Azahari Hassim
Numerous biblical scholars maintain that the four beasts described in Daniel 7 symbolize four distinct kingdoms: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Subsequently, the establishment of the kingdom of God is noted.
In contrast, certain Islamic scholars assert that the fifth kingdom, which they identify as the kingdom of God, corresponds to Islam, as it arose subsequent to the Byzantine Empire, also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire. What is the rationale behind this interpretation?
The Islamic interpretation of the prophecy in Daniel 7, which identifies the “fifth kingdom” (the kingdom of God) with Islam, is based on historical and theological reasoning. Here are the key points behind this interpretation:
1. Historical Succession of Empires
Daniel 7 describes four beasts representing four successive kingdoms. Many biblical scholars identify these as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
Islam emerged in the 7th century CE, after the decline of the Western Roman Empire and during the weakening of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire. Since Daniel’s vision mentions the establishment of God’s kingdom after the fourth empire, some Islamic scholars argue that Islam, which emerged after Rome, fulfills this prophecy.
2. The Fall of the Byzantine Empire and the Rise of Islam
The Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire was a dominant power before Islam’s expansion. Islamic scholars argue that with the conquests of the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates, Islam effectively replaced Byzantine rule in large parts of the Mediterranean, the Levant, and North Africa.
The rapid spread of Islam and its dominance over former Roman territories is seen as a fulfillment of the prophecy that a divine kingdom would supersede worldly empires.
3. The Concept of God’s Kingdom in Islam
Jesus did not equate the kingdom of God that he preached with the religion of Christianity. Rather, the concept of the “kingdom of God” is frequently linked to the arrival of a figure resembling a son of man as described in Daniel 7.
Islamic scholars, however, interpret God’s kingdom as a system of governance based on divine law (Sharia). Since Islam established a political-religious order that claimed to rule by divine law, it is seen as fulfilling the vision of God’s kingdom replacing human empires.
4. Islam as a Universal and Everlasting Kingdom
Daniel 7, verse 14 describes the final kingdom as one that will never be destroyed. Islamic scholars argue that Islam, despite historical challenges, continues to be a major global faith and political influence.
The continuity of Islam as a religious and civilizational force is seen as evidence that it aligns with the prophecy of a kingdom that endures.
5. The Role of Prophet Muhammad in Quranic Prophecy
Some Islamic scholars extend this interpretation by linking it to prophecies about a future religion of Islam. They cite Surah 61, verse 9 of the Quran:
“He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse.”
Muhammad’s establishment of a religious-political order is viewed as the fulfillment of the divine kingdom prophesied in Daniel.
Conclusion
Islamic scholars interpret Daniel 7’s prophecy through a historical and theological lens, identifying Islam as the divine kingdom that follows Rome. They argue that Islam’s rise, territorial expansion, and legal-political system based on divine law fulfill the vision of a God-ordained kingdom that replaces human rule.
Consistency in Belief: Comparing the Night Journey of Muhammad and Daniel’s Vision
It is believed that those who deny the Night Journey of the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem, followed by his ascension to the seventh heaven to meet God, resemble the arguments of those who dismiss Daniel’s vision at night in Daniel 7, verse 13. How is this argument articulated?
The argument comparing the denial of the Isra and Mi’raj (the Night Journey and Ascension of the Prophet Muhammad) to the dismissal of Daniel’s vision in Daniel 7, verse 13 is articulated based on the following parallels:
1. Both Events Are Supernatural and Nighttime Experiences
The Isra and Mi’raj describe Prophet Muhammad’s journey from Mecca to Jerusalem and his ascension through the heavens, ultimately meeting God. This event is considered miraculous and beyond ordinary physical experiences.
Daniel 7, verse 13 states: “I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him.”
This is also a supernatural vision that occurs at night and describes an ascent toward the Divine.
2. Skepticism Toward Mystical or Spiritual Journeys
Critics of Isra and Mi’raj argue that such a physical and spiritual journey is implausible, similar to how some interpret Daniel’s vision as metaphorical rather than an actual event.
The argument suggests that if one denies the reality of Muhammad’s ascension on the basis of it being supernatural, they would logically also have to deny Daniel’s night vision using the same reasoning.
3. Heavenly Ascent and Divine Presence
In both cases, the central figure ascends toward a divine presence:
Muhammad ascends through the seven heavens, meeting prophets and ultimately reaching the Divine Presence.
Daniel sees one like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven to stand before the Ancient of Days, a scene often interpreted as a meeting with God.
4. Implication of Denial: Consistency in Theological Interpretation
If one dismisses Muhammad’s ascension as merely metaphorical or fabricated, they must question whether Daniel’s vision was also just symbolic.
This challenges those (particularly in the Abrahamic faith traditions) who accept Daniel’s vision as authentic revelation but reject Muhammad’s journey on the grounds of improbability.
Conclusion
This argument is used to highlight consistency in belief regarding divine visions and supernatural events. If one affirms that Daniel’s vision describes a genuine, divinely granted experience, then logically, they should not outright dismiss the Isra and Mi’raj on the same grounds. Instead, they should engage with both narratives under a coherent theological framework.
The Prophecy of Daniel: Constantine the Great and Muhammad the Prophet
Some believe that Daniel 7, verse 25 alludes to Constantine the Great, who presided over the council of Nicaea, while Daniel 7, verse 13, points to Muhammad’s Night Journey. How is this argument explained?
This is a very controversial argument that is not widely accepted by most biblical scholars and Christians, who believe that Daniel 7, verse 25, and Daniel 7, verse 13, refer to the Antichrist and the Messiah, respectively. However, some people who support this argument explain it in the following way:
They claim that Constantine the Great, who was the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity and who convened the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, was the little horn of Daniel 7, verse 25, who spoke pompous words against the Most High and tried to change the times and the laws.
They argue that Constantine corrupted the original teachings of Jesus and imposed his own doctrines and creeds on the Christian church, such as the doctrine of the Trinity, the observance of Sunday instead of Saturday as the Sabbath, and the celebration of Easter instead of Passover.
They also accuse Constantine of persecuting and oppressing those who did not conform to his version of Christianity, such as the followers of Arianism, who denied the divinity of Jesus.
Arianism sparked significant debates within the Church, particularly during the early Ecumenical Councils. The First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD condemned Arianism, affirming the doctrine of the Trinity and the full divinity of Christ. The Nicene Creed established the belief that the Son is “begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father.”
Islamic scholars claim that Muhammad, who was the prophet of Islam and who claimed to have a miraculous Night Journey from Mecca to Jerusalem and then to heaven in 621 AD, was the Son of Man of Daniel 7, verse 13, who came with the clouds of heaven and was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom by the Ancient of Days, that is God.
The term “night visions” directly suggests an event that takes place at night. Muhammad’s Night Journey, which is said to have occurred during the night, aligns with this description. In contrast, Jesus’ ascension is generally not described as happening at night in Christian texts.
They argue that Muhammad was a true prophet of God who restored the pure monotheism that was lost by Constantine and his followers. They also assert that Muhammad’s kingdom is an everlasting kingdom that will never be destroyed, and that all nations and peoples of every language will serve him or submit to his law.
In summary, these are a few points made by Islamic scholars to back the notion that Daniel 7, verse 25, and 7, verse 13, refer to Constantine as the little horn who established the Trinity at the Council of Nicea, and Muhammad as the Son of Man who encountered God on his Night Journey to the seventh heaven.
The Covenant of Abraham: A Comparison Between the Bible and the Quran
According to biblical scripture, it is recorded that God established a covenant with Abraham through his son Isaac, rather than his firstborn Ishmael. Conversely, the Quran presents a different perspective by indicating that the covenant was made with Ishmael instead of Isaac. How does the Quran describe this?
Surah 2, verses 124 to 125 of the Quran read:
“And when his Lord tested Abraham with certain words, and he fulfilled them. God said, “I am making you a leader of humanity.” Abraham said, “And my descendants?” God said, “My covenant does not include the wrongdoers.”
“And We made the House a focal point for the people, and a sanctuary. Use the shrine of Abraham as a place of prayer. And We commissioned Abraham and Ishmael, “Sanctify My House for those who circle around it, and those who seclude themselves in it, and those who kneel and prostrate.”
The phrase “And when his Lord tested Abraham with certain words,” presented in verse 124, is understood by Quranic commentators to refer to the tests and commands that God imparted to Abraham. These included leaving his family in a barren land, sacrificing his son Ishmael, rebuilding the Kaaba (House of God), and instituting the rite of circumcision.
The Quran clearly states in Surah 2, verse 124 that God made a covenant with Abraham through his son Ishmael, not Isaac. The covenant was established prior to the birth of Isaac, who is regarded as a divine gift to Abraham and Sarah, a result of Abraham’s readiness to offer Ishmael as a sacrifice.
In this context, Ishmael is understood as a son dedicated to God, whereas Isaac is considered a son of blessing for Abraham and Sarah. This contradicts the Biblical account which portrays Isaac as the son who was to inherit the covenant from Abraham.
According to the Quran and Islamic tradition, the Biblical account was distorted to diminish Ishmael’s status as Abraham’s heir in favor of Isaac. This alteration is thought to stem from the bias of Jewish scribes toward the Israelite lineage.
The Quran asserts that it rectifies this distortion by confirming Ishmael as the son who carried on Abraham’s legacy in accordance with the original divine covenant. Additionally, the divine selection of the ancient Israelites and their Hebrew prophets before the advent of Islam is seen as a preparation for the arrival of Muhammad, the final Prophet.
Heir to Abraham: Isaac vs. Ishmael
The phrase “Heir to Abraham: Isaac vs. Ishmael” pertains to the biblical narrative surrounding Abraham, who is regarded as the progenitor of both Isaac and Ishmael. In the biblical account, God assures Abraham that he will have a son, leading to the birth of two sons: Isaac, born to his wife Sarah, and Ishmael, born to his servant Hagar.
The competition between Isaac and Ishmael arises from their respective positions as heirs to Abraham’s legacy. Within Jewish tradition, Isaac is recognized as the legitimate heir and the primary recipient of God’s covenant with Abraham, while Ishmael is frequently depicted as an outsider or a rejected figure.
Conversely, Islamic tradition perceives Ishmael as a fruit of Abraham, wheras Isaac is considered a divine gift given to Abraham and Sarah during their later years, due to Abraham’s obedience in leaving the infant Ishmael and his mother in the desert near the Kaaba (the house of God), as well as his willingness to sacrifice Ishmael.
I seek clarification regarding the interpretation of this argument.
In the Islamic tradition, Ishmael is regarded as a symbol of Abraham’s initial struggle and test of faith, while Isaac represents the ultimate reward for his unwavering obedience to God. The narrative of Abraham leaving infant Ishmael and his mother in the desert near the Kaaba illustrates Abraham’s trust in God’s plan, even when confronted with difficult decisions.
Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice Ishmael further underscores his complete submission to God’s will, as he was willing to relinquish the most precious thing in his life without hesitation. This act of devotion holds great significance in Islamic teachings and serves as a compelling example of faith and obedience.
As a reward for Abraham’s steadfastness and willingness to follow God’s commands — both in leaving infant Ishmael and Hagar in the desert and in his willingness to sacrifice Ishmael — God granted Abraham and Sarah a miraculous gift: the birth of Isaac in their old age.
This divine blessing signified God’s recognition of Abraham’s faith and further cemented his role as a patriarch of monotheistic faith, with both Ishmael and Isaac becoming the forebears of great nations.
This narrative highlights the interconnected themes of sacrifice, trust, and divine reward, demonstrating that true faith is met with God’s grace and fulfillment of His promises.
The Quran asserts that it rectifies the biblical narrative surrounding Abraham by confirming Ishmael as the son who carried on Abraham’s legacy in accordance with the Abrahamic covenant.
Additionally, the divine selection of the ancient Israelites and their Hebrew prophets under the Sinai covenant before the advent of Islam is seen as a precursor to the coming of Muhammad, the last Prophet.
ABRAHAMIC THEOLOGY 