Pickthall	Yusuf Ali	Shakir	Sher Ali	Rashad Khalifa	Kamal Omar
There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them -	And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;-	And there is not one of the followers of the Book but most certainly believes in this before his death, and on the day of resurrection he (Isa) shall be a witness against them.	And there is none among the People of the Book but will continue to believe in it before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he (Jesus) shall be a witness against them.	Everyone among the people of the scripture was required to believe in him before his death. On the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.	And (one) is not (to be regarded as) from among 'Ahl-ul-Kitab' unless (and untill) he surely believes in (and accepts) This (Book), prior to his death; and on the day of Ressurection (This Book) will act as a witness (to judge them for their deeds).
Hilali / Khan: And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allâh and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) <> or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them.{*}

The main issue of interest regarding this ayah (the question: "it" or "him" and the referent of "his" in the phrase "believe in him/it before his death) is dealt with in our discussion of this vers in the Qur'an Commentary section. Here we only want to point out how easily Muslims corrupt their own scriptures by investing passages with meaning which is not really there. It is sad to see when Christians commit corruption with the tongue to make the Bible say what they want, but Muslims are no less guilty of this, with the Bible as well as with the Qur'an. This does not mean the text in the original language is corrupted, but Muslims certainly have no moral ground accusing Christians of corruption given the way they treat their own book.

Hilali and Khan have in their usual way imported a lot of meaning into the text which is clearly not in the Arabic. They are twisting the scripture with their tongue to make a very vague ayah say what it doesn't really say because this is the message they want readers to hear. However, their interpretation is still "relatively" mainstream. In particular, Ahl al-Kitab are the Jews and Christians as is agreed to by everybody except Dr. Kamal Omar.

Kamal Omar is absolutely the most esoteric and his translation as well is made to conform to his special theory where he wants to prove the identity Torah = Injil = Zabur = Qur'an, and so he also feels compelled to deny that Jews and Christians are to be considered "People of the Book" unless they accept the Qur'an (See: Kamal Omar: The Ultimate Truth). Hardly anyone would agree that this is the natural sense of the verse in its context. The corruption for the paltry gain of supporting a faulty theory is obvious.

Qur'an Versions
Answering Islam Home Page