Demonstrating the Islamic Dilemma

If the Quran is true, then the Bible is true. But if the Bible is true, then the Quran is false.

That is the dilemma. I know this will disturb some, and others may take offense. But I want to begin by saying I’m not looking to do any of those things. My interest here is truth. I am interested in what we can establish from primary texts. As I often remark, I do not pretend to be an expert. In fact, I would appreciate substantive, reasoned pushback and clarification.

I will present my argument in three blocks. First, I will show that the Quran consistently approves of the Bible, especially the Torah and the Injeel (i.e., Gospels), as divinely inspired and unalterable words of Allah. Then, I will show that the Quran is often wrong in many details compared to the Bible. Finally, I’ll demonstrate that the Bible knows nothing about and does not anticipate the Quran.

We begin with Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 136:
قُولُوا آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

Say, [O believers], “We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him.”

These verses of Quran 2 clearly imply consistency and continuity in the messages revealed to Abraham all the way to Jesus. Verse 146 adds, “Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him as they know their own sons,” even if not all of them were faithful. To avoid any misconception, Allah further reveals Quran 5, Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 46:

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous.

Allah has been consistent in his messaging. The message revealed to Jesus in the Gospels continues and confirms what was revealed to Moses in the Torah. Allah also says the Gospel message of Jesus “was guidance and light” for the righteous. In fact, Allah so approves of the Gospel that he further says:

Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 47:
وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الْإِنجِيلِ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ

And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient.

So, again, we see that Allah claims to have revealed the Gospel and expects Christians to live and judge by it. Indeed, Allah rewarded those who faithfully lived by the Gospel:

Surah Al-Hadid, Verse 27:
ثُمَّ قَفَّيْنَا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم بِرُسُلِنَا وَقَفَّيْنَا بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنجِيلَ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُ رَأْفَةً وَرَحْمَةً وَرَهْبَانِيَّةً ابْتَدَعُوهَا مَا كَتَبْنَاهَا عَلَيْهِمْ إِلَّا ابْتِغَاءَ رِضْوَانِ اللَّهِ فَمَا رَعَوْهَا حَقَّ رِعَايَتِهَا فَآتَيْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْهُمْ أَجْرَهُمْ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ

Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah . But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.

It is typically at this point in conversations that Muslim apologists generally claim that the Gospel has been corrupted. There are at least two problems with this claim. First, the Quran never makes such a claim, as shown elsewhere. On the contrary, the Quran plainly says the Bible of Muhammed’s time was reliable and trustworthy (5:43 – 44). Second, the Quran forbids such a claim. If the Gospel can be corrupted, being the authorized word of Allah, then the Quran can be corrupted. You can’t have one but not the other. Besides, Allah says his words are unalterable:

Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 34:
وَلَقَدْ كُذِّبَتْ رُسُلٌ مِّن قَبْلِكَ فَصَبَرُوا عَلَىٰ مَا كُذِّبُوا وَأُوذُوا حَتَّىٰ أَتَاهُمْ نَصْرُنَا وَلَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ وَلَقَدْ جَاءَكَ مِن نَّبَإِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ

And certainly were messengers denied before you, but they were patient over [the effects of] denial, and they were harmed until Our victory came to them. And none can alter the words of Allah . And there has certainly come to you some information about the [previous] messengers.

Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 115:
وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.

So, we see that Allah’s words cannot be altered. Furthermore, the popular idea among Muslims that the Bible was corrupt ought to have been abandoned after the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. These scrolls belonged to a community that existed before Jesus’s time, and the Torah therein is the same as the one in our Bible.

Here we are, then, in our argument. The Quran consistently affirms that the messages revealed to prophets like Abraham, Moses, David, and Jesus all ultimately derived from Allah, and Allah’s words are incorruptible. Indeed, the Quran explicitly makes specific relevant claims:

Surah Ghafir, Verse 78:
وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلًا مِّن قَبْلِكَ مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُم مَّن لَّمْ نَقْصُصْ عَلَيْكَ وَمَا كَانَ لِرَسُولٍ أَن يَأْتِيَ بِآيَةٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا جَاءَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قُضِيَ بِالْحَقِّ وَخَسِرَ هُنَالِكَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ

And We have already sent messengers before you. Among them are those [whose stories] We have related to you, and among them are those [whose stories] We have not related to you. And it was not for any messenger to bring a sign [or verse] except by permission of Allah . So when the command of Allah comes, it will be concluded in truth, and the falsifiers will thereupon lose [all].

The implication, again, is that the stories Allah revealed to Muhammed about prophets before him are correct and true. This means we should expect to find the same stories in the Bible, or, at the least, we should not find inconsistency. Again, the Quran supports this reading:

Surah Fussilat, Verse 43:
مَّا يُقَالُ لَكَ إِلَّا مَا قَدْ قِيلَ لِلرُّسُلِ مِن قَبْلِكَ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَذُو مَغْفِرَةٍ وَذُو عِقَابٍ أَلِيمٍ

Nothing is said to you, [O Muhammad], except what was already said to the messengers before you. Indeed, your Lord is a possessor of forgiveness and a possessor of painful penalty.

The problem begins when we compare what Allah supposedly revealed in the Bible to what Muhammed claims in the Quran. We find too many inconsistencies – the sort one might expect from a fabrication. Let us begin with Surah 10:

Surah Yunus, Verse 37:
وَمَا كَانَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَىٰ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلَٰكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

And it was not [possible] for this Qur’an to be produced by other than Allah , but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.

The Quran is only about one-sixth the size of the Bible, yet it claims to be a “detailed explanation” of the Bible. The easily verifiable truth is that the Quran lacks details and often briefly alludes to biblical stories, expecting the readers to consult the Bible for details. For instance, in Quran 2, while seeking a justification for a holy army that fights on behalf of Allah, Muhammed leans on the story of the ancient Israelites in the days of kings Saul and David. The Quran devotes only six short verses to the story in 2:246 – 251, while the Bible has ten chapters for it. Unsurprisingly, what ensues is a confusion. Consider this:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 246:
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الْمَلَإِ مِن بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ مِن بَعْدِ مُوسَىٰ إِذْ قَالُوا لِنَبِيٍّ لَّهُمُ ابْعَثْ لَنَا مَلِكًا نُّقَاتِلْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ قَالَ هَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِتَالُ أَلَّا تُقَاتِلُوا قَالُوا وَمَا لَنَا أَلَّا نُقَاتِلَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَقَدْ أُخْرِجْنَا مِن دِيَارِنَا وَأَبْنَائِنَا فَلَمَّا كُتِبَ عَلَيْهِمُ الْقِتَالُ تَوَلَّوْا إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ بِالظَّالِمِينَ

Have you not considered the assembly of the Children of Israel after [the time of] Moses when they said to a prophet of theirs, “Send to us a king, and we will fight in the way of Allah “? He said, “Would you perhaps refrain from fighting if fighting was prescribed for you?” They said, “And why should we not fight in the cause of Allah when we have been driven out from our homes and from our children?” But when fighting was prescribed for them, they turned away, except for a few of them. And Allah is Knowing of the wrongdoers.

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 247:
وَقَالَ لَهُمْ نَبِيُّهُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ بَعَثَ لَكُمْ طَالُوتَ مَلِكًا قَالُوا أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُ الْمُلْكُ عَلَيْنَا وَنَحْنُ أَحَقُّ بِالْمُلْكِ مِنْهُ وَلَمْ يُؤْتَ سَعَةً مِّنَ الْمَالِ قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَاهُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَزَادَهُ بَسْطَةً فِي الْعِلْمِ وَالْجِسْمِ وَاللَّهُ يُؤْتِي مُلْكَهُ مَن يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ

And their prophet said to them, “Indeed, Allah has sent to you Saul as a king.” They said, “How can he have kingship over us while we are more worthy of kingship than him and he has not been given any measure of wealth?” He said, “Indeed, Allah has chosen him over you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and stature. And Allah gives His sovereignty to whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing [in favor] and Knowing.”

This, in fact, did not happen. In the Bible, the Israelites wanted a human king after the prophet Samuel had become old and his children were not competent judges:

1 Samuel 8:4-5 ESV
[4] Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah [5] and said to him, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.”

Unlike the Quran’s stated motive in 2:246, the Israelites did not ask for a king so they could become a fighting people. They wanted a king to judge their affairs. Of course, they knew that kings also fought battles. Indeed, Samuel warned them that the king they would get would rule them unfairly by conscripting their children into his army, perhaps against their will (1 Samuel 8:11 – 14). But when Saul was finally revealed as the king, the people did not protest – they were too desperate for a king. Indeed, here is how the Bible records their response:

1 Samuel 10:24 ESV
And Samuel said to all the people, “Do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people.” And all the people shouted, “Long live the king!”

The protest that the Quran attributes to the people against the selection of Saul was actually something Saul himself did. He was a man of low self-esteem. Upon having a chance to speak with the revered prophet Samuel, Saul said:

1 Samuel 9:21 ESV
Saul answered, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least of the tribes of Israel? And is not my clan the humblest of all the clans of the tribe of Benjamin? Why then have you spoken to me in this way?”

It is low self-esteem masquerading as humility. The additional details in Quran 2:247 are apocryphal. That is not how it happened.

This sort of things are not the exceptions but the rules. The Quran repeatedly misses all kinds of details too many to count. For instance, the Quran says Pharaoh’s wife raised Moses in the palace while the Bible says it was Pharaoh’s daughter. Quran 12:70 says a “golden bowl” belonging to the prince of Egypt, Joseph, was placed in Benjamin’s bag while the Bible says it was a “silver cup.” Then there are instances of extra-biblical embellishment of biblical stories. I have blogged about cases of the Quran’s use of known fictional Judeo-Christian materials in its embellishment. For instance, the Quran tells a story of the boy Jesus animating a clay bird. This story existed in a recognizable form in the non-authoritative, pseudepigraphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas. In other words, while claiming divine revelation, we see that the Quran merely repurposed human materials known to critics in Muhammed’s day.

Now, we are ready to proceed to the final part of the argument. Consider the following:

Surah As-Saff, Verse 6:
وَإِذْ قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِلَيْكُم مُّصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيَّ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَمُبَشِّرًا بِرَسُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ قَالُوا هَٰذَا سِحْرٌ مُّبِينٌ

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, “O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad.” But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, “This is obvious magic.”

The Quran explicitly says Jesus anticipates the prophethood of Muhammed while also preserving evidence that even 7th century critics did not buy it. This verse has led generations of Muslims to attempt to locate Muhammed in the Bible. John is one common place Muslims go to. Some of the usual candidates are:

John 1:20-21 ESV
[20] He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” [21] And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.”

John 14:16 ESV
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,

There are too many reasons why this move is effete and ridiculous. First, the first chapter of John forbids a Muslim from even looking in the book for Muhammed. A good portion of the Quran is devoted to Islamic monotheism and the denial of the divinity of Jesus. But John begins his gospel account thus:

John 1:1-4 ESV
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] He was in the beginning with God. [3] All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. [4] In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

John affirms a plurality in the Godhead and names Jesus as a member of the Godhead. Clearly, John envisions a different God than the Quranic Allah.

Second, the passages above clearly do not refer to Muhammed. The John 1:20 – 21 passage above is about the JEWISH Messiah, and verse 20 explicitly says that. Third, Muhammed died and did not resurrect and so he did not live “forever.” Even if he did, Muhammed never met the disciples of Jesus and could not have been with them forever. Fourth, the very next verse in John 14 explicitly names the referent, “the Spirit of Truth” who, in the narrative world of John, is also referred to as the Holy Spirit.

Besides, according to the Torah, which Allah supposedly revealed, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Muhammed (or anyone else in his genealogy) to be “the prophet.” When God called Abraham and promised him that his offspring will be a blessing to the world, God seemingly did not set the promise rolling ten years after. Abraham was worried and tried to help God out by taking a second wife, Hagar. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, and Abraham reasoned that God’s promise and blessing might materialize through Ishmael’s lineage. But God explicitly rejected Ishmael and his lineage:

Genesis 17:18-21 ESV
[18] And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!” [19] God said, “No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him. [20] As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and multiply him greatly. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great nation. [21] But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this time next year.”

Because he was Abraham’s son, God prospered Ishmael materially. But Ishmael was not going to bear the covenant of a seed of Abraham becoming a blessing to the world. Muhammed cannot be found anywhere in the Bible because Allah made sure of it centuries prior.

Here we are then. If the Quran is true, the Bible is true. But if the Bible is true, the Quran is demonstrably false. This is the Islamic Dilemma.

If you are an informed Muslim or know someone who is, consider sharing this piece with them.

Continue Reading

Atonement Requires More than the Death of Jesus

I understand that this can become a charged issue for many Christians and that various Christian traditions over the ages have taught that Jesus’s death by itself was sufficient for atonement. Indeed, I believed similarly until I came across a scholarly work by David Moffitt. When we interact with various biblical data points, we will see that the Bible says something different about our topic. The belief that Jesus’ death was all needed for atonement has much biblical data for it. Here are a few:

John 1:29 ESV
The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

The idea here is that of the sacrificial lamb in Jewish temple rituals. Of course, John would further clarify that this lamb was slain in Revelation 5:6. Together, the verses imply that the slaying of the Lamb equals the taking away of sins.

Colossians 2:13-15 ESV
[13] And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, [14] by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. [15] He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Paul says the “record of debt” opposing the Colossians before God was canceled by nailing it to the cross. The idea is substitutionary. God took care of sins by the cross.

Romans 5:6, 8 ESV
[6] For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
[8] but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Again, Paul reiterates the same message that Jesus’ death has much to do with addressing humanity’s status as “sinners.”

There are other examples one could point to in defence of the traditional understanding that the death of Jesus by itself takes care of the human sin problem. However, a few other passages provide more details that must be accounted for along with the verses above. Consider the following:

1 Corinthians 15:16-17 ESV
[16] For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. [17] And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

This is a fantastic passage that is often overlooked. 1 Corinthians 15 is believed to be the earliest piece of Christian writing – before Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Paul here defends the resurrection of Jesus and tells his audience, if they were in doubt, to investigate the over 500 people still alive then and who saw the risen Jesus. In the quoted verses above, Paul says the Corinthians (and all of us) are still in our sins and retain the “sinners” status if Jesus did not resurrect. Contrasted with the traditional understanding of atonement, this is a staggering claim. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, then he remains forever dead. But if the death of Jesus per se was sufficient for atonement, then the resurrection should not matter. In other words, we should not remain in our sins if Jesus did not rise! Yet, the same Paul who makes the statements to the Colossians and the Romans now tells the Corinthians that there is more to the story.

Furthermore, Paul is not alone on this point. Indeed, one of the central themes of the book of Hebrews has to do with this subject. Consider the following:

Hebrews 7:25 ESV
Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.

This text says the resurrected Jesus lives to intercede for believers to save them “to the uttermost” or completely. Again, if his death took care of sin, why did he rise only to continuously make intercession for the people who already believed? The implication is that, contrary to a popular claim, the death of Jesus does not cover all sins – past, present, and future.

The penetrating insight Moffitt, a specialist in the book of Hebrews, offers is that we should understand Jesus’s sacrifice in light of the Old Testament’s sacrificial system. When we do, we realize that atonement sacrifices in ancient Judaism were not an event but a process. When a sinner approached the temple for propitiation, he came with an animal (a bull is required for the sin offering, a ram for a burnt offering, and two additional goats for Yom Kippur. See Leviticus 4 and 16). The sinner seeking to be cleansed then lays his hands on the head of the animal in a substitutionary move; his sins are transferred to the animal. Then, the animal is killed in the courtyard/entrance to the tent of the meeting. Here is an important point: the sinner is NOT yet cleansed because the animal was killed. There are yet more critical steps in the process.

The instructions differ a bit depending on whether the sinner is a priest, an ordinary Israelite, or an elder. But they invariably involve bringing some of the blood of the slain animal inside the Tent of Meeting. The priest would sprinkle some of the blood on the altar and pour the rest at the base of the burnt offering altar. The animal’s fat will be removed and burnt on the altar of the burnt offering. Then, the remaining parts of the slain animal – the head, legs, entrails, and dung – will be carried outside the camp to be burnt on a fire of wood. Only after the process is complete is a sinner assured of forgiveness.

Remarkably, the author of Hebrews sees the sacrifice of Jesus in the same way and declares the sacrificial system of Judaism as “copies of the true things” (9:24). Here is a relevant quote:

Hebrews 9:11-12 ESV
[11] But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) [12] he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

Jesus entered the holy places not in his death but through the ascension that followed his resurrection. This is why the resurrection is essential. If Jesus remained dead, he would have failed to complete the atonement process. This is not to trivialize his death – after all, there can be no resurrection without his death. So, all the New Testament passages suggesting that Jesus’s death achieved atonement took the resurrection (and ascension) for granted. The authors were aware of the process but focused on portions of the process as they saw fit. But when a church like the Corinthians started twisting truths, Paul had to set them straight by emphasizing the criticality of the resurrection in the atonement process.

Here is the key takeaway: Whereas the death of Jesus is by itself insufficient for atonement, Jesus is! The cross is vital, but it is not all there is. We don’t fix our gaze on the cross. We fix our gaze on the one who was on the cross and rose again!

Referenced Work

Moffitt, David M. Rethinking Atonement: New Perspectives on Jesus’s Death, Resurrection, and Ascension. Baker Academic, 2022.

Continue Reading

Women are Eternally Inferior in Islam

To a Christian, the fourth chapter of the Quran would be most important for its emphatic denial of the crucifixion of Jesus (4:157) and Jesus’ sonship (4:171), which are important ideas we have addressed elsewhere. However, this chapter also fleshes out an idea earlier introduced in the Quran: the inferiority of women. As we shall argue, the Quran is consistent in its portrayal of the inferiority of women. Women in Islam are not only inferior in this life but will also remain inferior in the afterlife. Let us begin with 4:2-3:

Surah An-Nisa, Verse 2:
وَآتُوا الْيَتَامَىٰ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلَا تَتَبَدَّلُوا الْخَبِيثَ بِالطَّيِّبِ وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَىٰ أَمْوَالِكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ حُوبًا كَبِيرًا

And give to the orphans their property, and do not substitute worthless (things) for (their) good (ones), and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property; this is surely a great crime.

Surah An-Nisa, Verse 3:
وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تُقْسِطُوا فِي الْيَتَامَىٰ فَانكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنَىٰ وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَلَّا تَعُولُوا

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

Continue Reading

The Damascus Road Experience: Understanding Galatians 1:11-12

Galatians 1:11-12 NIV
[11] I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. [12] I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

That is a staggering claim. Paul here says the gospel he preached had no human origin because no human taught it to him. In other words, Paul claims not to have attended a Sunday School meeting or responded to an altar call. If he had done any of these things, he would have been exposed to the human teachings of the gospel.

However, Paul seems to affirm the opposite position in 1 Corinthians: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures” (15:3 ESV). Here, Paul says he received the central Christian message concerning the death of Jesus apparently from those who were Apostles before him. (It also could be that Paul here says he received it from Jesus himself.) Do we have a contradiction in Paul’s messaging, or might there be more beneath the surface? That is the question this piece is devoted to. I shall argue that Paul’s encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus is the key that unravels these verses and that there is no contradiction. Being a late apostle, Paul had to rely on the earlier Apostles for the historical bits he missed out on, such as the sermons, sayings, and deeds of Jesus while he walked among disciples. However, Paul’s claim of not being taught the Gospel can co-exist with his (later) reliance on the Apostles.

Continue Reading

Unveiling Scriptures: The Quran on Alleged Bible Corruption

“Elohim”, “Allah,” and “God” function quite similarly in their original linguistic contexts. Indeed, the English language is somewhat odd here. The modern rule of capitalizing proper nouns muddies the waters. Initially, without qualifications, these words do not pick out any specific deity. At various points, I have highlighted that elohim is a common noun, not a proper one. In the Bible, elohim refers to Yahweh, Satan, angels, foreign gods, the spirit of a dead human, and so on.
Similarly, “allah” in the pre-Islamic era does not mean what it is now taken to mean. Indeed, the allah of that era was Hubal, the moon god with a dedicated shrine at the famous Ka’ba in Mecca. Some Islamic sources tell us that Hubal was imported from Syria. According to Islamic tradition, Muhammed cleansed the Kabah by destroying the idols and rededicating it to another God identified with the Biblical God, but this narrative is not without problems, as we shall now see.

Continue Reading

Yahweh and the Other Gods: Understanding Biblical Idolatry

Background

In ancient times, people did not worship idols as if they were, per se, deities. Agbẹ́gilére, the skilled sculptor who creates numerous copies of a deity’s idol in his shop, understands that these idols are not the real divine beings; if he believed they were, there would absurdly be countless Èṣù and Baal as gods. Moreover, on a successful business day, his shop would otherwise be empty of gods—something no one desired! Everyone recognized that an idol was a vital point of contact, a mediator, to connect with a specific god. Each “idol worshipper” sought to reach her particular deity through the idols and her supplications. Strictly speaking, nobody thought a god was destroyed because his idols were burned. And, of course, a devotee could always get new replacement idols. This is not to deny that devotees sometimes think of their idols as gods, especially after repeated associations. However, idols can be viewed as gods precisely because of their connection with immaterial, external deities.

Continue Reading

On John 3:5: Understanding Being Born of Water and Spirit

The Synoptics and John

The Gospel of John is different. It is so different that it is often not considered along with the other three canonical Gospels. In scholarly circles, the term “Synoptic Gospels” excludes John, but not without good reasons. John is believed to be the last written Gospel account. Given the evidence of material dependence among the other Gospels, we may assume that John had access to the other Gospels. Yet, John did not produce a similar work as the authors of the other Gospels. Indeed, John did not seem to care as much about chronology as he did about theology. Hence, he would often move pieces of stories around as he saw fit for his purposes. For instance, whereas the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) focus on Jesus’ ministry near Galilee with one recorded trip to Jerusalem towards the end of his earthly ministry, John records Jesus’ multiple trips to Jerusalem. Indeed, the Synoptic Gospels have Jesus clearing the Jerusalem temple towards the end of his ministry, while John brings the event forward in telling Jesus’ story. Besides, John omits many of the parables, instances of exorcism, and even the famous Sermon on the Mount while including unique materials like the resurrection of Lazarus in his account. So, if the authors of the Synoptics were interested in historical writings, John was interested in theological writing instead.

Continue Reading

On the Mission of Jesus Only to the Lost Sheep of Israel: A Pastoral Dialogue

I chatted with a Pastor friend on the blog entry about Jesus being sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. Among other things, my Pastor friend believes such a claim implies a few discordant things:

  1. Gentiles are “an afterthought.”
  2. Jesus is the Savior of only the Jews, and many Jews did not even accept him.
  3. Gentiles today should be practicing Judaism, not Christianity.

I am sympathetic to him and others who would feel that way. I had similar thoughts and discomfort when I was first confronted with these issues some years ago. However, I do not think the picture is as bleak or fuzzy as my friend may appear to imply. Let’s unpack the points one after the other.

First, I must reiterate that I did not claim that Jesus was only sent to the Jews in the first century. The Matthean Jesus did. In his own words, Jesus understood his mission as primarily to first-century Jews. So, even if a reader dislikes my explanation, the text remains and confronts us:

Matthew 15:24 ESV
[Jesus] answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

Continue Reading

On 1 Peter 3:1-6: Navigating Ancient Norms with Christ-Centered Wisdom

Background

We previously discussed the Household Code passages found in Colossians and Ephesians. These passages outline how Greco-Roman Christian households were expected to behave in a manner that honors Christ. We argued that these texts do not prescribe a uniform way for all Christian homes throughout history to operate. If they did, it might imply that every Christian household must own slaves. Instead, these passages illustrate Paul’s efforts to engage with a Gentile issue that even Jesus did not confront in his Jewish context.

The Greco-Roman family consisted of a husband and father who held legally granted absolute power over everyone who lived under his roof – a wife, children, and slaves. How he handled his home was tied to his public reputation and dignity. Women typically were married off by age 15, generally to much older men. Usually, love had very little to do with the marriage. Indeed, the Greco-Roman man was not required to love his wife. Paul found himself in this cultural context, and the options were few. He could have demonized the practice, as the European missionaries to sub-Sahara Africa did, and required the Christians to do marriages the “Christian way,” whatever that might have meant. But that move would be somewhat naive, impractical, and even foolish. First, cultural norms do not change overnight; expecting otherwise is embracing inevitable failure. Second, Christians were a minority, accounting for less than 10 % of the Roman empire at the time, and were despised for their culture-inverting beliefs and claims. An Emperor would later actively persecute them. So, Paul seemed to have taken a “slowly but surely” path to winning the Greco-Roman family structure for Jesus. He sowed the seeds and trusted God to enable germination.

Continue Reading
1 2 3 6