To: TonyTheTigger
Confronting Islam: Examining the Quran by Wayne Jackson Article Description Should we avoid exposing the errors in the Quran to spare the feelings of our Moslem friends?
An article appeared in July, 1997 edition of The Christian Chronicle under the title, The Islamic World. The author, managing editor Glover Shipp, suggested that Churches of Christ are at the amateur level in communication with and converting Muslims . . . .
Citing Wesley Jones, who is reputed to have a better insight into this matter than most of us, brother Shipp lists some principles which he feels will help us in reaching out to the Moslem community. Some of these suggestions are useful, but one of them is puzzling.
Know the Quran, but dont attack it. As there are slanderous opinions circulated about the Bible, so there are about the Quran. Intellectual honesty forbids that we repeat these. And obviously, attacking the Muslim Holy Book itself closes minds (p. 17).
A Response We believe that several things need to be said in response to this statement.
First, there are common-sense guidelines in the New Testament that will enable the devout Christian to know how to approach potential converts of any religion within a variety of international backgrounds. Granted those who have lived among certain peoples may have some keener insights into the cultural peculiarities of a country. These matters, however, are not the paramount aspect of seeking the lost. In the first century there was simply a compassionate proclamation of the pure gospel, brought to bear upon honest hearts; this produced an explosive growth of the kingdom of Christ.
Second, no lover of souls possessing intellectual honesty, has any desire whatever to misrepresent the teachings of the Moslem Quran, by appealing to unfounded slanderous opinions regarding Islams sacred book. Nothing is ever gained by misrepresenting an opponent, or in exhibiting a mean-spirited attitude. However, it would have been helpful if the author had cited a few examples of this unscrupulous methodology so that such tactics might be avoided.
Third, the suggestion that we should adopt a hands off policy with reference to Islams holy book is strange indeed. How could one possibly hope to convert those of the Islamic persuasion without demonstrating the fact that the Quran is not a sacred work?
The word attack is very loaded, of course, but the bottom line is this. If Moslems claim that the Quran is a divine production, and yet it is not, then this book represents a perversion of truth. No Moslem will ever be led to the Lord until he renounces this fraudulent document and acknowledges the Bible as his solitary source of divine guidance. The fact of the matter is, there is great value in showing that the Quran is not supported by the sort of evidence that would be characteristic of an inspired production.
Moslems sincerely believe that the Quran is a divine book. It is styled The Holy Quran. This volume consists of 114 sections called Suras, each of which is divided into verses. Each Sura (except 9) begins with: In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
It is alleged that the Quran was revealed to Mohammed verbatim by the angel Gabriel over a period of 23 years (but compiled after his death). One passage asserts: Praise be to God, Who hath sent to His Servant [Mohammed] The Book [the Quran], and hath allowed Therein no Crookedness (18:1).
Is the Quran from God? Inasmuch as the Quran declares itself to be a revelation from God, we have every right to examine this claim. If the book does not meet the standard that one has a right to expect from a document that claims to be from Heaven, it must be rejected as false, and its weaknesses should be exposed.
Geisler and Saleeb review eight lines of argument that are employed to demonstrate that the Quran is sacred. These may be summarized as follows:
The Qurans unique literary style is such that it could have been authored only by God (10:37; 17:88).
Since Mohammed was an unlettered Prophet, he could not have produced the book himself (7:157).
The claim is made that the Quran is the only book that has been preserved in its exact original form (Haneef, 19).
The Quran is believed to contain prophecies that demonstrate its inspiration.
Its alleged unity, or lack of discrepancy (4:82), is supposed to argue for its divine origin.
The Quran is allegedly marked by a scientific accuracy and foreknowledge that can be explained only in terms of inspiration.
Supposedly the Quran is characterized by a mathematical precision based upon the number nineteen.
It is argued that the Quran has changed lives, thus it must be sacred (pp. 181-203). When these arguments are critically examined they simply do not establish the case. For example: The Quran does not have a profound literary style. It is characterized by numerous grammatical aberrations. Moreover, as McClintock and Srong observed, it is exceedingly incoherent and sententious, the book evidently being without any logical order of thought either as a whole or in its parts (V.151).
The so-called prophecies are merely vague political speculations that do not even begin to rival biblical prophecy either in precision or in chronological proximity to the events they supposedly depict (cf. 30:2-4). Scientific accuracy can hardly be claimed when the Quran suggests that the human fetus results from sperm that changes into a clot of congealed blood, which then becomes bones, later to be covered with flesh (23:14).
The Quran is morally flawed in numerous respects. For example, those who oppose Mohammed should be subjected to execution [i.e., decapitation], or crucifixion, Or the cutting off of hand And feet from opposite sides . . . (5:36). Women are treated shamefully in the Moslem religion. If a woman is guilty of ill-conduct, she may be admonished, deprived of sex, or beaten in moderation (4:34).
Conclusion How could one deal with Islam without exposing the errors of the Quran? Surely our brethren who advise: dont attack [the Quran], have not carefully considered this matter. We must be kind, but we cannot ignore error.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOURCES Geisler, Norman and Saleeb, Abdul (1993), Answering Islam (Grand Rapids: Baker).
Haneef, Susanne (1979), What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims (Chicago: Kazi Publications).
McClintock, John & Strong, James (1969), Cyclopedia of Biblical, Ecclesiastical, and Theological Literature (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House).
The Holy Quran (1946), Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Translator (Islamic Propagation Centre International).
To: TonyTheTigger
Know the Quran, but dont attack it. As there are slanderous opinions circulated about the Bible, so there are about the Quran. Intellectual honesty forbids that we repeat these. And obviously, attacking the Muslim Holy Book itself closes minds (p. 17). The koran is not a religious or spiritual document but the muterrings of a faker, a mass murderer and pedophile (Mohomad). No differant than the cultist Bob Jones or whatever his name was down there in Guiana just more successful in deceiving large numbers of people.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson