al-Tawba 9:30

Wa qālati'l-yahūdu ʿUzayru'bnu'llāh wa qālati'l-naṣāra'l-masīḥu'bnu'llāh; dhālika qawluhum bi-afwāhihim; yuḍāhiʾūna qawla'lladhīna kafarū min qabl; qātalahumu'llāh; annā yuʾfakūn

"The Jews said, 'ʿUzayr is the son of God'; and the Christians said, 'The Messiah is the son of God.' That is their word with their mouths; they make it resemble the word of those who rejected before. May God confound them — how they are turned away!"

This verse and what follows it are about claims ascribed to two religious communities. The measure applied in this commentary is as follows, and I write it out plainly:

What is criticised is a word, not a community. The wording of the verse itself says so: dhālika qawluhum — "that is their word." The subject is whether a sentence is true.

In this commentary no ruling is issued about any religious community, and no quality is ascribed to any community. The relevant clause of Method operates here too.

And one further note: as to the historical setting in which the word about ʿUzayr mentioned in the verse was held, and how widespread it was, there are differing assessments in the classical and modern sources. This commentary does not enter that question and advances no historical claim. The wording of the verse records a word; this commentary conveys that record.

The sense of the root: to resemble, to make like. Muḍāhāt — making one thing resemble another, fitting it to it.

I record this as an observation about the language: the verse names the claim as an imitation — not a word issuing from themselves but a word made to resemble the word of another.

And the expression bi-afwāhihim must be recorded. This is the second link of the set of three treated at verse 8: 8, 30, 32. In all three the word is ascribed to the mouth — that is, its source is not shown; what is recorded is that it is being said.