Chapter 35

CHAPTER 35

FAITH, THE KORAN, AND THE BIBLE

"Diligently present yourself a workman approved to
God, who warrants no shame, cutting straight the word
of truth." (II Timothy 2:15, author's translation)

How does one grapple with the fact that there is "some” Truth in the Koran and yet know at the same time that there is also "distortion” of Truth, and even worse, out and out "denial” of Truth? The confusion that comes upon a Christian who takes the time to read through the Islamic holy book is this. How could Muhammad be so right about some things and so wrong about other things?

A sizable portion of what is in the Koran is found in the Old Testament. Yet even so, many of the Old Testament stories occurring in the Koran are retold in such a manner that they become incongruous with the originals. For example, when the Koran refers to Moses sighting the burning bush , it says that he told his household that he was going to get some of the fire and bring it back so they could warm themselves by it.(Surah XXVII, 7-8; Surah XXVIII, 29-31.) This is not the way the Old Testament relates the incident. The Exodus account says clearly and unmistakably that Moses approached the bush out of curiosity as to why it was not being consumed by the flames, (Exodus 3:2-3.) a motive entirely different from that of the Koran. Then further, when Moses arrived at the bush, the Koran introduces another aberration to the narrative. It has Allah using words and phrases that are incompatible with those of the ancient Pentateuch, and the modifications are more than what might be attributable to translation. In addition to the textual deviations from the Old Testament, the Koran perplexingly says, "We verily gave grace unto Moses and Aaron... and We gave them the clear scriptures." (Surah XXXVII, 114-117.) If the Koran says that the "clear scriptures" were given to Moses to begin with, then why would Muhammad's scribe digress so pronouncedly from the older text, as the prophet dictated the words to him?

The discrepancies between the Koran and the Bible really need to be addressed. If Hebrew scribes could recopy Old Testament stories many times across many centuries without any significant variation; and if Greek and Latin scribes could do the same translating the Hebrew into their respective languages; then why could not Muhammad's scribe do likewise when translating Old Testament stories into Arabic? Or dare we ask, “Who was getting it wrong -- Muhammad or his scribe?”

The story of Jacob in the Koran is even more striking. Unlike the much older material in the Book of Genesis where Jacob has to be told that Joseph is alive, the Koran portrays the patriarch as a prophet who knows prior to the telling. (Surah XII, 93-96.). Additionally, several Old Testament characters are called prophets in the Koran, whereas in the Old Testament itself, the same ones are never referred to by that title.

When reading the narrative of Noah in the Islamic holy book, we find the Koran quoting the antediluvian survivor as saying: "My Lord! Leave not one of the disbelievers in the land. If Thou shouldst leaven them, they will mislead Thy slaves and will beget none save lewd ingrates." (Surah, LXXI, 26-27.) Of course, as any Bible student will know, not one word of this appears in the actual record of Genesis. Quite bluntly, this sounds like a text that would serve well to legitimize Muhammad's program of killing off all the Arabians who were not willing to accept him as a genuine prophet of God.

To a lesser degree, some New Testament characters are mentioned in the Koran. Yet what is so baffling concerning this is that most of what the Koran says about New Testament characters and the events associated with their lives cannot be found in the twenty-seven books that complete the Bible. For example, the Koran says that Mary gave birth to Jesus while sitting under a date palm tree alone. (Surah XIX, 23.) To the contrary, the New Testament says that Mary gave birth to Jesus in a stable in Bethlehem with Joseph, her husband and stepfather of the child, at her side. (Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:1-20.) Again, the Koran says that Baby Jesus spoke articulately from the cradle. (Surah XIX, 29-33.) Much to its credit, not a trace of this type of infantile speech can be found in the New Testament. The canonized writings of the first century Church infer throughout that Jesus acted and behaved like any new born would be expected to act and behave.

Further the Koran says that Jesus presented himself to the Jews as an authentic messenger of God by fashioning the likeness of a bird out of clay and then miraculously bringing the clay bird to life by breathing into it. (Surah III, 49.) Once again, it must be highlighted that this story is not found in any of the New Testament books. Most Christian scholars, however, are acquainted with the tale and know it to be a fable.

In addition to the several anomalies, that which is most disturbing to Christians about the Koran is the material, which undermines or outright denies the central teachings of the New Testament. For example, the Koran says, "They shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is...in...the Gospel...." (Surah IX, 111.) Please! Halt right there! This is a flagrant un-Truth. Nowhere does the Gospel so much as hint that a Christian can slay another person, be he an enemy or not. To the contrary, the Gospel teaches that Christians are to be kind to all, even their enemies. (Matthew 5:43-48; Romans 12:17-21.)

Even worse, the Koran denies the Divinity of Christ with no small measure of disdain. Although Jesus is called a prophet and the "son of Mary" in the Islamic holy book, the Divinity of Jesus is brazenly contradicted. "They surely disbelieve," says the Koran, "who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary.... The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. (Surah V, 72-75.)

Even further, the Koran scorns the idea that Jesus is the "Son of God." Censoriously, the Islamic holy book says, "The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child, when there is for Him no consort." (Surah VI, 102.) No less than eleven times, the Koran stipulates that Allah has no son. Surah LXXII, 3-4 and Surah XIX, 89 reflect the Koranic position by declaring respectively that they who maintain that Allah has a son are telling "an atrocious lie," which is "a disastrous thing." Yet, twice in the Gospel of Matthew a voice comes from heaven saying of Jesus, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:17; 17:5.) The Gospel of John states emphatically and unequivocally that Jesus is "the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:16.) All four Gospel writers refer to Jesus as the "Son of God," not to mention the opening words in the Book of Hebrews specifying that God has spoken through His Son. (Hebrews 1:2.) With regard to the book of Hebrews, I might add that the entire thirteen chapters serve as one long exposition, explaining how the revelation of God through His Son, Jesus Christ, is a superior revelation to that which comes through “prophets” or “angels.” It seems that the book of Hebrews anticipated the heretical teachings of the Koran, long before Muhammad began dictating them to his scribe, in that the Koran came from an “angel” (allegedly Gabriel) through the “prophet,” (Muhammad).

If the preceding material is not bad enough, perhaps worst of all, the Koran repudiates the most central doctrine of Christianity; namely, the crucifixion of Jesus. All four Gospel writers -- Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- give detailed accounts of Jesus being put to death on the cross. In fact, forty percent of the Gospel of John is devoted to events leading up to and including the death and burial of Jesus. Thirty percent of the Gospel of Mark is devoted to the same; Matthew follows with twenty-five percent; meanwhile Luke trails behind with twenty percent. With the exception of a few of the shorter letters, all books of the New Testament either specify or infer the death of Jesus on the Cross. To deny something as prominent and as basic as the sin atoning death of Jesus, is a defamation of the Gospel. Yet, that is precisely what the Koran does. It maligns the life and mission of the only Savior the world will ever have, by saying: "they slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain." (Surah IV, 157.) Thus, with an air of patronizing certainty, the Koran discards the very heart of the Christian Scriptures.

As one compares the Koran with the Bible, the word inconsistent seems to describe what is found, although many Christians might regard this remark as a gross understatement. For instance, once the Islamic holy book has repudiated the Gospel, as noted above, it commands Muhammad to say with signal incoherence, "I believe in whatever Scriptures Allah hath sent down, and I am commanded to be just among you." (Surah XLII, 15.) This seems quite erratic, especially after what was said about Jesus having never died on a cross, and since most of Muhammad's knowledge of Jesus came from the New Testament that was more than 500 years old when the prophet produced the Koran. More incoherence is conspicuous when the Islamic holy book sums up the account of Jacob's son, Joseph, as also noted above, by saying, "It is no invented story but a confirmation of the existing (scriptures)...." (Surah XII, 111 (italics used for emphasis).) Does not the word "confirmation" seem out of place here? Again we read in the Koran, "He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel." (Surah III, 3 (italics used for emphasis). ) The incredulous terms here are the words "confirmation" and "confirming." Still again, we read "...this Koran is...a confirmation of that which was before it and an exposition of that which is decreed for mankind...." (Surah X, 38 (italics used for emphasis).) Really? A confirmation? Maybe an alteration! Maybe a modification! But a confirmation of the Scriptures, it is not!

The Koran and the Bible diverge at many crucial places. Can Caliphs and Islamic religious leaders continue to ignore the fact that the Scriptures in the Koran are not the same as those in the Bible, some of which predated Muhammad 2,000 years and all of which preceded him no less than 500 years? Are there no Scriptural scholars in Islam? Concerning the inaccuracies in the Koran as relating to the Pentateuch, is one to suppose that God did not convey the Scriptures correctly when He first gave them to Moses? Or did Moses simply fail to set the words down right as given to him? Even more incredible! Is one to assume that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, contemporaries and companions with Jesus, either knowingly or ignorantly wrote down incorrect information about their Lord; who He was and what He did? Can Caliphs really believe that Muhammad came along five centuries removed from the latest of these events and set the record straight?

Not only does the Koran post alarming inconsistencies with the Bible, it also contains not a few unmistakable antinomies within itself. Now it must be confessed that the New Testament has an appreciable amount of material within it that appears to be inconsistent. However, western scholars know that most variations within the New Testament (none of which are doctrinal variations, and most of which relate to minor details) can be explained by the fact that there were several writers, reporting on the same events. And as would be expected, the different writers were selective about what they wrote down –- preserving only that which was impressive and important to them (as they were understandably led by the Holy Spirit). As one thinks upon it, it is noteworthy that of the 10 authors who produced the New Testament, writing at different times and from different geographical locations, there is an enormous amount of cohesion. Therefore, with respect to the variations within the Christian Scriptures, virtually all can be explicated from the basis of multiple authors. The same justification, however, will not work for the Koran. Why? Simply because it has only one author!

For example, in one place the Koran says, "There is no compulsion in religion." (Surah II, 256 (italics used for emphasis).) Then in another place it says, "...If they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them." (Surah IV, 89.) Hmmm? No compulsion? If this is not compulsion, then what shall it be called? The thought of “lethal intimidation” comes to mind.

Further, consider this. The Koran vehemently opposes the worship of "partners" of God. "If thou ascribe a partner to Allah thy work will fail and thou indeed wilt be among the losers." (Surah XXXIX, 65.) Yet, there is a lot of "We" material in the Koran, which implies the worship of "partners," not to mention the material that actually calls for the worship of "partners." Perhaps, one should ask first, who are the "We" in the Koran? Whoever the “We” are, they are always speaking to Muhammad. Islamic mullahs say the "We" speaker(s) is really the angel Gabriel articulating on behalf of all the angels. Quite surprisingly, the "We" claim credit for building heaven and laying out the earth as stated here: "We have built the heavens with might, and We it is who make the vast extent (thereof)." (Surah LI, 47-48.) Further, they claim credit for creating people, saying: "We, even We, created them, and strengthened their frame...." (Surah LXXVI, 28.) At this point, I might introduce that Muslims have accused Christians of worshiping three gods, which is really a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. Christians do not claim to worship three Gods, but testify that the New Testament teaches that the one God had revealed Himself in three profound ways; namely, through the creation as Creator, through the Son as Jesus and through the Holy Spirit as inspirer and director of believers. Again, take note of what is in the Koran with regard to the "We" speakers. The Koran says explicitly that leading personages of the Old Testament "were worshipers of Us (alone)." (Surah XXI, 73.) Note the word "Us". It is a plural term. Who are the "Us”? They are the "We” in third person. They are the angels talking with Muhammad, and they call for the worship of "partners," which the Meccan prophet repeatedly says he abjures. No wonder Muhammad frequently doubted what his angels were telling him. For they seem to qualify as the "deceiving spirits" that give the "teachings of demons" as prophesied by the Apostle Paul to come in later times. (I Timothy 4:1.) Quite pointedly, the New Testament warns the Church that even Satan, the commander-in-chief of the fallen angels, may at times disguise himself "as an angel of light." (II Corinthians 11:14.) Then on top of this, the Koran has the absence of mind to say: "Will they not then ponder on the Quran? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much incongruity." Alas! Is not incongruity the very thing that is found in abundance? Any rational mind will reel with vertigo while reading through the Islamic holy book.

With regard to the inaccuracies relating to the Old Testament, and with regard to the repudiations of the central teachings of the New Testament, and with regard to the confounding inconsistencies present throughout the Koran itself, what is one to think? Regrettably Muslims are discouraged to think at all, when it comes to their religion. Not surprising, an unabashed misology permeates the entire Islamic society. It is not that Islamics are inferior with regard to intelligence. Nothing could be more ridiculous. Islamics are just as mentally capable as Christians. However, they are penalized by their religion. Fact is they are not allowed the freedom of thought as compared to those residing in Christian societies. The New Testament exhorts Christians to "Prove all things" and "hold on to that which is good." (I Thessalonians 5:21, author's translation.) Not so with Muslims. Islamics are taught to submit, not think, as the word Islam implies. Muslims are conditioned to surrender, not examine, as the word Muslim implies. Of course, the followers of Muhammad are to surrender to and submit to Allah as interpreted by the mullahs, caliphs, and imams who dominate the Arabic government and society. Be that as it may, the question remains. What is one to think? How is one to explain all the confutation, misinformation, and deviation found in the Koran? Does it not all boil down to the fact that Muhammad simply failed his tests of temptation, as delineated in the next chapter?

Return to Chapter Selections

CHAPTER 35
	FAITH, THE KORAN, AND THE BIBLE

	"Diligently present yourself a workman approved to God, who warrants no shame, cutting straight the word of truth." (II Timothy 2:15, author's translation)

	How does one grapple with the fact that there is "some” Truth in the Koran and yet know at the same time that there is also "distortion” of Truth, and even worse, out and out "denial” of Truth? The confusion that comes upon a Christian who takes the time to read through the Islamic holy book is this. How could Muhammad be so right about some things and so wrong about other things?

	A sizable portion of what is in the Koran is found in the Old Testament. Yet even so, many of the Old Testament stories occurring in the Koran are retold in such a manner that they become incongruous with the originals. For example, when the Koran refers to Moses sighting the burning bush , it says that he told his household that he was going to get some of the fire and bring it back so they could warm themselves by it.(Surah XXVII, 7-8; Surah XXVIII, 29-31.) This is not the way the Old Testament relates the incident. The Exodus account says clearly and unmistakably that Moses approached the bush out of curiosity as to why it was not being consumed by the flames, (Exodus 3:2-3.) a motive entirely different from that of the Koran. Then further, when Moses arrived at the bush, the Koran introduces another aberration to the narrative. It has Allah using words and phrases that are incompatible with those of the ancient Pentateuch, and the modifications are more than what might be attributable to translation. In addition to the textual deviations from the Old Testament, the Koran perplexingly says, "We verily gave grace unto Moses and Aaron... and We gave them the clear scriptures." (Surah XXXVII, 114-117.) If the Koran says that the "clear scriptures" were given to Moses to begin with, then why would Muhammad's scribe digress so pronouncedly from the older text, as the prophet dictated the words to him?

	The discrepancies between the Koran and the Bible really need to be addressed. If Hebrew scribes could recopy Old Testament stories many times across many centuries without any significant variation; and if Greek and Latin scribes could do the same translating the Hebrew into their respective languages; then why could not Muhammad's scribe do likewise when translating Old Testament stories into Arabic? Or dare we ask, “Who was getting it wrong -- Muhammad or his scribe?”

	The story of Jacob in the Koran is even more striking. Unlike the much older material in the Book of Genesis where Jacob has to be told that Joseph is alive, the Koran portrays the patriarch as a prophet who knows prior to the telling. (Surah XII, 93-96.). Additionally, several Old Testament characters are called prophets in the Koran, whereas in the Old Testament itself, the same ones are never referred to by that title.

	When reading the narrative of Noah in the Islamic holy book, we find the Koran quoting the antediluvian survivor as saying: "My Lord! Leave not one of the disbelievers in the land. If Thou shouldst leaven them, they will mislead Thy slaves and will beget none save lewd ingrates." (Surah, LXXI, 26-27.) Of course, as any Bible student will know, not one word of this appears in the actual record of Genesis. Quite bluntly, this sounds like a text that would serve well to legitimize Muhammad's program of killing off all the Arabians who were not willing to accept him as a genuine prophet of God.

	To a lesser degree, some New Testament characters are mentioned in the Koran. Yet what is so baffling concerning this is that most of what the Koran says about New Testament characters and the events associated with their lives cannot be found in the twenty-seven books that complete the Bible. For example, the Koran says that Mary gave birth to Jesus while sitting under a date palm tree alone. (Surah XIX, 23.) To the contrary, the New Testament says that Mary gave birth to Jesus in a stable in Bethlehem with Joseph, her husband and stepfather of the child, at her side. (Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:1-20.) Again, the Koran says that Baby Jesus spoke articulately from the cradle. (Surah XIX, 29-33.) Much to its credit, not a trace of this type of infantile speech can be found in the New Testament. The canonized writings of the first century Church infer throughout that Jesus acted and behaved like any new born would be expected to act and behave.

	Further the Koran says that Jesus presented himself to the Jews as an authentic messenger of God by fashioning the likeness of a bird out of clay and then miraculously bringing the clay bird to life by breathing into it. (Surah III, 49.) Once again, it must be highlighted that this story is not found in any of the New Testament books. Most Christian scholars, however, are acquainted with the tale and know it to be a fable.

	In addition to the several anomalies, that which is most disturbing to Christians about the Koran is the material, which undermines or outright denies the central teachings of the New Testament. For example, the Koran says, "They shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is...in...the Gospel...." (Surah IX, 111.) Please! Halt right there! This is a flagrant un-Truth. Nowhere does the Gospel so much as hint that a Christian can slay another person, be he an enemy or not. To the contrary, the Gospel teaches that Christians are to be kind to all, even their enemies. (Matthew 5:43-48; Romans 12:17-21.)

	Even worse, the Koran denies the Divinity of Christ with no small measure of disdain. Although Jesus is called a prophet and the "son of Mary" in the Islamic holy book, the Divinity of Jesus is brazenly contradicted. "They surely disbelieve," says the Koran, "who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary.... The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. (Surah V, 72-75.)

	Even further, the Koran scorns the idea that Jesus is the "Son of God." Censoriously, the Islamic holy book says, "The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child, when there is for Him no consort." (Surah VI, 102.) No less than eleven times, the Koran stipulates that Allah has no son. Surah LXXII, 3-4 and Surah XIX, 89 reflect the Koranic position by declaring respectively that they who maintain that Allah has a son are telling "an atrocious lie," which is "a disastrous thing." Yet, twice in the Gospel of Matthew a voice comes from heaven saying of Jesus, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:17; 17:5.) The Gospel of John states emphatically and unequivocally that Jesus is "the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:16.) All four Gospel writers refer to Jesus as the "Son of God," not to mention the opening words in the Book of Hebrews specifying that God has spoken through His Son. (Hebrews 1:2.) With regard to the book of Hebrews, I might add that the entire thirteen chapters serve as one long exposition, explaining how the revelation of God through His Son, Jesus Christ, is a superior revelation to that which comes through “prophets” or “angels.” It seems that the book of Hebrews anticipated the heretical teachings of the Koran, long before Muhammad began dictating them to his scribe, in that the Koran came from an “angel” (allegedly Gabriel) through the “prophet,” (Muhammad).

	If the preceding material is not bad enough, perhaps worst of all, the Koran repudiates the most central doctrine of Christianity; namely, the crucifixion of Jesus. All four Gospel writers -- Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- give detailed accounts of Jesus being put to death on the cross. In fact, forty percent of the Gospel of John is devoted to events leading up to and including the death and burial of Jesus. Thirty percent of the Gospel of Mark is devoted to the same; Matthew follows with twenty-five percent; meanwhile Luke trails behind with twenty percent. With the exception of a few of the shorter letters, all books of the New Testament either specify or infer the death of Jesus on the Cross. To deny something as prominent and as basic as the sin atoning death of Jesus, is a defamation of the Gospel. Yet, that is precisely what the Koran does. It maligns the life and mission of the only Savior the world will ever have, by saying: "they slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain." (Surah IV, 157.) Thus, with an air of patronizing certainty, the Koran discards the very heart of the Christian Scriptures.

	As one compares the Koran with the Bible, the word inconsistent seems to describe what is found, although many Christians might regard this remark as a gross understatement. For instance, once the Islamic holy book has repudiated the Gospel, as noted above, it commands Muhammad to say with signal incoherence, "I believe in whatever Scriptures Allah hath sent down, and I am commanded to be just among you." (Surah XLII, 15.) This seems quite erratic, especially after what was said about Jesus having never died on a cross, and since most of Muhammad's knowledge of Jesus came from the New Testament that was more than 500 years old when the prophet produced the Koran. More incoherence is conspicuous when the Islamic holy book sums up the account of Jacob's son, Joseph, as also noted above, by saying, "It is no invented story but a confirmation of the existing (scriptures)...." (Surah XII, 111 (italics used for emphasis).) Does not the word "confirmation" seem out of place here? Again we read in the Koran, "He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel." (Surah III, 3 (italics used for emphasis). ) The incredulous terms here are the words "confirmation" and "confirming." Still again, we read "...this Koran is...a confirmation of that which was before it and an exposition of that which is decreed for mankind...." (Surah X, 38 (italics used for emphasis).) Really? A confirmation? Maybe an alteration! Maybe a modification! But a confirmation of the Scriptures, it is not!

	The Koran and the Bible diverge at many crucial places. Can Caliphs and Islamic religious leaders continue to ignore the fact that the Scriptures in the Koran are not the same as those in the Bible, some of which predated Muhammad 2,000 years and all of which preceded him no less than 500 years? Are there no Scriptural scholars in Islam? Concerning the inaccuracies in the Koran as relating to the Pentateuch, is one to suppose that God did not convey the Scriptures correctly when He first gave them to Moses? Or did Moses simply fail to set the words down right as given to him? Even more incredible! Is one to assume that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, contemporaries and companions with Jesus, either knowingly or ignorantly wrote down incorrect information about their Lord; who He was and what He did? Can Caliphs really believe that Muhammad came along five centuries removed from the latest of these events and set the record straight?

	Not only does the Koran post alarming inconsistencies with the Bible, it also contains not a few unmistakable antinomies within itself. Now it must be confessed that the New Testament has an appreciable amount of material within it that appears to be inconsistent. However, western scholars know that most variations within the New Testament (none of which are doctrinal variations, and most of which relate to minor details) can be explained by the fact that there were several writers, reporting on the same events. And as would be expected, the different writers were selective about what they wrote down –- preserving only that which was impressive and important to them (as they were understandably led by the Holy Spirit). As one thinks upon it, it is noteworthy that of the 10 authors who produced the New Testament, writing at different times and from different geographical locations, there is an enormous amount of cohesion. Therefore, with respect to the variations within the Christian Scriptures, virtually all can be explicated from the basis of multiple authors. The same justification, however, will not work for the Koran. Why? Simply because it has only one author!

	For example, in one place the Koran says, "There is no compulsion in religion." (Surah II, 256 (italics used for emphasis).) Then in another place it says, "...If they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them." (Surah IV, 89.) Hmmm? No compulsion? If this is not compulsion, then what shall it be called? The thought of “lethal intimidation” comes to mind.

	Further, consider this. The Koran vehemently opposes the worship of "partners" of God. "If thou ascribe a partner to Allah thy work will fail and thou indeed wilt be among the losers." (Surah XXXIX, 65.) Yet, there is a lot of "We" material in the Koran, which implies the worship of "partners," not to mention the material that actually calls for the worship of "partners." Perhaps, one should ask first, who are the "We" in the Koran? Whoever the “We” are, they are always speaking to Muhammad. Islamic mullahs say the "We" speaker(s) is really the angel Gabriel articulating on behalf of all the angels. Quite surprisingly, the "We" claim credit for building heaven and laying out the earth as stated here: "We have built the heavens with might, and We it is who make the vast extent (thereof)." (Surah LI, 47-48.) Further, they claim credit for creating people, saying: "We, even We, created them, and strengthened their frame...." (Surah LXXVI, 28.) At this point, I might introduce that Muslims have accused Christians of worshiping three gods, which is really a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. Christians do not claim to worship three Gods, but testify that the New Testament teaches that the one God had revealed Himself in three profound ways; namely, through the creation as Creator, through the Son as Jesus and through the Holy Spirit as inspirer and director of believers. Again, take note of what is in the Koran with regard to the "We" speakers. The Koran says explicitly that leading personages of the Old Testament "were worshipers of Us (alone)." (Surah XXI, 73.) Note the word "Us". It is a plural term. Who are the "Us”? They are the "We” in third person. They are the angels talking with Muhammad, and they call for the worship of "partners," which the Meccan prophet repeatedly says he abjures. No wonder Muhammad frequently doubted what his angels were telling him. For they seem to qualify as the "deceiving spirits" that give the "teachings of demons" as prophesied by the Apostle Paul to come in later times. (I Timothy 4:1.) Quite pointedly, the New Testament warns the Church that even Satan, the commander-in-chief of the fallen angels, may at times disguise himself "as an angel of light." (II Corinthians 11:14.) Then on top of this, the Koran has the absence of mind to say: "Will they not then ponder on the Quran? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much incongruity." Alas! Is not incongruity the very thing that is found in abundance? Any rational mind will reel with vertigo while reading through the Islamic holy book.

	With regard to the inaccuracies relating to the Old Testament, and with regard to the repudiations of the central teachings of the New Testament, and with regard to the confounding inconsistencies present throughout the Koran itself, what is one to think? Regrettably Muslims are discouraged to think at all, when it comes to their religion. Not surprising, an unabashed misology permeates the entire Islamic society. It is not that Islamics are inferior with regard to intelligence. Nothing could be more ridiculous. Islamics are just as mentally capable as Christians. However, they are penalized by their religion. Fact is they are not allowed the freedom of thought as compared to those residing in Christian societies. The New Testament exhorts Christians to "Prove all things" and "hold on to that which is good." (I Thessalonians 5:21, author's translation.) Not so with Muslims. Islamics are taught to submit, not think, as the word Islam implies. Muslims are conditioned to surrender, not examine, as the word Muslim implies. Of course, the followers of Muhammad are to surrender to and submit to Allah as interpreted by the mullahs, caliphs, and imams who dominate the Arabic government and society. Be that as it may, the question remains. What is one to think? How is one to explain all the confutation, misinformation, and deviation found in the Koran? Does it not all boil down to the fact that Muhammad simply failed his tests of temptation, as delineated in the next chapter?



		Return to Chapter Selections