The Cow vs. 48 and 60 – Who then is righteous?

The Cow vs. 48 and 60 – Who then is righteous?

How to be fit for Heaven

Verse 48 introduces an interesting concept in the midst of another long declaration of how the sinful will perish forever and the sinless will earn paradise. It mentions the attempt to “deserve” Heaven by joining yourself to a “servant of God” as a model. Apparently, if you can identify with someone who certainly deserved Heaven and model yourself after him as much as possible, you may make your way in with the help of an ‘intercession’, the mechanics of which were not laid out. Maybe we will get more detail on that later. However, the very concept of following another human as an example seems strange to Christians, who believe that none of us are without sin and the only perfect example is Jesus Christ.

At this point, it is necessary to understand and remember the difference between the Christian and Muslim view of “sin”. In Islam, unintentional sin is not enough to keep you out of Heaven, but intentional sin is. In Christianity, the bar is raised much higher, but so is the level of hope. Even intentional sin, even the worst sort, can be forgiven through acceptance of Christ’s atonement. Christian faith is an all-or-nothing proposal, with no way to attain righteousness on your own. Islam is a little more vague, with the basic idea that you may be able to refrain from sin sufficient to bar you from Heaven, with Allah’s help and a great deal of prayer.

Sinless prophets through revisionist history

My first thought when reading about intercession was helpfully answered only a few verses later. Being a lifelong Christian, I instantly wondered how you would go about finding a sufficiently righteous man to emulate. “After all, even the prophets of the Bible, even the greatest people sinned. David committed adultery. Moses disobeyed God in Kadesh.”

What was Kadesh? It was the place where the Israelites, once again, complained about lack of water. Moses was told by God to ‘speak to the rock’ and that waters would gush out for the Israelites. Instead, Moses took them to task. “Do you expect me to bring water out of this rock for you?” And he struck the rock with his staff, twice. God answered, and brought the water, but informed Moses later that his punishment for disobedience was that he would never be able to cross over into the Chosen Land. Moses’ disobedience here, by the way, was a little more subtle than the plain story suggests. He did things his own way, and he neglected to give credit to God.

Verse 60 in the Koran, however, tells a different story. It claims that “We (Allah) told Moses to strike the rock, so that water would come out…” in the midst of it’s tirade, admittedly not unlike tirades among Old Testament prophets, about Israel’s unfaithfulness.

Now those who are not well versed in the Bible, not only what it says but why, would probably see the difference between ‘speaking’ and ‘striking’ in God’s orders to be so unimportant that it would not even need to be mentioned. God spoke to Moses, Moses struck the rock, the miracle happened. However, like the changes made from the Biblical account in earlier verses, a slight edit changes the entire story. A sinful human like the rest of us is transformed into a sinless paragon suitable for identification and capable of intercession.

Remember that Islam, unlike Christianity, is a ‘new revelation’ religion. The New Testament completes and explains the Old Testament, but it does not rewrite. The system of atonement for sin and the need for a Savior runs throughout the entirety of both Scriptures. However, Mohammed’s visions, to the Muslim, represent new revelation that overrides and corrects the old. So if the Bible says that God told Moses to speak to the rock and the Koran says that Allah told Moses to strike the rock, for the Muslims, the ‘newer revelation’ takes precedence. In that way, revisionist history is justified in order to protect a claim not defensible through the Old Testament that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all claim to hold in common.

The Cow vs 43 – Two Fundamental Principles of Religion

Here we come across a fairly simple verse, but my commentary claims it to be much more. “These are the two fundamental principles of religion,” the commentary claims, and so I immediately think of the equivalent section in the Bible, the two greatest commandments. Upon further study, I realized that these two greatest were similar on the outside and, as in previous sections, notably different in the details!

The Greatest Commandments

In the Bible, Jesus responds when asked for the greatest commandment, not with something from the pre-established Law, but something entirely new that nevertheless encompasses it. “You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart, and with all of your soul, and with all of your mind.” In the Koran, the first listed fundamental principle is at the beginning of the verse, with “Keep up prayer,” and at the end, with “bow down with those who bow down.” Jesus continues His speech with the second greatest commandment which is “like the first: Love your neighbor as yourself.” The corresponding part in the Koran is similar: to pay the poor-rate.

At first glance, there are similarities that make these a good set for comparison. In both cases, the first principle involves God while the second involves others. However, as before, the difference is in the details!

Do what with your God?

The commentary/translation note for the first part of the Koran verse, “Keep up prayer,” explains prayer as worship. I remembered the very first section, the seven-verse prayer known to be so much more important to the Muslims than the roughly corresponding Lord’s Prayer is to Protestant Christians. Upon looking up the word ‘worship’ in the dictionary, I came up with a similar word picture. The first principle for Muslims is to acknowledge Allah’s greatness and power, to show proper respect, and to exalt Allah to a proper place, being at the top of everything. This is not a bad thing for Christians to do when dealing with whom I refer to as “Yahweh” as from the Old Testament. However, Christians are asked to do so much more. Love the Lord your God.

Placing worship of a deity as the top priority is nothing new in the myriads of religions before and after Islam. In this, I admit that Mohammed disappoints me a great deal. Jesus encourages us to call to God using names that translate to a very close father-child relationship. The idea of loving your God rather than simply exalting Him is extraordinary, as well it should be. In the Old and New Testaments, God consistently breaks ground, confounding mortal wisdom. What we find in the Koran, which is supposed to be further revelation from this same God, is a step backwards to the common practice of so many other religions throughout history, a simple exaltation of Allah, who so far has seemed disinclined to draw very close to us. Furthermore, while Christians are told to love God with their hearts, minds, and souls, it seems that simple religious observance of prayers and acknowledgments at proper times is sufficient for Allah.

Is this connected in any way to the difference between the two religions of how badly we need salvation and from what? Yahweh, saving us from our sins and restoring us to a right relationship, may rightly speak of a love encompassing every part of us. Allah, only apparently having need to save us merely from ignorance and the consequences of sin accidentally committed, may therefore require less from us.

Who needs our help?

The second principle contrasted with the second commandment is something of which I have much less to speak, mostly because I have not read enough of the Koran to know if all of your neighbors are addressed at another juncture. I will, however, point out that Christians are required to do much more than to pay a poor-rate and otherwise support those who do not have enough material possessions. Jesus requires of us that we reach out not only to the poor but to the rich. When He said that if a man makes you carry his burden for a mile that you should go two, He was not speaking of aiding the poor. He was speaking not only of the rich, but of the rich oppressors over the Jews at that time. I will need to read more of the Koran to know if Mohammed addresses this issue in more detail.

Next Time: Speaking to Israel

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.