This document is designed for Christians and Muslims who value their friendship and want to explore the theological differences between their faiths with honesty, respect, and intellectual rigor. It's not a tool for "winning arguments" but rather a resource for understanding where and why these two great monotheistic traditions diverge.

The material is structured around common points of disagreement between Islam and Christianity, presenting the Christian perspective alongside typical Muslim responses. This format allows both parties to:

• • Understand the strongest arguments from both sides
• • Examine historical evidence and scholarly sources
• • Engage in thoughtful dialogue rather than talking past each other
• • Recognize where sincere, informed people can disagree

This guide is specifically written for:

• • Friends who respect each other: Muslims and Christians who have built genuine relationships and want to explore their theological differences without damaging those bonds
• • Serious seekers of truth: Those who believe that truth matters and are willing to examine challenging questions, even about their own faith traditions
• • People committed to respectful dialogue: Those who can disagree strongly while maintaining love, humility, and genuine curiosity about the other's perspective

If you're looking to attack, mock, or simply "defeat" someone of another faith, this guide is not for you. But if you're ready to engage deeply with difficult questions while preserving mutual respect, read on.

For mutual study:

• • Read sections together, taking time to discuss each point
• • Look up the biblical and Qur'anic references provided
• • Verify historical claims in the recommended scholarly sources
• • Take breaks when discussions become emotionally charged

Remember: The goal is understanding, not agreement. You may finish this guide with your convictions strengthened or challenged, but either way, you should finish with a deeper appreciation for why your friend believes what they believe.

This guide is written primarily from a Christian perspective. While the Christian perspective is presented more extensively, Muslim positions are represented fairly and substantively.

All citations reference scholarly sources, historical texts, and primary religious documents (Bible, Qur'an, Hadith). Both participants are encouraged to:

• • Verify claims independently
• • Consult scholars from their own tradition
• • Bring additional resources to the conversation
• • Challenge representations that seem unfair or inaccurate

Before diving into the content, both participants should commit to these principles:

• •
  Assume good faith: Believe that your friend is sincere in their beliefs and not intentionally deceptive
• •
  Listen to understand: The goal is to grasp why something makes sense to the other person, not just to formulate your rebuttal
• •
  Acknowledge uncertainty: Both traditions have difficult questions; be willing to say "I don't know" or "That's a fair point"
• •
  Protect the relationship: If tensions rise, pause the discussion and return to it later
• •
  Pray/Seek divine guidance: Each person should approach these conversations with spiritual humility

With these commitments in place, you're ready to explore some of the most important theological questions that separate—and sometimes unite—Christianity and Islam.

Muslims argue that Jesus never claimed to be divine and that all such claims were inventions of Paul or later church councils. They point to passages where Jesus seems to distinguish himself from God (e.g., "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone" - Mark 10:18).

A. The Creedal Formula in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7

The Claim: Paul himself is quoting an even earlier creed, dated by scholars to within 2-5 years of the crucifixion (circa AD 30-35).

Evidence:

• •Dating: Licona, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas all argue this creed predates Paul's writing (circa AD 55) and likely originated with the Jerusalem apostles
• •Content: While this creed doesn't explicitly state divinity, it shows immediate worship and religious devotion incompatible with mere prophet status
• •Paul's testimony: In Galatians 1:18-19, Paul says he met with Peter and James 3 years after his conversion (circa AD 34-37), where he likely received this tradition

Key Sources:

• •Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus (2010), pp. 223-278
• •Gary Habermas, "The Minimal Facts Approach" - establishes this as one of the "bedrock" historical facts
• •N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (2003), pp. 319-320

B. The Philippians Hymn (Philippians 2:6-11)

The Claim: This is another pre-Pauline hymn showing Jesus being worshiped as divine.

Evidence:

• •Dating: Scholars across the theological spectrum (including Bart Ehrman) recognize this as a pre-Pauline hymn from the 30s-40s AD
• •Content: Jesus is described as existing "in the form of God" (ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ) and receiving worship (προσκυνέω) that Jews reserved for YHWH alone
• •Context: First-generation Jewish Christians singing this hymn shows they didn't view it as idolatry

Key Sources:

• •Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel (2008)
• •Larry Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? (2005)
• •Bowman & Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place (2007), pp. 91-107

C. The Aramaic Prayer "Maranatha" (1 Cor 16:22; Didache 10:6; Rev 22:20)

The Claim: Even Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians prayed directly to Jesus - something forbidden for anyone but God.

Evidence:

• •Language: "Maranatha" (מרנא תא) means "Our Lord, come!" - addressing Jesus with the divine title
• •Significance: The Aramaic preservation shows this wasn't a Hellenistic innovation but came from the earliest Palestinian church
• •Worship context: Used in early Christian liturgy alongside prayers to the Father

Key Sources:

• •Oscar Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testament (1963)
• •Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ (2003), pp. 103-107
• •Qureshi, No God but One (2016), Chapter 13

D. The "I AM" Statements in John's Gospel

Muslim Counter: John's Gospel was written too late (AD 90-100) and is theologically embellished.

Christian Response:

• •Early dating evidence: P52 (John Rylands fragment) dates to AD 125, meaning John must have circulated widely by then
• •John's use of eyewitness details: Richard Bauckham demonstrates John contains specific Palestinian geography and Jewish customs showing eyewitness testimony
• •The seven "I AM" statements: Jesus uses "ἐγώ εἰμι" (ego eimi) echoing YHWH's self-identification in Exodus 3:14 (LXX)

Specific passages:

• •John 8:58: "Before Abraham was, I AM" - Jewish listeners understood this as a divine claim (they picked up stones)
• •John 8:24: "Unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins"
• •John 18:5-6: When Jesus says "I AM" to the arresting party, they fall backward

Key Sources:

• •Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of John's Gospel (2001)
• •Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (2006)
• •D.A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (1991), pp. 343-344

E. Jesus's Actions That Assumed Divine Authority (Synoptic Gospels)

Even in the earliest gospels (Mark, dated AD 65-70):

• • Forgiving sins (Mark 2:5-12) - Jewish leaders correctly understood: "Only God can forgive sins" - Jesus didn't dispute this - He healed to prove He had this authority
• • Accepting worship (Matthew 14:33, 28:9, 28:17) - προσκυνέω (proskyneo) - the same word used for worshiping God - Devout Jews (Peter, John) prostrated before Him - Contrast: Peter and angels refuse worship (Acts 10:25-26; Rev 19:10)
• • Claiming to judge the world (Mark 14:62; Matthew 25:31-46) - At His trial, Jesus claims He will sit at God's right hand (Psalm 110:1) - Claims to be the eschatological judge - a role reserved for God alone
• • Claiming authority over the Sabbath (Mark 2:28) - "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" - Since God instituted the Sabbath, only God could have authority over it
• • Reinterpreting Torah with His own authority (Matthew 5:21-48) - "You have heard it said... but I say to you" - Not "Thus says the Lord" but speaking with inherent divine authority

Key Sources:

• • Bowman & Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place (2007) - entire book, especially HANDS acrostic
• • Craig Evans, Fabricating Jesus (2006), pp. 197-213
• • Ben Witherington III, The Christology of Jesus (1990)

F. The Son of Man Title

Muslim Objection: "Son of Man" is a humble title emphasizing Jesus's humanity.

Christian Response:

• •In Daniel 7:13-14, the "Son of Man" receives worship and an eternal kingdom
• •Jesus combines this title with divine prerogatives
• •Mark 14:62: Jesus explicitly links "Son of Man" with sitting at God's right hand

Key Sources:

• •C.F.D. Moule, The Origin of Christology (1977)
• •I.H. Marshall, The Origins of New Testament Christology (1976)

Why these claims are authentic:

• • Multiple independent sources: Mark, Q (material in Matthew/Luke), M (Matthew's unique material), L (Luke's unique material), John, Paul's letters all attest to Jesus's divine claims
• • Criterion of embarrassment: If the church invented Jesus's divinity, why include passages that seem problematic (e.g., "Why do you call me good?")?
• • Against the grain: Jewish monotheism made inventing a divine Messiah extremely unlikely

Key Sources:

• • Komoszewski, Sawyer, & Wallace, Reinventing Jesus (2006), pp. 113-136
• • Craig Keener, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (2009)

Claim: "Jesus only claimed to be 'Son of God' which just means prophet"

Response:

• •The Jewish high priest tore his clothes when Jesus claimed to be Son of God - this reaction only makes sense if it was understood as a divine claim (Mark 14:61-64)
• •The term isn't merely prophetic; in Jewish context, it indicated unique relationship and nature
• •Combined with other titles and claims, the cumulative case is overwhelming

Claim: "The Trinity wasn't invented until Nicea (AD 325)"

Response:

• •Nicea clarified and defended what was already believed, it didn't invent it
• •Pre-Nicene fathers (Ignatius c. AD 110, Justin Martyr c. AD 150, Irenaeus c. AD 180) all affirm Jesus's divinity
• •The debate at Nicea was about how to articulate Jesus's relationship to the Father, not whether He was divine

Key Sources:

• •Komoszewski & Bowman, Putting Jesus in His Place, pp. 293-316
• •Michael Kruger, Christianity at the Crossroads (2018)
• •Andreas Köstenberger, Truth in a Culture of Doubt (2014)

---

Paul's emphasis: "A person is justified by faith apart from works of the law" (Romans 3:28)
James's emphasis: "A person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24)

A. Different Definitions of "Faith"

Paul's "faith": Genuine trust in Christ that transforms the heart
James's "faith": Mere intellectual assent without life change (James 2:19 - "Even the demons believe")

Key Insight: Paul and James are combating different errors:

• •Paul fights legalism (trying to earn salvation through law-keeping)
• •James fights antinomianism (claiming faith while living unchanged)

B. Different Definitions of "Works"

Paul's "works": Works of Torah done to earn righteousness before God
James's "works": The fruit/evidence of genuine faith (care for poor, etc.)

Biblical Support:

• •Paul himself says faith produces works: Ephesians 2:8-10 ("created in Christ Jesus for good works")
• •Galatians 5:6 ("faith working through love")
• •James himself says works can't save apart from faith (James 2:14 - "Can that faith save him?")

C. Different Definitions of "Justification"

Paul's usage: Initial declaration of righteousness (forensic/legal)
James's usage: Demonstration/vindication of righteousness (evidential)

Example: Abraham

• •Paul: Abraham was justified when he believed (Romans 4:3, citing Genesis 15:6)
• •James: Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac (James 2:21, citing Genesis 22)
• •Resolution: Genesis 15 was Abraham's initial justification; Genesis 22 (25 years later!) demonstrated/vindicated that faith

D. Different Audiences and Contexts

Paul's context:

• •Writing to churches infiltrated by Judaizers
• •Fighting the error of salvation by law-keeping
• •Emphasis on how one is saved

James's context:

• •Writing to Jewish Christians facing persecution
• •Fighting dead orthodoxy and hypocrisy
• •Emphasis on evidence of being saved

E. Historical Context: James Before Paul's Letters

Important consideration: James (written AD 45-50) predates most of Paul's letters. James couldn't be responding to a misunderstanding of Paul because Paul hadn't written yet!

More likely: James is addressing Jewish Christians who thought belief in Jesus as Messiah (without life transformation) was sufficient.

Both Paul and James cite the same verse (Genesis 15:6) but for different purposes:

Paul (Romans 4:2-3): "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.'"

James (2:23): "The scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness'—and he was called a friend of God."

Analysis:

• •Paul: Abraham's belief preceded and caused his justification
• •James: Abraham's works decades later fulfilled (demonstrated/vindicated) that earlier faith

Key Sources:

• •Douglas Moo, The Letter of James (2000) - Pillar NT Commentary
• •D.A. Carson, "The Vindication of Imputation" in Justification (2004)
• •John Piper, The Future of Justification (2007), pp. 115-131
• •Thomas Schreiner, Faith Alone (2015), pp. 225-242

Quote from D.A. Carson: "It is now widely recognized that Paul and James are not in contradiction. They use the key terms differently, and they are addressing different situations."

Quote from Douglas Moo: "James uses 'justify' in a demonstrative sense... the sense of 'vindicate' or 'show to be righteous.'"

Historical note: Luther initially called James an "epistle of straw" because he misunderstood this tension. Later Luther came to see the harmony and affirmed James's place in canon.

The harmony shows:

• •Salvation is by faith alone - no one earns their way to God
• •True faith is never alone - genuine faith produces transformed life
• •Works are the evidence, not the cause - like smoke proves fire

Analogy: A living tree produces fruit. The fruit doesn't make it alive; the fruit proves it's alive.

This harmony matters for Muslim dialogue because:

• •Shows biblical consistency
• •Demonstrates that Christianity doesn't teach "cheap grace"
• •Parallels Islamic emphasis on fruits of faith, while maintaining grace foundation
• •Shows Christianity has high ethical standards rooted in transformation, not just external law

---

Muslims commonly claim:

• •The Bible has been "corrupted" (tahrif)
• •We don't have the original text
• •Thousands of variants prove unreliability
• •The Dead Sea Scrolls show major changes
• •The Bible was edited by councils/emperors

A. Manuscript Evidence Overview

New Testament Statistics:

• •5,856 Greek manuscripts
• •10,000+ Latin manuscripts
• •9,300+ other early versions (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.)
• •Total: 25,000+ manuscripts

Comparison to other ancient works:

Key Point: If we reject the NT's reliability, we must reject all ancient history.

Key Sources:

• •Komoszewski, Sawyer, & Wallace, Reinventing Jesus (2006), pp. 53-113
• •Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (4th ed., 2005)
• •F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (6th ed., 1981)

B. Early Papyri

The most significant manuscripts:

• • P52 (John Rylands Fragment) - Date: AD 125 (±25 years) - Content: John 18:31-33, 37-38 - Significance: Proves John's Gospel circulated within one generation of original
• • P46 (Chester Beatty II) - Date: AD 175-225 - Content: Most of Paul's letters - Significance: Shows Paul's letters as collected corpus very early
• • P75 (Bodmer XIV-XV) - Date: AD 175-225 - Content: Luke and John - Significance: Nearly identical to later manuscripts, proving careful copying
• • P66 (Bodmer II) - Date: AD 200 - Content: Most of John's Gospel - Significance: Confirms text stability

Key Insight: The text we have matches what was originally written. The variants are minor and don't affect doctrine.

Key Sources:

• • Daniel Wallace, "The Reliability of the New Testament Text" (multiple articles)
• • Philip Comfort & David Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (2001)

C. The Nature of Textual Variants

Bart Ehrman's misleading claim: 400,000+ variants prove the Bible is unreliable.

The Reality:

• • Most variants are spelling differences - Example: "Jesus Christ" vs. "Christ Jesus" - No English translation would differ
• • The more manuscripts, the more variants - Having 5,856 Greek MSS creates more opportunities to note differences - The Quran has fewer variants only because far fewer early manuscripts exist
• • Meaningful variants affect less than 1% of text - Wallace: "For more than 99% of the cases, the original text has been recovered" - No cardinal doctrine is affected by any viable variant
• • Textual criticism RECOVERS the original - We can compare manuscripts and determine original readings - Having multiple witnesses strengthens confidence

The Major Variants:

Key Point: We know where the variants are. No ancient document is better attested.

Key Sources:

• • Komoszewski, Sawyer, & Wallace, Reinventing Jesus, pp. 54-85
• • Bruce Metzger & Bart Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament (4th ed., 2005)
• • Daniel Wallace, "Gospel According to Bart" in Reinventing Jesus, pp. 19-53

D. The Dead Sea Scrolls

Muslim Claim: "The Dead Sea Scrolls show the Bible was changed."

The Reality: The opposite is true!

What the Dead Sea Scrolls proved:

• • Text stability over 1,000 years - Pre-DSS: Oldest Hebrew Bible manuscripts dated to AD 1000 (Masoretic Text) - Post-DSS: Hebrew Bible manuscripts dated to 150 BC - AD 70 - Result: Nearly identical text across 1,000+ years!
• • The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaª) - Date: 125 BC (1,000 years older than previous oldest copy) - Content: Complete book of Isaiah - Comparison: 95% identical to Masoretic Text - Differences: Minor spelling and grammatical variants, no doctrinal changes - Isaiah 53 (Messianic prophecy): Virtually identical
• • Other findings: - Fragments of every OT book except Esther - Multiple text families (proto-Masoretic, proto-Septuagint, proto-Samaritan) - All support reliability of transmission

Key Quote: "The Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that the Jewish scribes were incredibly accurate in their copying." - Dr. Edwin Yamauchi

Key Sources:

• • Peter Flint & James VanderKam, The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2002)
• • Timothy Lim, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Very Short Introduction (2005)
• • Geza Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English (7th ed., 2011)

E. Early Church Fathers

An embarrassment of riches: Early church fathers quoted the NT so extensively that we could reconstruct almost the entire NT from their quotations alone.

Statistics:

• • Clement of Rome (AD 95): 180+ NT quotations
• • Ignatius (AD 110): 200+ NT quotations
• • Polycarp (AD 110): 100+ NT quotations
• • Irenaeus (AD 180): 1,800+ NT quotations
• • Tertullian (AD 200): 7,200+ NT quotations
• • Total by AD 400: 86,000+ quotations

Significance: We can verify the NT text from multiple independent sources across vast geography.

Key Sources:

• • Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament (1987)
• • Michael Kruger, Canon Revisited (2012)

F. Old Testament Reliability

The Masoretic Text Tradition:

• • Jewish scribes used extraordinary care: - Counted every letter - If a single error was found, entire scroll was destroyed - Multiple checks and balances - Result: Virtually identical copies across centuries

The Septuagint (LXX):

• • Greek translation made 250-150 BC
• • Confirms Hebrew text reliability
• • Used by Jesus and apostles (most NT OT quotes are from LXX)

Comparison of Major Texts:

• • Masoretic Text (MT) - Hebrew, AD 1000
• • Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) - Hebrew, 150 BC - AD 70
• • Septuagint (LXX) - Greek, 250-150 BC
• • Samaritan Pentateuch - Hebrew, 400 BC

Result: Remarkable agreement across 1,000+ years and multiple languages.

Key Sources:

• • Ernst Würthwein, The Text of the Old Testament (3rd ed., 2014)
• • Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (3rd ed., 2012)

G. Responding to Bart Ehrman

Ehrman's credentials: Leading textual critic, agnostic, former evangelical

His valid points:

• • Yes, there are variants in NT manuscripts
• • Yes, some variants are theologically motivated
• • Yes, we don't have the originals (autographs)

His exaggerations:

• • The 400,000 variants: Misleading statistic - Every spelling difference in every manuscript is counted separately - If one word is misspelled in 1,000 manuscripts, that's 1,000 "variants"
• • "We can never know what the original said": False - Textual criticism can determine original reading with 99%+ certainty - Ehrman himself admits in his academic work: "essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants"
• • "Orthodox corruption of scripture": Overstated - His evidence shows both orthodox and heterodox changes - The variants he identifies are well-known and don't hide anything - We can identify and correct these variants

Ehrman's own admission (in debate with Daniel Wallace): "The textual tradition of the New Testament is in fact one of the most well-established and verified traditions among ancient texts."

Key Sources:

• • Craig Evans & Daniel Wallace (eds.), Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament (2011)
• • Darrell Bock & Daniel Wallace, Dethroning Jesus (2007)
• • Timothy Paul Jones, Misquoting Truth (2007)

H. The Canon Formation

Muslim Claim: "The Bible canon was decided by Constantine/councils who removed books"

The Reality: The canon recognized books already accepted as Scripture, it didn't create them.

Timeline:

• • The books were written: AD 50-100
• • Early lists appear: Muratorian Fragment (AD 170) lists 22 of 27 NT books
• • Widely accepted: By AD 250, the core NT was universally accepted
• • Councils formalized: - Council of Hippo (AD 393) - Council of Carthage (AD 397) - These councils merely recognized existing usage

Criteria for canonicity:

• • Apostolic authorship or connection to apostles
• • Orthodox content - agreed with known apostolic teaching
• • Ancient usage - already being used in churches
• • Divine inspiration - self-authenticating quality

The disputed books (Antilegomena):

• • Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Revelation
• • All eventually accepted based on evidence of apostolic connection
• • The debate proves careful consideration, not arbitrary selection

The "lost books":

• • Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, etc.
• • Not "lost": We have many of them
• • Not "banned": They were never widely accepted
• • Not "equal": They date later (2nd-4th centuries), lack apostolic connection

Key Sources:

• • Michael Kruger, The Question of Canon (2013)
• • F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (1988)
• • Lee McDonald, The Biblical Canon (2007)

• • Manuscript abundance: 25,000+ manuscripts (vs. 643 for Homer, 10 for Caesar)
• • Early dating: Manuscripts within decades of originals
• • Geographic spread: From Britain to India, preventing coordinated corruption
• • Text-type families: Multiple independent transmission lines preserve original
• • Dead Sea Scrolls: Prove OT text stability over 1,000+ years
• • Patristic quotations: 86,000+ quotes reconstruct nearly entire NT
• • Textual variants: 99%+ of text certain; no doctrine affected by uncertain variants
• • Archaeological confirmation: Places, people, customs verified

Quote from Sir Frederic Kenyon (former director, British Museum): "The interval between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed."

Paul states: "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile" (1 Corinthians 15:17). The resurrection is not peripheral but central to Christianity.

The Minimal Facts Method (Habermas & Licona)

What are "minimal facts"? Facts that meet these criteria:

• •Strongly attested by multiple sources
• •Granted by the majority of scholars (including skeptics)
• •Can be established independent of biblical inspiration

The Five Core Facts:

FACT 1: Jesus died by crucifixion

Evidence:

• •Multiple independent sources: Mark, Q, M, L, John, Paul, Josephus, Tacitus, Lucian
• •Medical evidence: Crucifixion universally fatal
• •No ancient source disputes this (including Talmud, which admits Jesus was executed)

Significance: Eliminates swoon theory

FACT 2: Jesus's disciples believed He appeared to them risen from the dead

Evidence:

• •1 Corinthians 15:3-7 (creed within 2-5 years)
• •Multiple independent appearance traditions (Jerusalem, Galilee, on road, etc.)
• •Paul's personal testimony (appeared to him too)
• •Transformation of disciples (from hiding to boldness)

Significance: Something happened to convince them, not just "legend over time"

FACT 3: Paul, a church persecutor, was converted

Evidence:

• •Paul's own testimony in his letters (written 20-30 years after conversion)
• •Independent account in Acts
• •Radical transformation from zealous Pharisee to Christian missionary
• •Suffered greatly for his conversion (2 Cor 11:23-29)

Significance: Hostile witness converted by claimed resurrection appearance

FACT 4: James, Jesus's skeptical brother, was converted

Evidence:

• •John 7:5: During Jesus's ministry, His brothers didn't believe
• •1 Corinthians 15:7: Jesus appeared to James
• •James became leader of Jerusalem church (Galatians 1:19; Acts 15)
• •Josephus records James's martyrdom

Significance: Another hostile/skeptical witness converted

FACT 5: The tomb was empty

Evidence:

• •Multiple independent attestation (Mark, John, probably Q)
• •Criterion of embarrassment: Women as first witnesses (women's testimony not valued in that culture)
• •Jewish polemic admits empty tomb (Matthew 28:13 - "disciples stole the body")
• •Early Jerusalem preaching impossible with body in tomb
• •No contrary tradition of occupied tomb

Significance: Even opponents admitted body was gone

Key Sources:

• •Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (2010)
• •Gary Habermas & Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (2004)
• •N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (2003)

The Historical Method

Licona's five historiographical tests:

• • Multiple, independent attestation: Event reported in multiple independent sources
• • Early testimony: Closer to event, more reliable
• • Embarrassing testimony: Details authors wouldn't invent
• • Testimony against interest: When authors report facts harmful to their case
• • Enemy attestation: When opponents confirm facts

Application to Resurrection:

• • Passes ALL five tests
• • No other explanation fits the data as well

A. The Hallucination Theory

The Theory: Disciples hallucinated seeing Jesus.

Problems:

• •Group hallucinations don't occur: Hallucinations are private, subjective experiences
• •Different times, places, people: 500 saw Him at once (1 Cor 15:6)
• •Wrong psychological state: Hallucinations require expectation; disciples were despairing
• •Physical interactions: Eating, touching, conversations don't fit hallucinations
• •Empty tomb: Doesn't explain missing body
• •James and Paul: Weren't expecting to see Jesus; hostile to Christianity

Key Source: Gary Habermas, "Explaining Away Jesus' Resurrection" in The Apologetics Study Bible (2007)

B. The Conspiracy Theory

The Theory: Disciples stole the body and lied about resurrection.

Problems:

• •The guard: Matthew reports a guard on the tomb (even if legendary, shows early concern about this theory)
• •Psychological impossibility: Would disciples die for a known lie?
• •The transformation: James and Paul converted independently
• •The women witnesses: If inventing, wouldn't use women (not credible in that culture)
• •The rapid growth: Doesn't explain why thousands in Jerusalem believed (Acts 2:41)
• •No confession: Despite torture and death, no disciple recanted

Key Point: People might die for a lie they believe is true, but not for a lie they know is false.

Key Source: J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City (1987), pp. 159-183

C. The Swoon Theory

The Theory: Jesus didn't actually die; He revived in the tomb.

Problems:

• •Roman crucifixion: Professionally fatal - executioners expert at killing
• •The spear thrust: John 19:34 - water and blood indicates death
• •The burial wrappings: 75 pounds of spices, tightly wrapped (John 19:39-40)
• •No treatment: Three days without food, water, medical attention
• •The stone: Couldn't move large stone from inside, weakened
• •The appearances: Half-dead man wouldn't inspire resurrection faith
• •The ascension: What happened to Jesus later?
• •Historical attestation: No ancient source (including Jewish or Roman opponents) suggests Jesus survived

Quote from David Strauss (skeptical scholar, 19th century): "It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulchre, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment... could have given the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror over death and the grave."

Key Source: William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith (3rd ed., 2008), pp. 361-389

D. The Wrong Tomb Theory

The Theory: Women went to wrong tomb; found it empty; misunderstood.

Problems:

• •Joseph of Arimathea: Named owner of tomb could correct error
• •The guards: Would be at correct tomb
• •Jewish/Roman authorities: Could produce body from right tomb
• •The women: Saw Jesus buried, would remember location 36 hours later
• •Multiple people: Peter and John also went to tomb (John 20:3-9)
• •The appearances: Doesn't explain Jesus appearing

Key Source: Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus (3rd ed., 2002)

E. The Legend Theory

The Theory: Resurrection stories developed gradually over time like mythology.

Problems:

• •Too early: 1 Cor 15:3-7 creed dates to 2-5 years after event
- Legends require generations, not years - Contemporary eyewitnesses would correct legends
• •Wrong culture: Jewish culture had no expectation of individual resurrection before end of world
- Borrowing pagan myths highly unlikely for Jews
• •Empty tomb: Attested too early for legend
• •The martyrdoms: Disciples died for resurrection claim
• •Paul's evidence: Writing 20-25 years after, cites living eyewitnesses (1 Cor 15:6)
• •Lack of legendary development: Compare canonical gospels to later apocryphal gospels (2nd-4th centuries) - huge difference in style and content

A.N. Sherwin-White (Classical historian, Oxford): "For [the gospels] to be legends, the rate of legendary accumulation would have to be 'unbelievable.' More generations would be needed."

Key Sources:

• •Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, pp. 31-84
• •Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (2nd ed., 2007)

F. The Spiritual Resurrection Theory

The Theory: Resurrection was spiritual/metaphorical, not physical.

Problems:

• •Paul's language: σῶμα (body) is always physical in Paul's usage
• •Transformation claim: Paul contrasts current bodies with resurrection bodies, but both are physical (1 Cor 15:35-49)
• •First-century Judaism: No concept of non-physical resurrection
- Pharisees believed in physical resurrection - Sadducees denied resurrection entirely - No "middle" position existed
• •The empty tomb: Physical body was gone
• •The appearances: Eating, touching, not ghost-like
• •The disciples: If purely spiritual, they had language to express that - they insisted on physical

Key quote - Wright: "Nobody in the ancient world thought resurrection meant 'going to heaven when you die.'"

Key Source: Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, pp. 31-206

Why resurrection best explains the data:

• • Explanatory scope: Accounts for all the facts
• • Explanatory power: Makes sense of the facts (not ad hoc)
• • Plausibility: Fits historical/cultural context
• • Not ad hoc: Natural explanation, not contrived
• • Illumination: Explains other facts (Christian origins, transformation of disciples)
• • Superiority: Better than all alternative theories

The Bayesian Approach: Licona demonstrates that when we apply Bayesian probability theory (used by historians), resurrection has the highest posterior probability.

Even skeptical scholars grant the minimal facts:

Bart Ehrman (agnostic):

• •Grants: Jesus died by crucifixion
• •Grants: Disciples believed they saw Him risen
• •Grants: Paul and James converted by claimed appearances

Gerd Lüdemann (atheist, German scholar):

• •Grants all five minimal facts
• •Proposes hallucination theory (but acknowledges its problems)

Paula Fredriksen (Jewish scholar, Boston University): "I know in their own terms what they saw was the raised Jesus. That's what they say and then all the historic evidence we have afterwards attests to their conviction that that's what they saw."

John Dominic Crossan (Jesus Seminar co-founder): "That Jesus was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be."

Quote from N.T. Wright: "The historian may and must say that all other explanations for why Christianity arose... are far less convincing as historical explanations than the one the early Christians themselves offered: that Jesus really had been raised from the dead."

Evidence Jesus's resurrection was physical:

• • The empty tomb: Body was gone
• • The grave clothes: Left behind (John 20:6-7)
• • Physical interactions: - Touching: John 20:27 (Thomas); Matt 28:9 (women) - Eating: Luke 24:42-43; John 21:12-13 - Speaking: Multiple extended conversations
• • Not a ghost: Luke 24:39 - "A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have"
• • The "spiritual body": 1 Cor 15:44 - σῶμα πνευματικόν means a body animated/empowered by the Spirit, not immaterial

Why resurrection wasn't expected:

• • Resurrection was corporate, not individual: Jews expected all righteous raised together at end of age
• • No messiah resurrection tradition: Dead messiah = failed messiah in Judaism
• • No precedent: Resurrections in OT (e.g., Elijah, Elisha) were resuscitations, not glorified bodies

The disciples' transformation proves something extraordinary happened:

• • Peter: From denying Jesus to boldly preaching in Jerusalem
• • John: From abandoning Jesus to founding churches
• • Thomas: From doubting to missionary to India (tradition)
• • Paul: From persecutor to missionary suffering greatly

Confirming details:

• •Pontius Pilate (stone inscription found 1961)
• •Caiaphas ossuary (found 1990)
• •Pool of Bethesda (John 5) - found in 19th century
• •Pool of Siloam (John 9) - found 2004
• •Crucifixion evidence (Yehohanan ossuary, nail still in heel bone)

Early Christian claims:

• •1 Clement (AD 95): References resurrection as known fact
• •Ignatius (AD 110): "I know that after His resurrection also He was still possessed of flesh"
• •Pliny the Younger (AD 112): Christians "sing hymns to Christ as to a god"

---

Common Muslim misconceptions:

• •"Christians worship three Gods" (tritheism)
• •"Christians believe God had sex with Mary to produce Jesus"
• •"The Trinity = Father, Mary, and Jesus" (Qur'an 5:116 seems to suggest this)
• •"Trinity was invented at Council of Nicea (AD 325)"

What the Trinity is:

• •One God
• •Three persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)
• •Each person is fully God
• •Each person is distinct from the others
• •One divine essence/nature shared by three persons

What the Trinity is NOT:

• •NOT three gods (tritheism)
• •NOT one person playing three roles (modalism)
• •NOT God divided into thirds (partialism)
• •NOT illogical (not saying 1=3)

The formula: One what (essence), three whos (persons)

A. Old Testament Foundations

1. Plural language for God:

• •Genesis 1:26: "Let us make man in our image"
• •Genesis 3:22: "The man has become like one of us"
• •Genesis 11:7: "Let us go down and confuse their language"
• •Isaiah 6:8: "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?"

Note: Not "royal we" - Hebrew has separate form for that

2. The Angel of the LORD:

• •Appears as God but also distinct from God
• •Genesis 16:7-13 (Hagar): Angel = LORD
• •Exodus 3:2-6 (burning bush): Angel = God
• •Judges 6:11-24 (Gideon): Angel = LORD

3. Wisdom personified (Proverbs 8):

• •Wisdom present at creation
• •Early church saw as reference to Christ/Logos

4. The Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4): "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one."

Hebrew: יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָֽד

Key linguistic point:

• •Elohim (אֱלֹהִים) = plural form (literally "Gods")
• •Echad (אֶחָד) = "one" - but composite unity, not absolute singularity
- Compare: Yachid (יָחִיד) = absolute singularity - Genesis 2:24: Man and woman become "one (echad) flesh" - unity of multiple entities

Key Sources:

• •Michael Heiser, The Unseen Realm (2015), pp. 24-42
• •Heiser, "Two Powers in Heaven" articles
• •Robert Bowman, Why You Should Believe in the Trinity (1989)

B. New Testament Evidence

1. Trinitarian formulas:

Matthew 28:19: "Baptizing them in the name [singular] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

• •Analysis: One NAME (not names), three persons
• •Earliest baptismal formula

2 Corinthians 13:14: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all"

• •Analysis: Three persons given equal divine status

Ephesians 4:4-6: "One body and one Spirit... one Lord... one God and Father"

• •Analysis: Spirit, Lord (Jesus), and Father all designated as "one"

1 Peter 1:2: "According to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ"

• •Analysis: All three involved in salvation

2. Jesus as God (see Section 1 above, plus):

John 1:1: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"

• •Greek: θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (theos ēn ho logos)
• •Analysis: The Word (Jesus) is distinct from God (with God) yet is God

John 20:28: Thomas: "My Lord and my God!"

• •Greek: Ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου (Ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou)
• •Analysis: Jesus accepts worship as God

Titus 2:13: "Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ"

• •Greek grammar: Granville Sharp rule - both titles refer to Jesus

Hebrews 1:3: Jesus is "the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature"

Colossians 2:9: "In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily"

3. The Holy Spirit as God:

Acts 5:3-4:

• •Verse 3: Lying to the Holy Spirit
• •Verse 4: Lying to God
• •Analysis: Holy Spirit = God

1 Corinthians 3:16: "You are God's temple and God's Spirit dwells in you"

• •Analysis: God's Spirit dwelling makes it God's temple

1 Corinthians 2:10-11: "The Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God"

• •Analysis: Only God can know the depths of God

2 Corinthians 3:17: "The Lord is the Spirit"

Key Sources:

• •Bowman & Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place (2007)
• •James White, The Forgotten Trinity (1998)
• •Robert Letham, The Holy Trinity (2004)

C. The Distinction of Persons

Evidence the three are distinct:

Father and Son are distinct:

• •Jesus prays to the Father (John 17)
• •Father sends the Son (John 3:16; Gal 4:4)
• •Father testifies about Son (Matt 3:17; 17:5)
• •Son submits to Father's will (Luke 22:42)

Holy Spirit is distinct from Father and Son:

• •Father sends Spirit (John 14:26)
• •Son sends Spirit (John 15:26)
• •Spirit intercedes (Romans 8:26-27)
• •Spirit speaks distinct from Father and Son (Acts 13:2)

Key passages showing all three together:

• •Jesus's baptism: Father speaks, Spirit descends, Son is baptized (Matt 3:16-17)
• •Great Commission: Baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19)
• •Jesus's farewell: Father, Son, and Spirit all mentioned distinctly (John 14-16)

Pre-Nicene Witnesses

Ignatius of Antioch (AD 110): "[Jesus is] God in man, true life in death, born of Mary and of God"

Justin Martyr (AD 150): "We worship the Father, the Son, and the Spirit"

Irenaeus (AD 180): "The Father is God and the Son is God; for that which is begotten of God is God"

Tertullian (AD 200):

• •First to use Latin word "Trinitas" (Trinity)
• •Developed "three persons, one substance" language

Origen (AD 225): Extensive writings on Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct yet divine

The Council of Nicea (AD 325)

What actually happened:

• •The issue: Arius taught Jesus was first created being (not eternal, not fully God)
• •The debate: Is Jesus homoousios (same essence) or homoiousios (similar essence) with Father?
• •The decision: Affirmed Jesus is homoousios - same divine essence as Father
• •The result: Nicene Creed formalized existing belief

What did NOT happen:

• •Trinity wasn't "invented" - church fathers defended what was already believed
• •Bible wasn't edited (as Muslims often claim)
• •Constantine didn't force a vote - bishops debated theology
• •Close books weren't excluded - canon was already largely settled

The Nicene Creed (AD 325): "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty... And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father... And in the Holy Spirit."

Key Sources:

• •Komoszewski & Bowman, Putting Jesus in His Place, pp. 293-316
• •J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (5th ed., 1977)
• •Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (1971)

Is the Trinity Illogical?

The charge: 1 = 3 is mathematically impossible.

The response: That's not what we're saying.

Proper understanding:

• •One what (essence/being)
• •Three whos (persons)
• •Not saying one person = three persons
• •Not saying one God = three Gods

Analogy (all analogies break down, but this helps): Time: Past, present, future - three distinct but one time Triangle: Three sides, three angles - one triangle Human: Body, soul, spirit - one person

Best analogy - Relationship: God is love (1 John 4:8) - love requires relationship, which requires plurality

Common Muslim Objections Answered

Objection 1: "1+1+1=3, not 1"

Response: We're not adding. We're saying:

• •100% Father = God
• •100% Son = God
• •100% Spirit = God
• •Not 300% God, but each fully possesses the one divine essence

Objection 2: "The Qur'an says don't say 'three'" (Surah 4:171)

Response:

• •The Qur'an misunderstands the Trinity (seems to think it's Father, Mary, Jesus - Surah 5:116)
• •We agree: don't say "three gods" - we say "one God, three persons"

Objection 3: "Jesus can't be God - God doesn't die"

Response:

• •Jesus's divine nature didn't die
• •Jesus's human nature died
• •The person of Jesus (who is both divine and human) experienced death in His humanity

Analogy: If I cut my fingernail, I don't cease to exist. Part of me is separated, but I continue.

Objection 4: "If Jesus is God, who was He praying to?"

Response:

• •Jesus (the Son) was praying to the Father
• •This shows the distinction of persons
• •Jesus operates in His human nature, in submission to the Father's will

Objection 5: "Jesus said 'the Father is greater than I' (John 14:28)"

Response:

• •Functional subordination: In the economy of salvation, the Son submits to the Father's role
• •Ontological equality: In essence/nature, Father and Son are equal
• •Analogy: A general and a private are equal in human nature, different in function/role

Objection 6: "Jesus said He doesn't know the day or hour (Mark 13:32)"

Response:

• •Jesus is speaking in His human nature
• •The incarnation involves genuine human limitations
• •This is the "kenosis" - self-emptying (Philippians 2:7)

Key Sources:

• •William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (2003), pp. 587-596
• •Edward Feser, Five Proofs of the Existence of God (2017), pp. 291-296 (on divine simplicity and Trinity)
• •Richard Swinburne, The Christian God (1994)

Common ground:

• •Both affirm: one God, creator of all
• •Both affirm: God is all-powerful, all-knowing
• •Both affirm: God reveals Himself

Key differences:

• •Islamic concept: Tawhid (absolute unity) - God is utterly simple, no plurality
• •Christian concept: Unity of essence with plurality of persons

Why the Trinity matters for dialogue:

• •Explains how God can be love eternally (requires relationship)
• •Explains incarnation (one person of Trinity takes on human nature)
• •Explains atonement (divine person pays infinite debt for sin)
• •Shows God is not distant/impersonal but involved in human history

Quote from Qureshi (Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus): "The Trinity makes sense of God being love before creation. Allah cannot have been loving before He created, because there was no one to love. But the Christian God, being three persons in eternal loving relationship, has always been love."

---

The core Islamic sources:

• •
  The Qur'an: Muslim holy book

  • Tells surprisingly little about Muhammad's life
  • More focused on law, theology, polemic
• •
  Hadith collections: Sayings and actions of Muhammad

  • Sahih Bukhari (810-870 AD) - most authoritative
  • Sahih Muslim (821-875 AD) - second most authoritative
  • Sunan Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Al-Nasa'i - other major collections
  • Compiled 200-250 years after Muhammad's death
• •
  Sirat (Sira) - Biography:

  • Ibn Ishaq (died 767 AD) - original biography
    • Problem: Only exists in later edition by Ibn Hisham (died 833 AD)
    • Ibn Hisham admits he removed material that "would distress certain people"
  • Al-Tabari (died 923 AD) - major history
  • Ibn Sa'd (died 845 AD) - biographical dictionary

A. Late Composition

Timeline:

• •Muhammad dies: 632 AD
• •Earliest biography (Ibn Ishaq): c. 750 AD (120+ years later)
• •Edited version (Ibn Hisham): c. 833 AD (200+ years later)
• •Hadith collections: 810-875 AD (180-240 years later)

Compare to New Testament:

• •Jesus dies: c. 30-33 AD
• •Paul's letters: 48-65 AD (15-35 years later)
• •Gospels: 65-95 AD (35-65 years later)
• •Gap for NT: 15-65 years
• •Gap for Muhammad: 120-240 years

The problem:

• •Oral traditions degrade significantly over time
• •200 years allows for substantial legendary development
• •No contemporary accounts to check against

Key Sources:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 217-223
• •Robert Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist? (2012)
• •Tom Holland, In the Shadow of the Sword (2012)

B. Ibn Hisham's Editorial Admission

The smoking gun quote (from Ibn Hisham's introduction to his edition of Ibn Ishaq):

"I have omitted things which Ibn Ishaq recorded in this book... things which it is disgraceful to discuss; matters which would distress certain people; and such reports as [my teacher] al-Bakka'i told me he could not accept as trustworthy."

Translation: "I removed anything embarrassing or problematic."

The implications:

• •We don't have the original biography
• •We don't know what was removed
• •The editor admits to censorship for religious/political reasons
• •This would be unthinkable for biblical scholars

Key Sources:

• •Ibn Hisham, The Life of Muhammad (English translation by A. Guillaume, 1955), p. xviii
• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 222-223

C. The Hadith Grading System

The isnad system: Chain of transmission graded by reliability of narrators

Categories:

• •Sahih (authentic): Highest reliability
• •Hasan (good): Acceptable
• •Daif (weak): Questionable
• •Maudu (fabricated): Rejected

The problem:

• •System developed centuries after events
• •No way to verify chains of transmission
• •Political/theological biases in accepting/rejecting hadiths
• •Different schools accept/reject different hadiths

Example of fabrication:

• •One collector (Al-Bukhari) examined 600,000 hadith
• •Only accepted 7,275 as authentic (about 1%)
• •This means 99% were considered fabrications or unreliable

Question: How can we trust any of them if 99% are false?

Key Sources:

• •Jonathan Brown, Hadith: Muhammad's Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (2009)
• •G.H.A. Juynboll, Muslim Tradition: Studies in Chronology, Provenance, and Authorship (1983)

D. Archaeological Silence

What archaeology shows:

• •No contemporary (7th century) inscriptions mentioning Muhammad
• •No coins with his name until late 7th/early 8th century
• •Earliest Qur'anic manuscripts don't match standard text

The Dome of the Rock (completed 691 AD):

• •Inscriptions mention "servant of God" but don't clearly identify Muhammad
• •Some scholars debate whether it originally referred to Muhammad or someone else

The problem:

• •For someone who supposedly led armies, conquered Arabia, and founded a religion, the archaeological evidence is surprisingly sparse

Contrast with Jesus:

• •Josephus mentions Jesus (even skeptics accept core reference)
• •Tacitus mentions Christians and Christ
• •Pliny the Younger mentions Christians worshiping Christ
• •Multiple 1st-2nd century sources

Key Sources:

• •Dan Gibson, Quranic Geography (2011)
• •Tom Holland, In the Shadow of the Sword (2012)
• •Robert Hoyland, In God's Path (2015)

E. Internal Contradictions

Example 1: The Night Journey:

• •Some hadiths say it was physical
• •Some say it was a vision/dream
• •Qur'an unclear (Surah 17:1)

Example 2: Satanic Verses:

• •Early sources (Tabari, Ibn Sa'd) record incident where Muhammad recited verses praising pagan goddesses
• •Later Muslim scholars reject as fabrication
• •But it's in earliest sources and fits "criterion of embarrassment"

Example 3: Muhammad's wives:

• •Qur'an limits men to 4 wives (Surah 4:3)
• •Muhammad had 11+ wives
• •Special revelation given just for Muhammad (Surah 33:50)
• •Convenient timing raises questions

The pattern: Problematic material explained away or attributed to weak sources, while favorable material accepted.

Key Sources:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 220-228
• •Waqar Akbar Cheema, articles on hadith criticism

Common Muslim arguments:

• •
  "Oral tradition was very strong in Arab culture"

  Counter:

  • Yes, but 200 years is still too long
  • Even strong oral cultures have degradation
  • No way to verify accuracy after that time
• •
  "The hadith collectors were very careful"

  Counter:

  • They lived 200+ years later
  • They rejected 99% of hadiths as false
  • Different collectors disagree on which are authentic
• •
  "The Qur'an confirms Muhammad's prophethood"

  Counter:

  • This is circular reasoning
  • The question is whether the Qur'an itself is reliable (see Section 9)
• •
  "You have faith in your sources, we have faith in ours"

  Counter:

  • Not all faith claims are equal
  • Historical evidence matters
  • Christians provide evidence for reliability; Muslims must do the same

Muslim argument: "These practices were normal in 7th century Arabia"

Problems with this defense:

• •If Muhammad is the eternal moral example (uswa hasana - Surah 33:21), shouldn't he transcend his culture?
• •Jews and Christians in the same time/place had higher ethical standards
• •Islam claims to be progressive reform of Arabian society, yet in some ways mirrors the worst of it
• •If slavery, violence against non-Muslims, polygamy, etc. were "just cultural," why are they encoded in eternal Islamic law?

The dilemma for Muslims:

• •If Muhammad's actions were "just cultural," then Islamic law based on them isn't universal
• •If Muhammad's actions are universally normative, then concerning behaviors must be defended

Key Source:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 177-243

---

Muslims often claim Islam elevated women's status in Arabia and gave women rights. This is partially true compared to pre-Islamic Arabian polytheism, but requires examination.

A. Marriage and Sexual Ethics

1. Child Marriage: Aisha

The hadith evidence (all from Sahih Bukhari - most authoritative source):

Sahih Bukhari 5133, Volume 7, Book 62, Hadith 64: "Narrated Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old."

Sahih Bukhari 5158, Volume 7, Book 62, Hadith 88: "Narrated Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

Multiple attestation:

• •Also in Sahih Muslim 1422a
• •Al-Tabari's History: Aisha was 6 at marriage, 9 at consummation
• •Ibn Sa'd's Biographical Dictionary confirms

The problem:

• •Muhammad is the "excellent example" for all time (Qur'an 33:21)
• •This behavior is emulated today in some Muslim countries
• •No biological/psychological basis for a 9-year-old to be ready for sexual relations
• •Even in 7th century, this was young (not "normal for the time")

Muslim responses:

Response 1: "She was actually older; hadiths are wrong"

• •Counter: Rejects most authoritative sources
• •Counter: No early sources support older age
• •Counter: If hadiths wrong here, what else is wrong?

Response 2: "Girls matured earlier then"

• •Counter: No biological evidence for this
• •Counter: Menarche (first period) hasn't changed significantly
• •Counter: Psychological maturity certainly not present at 9

Response 3: "It was normal for the time"

• •Counter: See "Historical Context" above
• •Counter: Even in Arabia, this was considered young
• •Counter: Doesn't address normative example for today

Modern implications:

• •Iran: Age of marriage for girls = 13 (was 9 until 2002)
• •Yemen: No minimum age until 2009 reform (now contested)
• •Multiple cases of child marriages defended by citing Muhammad's example

Key Sources:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 182-185
• •David Wood, "Muhammad's Marriage to Aisha" (article)
• •Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad (2006), pp. 84-93

2. "Those Whom Your Right Hands Possess" - Sexual Slavery

Qur'anic permission:

Surah 4:24: "And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess."

Interpretation:

• •"Right hands possess" = slaves/captives
• •Married women are forbidden EXCEPT slave women
• •This permits sex with slave women, even if they were married before capture

Surah 23:5-6: "[Believers] guard their private parts except from their wives or those their right hands possess."

Surah 70:29-30: "And they who guard their private parts except from their wives or those their right hands possess."

Hadith confirmation:

Sahih Muslim 1438a, Book 17, Hadith 18: "Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: 'And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (4:24)'"

Analysis:

• •This hadith explicitly connects the verse to sexual access to married captive women
• •The men were hesitant; "revelation" gave permission
• •This is rape by any modern definition (non-consensual sex with captives)

Sahih Bukhari 5210: "We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them."

The problem:

• •This is institutionalized sexual slavery
• •No consent from the women
• •Commanded/permitted in "eternal" revelation
• •Cannot be dismissed as "cultural"

Modern implications:

• •ISIS cited these verses to justify sexual slavery of Yazidi women
• •Boko Haram cited these verses for captured schoolgirls
• •When modern Muslims say this doesn't apply today, on what basis?

Key Sources:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 185-188
• •Jonathan A.C. Brown, Slavery and Islam (2019) - admits this was accepted practice
• •Kecia Ali, Sexual Ethics and Islam (2006)

B. Testimony and Inheritance

Qur'an 2:282 (on legal testimony): "And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her."

Interpretation:

• •One man's testimony = two women's testimony
• •Rationale: Women might "err" (forget/be confused)

Qur'an 4:11 (on inheritance): "Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females."

The problem:

• •If these are eternal divine commands, women are perpetually worth half of men
• •If these are cultural accommodations, then Qur'an isn't timeless

Muslim responses:

• •Some argue this was improvement over pre-Islamic Arabia (may be true)
• •Some argue different roles justify different inheritance
• •None can explain why a timeless, perfect revelation would enshrine inequality

Key Sources:

• •Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam (1992)
• •Amina Wadud, Qur'an and Woman (1999)

C. Divorce and Polygamy

Qur'an 4:3: "Marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hands possess. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice]."

Polygyny (multiple wives):

• •Men can marry up to 4 wives
• •Women cannot have multiple husbands
• •Asymmetry in sexual ethics

Qur'an 2:228: "And due to them [i.e., the wives] is similar to what is expected of them, according to what is reasonable. But the men have a degree over them [in responsibility and authority]."

Qur'an 4:34: "Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them."

The word "strike":

• •Arabic: وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ (wadribuhunna)
• •Root: ضرب (daraba) - to strike, hit, beat
• •Some translators soften to "tap" or "separate," but classical tafsir (commentaries) confirm physical striking

Divorce:

• •Men can divorce by simple declaration (talaq)
• •Women must go through court process (khula), often requiring return of dowry
• •Asymmetry in ease of divorce

Key Hadiths on Wife-Beating:

Sahih Muslim 1218a, Book 15, Hadith 43: "He [Muhammad] then addressed them [women], saying: 'I have not seen any one more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.' The women asked: 'O Allah's Messenger! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?' He said: 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said: 'This is the deficiency in your intelligence.'"

Key Sources:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 185-188
• •Asma Barlas, Believing Women in Islam (2002) - Muslim feminist perspective

D. The Hadith on Women

Sahih Bukhari 1462, Volume 2, Book 24, Hadith 541: "Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, 'Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?' The women said, 'Yes.' He said, 'This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind.'"

Sahih Bukhari 3241, Volume 4, Book 55, Hadith 548: "The Prophet said, 'Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?' The women said, 'Yes.' He said, 'This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind.'"

Sahih Bukhari 304, Volume 1, Book 6, Hadith 301: "Once Allah's Messenger went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) of 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, 'O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).' They asked, 'Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger?' He replied, 'You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.' The women asked, 'O Allah's Messenger! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?' He said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?' The women replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her religion.'"

The problem:

• •These are from Sahih Bukhari - most authentic source
• •Muhammad explicitly states women are intellectually deficient
• •States majority of hell's inhabitants are women
• •Cannot be dismissed as "weak" hadiths

Muslim responses:

• •Some reject these hadiths (but on what basis, if from Sahih Bukhari?)
• •Some argue "deficiency" is mistranslation (but Arabic is clear)
• •Some attempt to contextualize (but Muhammad's words are clear)

Partial truths:

• • Pre-Islamic Arabia practiced female infanticide - Islam forbade this
• • Women had few inheritance rights - Islam gave them some
• • Women were treated as property - Islam gave them some legal personhood

However:

• • These were improvements over polytheistic Arabia, not over Judaism or Christianity
• • The improvements were minimal and still encoded severe inequality
• • If Islam is the final, perfect revelation, why didn't it grant equality?

Comparison with Jesus:

• •
  Jesus elevated women radically in His context:

  • Women were His disciples (Luke 8:1-3)
  • Women were first witnesses of resurrection (despite their testimony not being valued)
  • Jesus defended women against unjust divorce (Matthew 19:3-9)
  • Jesus defended the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11)
  • Jesus engaged Samaritan woman as theological equal (John 4)
  • Jesus never spoke of women as deficient or inferior

The Apostle Paul (often criticized):

• • "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28)
• • While Paul had household codes reflecting his culture, he never claimed women were intellectually inferior
• • Paul's teaching was subversive for his time (calling for mutual submission in marriage - Ephesians 5:21)

Muslim argument: "These things were normal for the time"

Problems:

• •
  Jewish and Christian ethics: Contemporaneous Jews and Christians had higher standards

  • No child marriage
  • No sex with slaves
  • Monogamy was standard in Christianity
• • Qur'an claims timelessness: If these rules are eternal, they can't be dismissed as "cultural"
• •
  Muhammad as "excellent example": Qur'an 33:21 says Muhammad is the model for all time

  • If his behavior was "just cultural," he's not a timeless model
  • If his behavior is normative, it must be defended today
• •
  Modern applications: These teachings have real effects today:

  • Child marriage still defended by citing Muhammad
  • Domestic violence excused by citing Qur'an 4:34
  • Women's testimony worth less in Islamic courts
  • Women's inheritance less than men's in Sharia law

Books:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus (2014), pp. 177-188
• •Qureshi, Answering Jihad (2016), pp. 128-143
• •Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Infidel (2007)
• •Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Heretic (2015)
• •Nonie Darwish, Cruel and Usual Punishment (2009)
• •Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad (2006), pp. 84-93, 106-130

Articles:

• •David Wood, "Muhammad and Women" (Acts 17 Apologetics)
• •Sam Shamoun, various articles on Answering Islam website

Primary Sources:

• •Sahih Bukhari (English translation)
• •Sahih Muslim (English translation)
• •Qur'an translations

---

Muslims commonly claim:

• •Islam is a religion of peace
• •Muhammad only fought defensively
• •Terrorism is against Islam
• •Qur'anic verses are taken out of context

These claims must be evaluated against Islamic primary sources and historical record.

A. Offensive Warfare Commands

Qur'an 9:29: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [i.e., Islam] from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah [tribute tax] willingly while they are humbled."

Analysis:

• •Not defensive - command to fight until non-Muslims pay tax and submit
• •This is offensive warfare against Jews and Christians
• •Classical commentators (tafsir) confirm this understanding

Qur'an 9:5 (The "Sword Verse"): "And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Analysis:

• •Command to kill polytheists (unless they convert)
• •Not "kill them if they attack you" - "kill them wherever you find them"
• •Classical scholars considered this one of the final revelations
• •Many scholars believe this "abrogates" (cancels) earlier peaceful verses

Qur'an 8:39: "And fight them until there is no fitnah [disbelief/discord] and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah."

Analysis:

• •Fight until Islam dominates
• •Not "fight until you're safe" but "fight until Islam prevails"

Qur'an 48:29: "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves."

Analysis:

• •Explicitly describes Muhammad and followers as "forceful against disbelievers"
• •Two-tiered ethics: mercy for Muslims, force for non-Muslims

Qur'an 8:12: "[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, 'I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.'"

Analysis:

• •Graphic violence commanded
• •Beheading specifically mentioned

B. The Doctrine of Abrogation (Naskh)

The principle:

• •When later Qur'anic verses contradict earlier ones, the later verses abrogate (cancel) the earlier
• •This is stated in the Qur'an itself

Qur'an 2:106: "We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?"

The timeline of revelation:

• •Meccan period (610-622 AD): Muhammad weak, minority - peaceful verses
• •Medinan period (622-632 AD): Muhammad strong, leader - violent verses

Peaceful verses (early, Meccan):

Qur'an 2:256: "There shall be no compulsion in religion" Qur'an 109:6: "To you your religion, and to me my religion" Qur'an 73:10: "Be patient with what they say, and leave them with noble dignity"

Violent verses (late, Medinan):

• •9:5 (Sword Verse)
• •9:29 (Fight Jews and Christians)
• •9:73 ("O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them")

The classical position:

• •Ibn Kathir, Imam al-Shafi'i, Imam al-Tabari all affirm that later violent verses abrogate earlier peaceful ones
• •This is mainstream classical Islamic scholarship

Modern confusion:

• •Many modern Muslims cite peaceful verses without knowing they're considered abrogated
• •Western Muslims often unaware of classical scholarly consensus on this

Quote from Ibn Kathir (major classical commentator) on Qur'an 9:5: "This honorable Ayah was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, 'It abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term.' Al-Awfi said that Ibn Abbas commented: 'No idolater had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara'ah [Chapter 9] was revealed.'"

Key Sources:

• •David Powers, "The Exegetical Genre nāsikh al-Qurʾān wa mansūkhuhu" in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qurʾān (1988)
• •John Burton, The Sources of Islamic Law (1990)

C. Historical Raids and Battles

The Caravan Raids:

Battle of Badr (624 AD):

• •Muhammad raided Meccan trade caravan
• •Not defensive - Meccans were passing through
• •Muslims outnumbered, but attacked for plunder
• •Qur'an 8:41: "Know that one-fifth of what you capture as war booty belongs to Allah and to the Messenger"

Hadith evidence (Sahih Bukhari 3949): "Narrated Ibn `Abbas: When the Prophet intended to go to Badr, he said, 'We are going to the caravan of Quraysh.'"

Analysis: Planned raid, not defense.

The Siege of Banu Qurayza (627 AD):

After the Battle of the Trench, Muhammad besieged the Jewish tribe Banu Qurayza.

What happened (from Ibn Ishaq's Sirat):

• •600-900 Jewish men beheaded
• •Women and children taken as slaves
• •Property distributed among Muslims

Hadith confirmation (Sahih Bukhari 4121): "Narrated Aisha: Sad said, 'O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieved Your Apostle and turned him out (of Mecca). O Allah! I think you have put to an end the fight between us and them (i.e., Quraish infidels). And if there still remains any fight with the Quraish (infidels), then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your Sake. But if you have brought the war to an end, then let this wound blow from my throat.'"

The Question: Was this defensive?

• •Banu Qurayza had NOT attacked Muslims
• •They were accused of contemplating alliance with enemy (never acted)
• •Punishment was execution of entire male population

Modern parallels:

• •ISIS cited this precedent for Yazidi genocide
• •Classical Islamic law codified this as legitimate treatment of treaty-breakers

Key Sources:

• •Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, pp. 461-469
• •Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, Vol. 8, pp. 27-41
• •Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources (1983), pp. 229-233

The Conquest of Khaybar (628 AD):

Muhammad attacked Jewish settlement of Khaybar.

What happened:

• •Muslims besieged and conquered Jewish fortress
• •Men killed, women and children enslaved
• •Muhammad married Safiyya (Jewish woman whose husband he had killed)

Hadith (Sahih Bukhari 4200): "Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, 'Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.' Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives."

Analysis:

• •Not defensive - Muhammad attacked them
• •Jews posed no threat to Medina
• •This established pattern for treatment of non-Muslims

D. Assassinations

The Assassination of Asma bint Marwan:

From Ibn Ishaq's Sirat:

• •Asma was a poetess who mocked Muhammad in verse
• •Muhammad asked, "Will no one rid me of this daughter of Marwan?"
• •Umayr ibn Adi volunteered
• •He entered her house at night and killed her while she was nursing her baby

Muhammad's response (according to Ibn Ishaq): When Umayr returned, Muhammad said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O `Umayr!"

The Assassination of Abu 'Afak:

From Ibn Ishaq's Sirat:

• •Abu 'Afak was 120-year-old poet who criticized Muhammad
• •Muhammad asked, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?"
• •Salim ibn `Umayr volunteered and killed him

The Assassination of Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf:

Hadith (Sahih Bukhari 3032): "Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, 'Who is willing to kill Kab bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?' Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, 'O Allah's Messenger! Would you like that I kill him?' The Prophet said, 'Yes,' Muhammad bin Maslama said, 'Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Ka`b).' The Prophet said, 'You may say it.'"

Analysis:

• •Muhammad approved deception to murder critic
• •Ka'b had written poetry against Muhammad
• •Not killed in battle but through assassination

The pattern: Multiple assassinations of critics, poets, and opponents - not in battle but through targeted killings.

Key Sources:

• •Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Guillaume translation)
• •Qureshi, Answering Jihad, pp. 85-107

E. Treatment of Apostates

Qur'an 4:89: "They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away [i.e., refuse], then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper."

Hadith on Apostasy (Sahih Bukhari 6922): "Narrated Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn `Abbas who said, 'If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Messenger forbade it, saying, "Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire)." I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Messenger, "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."'"

Hadith (Sahih Bukhari 6878): "Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, 'The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.'"

Analysis:

• •Death penalty for leaving Islam
• •Codified in Islamic law (Sharia)
• •Still enforced in some Muslim countries today

Modern applications:

• •Saudi Arabia: Death penalty for apostasy
• •Iran: Death penalty for apostasy
• •Pakistan: Blasphemy laws (death penalty)
• •Many Muslims who convert to Christianity face death threats

Muslim claim: "The violent verses only applied defensively"

Problems with this claim:

• •
  The text doesn't say "only defensively"

  • 9:29 says fight until they pay jizya (tax) - this is offensive
  • 8:39 says fight until Islam dominates - this is offensive
• •
  Classical scholars didn't interpret it defensively

  • Ibn Kathir, Al-Tabari, Imam al-Shafi'i all understood these as offensive jihad commands
  • The four schools of Islamic law (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali) all codified offensive jihad
• •
  Islamic history shows offensive conquest

  • Within 100 years of Muhammad's death, Islam conquered:
    • Arabian Peninsula
    • Persia
    • Egypt
    • North Africa
    • Spain
  • These weren't defensive wars
• •
  Muhammad's own example

  • Conquered Mecca (630 AD)
  • Attacked Khaybar (unprovoked)
  • Sent armies to Syria before his death
  • Planned invasion of Byzantine Empire

Quote from Ibn Khaldun (14th century Muslim historian): "In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force."

The debate: Do terrorists represent "true Islam"?

The problem with "true Islam" arguments:

• • Both peaceful Muslims and violent jihadists cite Qur'an and hadith
• • Both claim to represent "true Islam"
• • The texts themselves contain both peaceful and violent teachings

What terrorists cite:

• •
  Qur'anic verses:

  • 9:5 (Sword Verse)
  • 9:29 (Fight Jews and Christians)
  • 8:12 (Strike necks)
  • 47:4 (Behead disbelievers)
• •
  Muhammad's example:

  • Conquests
  • Executions of prisoners
  • Treatment of apostates
  • Assassinations of critics
• •
  Classical Islamic law:

  • Offensive jihad doctrine
  • Dhimmi (second-class) status for non-Muslims
  • Hudud punishments (amputation, stoning, etc.)

The dilemma for moderate Muslims:

• • If they say terrorists misinterpret Qur'an, they must explain why terrorists' interpretation matches classical scholars
• • If they say classical scholars were wrong, they undermine Islamic tradition
• • If they say context matters, they must explain why Qur'an is considered timeless

Key insight from Qureshi: "The problem is not that terrorists are misinterpreting Islam. The problem is that they are interpreting it the same way classical scholars did - literally and completely."

Jesus's teaching:

• •"Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matthew 5:44)
• •"Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9)
• •"Put your sword away, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword" (Matthew 26:52)
• •"My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight" (John 18:36)

Jesus's example:

• •Never killed anyone
• •Never ordered violence
• •Died without fighting back
• •Forgave His executioners

Early Christianity:

• •Christians were martyred, not martyring others
• •Christians were persecuted, not persecuting
• •First 300 years: Christianity spread despite persecution, not through conquest
• •Early Christians were pacifists (see Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen)

The contrast:

• •Jesus died for His enemies
• •Muhammad killed His enemies
• •Christians were killed for their faith
• •Muslims killed for their faith
• •Christianity conquered through martyrdom
• •Islam conquered through military might

Historical divergence:

• •Yes, later "Christian" Crusades and Inquisition were evil
• •But they violated Jesus's teaching
• •Islamic conquests followed Muhammad's teaching and example

Why Islamic reform is difficult:

• •
  The Qur'an is considered eternal, uncreated word of Allah

  • Cannot be changed, updated, or reinterpreted freely
  • Muhammad is the "excellent example" for all time (33:21)
• •
  Abrogation doctrine

  • Later (violent) verses abrogate earlier (peaceful) verses
  • Reformers who cite peaceful verses are ignoring classical scholarship
• •
  The example of Muhammad

  • If Muhammad ordered killings, how can Muslims condemn them?
  • If Muhammad's ethics were "just cultural," why follow him today?
• •
  Sharia law

  • Codified in four schools of Islamic jurisprudence
  • Based on Qur'an and Sunnah (Muhammad's example)
  • Reforming Sharia means rejecting traditional Islam

Contrast with Christianity:

• • Jesus never sinned (even Muslims affirm this)
• • If Christians behave badly, they're violating Jesus's teaching
• • If Muslims behave violently, they can claim to follow Muhammad's example

Muslim argument: "That violence was normal for 7th century Arabia"

Response:

• •If it was "just cultural," then Islam isn't universally applicable
• •Jews and Christians in same era had different ethics (no offensive jihad doctrine)
• •The Qur'an claims to be timeless - can't dismiss parts as "cultural"
• •Islamic law codified these practices as permanent, not temporary

Books:

• •Qureshi, Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward (2016)
• •Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad (2006)
• •Robert Spencer, The Complete Infidel's Guide to ISIS (2015)
• •David Wood, Muhammad: The "Perfect" Man? (pamphlet)
• •Bill Warner, Sharia Law for Non-Muslims (2010)

Primary Islamic Sources:

• •Sahih Bukhari (English translation)
• •Sahih Muslim (English translation)
• •Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Guillaume translation)
• •Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari (English translation)
• •Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (commentary on Qur'an)

Websites:

• •Answering Islam (www.answering-islam.org)
• •Acts 17 Apologetics (David Wood)

---

Muslims claim:

• •The Qur'an is perfectly preserved, unchanged since revelation
• •Not a single letter has been altered
• •The Qur'an is the uncreated, eternal word of Allah
• •Muhammad received it through angel Gabriel
• •The Qur'an is miraculous in its language and content

A. The Compilation Process

During Muhammad's Lifetime (610-632 AD):

The problem: The Qur'an was NOT compiled into a single book during Muhammad's lifetime.

What we know from Islamic sources:

• • Revelations were written on various materials (palm leaves, stones, bones, leather)
• • Some memorized by companions
• • No official collection existed
• • Muhammad died without leaving a complete written Qur'an

Hadith evidence (Sahih Bukhari 4986): "Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed. Then Abu Bakr said (to me), 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Messenger. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it (in one book).' By Allah! If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier on me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an."

Analysis:

• • Collection happened AFTER Muhammad's death
• • Zaid bin Thabit found it extremely difficult
• • Material was scattered, fragmentary

B. The First Collection Under Abu Bakr (633-634 AD)

The context: Many huffaz (memorizers) were killed in the Battle of Yamama.

Umar's concern (from Sahih Bukhari 4986): "The people have been killed in great numbers in the Battle of Yamama, and I am afraid that more of the huffaz will be killed on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost."

The problem: If the Qur'an was perfectly preserved through memorization, why the fear of losing it?

The process:

• • Zaid bin Thabit collected from multiple sources
• • Compared written fragments with memorizations
• • Produced one master copy (mushaf)
• • Kept by Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Hafsa (Umar's daughter)

C. The Standardization Under Uthman (650-656 AD)

The crisis: Different Islamic regions were using different versions of the Qur'an.

Hadith evidence (Sahih Bukhari 4987): "Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Qur'an) as Jews and the Christians did before.'"

What Uthman did:

• • Obtained Hafsa's copy
• • Made several copies of this version
• • Sent copies to major Islamic centers
• • BURNED ALL OTHER VERSIONS

Hadith (Sahih Bukhari 4987): "So `Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt."

The critical questions:

• • Why did different versions exist?
• • What was in the burned versions?
• • How do we know Uthman's version was correct?
• • If the Qur'an was "perfectly preserved," why standardization needed?

D. The Evidence of Variants

1. The Missing Verses

Hadith on the Verse of Stoning (Sahih Muslim 1691a): "Umar said: 'Allah sent Muhammad with the truth and revealed the Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of stoning to death (for married persons who commit adultery). We did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Messenger did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him. I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, "By Allah, we do not find the Verse of stoning in Allah's Book," and thus they will go astray by abandoning an obligation which Allah has revealed.'"

Analysis:

• • Umar (second caliph) affirms a verse existed but is now missing from the Qur'an
• • The verse commanded stoning for adultery
• • It was "revealed" but not in the current Qur'an

The Verse About the Suckling:

Hadith (Sahih Muslim 1452a): "Aisha reported that it had been revealed in the Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle died and it was before that time (found) in the Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims)."

Another hadith (Sunan Ibn Majah 1944): "Aishah said: 'The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.'"

Analysis:

• • Verses were "revealed" but are not in current Qur'an
• • Explanation: A SHEEP ate the paper?
• • This contradicts the claim of perfect preservation

2. The Qira'at (Variant Readings)

The reality: There are seven (or ten) canonical "readings" (qira'at) of the Qur'an recognized today.

Examples of variants:

Surah 2:158:

• • Warsh reading: "faman hajja l-bayta aw i'tamara"
• • Hafs reading: slightly different voweling

Surah 5:54:

• • Warsh: "yuqātilūnahum" (they fight)
• • Hafs: slightly different

The problem: These are not just vowel differences (which Arabic often omits in writing). Some involve different consonants, which changes meaning.

Muslim response: "These are all valid readings that go back to Muhammad"

Counter:

• • If God's eternal word has multiple valid readings, it's not perfectly preserved
• • Some readings contradict others in meaning
• • How do we know which reading is correct?

Key Source:

• • Ahmad Ali al-Imam, Variant Readings of the Quran: A Critical Study of their Historical and Linguistic Origins (2006)

E. The Sana'a Manuscripts

The discovery (1972):

• • Ancient Qur'an manuscripts found in Yemen
• • Dated to 7th-8th century (early)
• • Contained significant variants from standard Qur'an

What was found:

• • Different word order
• • Different words
• • Additional text
• • Omitted text

Significance:

• • Shows Qur'an was NOT perfectly preserved
• • Early manuscripts differ from standard text
• • Uthman's standardization didn't eliminate all variants

Muslim response:

• • Initially suppressed/denied
• • Later claimed they were "notes" not Qur'an
• • But they follow Qur'anic text structure

Key Sources:

• • Gerd R. Puin, "Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in Sana'a" in The Qur'an as Text (1996)
• • Behnam Sadeghi & Mohsen Goudarzi, "Ṣanʿāʾ 1 and the Origins of the Qurʾān" in Der Islam 87 (2012)

F. The Doctrine of Abrogation (Revisited)

The internal contradiction:

• • Qur'an claims to be perfect, eternal word of God
• • But later verses "abrogate" (cancel) earlier verses
• • Qur'an 2:106: "We do not abrogate a verse... except that We bring forth [one] better than it"

The problem:

• • If the Qur'an is eternal and perfect, why does God need to revise it?
• • How can God's eternal word be "better" or "worse"?

Examples of abrogation:

• •
  Alcohol:

  • First, permitted (16:67)
  • Then, discouraged (4:43)
  • Finally, forbidden (5:90)
• •
  Qibla (prayer direction):

  • First, toward Jerusalem (2:142-144)
  • Then, toward Mecca (2:144)
• •
  Fighting:

  • First, peaceful (many verses)
  • Then, defensive fighting (2:190)
  • Finally, offensive fighting (9:5, 9:29)

The implications:

• • God changed His mind?
• • Or Muhammad made it up as situations changed?

G. The Satanic Verses Incident

The account (from Al-Tabari's History):

Muhammad was in Mecca, desperate for peace with Meccans. While reciting Surah 53, Satan allegedly caused him to recite verses praising the pagan goddesses Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat:

"These are the exalted gharaniq [cranes/swans], and their intercession is hoped for."

What happened next:

• • Muhammad prostrated in worship
• • Meccans were pleased - thought Muhammad accepted their gods
• • Later, Muhammad said Angel Gabriel corrected him
• • The verses were removed and replaced

Current Surah 53:19-23: "So have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza? And Manat, the third - the other one? Is the male for you and for Him the female? That, then, is an unjust division."

The problem:

• • If Muhammad could be deceived by Satan about revelation, how can we trust ANY of the Qur'an?
• • The incident is in early Islamic sources (Tabari, Ibn Sa'd)
• • Later Muslims reject it as impossible - but it's in their own sources

Muslim responses:

• • "It's a weak tradition" - but it's in multiple early sources and fits criterion of embarrassment
• • "It's impossible for Satan to deceive a prophet" - but Qur'an 22:52 seems to acknowledge it can happen

Key Sources:

• • Al-Tabari, History of the Prophets and Kings Vol. 6
• • Shahab Ahmed, "Ibn Taymiyyah and the Satanic Verses" in Studia Islamica (1998)
• • William Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Mecca (1953), pp. 100-109

H. The Qur'an's Self-Contradictions

Example 1: Can God have a son?

• • Qur'an denies God has a son (many verses)
• • Qur'an 19:35: "It is not befitting to Allah that He should beget a son"
• • But Jesus is called "Messiah, Jesus son of Mary" (Masih Isa ibn Maryam)
• • And Jesus is called "Word of God" (Kalimat Allah)
• • And Jesus is called "Spirit from God" (Ruh min Allah)

Example 2: Creation timeline

• • Surah 7:54: Created in 6 days
• • Surah 41:9-12: Created in 2+4+2 = 8 days

Example 3: Can Allah be seen?

• • Surah 6:103: "No vision can grasp Him"
• • Surah 75:22-23: "Some faces that Day will be radiant, looking at their Lord"

Example 4: Pharaoh's salvation

• • Surah 10:92: Allah saved Pharaoh's body as a sign
• • History: Pharaoh drowned (no salvation)

Muslim response: "These aren't contradictions if you understand Arabic/context"

Counter: The apologetics required to harmonize these rivals Christian attempts to harmonize the Gospels - yet Muslims criticize biblical "contradictions."

I. The Challenge Verse

Qur'an 2:23: "And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful."

The challenge: Produce something like the Qur'an to prove it's not from God.

The problem with this challenge:

• •
  Purely subjective: Who judges if something is "like" the Qur'an?

  • Literary quality is subjective
  • Muslims will always claim nothing matches it
• •
  Circular reasoning:

  • "The Qur'an is miraculous because nothing can match it"
  • "How do you know nothing can match it?"
  • "Because the Qur'an says so"
• •
  Similar challenges fail:

  • Pre-Islamic Arabic poetry (Mu'allaqat) is considered by literary scholars to match or exceed Qur'anic eloquence
  • Modern Arabic poets have produced comparable works
  • Muslims simply dismiss them as "not matching"
• • Language barriers: Non-Arabic speakers can't judge Arabic eloquence
• • Historical bias: 7th century Arabs were steeped in oral tradition - of course they found the Qur'an's rhyming prose impressive

Comparison: Imagine the Book of Mormon challenging people to produce something as amazing. Mormons would always claim nothing matches it - same logical fallacy.

The irony: Muslims criticize biblical variants while the Qur'an has similar (or worse) textual problems, but these are hidden or denied rather than studied openly.

Muslim claim: The Qur'an contains scientific facts unknown in 7th century, proving divine origin.

Common examples:

• •
  Embryology (Surah 23:12-14):

  • Claim: Qur'an describes embryonic development stages
  • Reality: Greek physician Galen (2nd century AD) described same stages
  • The Qur'an's description mirrors Galen, including his errors
• •
  Expanding universe (Surah 51:47):

  • Claim: Qur'an says universe is expanding
  • Reality: Verse is ambiguous; could mean many things
  • Translation: "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander"
  • Problem: This could mean God is powerful, not that universe expands
• •
  Honey has healing properties (Surah 16:69):

  • Claim: Qur'an reveals medicinal value of honey
  • Reality: This was well-known in ancient world (used by Egyptians, Greeks, etc.)
• •
  Fingerprints are unique (Surah 75:4):

  • Claim: Qur'an mentions fingertips, implying knowledge of fingerprints
  • Reality: Verse just says God can recreate fingertips
  • Massive eisegesis (reading into text what isn't there)

The pattern:

• • Vague verses reinterpreted in light of modern science
• • When science changes, interpretation changes
• • Clear scientific errors ignored

Scientific errors in Qur'an:

• • Sun sets in muddy spring (Surah 18:86)
• • Mountains prevent earthquakes (Surah 16:15) - Actually mountains form at fault lines where earthquakes occur
• • Stars are missiles against demons (Surah 67:5)
• • Bones form before flesh (Surah 23:14) - Actually they develop simultaneously
• • Semen comes from between backbone and ribs (Surah 86:6-7) - Anatomically false

The "Bucailleism" problem:

• • Named after Maurice Bucaille, who started this trend
• • David Wood calls it "vague verse-ology": taking vague verses and reinterpreting them to match modern science
• • Same method can "prove" Nostradamus predicted the future

Key Sources:

• • Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 197-208
• • David Wood, "The Quran and Modern Science: A Refutation of Maurice Bucaille"
• • Hamza Andreas Tzortzis (Muslim apologist) admitted in 2013: "Linking the Qur'an to contemporary science is not a necessary or sufficient strategy to relate to non-muslims or Muslims"

The dilemma:

• • If the Qur'an is uncreated and eternal, how does abrogation work?
• • If the Qur'an was perfectly preserved, why did Uthman burn variants?
• • If the Qur'an is God's final word, why are there missing verses?
• • If the Qur'an is miraculous, why does it contain errors?
• • If the Qur'an is clear (15:1), why do Muslims disagree on interpretation?

The deeper problem: The Qur'an's entire authority rests on it being perfectly preserved, but Islamic sources themselves admit it wasn't.

Books:

• •Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, pp. 197-228
• •Qureshi, No God but One: Allah or Jesus?, pp. 145-178
• •David Wood, The Quran: A Short, Simple, Shocking Guide (2022)
• •Jay Smith, "The Quran: Its History and Corruption" (lecture series)
• •Robert Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist? (2012)

Primary Islamic Sources:

• •Sahih Bukhari, Book 61 (Virtues of the Qur'an)
• •Sahih Muslim, relevant sections
• •Al-Tabari, History
• •Ibn Hisham, Life of Muhammad

Academic Sources:

• •Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Quran (1937)
• •Theodor Nöldeke, The History of the Qur'an (1860; revised and expanded 2013)
• •John Wansbrough, Quranic Studies (1977)

Websites:

• •Answering Islam (www.answering-islam.org)
• •Jay Smith YouTube channel
• •Acts 17 Apologetics (David Wood)

---

When engaging with these materials together as friends from different faith traditions, remember:

• • Relationship first: Your friendship matters more than winning arguments
• • Mutual humility: Both should present evidence and perspectives without condescension
• • Common ground: Start with shared beliefs (one God, prophets, moral law, reverence for Jesus)
• • Ask questions: Genuine curiosity leads to deeper understanding than debate tactics
• • Show respect: Even while disagreeing, honor each other as people of faith seeking truth
• • Listen well: Understanding each other's perspectives deeply matters more than rapid rebuttals
• • Pray/Seek guidance: Both should approach these conversations with hearts open to truth, wherever it leads

The Socratic approach (as modeled in Qureshi's interfaith dialogues):

• • Ask questions that lead both of you to think deeply through challenging topics
• • "How do you reconcile X with Y?"
• • "What evidence convinced you of Z?"
• • "If that's true, what would we expect to find?"

Example questions for mutual exploration:

• • "How do Muslims understand the Uthman standardization in light of claims about perfect preservation?"
• • "How do both traditions navigate applying ancient practices in modern contexts?"
• • "What do Muslims believe Jesus meant when he made statements that led to accusations of blasphemy?"
• • "What criteria do we each use to evaluate truth claims in our respective traditions?"
• • "How do Christians reconcile the problem of evil with an all-powerful, loving God?"
• • "What are the hardest questions each of us faces within our own faith?"

Beyond historical questions, the most profound difference lies in how each tradition understands humanity's relationship with God:

Islamic view: Salvation through submission and good deeds, with hope in Allah's mercy

Christian view: Salvation through God's grace in Christ, offering assurance through faith

These differing understandings of how humans are reconciled to God shape everything else in both traditions and merit deep, respectful exploration together.

Books for understanding both perspectives:

• • Qureshi, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus (a Muslim's journey exploring Christianity - compelling personal narrative)
• • Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict (historical evidence for Christian claims)
• • Ravi Zacharias, Jesus Among Other Gods (comparative religious philosophy)
• • Martin Accad, Sacred Misinterpretation (Christian-Muslim dialogue from both perspectives)

Online Resources:

• • Answering Islam (www.answering-islam.org) - Christian apologetics perspective
• • Nabeel Qureshi's archived content (articles and videos on interfaith dialogue)
• • RZIM (www.rzim.org) - Resources on comparative worldviews

Both of you are made in God's image and are sincere seekers of truth. The goal of these conversations isn't to "win" but to pursue truth together in love, with mutual respect for each other's deeply held convictions.

Quote from Qureshi: "The best evangelism is friendship. Share your life, your heart, and your Lord. Let them see Jesus in you, not just arguments about Jesus."

May your friendship deepen through honest dialogue, and may both of you grow in understanding as you explore these profound questions together.

---