The First Sin (The Cow vs 34-39 and Book 20:112-125)

This corresponding section of the Bible lays out the primary need and provision for salvation, that which is of first importance to Christians. The Koran tells a very different story, for all that the summary seems similar. “The devil is in the details,” they say, and in this case that is pretty nearly literal.

Did Adam and Eve mean it?

The Koran makes it clear that Adam’s sin was entirely unintentional, placing the whole blame upon the devil. When they ate, “their evil inclinations became manifest to them,” and they had to leave this garden. According to the commentary, the Garden was an allegory of a state of inertia, containing no inclination towards good or evil. I really don’t think I can say that all Muslims see the Garden as an allegory based on this one commentary, especially since some Christians see it as an allegory and many do not. All that aside, however, there is an important difference here in viewing the state of the human being.

As Francis Schaeffer put it so well in his radio series, which I’ve been listening to lately, Christianity is not Romanticism in that it does not assume that man is inherently good and getting better. Even the Christians who do not believe that every baby is born already stained with Adam’s sin, there is no denying that every one ends up in dire need of God’s salvation. We are unable to fix ourselves, and so we need atonement before we can even hope to reconcile with God. The story of Adam and Eve in the Bible ends with what is widely considered the first prophetic mention of Jesus Christ.

The dampening down or eliminating of Adam’s sin is necessary to remove the need for a Savior. Islam, claiming to be one of ‘the three Abrahamic religions’, once again distinguishes itself from Christianity and Judaism and joins just about every other world religion in believing that good works and wisdom alone are sufficient to pave your way to Heaven. Now, some Christians might chime in and ask why I place Christianity and Judaism together in this light. Although the Jews are still waiting for their political savior, even though they no longer perform animal sacrifice on altars as in the Old Testament, nevertheless they believe that a genuine repentance and accompanying forgiveness from God is necessary to wipe out sin. This is a work done nearly entirely by God, separate from any good deeds that the Jew or Christian has committed. Amid the various web commentaries on this section of the Koran, I found the statement, “A good deed cancels a bad deed.” This is not found in Christianity or Judaism.

Eve and Women as Individuals

In another important point, the Bible claims that Eve was persuaded by the devil (in the form of a serpent) and then persuaded Adam. The Koran up to this point has only addressed Adam himself or Adam and “his wife”. Some claim that the Koran is therefore more “woman-friendly”, having not placed the blame of the First Sin on Eve. (Granted, as the First Sin is entirely the fault of the devil and his ability to place evil thoughts into man’s mind rather than the more subtle leading-astray in the Bible, man doesn’t really take the hit either.) I see it a different way.

Eve in the Bible was her own person, an individual, who thought for herself and had the power to convince her husband to follow. She discerned wrongly, but she did discern! Though Adam tried later to shift full blame to her, God gave him a separate punishment, underlying what Christians already know: Eve does not carry full blame for the Fall of Man. However, her existence as a separate and important human being has already been shown in the Bible, in the Naming of the Animals, an emphasis missing in the corresponding story in the Koran. In the Bible, Woman shares in sin and its consequences as an equal person to Adam, with intelligence and influence, and God addresses her separately. Interestingly, this difference was highlighted for me in how the first human couple in the Bible are sometimes addressed as “Adam and Eve”, sometimes as “Adam and his wife”, and sometimes as “Eve and her husband.” In the Koran, it is always “Adam” or “Adam/man and his wife”.

Consequences

Although Christianity and Judaism differ in the role of the Messiah, they both place the primary emphasis on forgiveness of sin being necessary for a right relationship with god. Islam places more importance on good deeds and revealed Divine knowledge, and we begin to see that here.

Man must now leave the garden. Why? Because “some of you are the enemies of others.” Man, though he supposedly had not deliberately sinned, has nevertheless given in to his “low desires” and is now more likely to war with each other. Though Adam is said to have “repented” by turning back to Allah, this appears to be a direct result of Allah revealing knowledge to him. My helpful commentary declares, “Man is found too weak to overcome the evil suggestions of the devil or the [pre-Fall] evil inclinations in him… He [Allah] sends down revelation which, strengthening his faith in God [Allah], gives him the strength to overcome the devil and reject his suggestions.” There we have it; man couldn’t have known he was giving in to evil, but now he does, so he won’t do it again! Though it is referred to by the commentary as ‘repentance’, nothing appears to need forgiving. “Allah is merciful.” Under such circumstances, I would hope so!

The section ends, not with the punishment of man and wife and the promise of Satan’s eventual defeat, but with the simple promise that prophets will come from time to time with new revealed knowledge of Allah. This total departure from the Bible is necessary for Mohammed to claim any new revelation after the coming of Jesus. When you believe that the Fall of Man is corrected by a work already done, what is there to add? As well, if you are still waiting for your prophesied Savior, what use have you for someone who claims that there will not be one?

The Naming of the Animals (The Cow vs30-33)

This looks on the surface like the same Naming of the Animals story in the Bible. However, though the end result is the same, the stories accord the honor in different ways, leading to completely different lessons to learn.

The Koran claims that Allah taught man the names of the animals to prove his superiority to the angels, who doubted Allah's wisdom in putting a 'ruler' (man) on the earth. He then brought man before the angels and had man recite the names back to them, showing them that he had chosen to give man knowledge that they did not have. There is a notable lack of fellowship between man and Allah here, when compared to the Biblical story. Man is given the information in order to prove the the angels that he is superior, not apparently through any ability or work of his own, but because Allah chose to give him information that they lacked.

The Bible paints a very different picture. The angels are not even a part of the story. Yahweh (so called in this 'article' to distinguish Him from Allah) brings the animals to man to see what names man would give them. Yahweh had a couple reasons for doing this. One reason was to confirm man's authority over the animals. The other was to show man that there was no fit companion for him among them. This set the stage for the introduction of Woman, "flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone," above the beasts, recognized as the same race of man. She has equal intelligence and basic human dignity, recognized as an indispensable part of the human race.

The Koran apparently does not cover the origin of women at all, according to the web search I did when this part of The Cow failed to turn up any extra information. I will see in time whether this is true, or whether it is listed in a different chapter.

I find it interesting that The Cow vs 1-30 continue to emphasize Allah's superiority, the same simple theme carried onto the Naming of the Animals. Meanwhile, the Bible is already branching out to the purpose of man and woman, allowing man a greater measure of creativity and setting woman's place within creation. In the Biblical account, we are already seeing Yahweh's willingness to fellowship with His created man, giving man the honor of naming His creation the way a parent might ask his child to label his painted picture or sculpted model.

Granted, this part of the Koran seems so far to be merely a summary of the Old Testament. I also have seen a lack of complexity such that I am accustomed to from the Bible, but I am still pretty early in the book. Maybe it will change further in.

I would accept the notion that the Koran is merely meant to be a continuation of the Old and New Testament, therefore needing much less complexity in it's history lessons, but what I have read already shows a very different interpretation of the old stories summarized within.

Next Time: The Garden of Eden and Man's Sin

Quran from a Christian's Perspective Part 1

Al-Fåtihah: The Opening

Introduction

This is apparently the Muslim version of the Lord’s Prayer, only with more importance. It is the prayer a Muslim should make at the beginning of each day, beginning each lesson, etc. The prayer I use before each Bible lesson is rather different than the Lord’s Prayer, so I used the Lord’s Prayer in comparison when teasing out the nuances.

The Muslim opening prayer is a fairly simple seven-verse thing, listing attributes of Allah and requesting Allah’s help in being led on the right path, neither that of those upon whom wrath is brought down nor those who go astray. On the surface, there is nothing really wrong with it, and further inspection finds some quirks, but still a fairly decent prayer for a good Muslim. If I did not have the Lord’s Prayer to compare it with, I might agree with the author of my English translation that the concepts expressed are nothing short of sublime.

Divine Attributes

The divine attributes are four in number, being providence, beneficence, mercy, and requital. For all that, the English translation doesn’t use the word ‘providence’, unless it is hidden somehow in it’s mention of Allah as ‘Lord’. I get a gentle chiding here for the frequent English translation of ‘King’. An emphasis on the word used strengthens the definition from ‘King’ to something further, a ‘Master’. The difference is important, because a master could forgive his servants without breaking the law, while a king could not. I find that interesting, as it suggests that in Islam the forgiveness of sins is possible only because Allah is above the law, while in Christianity it is the fulfillment of the law through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Beneficence and Mercy barely need mention, as I pretty much agree with them. To a Christian comparing the Quran to the Bible, they need no explanation.

The one that really caught my eye was requital. I had to look up the word to make sure I had the nuance correct. It’s most common synonym is ‘reciprocate’ or ‘return’, the idea of giving back what is given to you. For a judgmental god, that makes some sense. You do good, you get good. You do bad, you get bad. Unfortunately, it leaves no room for forgiveness of sins, or for the Biblical verses about even our righteousness being no better than dirty rags before God’s glory. Again, the translator/commentator set me straight. The judgment of Allah is not apparently the rigid judgment of natural law, but the beneficent judgment of a loving Master.

Is that different from Christianity? I see one way that it is, and that one way is strengthened by what the Lord’s Prayer has that the Fatihah does not.

Forgiveness and Remission of Sins

The Lord’s Prayer and the Fatihah has concepts in common regarding God’s magnificence, beneficence, love and power. They both request direction in the supplicant’s life. The mention of “Thy Kingdom Come” and the meaning of it’s omission in the Fatihah will have to wait until I have more information. The two extra parts in the Lord’s Prayer are the appeal for sustenance (“Give us this day our daily bread”) and for forgiveness of sins.

While one of the words used to describe Allah in these seven verses refers to him as ‘sustainer to perfection’, I do not come away from reading the prayer with a feeling that you can request that sustenance of him, or a sense that forgiveness is something you specifically seek. The Lord’s Prayer suggests, as other words of Jesus confirm, that remission of sins is something that you can not only hope for but expect once you have made your request. God is seen as a faithful and steady keeper of His word, and that expectation is strengthened by the knowledge that salvation and forgiveness is the fulfillment of the Law and not it’s bypassing. For that Jesus’s sacrifice was needed.

For Allah, on the other hand, whose forgiveness appears to be above the Law, I see no guarantee of remission of sins beyond the simple assurance that Allah is loving and merciful, and it is not beyond his nature to do so.

Next Time: Starting the Cow

Quran from a Christian's Perspective Introduction

I have finally decided to give the Muslim's holy book a good look over. Being who I am, of course, I will be taking notes as I read, and writing up my thoughts afterwards. Maybe it'll become a book. Maybe not. At any rate, I'll post them here as I write them.

I've got a translation of the Quran from http://www.muslim.org/ with commentary from Maulana Muhammed Ali. I think that should be a fairly good representation of their text, not biased towards their detractors and with a genuine wish to make it understandable. So far, I find the commentary useful and the text interesting.

Let's see how long this lasts, and what I come up with in the meantime.

Spanking guidelines

I get the feeling that people who decry spanking of any sort for any reason, who talk about things like brutality and unacceptable punishment, really don't appreciate how hard it is to spank correctly. I don't think they understand how carefully calculated and measured it is, how much easier it is to perform much harsher punishments, like name-calling and other emotionally-damaging attacks. So for those who don't understand how to spank for one reason or another, I present my guidelines.

Do not spank in anger or without decisiveness. Never strike any person in anger. You can't help the mother bear slap of fear, especially with a toddler. That's not likely to do them any real damage. But never actually spank a child without a clear idea of why it is necessary and a cool head.

Do not spank for genuine forgetfulness, for absent-mindedness, or for accidents. I reserve spanking for deliberate disobedience. If he throws a toy in the house, I tell him no. If he gets all excited playing and does it again, I may remove the toy for a while. If I say "Do not throw toys" and he responds by looking at me and throwing another, that is call for a spanking.

I had a particular challenge with my son in this area. If he got put to bed early for acting thoroughly tired, he would refuse to pee before bed and then wet the bed. Was he doing it deliberately? Much as I hesitate to decide that, it seemed so. However, I do not feel it is right to spank a child for bed-wetting. How did I deal with it? By making it more of a nuisance to him than was worth. A thorough impromptu shower including a hair-wash, thorough change of clothes and bedding, and answering complaints with "You wet the bed, so we have to make everything clean again."

Measure the spanking and spanking tool. I favor hand or wood, the hand because you can better gauge how hard the spanking is, and wood because it is lighter and more flexible, stinging without injuring. A wide wooden spoon is good for this, spreading out the impact. Plastic hurts more, and I don't favor it. How do I measure spankings? This is a carefully administered punishment, not a beating opportunity. Just as I used the inside of my wrist to test his bath temperature, I use my own arm or leg to test the spanking before I deliver it. (You don't have to do this every single time. Just enough to get the feel of whatever you're using.)

Make sure he knows ahead of time how many spanks and what they are for. "One spank for disobeying me, and one spank for spitting at me." That reinforces his sense of fairness, understanding exactly what is deserved and why.

I saved the most important for last. Ensure that the spanking wipes out the offense. Once it is finished, it has done the job of restoring him to good graces. Don't reward him afterwards, but do not withhold hugs and let your voice revert to it's pleasant tone. Treat him as if the offense and punishment has not happened at all. If you are raising him as a Christian, you are teaching the most important spiritual truth in this way; total forgiveness and remission of sins.

I hope my little guideline list has helped you understand how I use spanking for punishment. I was one of the lucky kids who learned how to spank from my own parents. My husband derived similar rules from his own experience. It is useful to keep in mind that what your child learns from your spanking habits will affect the way he punishes his own children, your grandchildren. And grandchildren are perfect, aren't they?