendant, offspring, scion; son; boy

Ibn: son; child; boy; descendant

Here you can see that the Quran is condemning the idea that God has procreated with a wife to produce a son.  It is not contradicting the true teachings of the Bible.

‏وَأَنَّهُۥ تَعَلَىٰ جَدُّ رَبِّنَا مَا ٱتَّخَذَ صَحِبَةًۭ وَلَا وَلَدًۭا

Quran 72: 3  'And exalted is the Majesty of our Lord: He has taken neither a wife nor a son (Waladan).

 ‏وَقَالُوا۟ ٱتَّخَذَ ٱللَّهُ وَلَدًۭا ۗ سُبْحَنَهُۥ ۖ بَل لَّهُۥ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَوَتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ ۖ كُلٌّۭ لَّهُۥ قَنِتُونَ

Quran 2: 116  They say: "God hath begotten a son (Waladan)": Glory be to Him.—Nay, to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth: everything renders worship to Him.'"

‏مَا كَانَ لِلَّهِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ مِن وَلَدٍۢ ۖ سُبْحَنَهُۥٓ ۚ إِذَا قَضَىٰٓ أَمْرًۭا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُۥ كُن فَيَكُونُ

Quran 19:35  It is not befitting to (the majesty of) God that He should beget a son (Waladin).

 ‏وَقَالُوا۟ ٱتَّخَذَ ٱلرَّحْمَنُ وَلَدًۭا

Quran 19:88 They say: "(God) Most Gracious has begotten a son (Waladan)!"

 ‏لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ

Quran 112:3 He begetteth (Yalid) not, nor is He begotten (Yulad);

‏وَقَالَتِ ٱلْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ ٱبْنُ ٱللَّهِ وَقَالَتِ ٱلنَّصَرَى ٱلْمَسِيحُ ٱبْنُ ٱللَّهِ ۖ ذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُم بِأَفْوَهِهِمْ ۖ يُضَهِـُٔونَ قَوْلَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ ۚ قَتَلَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ ۚ أَنَّىٰ يُؤْفَكُونَ

Quran 9:30  The Jews call ’Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son (Ibn) of God.  That is a saying from their mouth; (In this) they but imitate what the Unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

These verses were important because they differentiate the true God from the pagan gods the Arabs had been worshipping. 

Early Christians adopted many aspects of Paganism into their beliefs, including God’s relationship to Mary and Jesus. 

You can see one modern example of this in the Catholic Church, the largest denomination.  Catholics pray to Mary as the “Queen of Heaven.  They teach that Mary remained a virgin her whole life because she is the “Spouse of the Holy Spirit” and they constantly refer to her as the “Mother of God”.  Any good Catholic will tell you that they don’t believe God had sex with Mary and produced Jesus.  They will tell you that they are being metaphorical when they call her the “Spouse of the Holy Spirit”.  I don’t want to misrepresent their position.  But, they do take it literally enough that they insist it would have been adultery for Mary to have sex with Joseph.  That is why they believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary.  Most Protestants would consider these positions to be blasphemous, and certainly all Muslims would.

Many people assume that the Quran is portraying the Christian belief of Jesus as the “Son of God” as being similar to the pagan gods and their offspring.  But, I believe the Quran was fighting against several ideas at once.  It obviously spends some time explaining that God is not like the pagan gods who procreated.  But it also explicitly says that Jesus is not God.

Quran 5:72

‏لَقَدْ كَفَرَ ٱلَّذِينَ قَالُوٓا۟ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ هُوَ ٱلْمَسِيحُ ٱبْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَقَالَ ٱلْمَسِيحُ يَبَنِىٓ إِسْرَٓءِيلَ ٱعْبُدُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ رَبِّى وَرَبَّكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُۥ مَن يُشْرِكْ بِٱللَّهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ ٱلْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَىٰهُ ٱلنَّارُ ۖ وَمَا لِلظَّلِمِينَ مِنْ أَنصَارٍۢ

72. They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.

The Quran promotes a strict monotheistic view of the universe where there is only one being who is actually God and He made everyone else, including Jesus. 

The Bible uses the phrase “Son of God” in a metaphorical sense, which is compatible with strict monotheism.  But, the Nicene Creed defines the phrase “Son of God” in a non-metaphorical way.  I believe that an honest look at the language of the Nicene Creed will explain why a strict monotheist would condemn it.  And I believe that its definition of “Son of God” is rather close to the Arabic word “walad” in meaning.  I believe the Quran condemns the Nicene Creed when it repeatedly says that God does not have a “walad”.

Here is the Nicene Creed as defined in the first Ecumenical Council in Nicaea in A.D. 325.

In Greek it reads

Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα Θεὸν Πατέρα παντοκράτορα πάντων ὁρατῶν τε καὶ ἀοράτων ποιητήν· καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς μονογενῆ τουτέστιν ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ Πατρος Θεὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ, Φῶς ἐκ Φωτός,Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ,γεννηθέντα, οὐ ποιηθέντα,ὁμοούσιον τῷ Πατρί,δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο τά τε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ τὰ ἐν τῇ γῇ,τὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν,κατελθόντα,καὶ σαρκωθέντα,καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα,παθόντα,καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ,ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς,ἐρχόμενον κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς.καὶ εἰς τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα.Τοὺς δὲ λέγοντας Ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν,καὶ Πρὶν γεννηθῆναι οὐκ ἦν,καὶ ὅτι Ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων εγένετο,ἢ Ἐξ ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως ἢ οὐσιάς φάσκοντας εἶναι ἢ κτιστόν ἢ τρεπτόν ἢ ἀλλοιωτὸν τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ,τούτους ἀναθεματίζει ἡ ἁγία καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολικὴ ἐκκλησία.

In Latin it reads

Credimus in unum Deum patrem omnipotentem, omnium visibilium et invisibilium factorem. Et in unum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum filium Dei,  natum ex Patre unigenitum,  hoc est, de substantia Patris,  Deum ex Deo,  lumen ex lumine,  Deum verum de Deo vero,  natum non factum,  unius substantiae cum Patre, quod graece dicunt homousion,  per quem omnia facta sunt quae in coelo et in terra,  qui propter nostram salutem descendit,  incarnatus est,  et homo factus est,  et passus est,  et resurrexit tertia die,  et adscendit in coelos,  venturus judicare vivos et mortuos.  Et in Spiritum sanctum.  Eos autem, qui dicunt, Erat quando non erat,  et ante quam nasceretur non erat,  et quod de non exstantibus factus est,  vel ex alia substantia aut essentia, dicentes convertibilem et demutabilem Deum:  hos anathematizat catholica Ecclesia.

In English it reads

We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father,God from God,light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made,of one substance with the Father,through Whom all things came into being,things in heaven and things on earth,Who because of us men and because of our salvation came down,and became incarnate and became man,and suffered,and rose again on the third day, and ascended to the heavens, and will come to judge the living and dead,And in the Holy Spirit. But as for those who say, There was when He was not, and, Before being born He was not, and that He came into existence out of nothing,or who assert that the Son of God is of a different hypostasis or substance, or created, or is subject to alteration or change - these the Catholic and apostolic Church anathematizes.

Here is the updated form as defined in the first Ecumenical Council in Nicaea in A.D. 325.

In Greek it reads

Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα Θεὸν Πατέρα παντοκράτορα ποιητὴν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς ὁρατῶν τε πάντων καὶ ἀοράτων· καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν Μονογενῆ,τὸν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς γεννηθέντα πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων,Φῶς ἐκ Φωτός,Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ,γεννηθέντα οὐ ποιηθέντα,ὁμοούσιον τῷ Πατρί,δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο· τὸν δι' ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν,καὶ σαρκωθέντα ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου,καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα,σταυρωθέντα τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου,καὶ παθόντα, καὶ ταφέντα,καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς,καὶ ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς,καὶ καθεζόμενον ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Πατρὸς,καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον μετὰ δόξης κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς,οὗ τῆς βασιλείας οὐκ ἔσται τέλος· καὶ εἰς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Ἅγιον, τὸ Κύριον καὶ Ζωοποιόν,τὸ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον,τὸ σὺν Πατρὶ καὶ Υἱῷ συμπροσκυνούμενον καὶ συνδοξαζόμενον,τὸ λαλῆσαν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν· εἰς μίαν ἁγίαν καθολικὴν καὶ ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν· ὁμολογοῦμεν ἓν βάπτισμα εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν· προσδοκῶμεν ἀνάστασιν νεκρῶν,καὶ ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος. ἀμήν.

In Latin it reads

Credimus in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium, et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unicum, de Patre natum ante omnia saecula; Deum verum de Deo vero; natum, non factum; ejusdemque substantiae qua Pater est; per quem omnia facta sunt; qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit, incarnatus est de Spiritu sancto, in Maria virgine homo factus, crucifixus pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, sepultus, resurrexit tertia die, ascendit ad coelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris; inde venturus est cum gloria judicare vivos ac mortuos, cujus regni non erit finis. Et in Spiritum sanctum, Dominum ac vivificatorem a Patre procedentem, qui cum Patre et Filio adoratur et glorificatur, qui locutus est per Prophetas; in unam catholicam atque apostolicam Ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptismum in remissionem peccatorum; speramus resurrectionem mortuorum, vitam futuri saeculi. Amen.

In English it reads

We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages,  light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through Whom all things came into existence, Who because of us men and because of our salvation came down from the heavens, and was incarnate from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures and ascended to heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father, and will come again with glory to judge living and dead, of Whose kingdom there will be no end; And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified, Who spoke through the prophets; in one holy Catholic and apostolic Church. We confess one baptism to the remission of sins; we look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen

We can see in the Nicene Creed that the meaning of “Son of God” is not the same metaphorical meaning given in the Biblical passages above.  Granted, it does not portray God as procreating like the pagan gods.  However, I feel that saying that Jesus is “the only begotten Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages,  light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father” does begin to approach the meaning of the Arabic word “walad” used in the Quran. 

The Trinity is, by definition, a mystery which we can’t understand.  But, we must use a word to describe the relationship.  To a strict monotheist, the Trinity is heretical.  If the Quran is going to condemn the Father –Son relationship in the Nicene Creed as heretical, then the Arabic word “walad” is the best word available to quickly explain what it is condemning.