My previous post addressed the question of what type of corruption does the Qur’an say took place within the previous Holy Books.  The overall conclusion I came to is that the Qur’an does not teach that the actual Holy Books are corrupt or have ever been corrupted, but that people (predominately Jews) were giving interpretations of their scriptures that were not in accordance with their written texts.

For today’s post I would like to discuss Muslim and Christian understanding of revelation and some of the misconceptions and misunderstandings that are prevalent within the topic of the previous Holy Books.  I will make an attempt to very briefly summarize both the Muslim and Christian understanding of revelation and then discuss specific issues of clarification.  Please respond and make comments if I have left anything of importance out or if I have misrepresented some aspect of this discussion.  Thank you.

Islamic View of Revelation:

Revelation within an Islamic context (wahy) is the actual words of God, dictated either from God Himself to a specific messenger (rasool) or from God to an intermediary agent such as the angel Gabriel (Jibreel) and then to the specific messenger.  It must be stressed that the messenger does not add or subtract anything from this message, he is only a conduit between God’s revealed Word and humanity.  Thus the Qur’an is believed to have no human narrative interspersed within its pages.  Any narrative or story about humanity in the Qur’an is told by God alone.

Christian View of Revelation:

Revelation within a Christian context (or Inspiration) involves some of the same aspects that the Islamic one exemplifies, however, it does allow for God to interact with His messenger and for the messenger to engage all of their faculties in recording and reciting God’s revelation.  This means that in the previous Holy Books where there is human narrative about what God has done, it is still part of revelation as God pressed upon His messenger what should be said or written.

If you read the Torat, there are many sections where prophet Moses (Musa) (as) is sharing stories of what God has done among His people.  These stories are not shared in the same way that you find in the Qur’an.  They are not the actual speech of God.  Rather they are God pressing upon Prophet Moses’ (as) human faculties to remember, recite, and record the story of what God has done.  Of course you will find portions within the previous Holy Books where the actual speech of God is recorded, however, this is always coupled with story that gives context to God’s speech.  These story aspects were just as much inspired by God as His actual speech.  Of course, you would always want to give weight to the actual speech of God, but that doesn’t diminish the holiness of the story that surrounds it.

The Gospel vs. the Gospels:

When the Qur’an refers to the book that God gives to Messiah Jesus (as), it is called the Injeel.  My understanding is that Injeel in this case is much more specific than the Christian usage.  Injeel in this case would be the actual teachings of Messiah Jesus (as), the Good News about God’s Kingdom.

Now, when you look at what Christians typically call the Gospels, they are referring to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Four narratives that both encompass Messiah Jesus’ (as) actual teachings, but also record his life, what he did, the story surrounding what he taught.  Christians believe all four narratives, both Messiah Jesus’ (as) actual teachings, and the story surrounding his life, are all part of God’s revelation to humanity.  Christians believe that God pressed upon these four authors what they should record and teach about Messiah Jesus (as) and thus, all four narratives are Holy Scripture and inspired by God.

Within Islam, you have the Qur’an, the actual words of God dictated to Prophet Muhammad (saw).  Secondly, you have the Sunnah, which is the way and manners in which the Prophet lived.  This also includes the Hadith, or oral narratives about what the Prophet said.  Hadith and the Sunnah are given quite a bit of authority although idealistically, they may not hold as much weight as the Qur’an itself.  But, depending on which group within Islam we are discussing, they may hold greater or less authority over the lives of believers.  The Sunnah and Hadith might influence how one interprets the Qur’an, how one does the various rituals within Islam, and how one might seek to live a life similar to the Prophet.

For interfaith dialogue sake, it might clear things up if we as Christians were to describe the 4 Gospels in a similar light.  We have Messiah Jesus’ (as) actual teachings within the 4 Gospel narratives, some Bibles actually highlight these sections in red.  This section that encompasses Jesus’ actual teaching, comes directly from God through Jesus to humanity.  Secondly, the story surrounding Jesus’ life might find many similarities with the Sunnah–from reliable early witnesses.  The four Gospel accounts also come from early reliable witnesses.  Some from actual disciples (hawariyun) of Jesus’.  By the way, the disciples of Jesus were called Muslim according to the Qur’an.  So, at least two of the four Gospel accounts that we have today were written by Muslims.

Another way of putting it is that I as a follower of the Way (al-Sirat), seek to obey the teachings or Injeel of Messiah Jesus (as) and I also follow the Sunnah of Messiah Jesus (as).  The only difference is (and this really is only a slight difference) that Christians believe that the Sunnah of Messiah Jesus (as) is also from God, it is revelation from God and so is Holy and cannot be changed.

I’d like to leave it there for today and revisit the two issues I’ve brought up thus far and make some concluding remarks for the next post.  All for now.

Have The Previous Holy Books Been Changed?

In interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims, a common question that arises is whether the previous Holy Books been corrupted or changed?

I recently read a very interesting article from The Muslim World journal entitled, “The Charge of Distortion of Jewish and Christian Scriptures” by Dr. Saeed Abdullah[1].  If anyone would like me to email you the article I can do so, chris@al-najashi.org.  I will predominately be restating his basic argument and responding to it with some of my own thoughts and reflections.

There are many different avenues we can take to examine this question: there are the perceived differences between the Qur’an and the Bible in regards to theology as well as specifically the narrative about Jesus, there are the differences in understanding regarding the concept of revelation, and then there is what the Qur’an itself says about the earlier Holy Books.

For this discussion I would like to hold off on discussing the first issue with the hope that what might be discovered from an exploration of the latter two points might allay some concerns regarding perceived differences in theology and narrative.

My overall goal of this series is twofold:  one, I would like to show that the Qur’an confronts People of the Book (predominately Jews, not Christians) for corrupting their communication of the Scriptures.  This means that the Qur’an never accuses the People of the Book of actually altering the texts themselves, but rather through misrepresenting basic teachings or doctrines by their speech-what they say.

Two, I would like to show that it is differences in understanding the concept of revelation that have led Muslims and Christians into misunderstanding.  Also impinging on this topic is liberal Christian and non-Christian scholarship that have used textual criticism to evaluate the Bible and its claims.  However, it must be noted that many of these critics and scholars are not people of faith, nor do they believe in the supernatural, in miracles, nor in God’s intervention on earth.

Lastly, I hope as a result, Muslims and Christians both will see and understand that God protects His Holy Word, it cannot be changed (al-Hijr 15:09).  For Muslims, I hope they will have a renewed desire to read the earlier Holy Books that might shed new light upon the Qur’an and its meaning.  For Christians, I hope that they will have a renewed desire to read the Qur’an, and to see that it is not against the teachings of Jesus (as), but in actuality has the power to cause us to go back to the earlier books to re-read them, to make sure some of our preconceived notions are true or if our own cultural lenses have possibly colored our understanding of Jesus (as).

The Qur’anic Perspective of the Earlier Holy Books

The Christians on the Straight Path:

The Following passages from the Qur’an give the impression that at least some Christians and Jews were on the straight path and must have had access to their untainted Scriptures[2].

Surah al-Baqarah 2:62
002.062 Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Surah Aal-E-Imran 3:113-114
003.113 Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.
003.114 They believe in Allah and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten (in emulation) in (all) good works: They are in the ranks of the righteous.

Surah Aal-E-Imran 3:199
003.199 And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book, those who believe in Allah, in the revelation to you, and in the revelation to them, bowing in humility to Allah: They will not sell the Signs of Allah for a miserable gain! For them is a reward with their Lord, and Allah is swift in account.

Surah Aal-E-Imran 5:44-47
005.044 It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah’s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.

005.045 We ordained therein for them: “Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.” But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers.

005.046 And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah

005.047 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

Surah al-Maeda 5:65-66
005.065 If only the People of the Book had believed and been righteous, We should indeed have blotted out their iniquities and admitted them to gardens of bliss.
005.066 If only they had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course: but many of them follow a course that is evil.

Surah al-Maeda 5:82-85
005.082 Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, “We are Christians”: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.
005.083 And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: “Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses.
005.084 “What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us, seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?”
005.085 And for this their prayer hath Allah rewarded them with gardens, with rivers flowing underneath,- their eternal home. Such is the recompense of those who do good.

The Qur’an’s Perspective on Some Aspect of Distortion:

However, the following passages give the impression that there were certain corruptions that took place.  In order to ascertain what types of changes, corruption, and/or distortion were employed I will be referring to Abdullah Saeed’s paper as well as looking at Qur’anic commentary (tafsir) on this subject.  According to Saeed,

There is no doubt that the Qur’ān refers to certain “distortions” of the scriptures by some groups of the People of the Book. Terms used for this vary, but the most obvious is taḥrīf Scholars of tafsīr have explored verses in which taḥrīf and other related terms are used. Unlike the vast majority of Muslims, these tafsīr scholars appear to be more cautious in their assessment of the issue of “distortion.” This article briefly explores how a number of interpreters of the Qur’ān, namely Ṭabarī, Qurṭubī, Rāzī, Ibn Taymiyya and Quṭb, have treated this issue.[3]

Surah al-Baqarah 2:59
002.059 But the transgressors changed the word from that which had been given them; so We sent on the transgressors a plague from heaven, for that they infringed (Our command) repeatedly.

In examining this verse, the immediate context is referring to God’s provisions for the Jews while Moses was leading them in the desert (S. 2:54-58), thus this particular verse is referring to the Jews of Moses’ day.  This of course would greatly predate the Qur’an.  According to Tabari, the reference to changing words has to do with how they are pronounced[4].

Surah al-Baqarah 2:79
002.079 Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

Again, the context is referring to the Jews (S. 2:63-65, 67, 83).  Although, if you read verse 83, it makes a similar suggestion that there were some Jews who did remain faithful to God’s revelation.  This reference suggests that some people were writing things down and then alleging that it was from God.

Surah Aal-E-Imran 3:78
003.078 There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!

In this case, it does appear that this might be a reference to either or both Christians and Jews (S. 3:67).  However, it must also be noted that this was not a reference to actual textual corruption nor is it a reference to an entire community in collaboration. The reference limits itself to “a section who distort the Book.”  How big is this section?  The Qur’an does not say, but it is obvious that this is not a reference to all of the People of the Book nor does it refer to the texts, but rather what certain people were saying with their tongues.

Surah An-Nisa 4:46
004.046 Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) places, and say: “We hear and we disobey”; and “Hear what is not Heard”; and “Ra’ina”; with a twist of their tongues and a slander to Faith. If only they had said: “What hear and we obey”; and “Do hear”; and “Do look at us”; it would have been better for them, and more proper; but Allah hath cursed them for their Unbelief; and but few of them will believe.

Again, this is a reference to some Jews who displaced words, twisted their tongues, as well as slandered faith.  Yet, this is not saying the actual words in the text were corrupted.

Surah Al-Maeda 5:13
005.013 But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few - ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind.

This is also a reference to the Jews (see S. 5:12).  Here there is a charge of changing “the words from their (right) places”-we’ll need to come back to this verse and examine it more closely to see what this might mean.

Surah Al-Maeda 5:41
005.041 O Messenger! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say “We believe” with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie,- will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, “If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware!” If any one’s trial is intended by Allah, thou hast no authority in the least for him against Allah. For such - it is not Allah’s will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment.

This is also a reference to some “among the Jews.”  Regarding the same phrase in 5:13 and 5:41, “they change the words”, or in Arabic, yuḥarrifūnā al-kalima, we will need to ascertain what this phrase means.

Ṭabarī explains yuḥarrifūnabū as “they alter its meaning (maʻnāhu); that is, they change its direction, and its meaning to another meaning.” For Ibn Zayd, as reported in Ṭabarī, the Jews altered and changed Tawrāt by making its ḥalāl as ḥarām and ḥarām as ḥalāl, truth as falsehood and falsehood as truth. Later on, Ṭabarī implies that the alteration of meaning is more likely, which seems to confirm that he saw taḥrīf as related to the meaning of the text, not the actual text itself.[5]

It’s helpful to know that Razi also gives weight to this same view regarding 5:13 and 41 that these references are changes in interpretation, not in the text themselves.  And according to Sayyid Qut’b, actually this is a problem for people of religion in general, even for Muslims.[6]

Lastly, I will post the entire conclusion from Abdullah Saeed’s paper and will in my next post discuss the differences in understanding regarding revelation.

Although the possibility of textual corruption of the Jewish and Christian scriptures in small sections (changing a word or a phrase but not wholesale or large scale deliberate falsification) existed, almost all interpreters whose views are explored herein seem to have seen the corruption as largely lying with interpretation: for example, changing ḥalāl to ḥarām or vice versa; and concealing or obscuring what exists in the scripture to confuse others, as in the case of verse 5:41. Large-scale and deliberate commission and omission, in the case of texts that have a long tradition of transmission and are widely and thoroughly known, would be difficult. Rāzī and Qurṭubī, in particular, seem to hold this view. Even if there is textual corruption associated with interpretation, the actual scriptures can still be relied upon and considered “Books of God.” For the Qur’ān, the concept of the “Book of God” was appropriately used to the scriptures of Jews and Christians even though these may not be from the Muslim point of view “exactly as they were” during the time of Moses or Jesus and are, in some cases, translated from the original languages to other languages or narrated by a person other than the Prophet who received the revelation.

Since the “authorized” scriptures of Jews and Christians remain very much today as they existed at the time of the Prophet, it is difficult to argue that the Qur’anic references to Tawrāt and Injīl were only to the “pure” Tawrāt and Injīl as existed at the time of Moses and Jesus, respectively. If the texts have remained more or less as they were in the seventh century CE, the reverence the Qur’ān has shown them at the time should be retained even today. Many interpreters of the Qur’ān, from Ṭabarī to Rāzī to Ibn Taymiyya and even Quṭb, appear to be inclined to share this view. The wholesale dismissive attitude held by many Muslims in the modern period towards the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity do not seem have the support of either the Qur’ān or the major figures of tafsīr. Further research is required to explore the complexities associated with the doctrine of taḥrīf and the social, political and intellectual contexts in which this doctrine developed within Islam.[7]

---

[1] Abdullah Saeed, “The Charge of Distortion of Jewish and Christian Scriptures”, Muslim World, Vol. 92 (2002), pp. 419-436.

[2] Unless otherwise noted, all Qur’an translations are from The Qur’an: A Translation. (Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Trans.).  (Elmhurst, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an, Inc., 2000).

[3] Abdullah Saeed, “The Charge of Distortion of Jewish and Christian Scriptures”, Muslim World, Vol. 92 (2002), p. 419.

[4] Ibid., p. 419

[5] Ibid, p. 423

[6] Ibid, p. 425.

[7] Ibid, pp. 434-435.

I just came across an interesting film clip sent by a concerned friend of mine.  I thought I’d say a few thoughts on the subject, although in many ways this film reminds me of my response to the Obsession film I reviewed already.  The short film clip is entitled, Muslim Demographics.

It appears this film was uploaded to Youtube on March 31, 2009.  But already it is circulating rapidly and before too long I’m sure I will be hearing about this from other concerned friends.  Both Christian and Muslim. But sadly, not for the same reasons.

I am not a statistician, nor is it easy to verify all the data that the film rattles off, however, basic academic honesty would preclude that the author cite his or her sources which from what I can tell he/she does not.

However, I do feel at liberty to respond to the overall message and underlying objectives of the film clip.  One can tell just by the scary music, the way the story unfolds and the general tenor of the short clip that the author is seeking to ignite feelings of concern within the Christian community that unless something is done, unless something changes, that very soon Islam will overtake the Christian West.

One question ran through my mind as I watched the film clip, what is the author’s suggested response?

Fear seems to be one such response whether it is intended as a solution or not.  This might seem funny, but another thought popped in my head, is the author by chance suggesting that Christians ought to make more babies in an attempt to catch up?  Other thoughts were more disconcerting.

Regarding the veracity of the film’s stats and assessment, I would be curious to see some accurate, government sponsored demographics that would either back the claims made in the film or would disprove them.  I think it is important not to rush to conclusions and assume that this film is accurate and objective in its approach.  In all honesty, I think at least mild scepticism is in order.

If any of my readers do have legitimate information on this topic, I wholeheartedly welcome their responses, links to sources, etc.

Lastly, even if a portion of the clips’ statistics are correct, these numbers do not necessarily add up to the author’s conclusions.  I found a very good response from the Muslim perspective that I will post here, I felt that they raised a number of good points that the video failed to address.

However, regardless of all of the above and probably more important, Christians (including myself) need to consider Jesus’ own words:

1.  Love God and Love your Neighbor

Jesus had just finished restating a summary of the Law in two commandments–Love God and love your neighbor.  But there was one man who wanted to prove himself and so asked Jesus who he meant by “neighbor.”

Luke 10:30-37
30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him up, and went off, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, but when he saw the injured man he passed by on the other side. 32 So too a Levite, when he came up to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan who was traveling came to where the injured man was, and when he saw him, he felt compassion for him. 34 He went up to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever else you spend, I will repay you when I come back this way.’ 36 Which of these three do you think became a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?” 37 The expert in religious law said, “The one who showed mercy to him.” So Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.”

2.  Is the glass half full or half empty?

Maybe what the author sought to use as a scare tactic might inspire a number of Christians to get to know their Muslim neighbors not for converting them, but for understanding them, loving them, connecting at a deeper level, and discovering both our common humanity and common ground we share.  And of course, hopefully through these established relationships, some of our differences in perspective can be shared and discussed in a climate of trust and real relationship.

Maybe, just maybe Christians might better understand the Qur’an, and the life of Muhammad…

And maybe, just maybe Muslims might better understand the life and teachings of Jesus…

Wouldn’t that be a more constructive and helpful effort than continuing to talk about one another rather than with one another.

Based on what has been discussed:

-The “Son of God” title in the Bible was not a term of divinity for Jesus (as), but was intended to mean that he was the promised king and Messiah that Allah (swt) had sent into the world.

-The “Son of God” title in the Qur’an is rejected because of its use and meaning within 7th Century AD/1st Century AH by certain Christian sects who were worshipping Mary (as) and Jesus (as) as second and third gods with Allah (swt), or who were saying that Jesus is Allah (swt), or who were saying that Jesus (as) was in some form or fashion a result of God procreating with Mary (as).

-The Torat and Injeel are in complete agreement with the above Qur’anic denunciations.

Therefore:

Does this bring us, Muslims and Christians, any closer to understanding one another and enabling us to dialogue and work together?  It is my conviction that the Holy Books themselves are not the issue, it is actually what we say they say that is the issue.  Maybe it is high time we learn Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Arabic and start studying ourselves?

I have encountered numerous times since I began my video project on A Common Word Between Us and You in India that a common distinction between Muslims and Christians is that Muslims believe Jesus is a prophet of God and Christians believe he is the Son of God or as one interviewee put it, Ibn Allah.

When he said the title in Arabic, I smiled and said absolutely not.  In Arabic there is only one meaning for this title and that is a literal meaning.  Rarely in Arabic and even more rarely in the Qur’an are there familial terms used figuratively, especially for the Divine.  So, to say Ibn Allah in regards to Jesus (as) really would be a mis-translation if we intend to communicate meaning over form.  Isn’t our desire in communication with one another meaning over form?

I think a highly meaningful translation of the Son of God title for Jesus (as) would be something like “God’s chosen king or agent.”  Isn’t it interesting that in Jesus’ (as) short life on this earth, he never reigned as king as he was prophesied to do.  Any thoughts?  Was Jesus (as) mistaken?  Did he fail in his original mission?  Or is there more to the story? Doesn’t Islam and Christianity both agree that Jesus (as) will return to inagurate the Last Day, to bring the world into submission unto Allah (swt)?

The issues raised today may be more constructive places to start our dialogues rather than to argue with one another over this controversial title.

To summarize:

False assumption:

Christians believe Muslims reject Jesus (as) as king and Messiah.

Correction:

The Qur’an rejects a number of false attributions to Jesus (as) that the Bible itself doesn’t teach, but the Qur’an does teach that Jesus (as) is the prophesied Messiah, that he will return on the Last Day, and that he is the Word of God kalaam Allah as well as the Spirit of God ruh Allah.

False assumption:

Christians are polytheists and their Books are corrupt because they call Jesus (as) God’s Son which is taught in their Bible.

Correction:

True Christians are monotheists and believe Jesus (as) is the Messiah and coming King, but don’t believe that he is Allah (swt), but that he is the Word of God and the Spirit of God and a prophet of God which are all confirmed in the Injeel and prophesied in the Torat and Zabbur.

Signing off for now.

See Papers section for more details and specifics, especially these particular papers:

New Paths in Interfaith Dialog

The Word of God in Islam and Christianity (English Version)

The Meaning of the Expression “Son of God” (English Version)

For this post I will discuss the historical difficulty in communicating the meaning of “Son of God” as well as why the Qur’an rejects it.

First, there is the problem of translating this term from the Greek or Hebrew into Arabic.  There are a number of issues that arise.  First and foremost is that in the Arabic there are very few examples of figurative usage of family-type language.  For the word, son, ibn, there is frequently only one meaning and that is a literal one.  So, when translating either ben elohim or huis ho Theos there are already inherent problems with this.  In Arabic this would mean God’s son by procreation.

In the Qur’an, which is in the language of classical Arabic, there is only one figurative use of the word son, “son of the road”, ibn al-sabeel (al-Baqarah 2:177) which when translated into English is a wayfarer or traveler.  Obviously in this Qur’anic instance it is not saying that the road literally had a son, it is a figurative expression.  However, in the Qur’an there is no such figurative expression when in reference to the divine.  And there is very plausible reasons for this which takes us to our second point, polytheism in Arabia and in general history.

When Prophet Muhammad (saw) came, Arabia was deeply immersed in a polytheistic system and one where such designations like “Son of God” would have meant something literal like the Greek and Roman myths such as of Hercules or could possibly even refer to historical persons like Plato or Alexander the Great.  These myths would involve a deity having a female consort and producing some sort of hybrid son that had supernatural, god-like powers and yet was also very much human.

A second problem lies in the language and particular Christian beliefs of some of the groups practicing their faith in Arabia at that time.  One such problem was that there was no Arabic translation of the Bible available at this time.  The closest language that may have been used was Syriac.

Some of these Christian groups did worship Mary and thus you have Scriptures in the Qur’an where Jesus says to Allah (swt) that he did not command his followers to worship himself and Mary his mother as gods.

In Surah al-Maeda 5:116 it says,

005.116 وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنْتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَهَيْنِ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ إِنْ كُنْتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ عَلامُ الْغُيُوبِ
005.116 And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.

This Qur’anic statement is in complete agreement with the Biblical text.  Jesus never commanded anyone to worship himself and his mother as gods along with Allah (swt).  In Arabia, there was a Christian group called the Collyridians who were practicing such a faith where Mary was worshipped (See pg. 135 of Geoffrey Parrinder’s Jesus in the Qur’an for more).

Another example is found in Surah An-Nisa 4:171, it says,

004.171 يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلا الْحَقَّ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَى مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِنْهُ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَلا تَقُولُوا ثَلاثَةٌ انْتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَكُمْ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ سُبْحَانَهُ أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ لَهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الأرْضِ وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلا
004.171 O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity” : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

And again in Surah al-Maeda 5:73,

005.073 لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلاثَةٍ وَمَا مِنْ إِلَهٍ إِلا إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَنْتَهُوا عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ لَيَمَسَّنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
005.073 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

Here you have two Scriptures dealing with the Trinity as well as the issue of God having a son.  The first is the Islamic definition of Trinity: “Allah is one of three” which is a clear deviation from true monotheism which as I have argued previously the Bible itself preserves with the words of Paul, James, and of course Jesus (as).  Secondly, here you have the Qur’an disputing that God has a son, and yet it is disputing either the physical implications of God having relations with Mary and/or it is disputing that Jesus shares divine status with two others gods, his mother and Allah (swt).

Clearly again, the Bible would in fact agree with the Qur’an based on its definitions and disputes.  Jesus is not one of three, he and his mother are not to be worshipped along with Allah as three separate gods, nor is he the bi-product of some sort of divine/female encounter.

This in no way means that the Qur’an and its Messenger Muhammad (saw) are mistaken.  No, this could quite possibly mean that many of these teachings that the Qur’an disputes were in fact being practiced by Christians in Arabia who were practicing a defective understanding of the Bible.

Does this mean the Bible itself is corrupt?  Allah (swt) is able to protect His Word from corruption even if some people have distorted what it says (Aal-E-Imran 3:78 and al-Hijr 15:09).  This makes even more sense when you juxtapose this correction of Christians with the very positive things the Qur’an has to say about Christians who have not left the Straight Path (Aal-E-Imran 3:113-115 or al-Maeda 5:65-66, 82-84).