Violence in the Bible and the Qur'an
Violence in the Bible and the Qur'an
A Christian Perspective
After the events of September 11th, the issue of violence and religion has once again come into intense discussions and debate. As soon as Christians and others of good will condemn the Islamic justification and foundation for resorting to violence in the name of God—justifications found both in the Qur'an and the life of prophet Muhammad—we are quickly told that the Bible (especially the Old Testament scriptures) and Christian history are also filled with violence and that we should not single out Islam or the Qur'an in this regard.
For example, Fareed Zakaria, in his report in Newsweek, entitled "Why they hate us: The roots of Islamic rage—and what we can do about it" writes, "The historian Paul Johnson has argued that Islam is intrinsically an intolerant and violent religion. Other scholars have disagreed, pointing out that Islam condemns the slaughter of innocents and prohibits suicide. Nothing will be solved by searching for ‘true Islam’ or quoting the Qur'an. The Qur'an is a vast, vague book, filled with poetry and contradictions (much like the Bible). You can find in it condemnations of war and incitements to struggle, beautiful expressions of tolerance and stern pictures against unbelievers. Quotations from it usually tell us more about the person who selected the passages than about Islam. Every religion is compatible with the best and the worst of humankind. Through its long history, Christianity has supported inquisitions and anti-Semitism, but also human rights and social welfare."
How can Christians respond to such counter-charges? Are Christians and their scriptures no different than Muslim terrorists and others who use violence in the name of God to destroy their enemies? What can we say in light of our own dark Church history and also graphic passages found in portions of the Old Testament that do not seem to cast any better light on the roots and actions of our own faith tradition? The following are some of my reflections on these questions. Time does not allow me to develop each point fully, but I hope that they can be of some help and bring some clarification to these issues.
- As Christians we must be very emphatic that Christians have and
continue to do many shameful things in the name of Christ, BUT the issue
is this: Christians who use violence in the name of God to destroy their
enemies have no justification for their actions from Jesus Christ, his
life and teachings as found in the New Testament. Whereas, Muslims who are
engaged in violence and destruction of anyone who opposes Islam, have
ample justification for their actions from the Qur'an and the life and
sayings of prophet Muhammad. It is beyond the scope of this paper to quote
verses and passages from the Qur'an, the Hadith and biographies of prophet
Muhammad (the reader can refer to other articles on this web site, e.g. in
the sections
Muhammad and his enemies or
Islamic
Terrorism), but suffice it to say that it is beyond doubt that the
prophet of Islam did encourage the killing and intimidation of his
enemies, not just in self defense as it is commonly reported by Muslims,
but in the promotion of the cause of God and the spread of Islam. Needles
to say, the actions of the prophet were in direct contradiction to the
teachings and actions of Jesus Christ and his disciples. So the point is
not that Christians have never resorted to violence and other horrible
atrocities. They have indeed committed many horrible acts, but when they
have done this, they have betrayed the very person that they claim to
follow. But when Muslims commit such acts, they can in fact claim that
they are following the example of their prophet and thus fulfilling the
will of God and promoting His cause. That, certainly, is a big difference!
- When we turn our attention to the Old Testament and look at passages
that are found in the book of Joshua regarding the extermination of the
Canaanites living in the land, we can still notice a dramatic difference
in those passages and the events in the early history of Islam. The
primary theme in those accounts is the issue of God's holiness. Even
hundreds of years before the invasion of Canaan, God had told Abraham that
the sins of the people living in the land had not reached its limit, but
when the inhabitants had defiled the land to its limit, the land was going
to "throw them up." In fact, God later warned the nation of Israel to be
careful in not repeating the sins of the previous people, otherwise the
land was going to throw them up too. So we see that God is using Israel as
an instrument of His justice to purge the land of its sinfulness and later
in history God used other nations like the Assyrians and the Babylonians
as His instruments to cleanse the land by destroying the people of Israel
for their sinfulness.
However, when one reads the early accounts of prophet Muhammad's raids and wars, not only one sees no mention of the theme of divine holiness and its opposition to sin, but the primary motivations that one constantly encounters are the looting of the enemies and the obtaining of booty and the spoils of war or the relief and pleasures of Paradise or conquering the enemies and spreading the rule of the prophet. I am not just repeating an old stereotypical charge against Islam. I have just finished reading the most ancient Muslim biography of prophet Muhammad, written by Ibn Ishaq in the second century of the Islamic era (translated by A. Guillaume and published by Oxford University Press in 1955). I truly encourage all Muslims and non-Muslims to read this book to see for themselves the violence in the actions of prophet Muhammad and his early followers.
- Another important point that we need to keep in mind is the fact that
the divine command for the destruction of the few cities of Canaan, was
for a specific people, a specific time and place and a specific purpose.
Nowhere in the later Old Testament period do we see God commanding the
nation of Israel to go and attack other pagan nations, either as
self-defense or as a way to promote faith in the true God of heaven and
earth. However, in the Qur'an, we encounter general commands to kill and
destroy the enemies of Islam that are applicable for all times and places
and people groups. It is beyond dispute that from the earliest times,
right after the death of the prophet, Muslim splinter groups began
fighting, killing and assassinating even each other, in the name of God.
The history of Islam, down to the present day is filled with the appeals
of various Muslims to ever-applicable Qur'anic passages to destroy and
kill their enemies.
- I would like to conclude this brief article by using a popular Islamic analogy. Muslims generally believe that since Islam is the final great monotheistic religion, it is superior in every respect to Judaism and Christianity. Living in the Middle East and growing up in a Muslim country, we were always told that Judaism was like elementary school, Christianity was like high school and Islam is like university. Each religion was from God, but each one became progressively higher and better. Now the question that we must ask is this, how can Islam claim to have a superior ethics to the New Testament, and yet resort back to the use and justification of violence, elements that were supposedly part of the early Jewish tradition? It seems that Islam not only has not improved on the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament in regard to the use of force, but that in fact Islam has gone back many steps in this regard.
I hope that the above comments have been helpful in clarifying some of the issues that we are facing these days regarding the use of violence in the Qur'an and the Bible. As Christians, we must not forget that the lens through which we must look at everything in life and even the Bible is the cross of Jesus Christ. Ultimately, it is the cross that defines for us who God is, what is He like and the means by which He is redeeming the world.
Related articles: The Goodness of God
Answering Islam Home Page
The World Trade Center towers in New York city are attacked...
September 11, 2001, another day that will live in infamy. The first thing I asked was, Who designed and built those buildings? They went down like a house of cards. The second thing I asked was, Did whoever committed this act know the buildings would collapse? It would seem they did, because to merely crash into them wouldn't have had enough impact, no pun intended. The third thing I asked was, Will anyone over here ever understand why this was done? This was a last-ditch scream for help or attention or understanding, or, put another way, it was an all-out declaration of war for our souls, by a people whose souls themselves have been imprisoned. The fourth thing, I asked for hope that our government in retaliation wouldn't do something stupid or barbaric that would reflect back upon all of us--like another UN-sponsored Iraq shooting--killing--gallery. The fifth thing I asked for, I admit it, was, If not Understanding, Victory; If not Wisdom, Humility.
Oh, and hey, you politicians--how 'bout fighting a real war this time, and actually trying to win...we'll all be watching...
Okay, that was a cheap shot, but it was oh so true. Is the puzzle beginning to fit together yet?
Of course, the killers are but the latest proxies of the "Evil Empire," eternally fighting their sick and dirty war against freedom and spirituality. When is the Free World going to ask itself why only "Capitalist" symbols and people who want freedom get blown up--whatever the garb--or "god"--of the killers? Cui bono--To whose profit? This thing started with Marx and Lenin and Stalin and Mao and it's not over yet until we WAKE UP.
That is why it is imperative that the correct enemy be engaged or we are setting ourselves--and the rest of the free world--upon a course for inexorable and final defeat. What They want is for us to engage the local-yokel Taliban and the Al Qua'da, or the Wahabbi sect of Islam. This would be a world-wide guerilla war that is probably unwinnable, and They know it. It could easily escalate into a full-blown religious war and a race war and, again, They know it. And it could last a century, and, in the end, we would lose. And They know that, too, and that's why They did it, of course.
Their plan--once again--is a masterful plan: All They have to do is stand back while all this is going on, offering verbal and sometimes token support to us, while covertly funding and arming and giving every other kind of aid to Their fanatical proxies as we are harried to death and ruin just like a wounded and tired lion beset upon by a pack of jackals.
They already have our heavy steel production, hello Comrade Mao. They've previously taken over the one country that was the main source of (precious stones and) exotic minerals--metals--that are required for jet engines and high-tech equipment, hello Comrade Mandela. They have bought or had given to Them by traitors in our own country our high-tech rocket and space and submarine and computer and nuclear technology--hello Comrades Clinton and Reno. Hey, Bill, ever hear of Benedict Arnold? you make him look like a Boy Scout!
What a Plan! They have the oil. They have our economy. They will indeed have us encircled, only to fall into Their clutches like a big fat ripe grapefruit, just like Lenin and Khrushchev boasted!
Yes, it is a Grand Plan. I guess one would have to say that, if America is going to fall. After all, it's better to lose because of your enemy's Grand Plan--it makes one appear a little less stupid.
But only if we are dumb enough to fight the wrong enemy.
The 'They' is Totalitarianism, Communism, Socialism and Materialism--all are the same, or of the same. When we are a sovereign and independent nation and to put ourselves under the sovereignty of the United Nations and to "ask" for Their help or Their "sanction" in this pivotal and monumental war is as stupid as the rooster asking the Fox to guard the hen house. I mean that exactly. The United Nations was started by Communists, run by Communists for the benefit of Communism and still is. The totalitarian countries in the United Nations--and the United Nations itself--are who are the enemy, who benefit from this debacle, from our fall.
Remember Korea? Remember Viet Nam? McNamara crumpled and apologized, but the silence is still deafening from his other co-conspirators...
Saddam Hussein is a straw man. As is disclosed elsewhere on this site (see War; Red Dragon Rising, Ch. 6, "A Present for Saddam"), China does his nuclear and germ-warfare work for him and the big stuff is most probably not in Iraq proper. Besides that, Iraq is a sovereign country, what right do we have to invade him--or bully or entice him into doing something stupid (like we did before, and he obediently invaded Kuwait)--and further decimate his country? There are other countries in his neighborhood which have more WMD ("weapons of mass destruction" and other toys) than he--why aren't They mentioned in this shouting match? Because They're the ones doing the shouting? Because he doesn't want anything to do with the UN? Except for his retro-dictatorial tendencies, you have to give him credit for being the leader of just about the last major country in the world to refuse to hand over its sovereignty to the UN goons. Does he know They'd one day turn around and enslave his country! Why don't we?
Are you shocked to hear me say that Iraq deserves our help to remake her into a free and prosperous country--that it does not deserve our murderous assault to reduce it to more rubble, greasing the slide into becoming another dictatorial socialist slave state? Do you want the United States of America to become--again--the monster's arm of the godless UN?
Please re-read the previous paragraph. Does it stand up to the incessant agit-prop to "Bomb Saddam!" that's being pounded into our senses day-in and day-out on all the media? (See War; Council on Foreign Relations)
I say we should make our own decisions and stand tall on our own two feet and act in the manner we know to be best for all. There are a lot of people in America who know the right thing to do; unfortunately, very few of them are in the government or the state department or the media.
I repeat: The only way to come out on top is not to deplete our dwindling resources and morale chasing a small band of fanatics, or bombing tents, but by confronting the correct enemy right from the start. If the Communist countries were confronted--predominantly China, who is the largest terrorist cell on this planet--we stand an excellent chance of prevailing, and this is only because right now we are still stronger than They. Being Communists, just about all They understand is force. Give Them one more year and They will have grown in strength so much--thanks again, Comrade Bill--They will not back down next time, and suddenly--almost magically, in the blink of an eye--all the Communist-controlled nations will coalesce and show Their fangs and become one against us (and what's left of the Free World). Their true nature will be manifest for all the world to see, instead of hiding and masking it behind duplicity and smiles.
This will be a rude awakening for a lot of people.
But not for others.
--your humble Scribe
September, 2001