The use of the Qur'an in Controversy

The ultimate foundation of Islam is the Qur'an. It is freely quoted in debate by the Muslim, and is a valuable weapon in the hand of the Christian. It will therefore be helpful if certain general principles can be arrived at, which should regulate the use and application to be made of it.

The objective that we briefly state in advance is to set limits to the bringing forward of the Qur'an by the Christian in controversy, and to stimulate in every way constant, systematic reference to the Christian Scriptures.

(1) the Qur'an

Direct attacks and damaging criticisms of the Qur’an are out of place until it is certain that our Muslim friend will receive them without offence.

The respective positions of the Muslim and the Christian towards the Qur'an are diametrically opposed. The Christian approaches the book from the first with the firm belief that, it is not from God. The European writers he has read upon the subject have supported this opinion by many irrefragable proofs, expressed in forms familiar to him, and rest upon axioms and principles understood and admitted.

The Muslim has been trained to look upon the Qur'an with excessive reverence, and his mind is not open to entertain the possibility of a different estimate. He believes in the plenary and verbal inspiration of the book in the fullest and most unqualified sense of the terms. He regards it as having existed from all eternity, written upon the ' preserved table' in heaven, from whence it was brought down by Gabriel and imparted to Muhammad.

Its eloquence is miraculous, so that the united efforts of men and genii could not produce another book like it. It comprehends all sciences, and is the repository of a perfect law. Muslims will tell you, wrote Leupolt in his Recollections (p. 87), ' that if God Himself were to come down from heaven and say that the Qur’an is not true, they would not believe Him.' An aged Baluchi Haji, encountered by Bishop French in a large mosque outside the gate of Muscat told him ' his Qur'an . . . was enough for him, and contained all he need know for both worlds, the best and most perfect of all knowledgeable things.' Hence the Muslim, holding such exaggerated opinions is as far as possible removed from that openness and fairness of mind which is capable of receiving the truth. Until there are indications of a more liberal spirit it is worse than useless to directly assail that which he holds so dear and honours with such unbounded reverence.

(2) Reference to the Qur'an is liable to create wrong impressions

The Muslims opinion of the Qur‘an being such as has just been described; we do not desire to do anything to confirm him in those sentiments, but rather to wean him from them. On general grounds, therefore, it is advisable to regulate the use of the Qur'an both by ourselves and our opponents and keep it within well-defined limits. There is nothing gained by allowing the Muslim to parade the erroneous teaching of his book before us.

We know that as a Muslim, implicitly accepts its teaching; and the proud enunciation of its dogmas, if it does not place the Christian in a false and uncomfortable position, it at least is neither welcome nor edifying, and it is quite easy to check it quietly and firmly without giving offence. Their book, we must remember, is the bulwark of a false religion and the vaunted charter of an erroneous system in spite of all the borrowed elements of truth it contains. Yet the system it embodies is untrue, and all the more dangerous and difficult to combat because of the portion of truth which is in it. As a general rule, then, no encouragement should be given to the other side to bring forward the Qur’an. The impression produced upon the speaker himself and other Muslims present is not a desirable one, nor one we wish to see fostered. Even the use of the Qur'an by the Christian in order to prove his points is sometimes stated in words like these, ‘I bring forward these arguments for you because the Qur'an has weight with you,' even with this qualification, it can hardly fail to give some colour to the idea that the book possesses an independent value, and is therefore calculated to encourage the Muslim to rely upon it. Reference to the testimony of the Qur'an has before now provoked the retort that the Christian himself acknowledges its authority. Therefore the point must be made quite clear that although we may have occasion to quote the Qur'an, yet it is only for our opponents’ sake that we do so, and that we do not acknowledge its authority for ourselves, nor seek its aid to establish the truth of the Christian religion.

(3) The difficulty of the effective use of the Qur'an also acts as a dissuasive from all but a moderate and discriminating employment of it in controversy. The interpretation of the text is an important part of Muslim theology, being itself an exact and elaborate science. There are besides many ways in which the effect of an argument from it may be evaded or minimized. One verse may be capped or answered by another. Questions of grammar, exposition, and interpretation (tafs'ir, ta’ul) may be raised. The possibilities of involving and obscuring a plain issue and neutralizing the force of an argument, that lie ready to the hand of a subtle arguer, are obvious when we bear in mind the existence of abrogated and abrogating verses and the seven or (as is also alleged) seventy inner meanings said to be contained in the Qur‘an. (# The following tradition of Ibn Mas’ud does not make quite so extravagant a claim. He relates that the Prophet' said, 'the Qur'an was sent down in seven dialects; and in every one of its sentences there is an external and an internal meaning, for each of them is a high place, from the top of which may be seen the bottom! - Mishkatu’l-Masabih, Bk 2 ch 2, pt 1 p.61 (Eng tr).

All passages labouring under any of the above mentioned disabilities will be avoided by the Christian unless he knows that he both has the balance of authority on his side and also the strength and ability to carry his point. Still, even so, the use of all but a limited number of quotations from the Qur'an is only too likely to raise a storm of objection, protest and counter-argument, and is hence opposed to what should be one great canon of controversy with Muslims, viz, that the arguments used should be weighty and irrefutable.

Additional reasons against arguing from the Qur’an:

1. It is liable to create a belief that we acknowledge it inwardly in our hearts.

2. There is a host of differences in the explanations of commentators and the supposed occasions of revelations.

3. Differences of opinions among Sunni’s Shiah’s, and other sects.

(4) The employment of the Qur'an in direct support of distinctive Christian doctrine is inadmissible. It is true that Muhammad regarded Islam in respect of its essential truths as identical with uncorrupted Judaism and Christianity, and declared that the Qur'an was sent down 'confirming that Scripture which was revealed before it.’ But these assertions rest upon his ignorance of the real nature of those religions and the contents of their books. To attempt to prove essential Christian doctrine from the Qur'an is in effect to try and show that Muhammad was ignorant of the true meaning of his supposed revelation and uttered expressions containing ideas which no Muslim ever attributed to him. It is as though we were trying to cause the scales to fall from the eyes of the ' true believer' in order that he might at last see clearly and find himself after all a Christian! It is entirely against Islamic consciousness, and will provoke resistance to the uttermost, in the same way as we ourselves should fight strenuously against any attempt to prove to us that we had misread our Gospel, and that if only we understood it aright we should be Babi’s or Muslims!

(5) The Qur'an, after all, is a most useful weapon. In spite of all that has been said above, an important sphere remains for the use of the Qur'an in controversy, and it is highly desirable to be able to make effective practice with this arrow from their quiver.

1. The excellent greatness and sublime glory of Jesus shine forth from the pages of the Qur‘an: He is God‘s Word, and 'a spirit proceeding from Him’ (# Surah 4 Nisa-, 169; 3 Al Imran, 39; c.p. 21 Ambiya, 91; 66 Tahrim, 12; see also 2 Baqarah, 86).

2. The Qur’an bears striking testimony to the existence and incorruptness of the previous Scriptures, the charge of corruption only being alleged against the Jews, and this not being a falsification of the text, but a perversion of the meaning. The Qur’an testifies that the Holy Scriptures are from God. On the other hand, the Qur’an is found to differ from the Bible in important particulars, e.g. the divinity of Christ, His death and atonement, etc. On the negative side it has no undoubted means of salvation to offer, and from the evidence it affords no reliance can be placed on the intercession of Muhammad either being granted or providing effectual. (# See Surah 2 Baqarah, 255; 10 Yunus, 3; 74 Muddassir, 44-49).

It may also be profitably quoted on the Christian side to refute the extravagant additions of later tradition to the primitive deposit of the Qur‘an itself, as e.g. the glorification of Muhammad and the attributing to him of countless miracles (# See Surah 18 Kahf, 110; and Surah 17 Bani Isra’il, 60; C.P. Mark 7:13). These points, if established and accepted, do not, of course, necessarily turn a Muslim into a Christian; but they should go a long way in that direction and effect important modifications in his spirit and attitude towards Christianity. If all that it accomplishes is only of a preliminary nature, it is notwithstanding an advantageous clearing of the ground. Prejudices are thereby removed. Christianity is discovered to be not an altogether baseless, worthless fabric. The difference between Muslim and Christian is found not to be a hopeless, yawning gulf, as was supposed. Further study and inquiry accordingly may not be an absolute waste of time for him. Nay, the ' true believer ' can hardly continue to be a good Muslim if he neglects the perusal of those ancient Scriptures of Jew and Christian, so wonderfully attested and eulogized in his own Qur'an.

Additional reasons for arguing from the Qur’an:

1. The praise of priests and monks.

2. The conception of Jesus through the operation of the Holy Spirit.

3. The exalted position given to the Virgin Mary.

4. The acceptance of the miracles of Jesus.

5. The Lord’s Ascension to heaven.

6. The absence of means of salvation for Muslims.

7. Muhammad did not come with miracles and wonderful works and had no power to perform them.

8. Muhammad confined the proof of his prophetship to the Qur’an itself.

9. Proof of sin and error concerning Muhammad himself.

10. Proof of Heaven and Hell being understood in a carnal physical sense.

11. Proof of contradictions in the Qur’an.

(6) Arguments from the Qur'an may most properly be refused by the Christian.

While the Muslim, from the nature of the case, cannot decline to accept arguments fairly drawn from his Qur'an, no such necessity lies upon the Christian to endorse them, and he, if need be may reject them on good grounds. For example, the divine Sonship, the Deity and Crucifixion of Jesus are all denied on the strength of verses of the Qur'an; and this testimony has the greatest weight with the Muslim. But the case is very different with us, to whom the Qur'an makes no appeal and comes with no authority. Our refusal to receive its evidence may take this line: ' It is of no avail for you to bring me proofs from a book which I cannot as a Christian accept. Arguments from what is accepted only by one side are obviously futile. Either prove to me that the Qur’an is true before you argue from it, or else, leaving it on one side, bring forward proofs from outside the Qur'an either proofs of reason or arguments from the Taurat and Injil, the holy books which we both acknowledge’.

THE USE OF THE TRADITIONS

When appropriately introduced in argument they are very effective. They are frequently used by Muslims themselves and are well worth the attention and study of the Christian, but they must be well authenticated. As for ourselves, we are not bound to accept the traditions that may be brought forward. As we may decline arguments from the Qur’an, much more may we refuse the evidence of traditions, if they contradict the clear sense of the Qur’an (e.g. Muhammad’s miracles, his sinlessness and that of all the prophets), on the ground that we have to do with the Qur’an, which is the authoritative charter of Islam, and not with the traditions, of which there are many thousands, true and false.

The use of traditions may be alluded to here to rebuke incivility or rudeness, though it does not strictly come within, the scope of this article. The Rev. Dr. Bruce, was once visiting one of the chief men of Isfahan, and the customary civilities were pointedly omitted; upon which the doctor put the assembly to shame by questioning their right to call themselves Muslims because of their neglect of the well-known traditional precept, ,'Honour the guest, although he be a kafir. (Akrimu’z-zaifa wa lau kana kafiran). On one occasion the writer was itinerating near Isfahan when I was overtaken by a party of people on horseback, who had been to call on a Mulla and welcome him back from Tehran I had some conversation with the gentlemen of the party as we rode along, and, after they had passed on, began talking with some others, who seemed to be part of their retinue, and, judging by their behaviour fellows of the baser sort. They were inclined to scoff and. become abusive, one of them calling me ' unclean’ and ' a child of hell.' So I asked him whether they were commanded by their Prophet to abuse others , and told him the story of Muhammad calling upon the sick Jew, who according to one version of the story, had been a bitterly abusive enemy of his; and moreover, I added he was not a Muslim to act in that way. To this they had nothing to answer, and rode off and the few left behind showed a better spirit.