Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus: A Devout Muslim Encounters Christianity

by Nabeel Qureshi

But for now, David and I were focused on the first point, the textual integrity of the Bible, specifically the New Testament. Like most Muslims, I was not concerned with the Old Testament nearly as much as I was with the New Testament. The way I saw it, the Old Testament mostly agreed with the Quran: it named many of the same prophets, it showed prophets going to war against polytheists, and it did not say anything about the Trinity.

“Looks like I was right about whole sections of the Bible being interpolations. Bible scholars are saying that the end of Mark is not original, and neither is the story in John about the woman caught in adultery.

considered his words, but the very fact that there were multiple versions continued to bother me. It meant that the words of the Bible were not agreed upon. “Aren’t the exact words important, David? As a Muslim, I believe that the Quran is exactly the same as it was dictated to Muhammad. Not a single word has ever been changed.38 From what you are telling me, it seems like you think the exact words of the Bible do not matter.” “The words do matter, but they matter because they constitute a message. The message is paramount. That’s why the Bible can be translated. If the inspiration were tied to words themselves as opposed to their message, then we could never translate the Bible, and if we could never translate it, how could it be a book for all people?”

“The words do matter, but they matter because they constitute a message. The message is paramount. That’s why the Bible can be translated. If the inspiration were tied to words themselves as opposed to their message, then we could never translate the Bible, and if we could never translate it, how could it be a book for all people?”

Even though David was making plain sense, I didn’t like being in a corner. “I already told you, the end of Mark, a story in John, and the interpolation in first John five about the Trinity are all examples of how the Bible has been changed.” “And I told you, virtually no scholar considers those segments as parts of the Bible anymore. You need to show me a major change in something we actually consider a part of the Bible.”

“That’s conjecture again, Nabeel. ‘What if ’ does not constitute much of an argument. What’s the claim? Where’s the evidence? If there are no specifics, there’s no argument.”

“There is no conceivable model for the New Testament to have been changed in any significant sense.”

David turned to me in mock surprise. “But, Nabeel! How can you ask such a thing? Doesn’t the Quran say the Injil is the word of Allah?” It was clear that David had been studying Islam so he could understand me better. And he was right. My position was not common among Muslims, who often believe that the gospels of the New Testament are the Injil.

Injil: The book that Muslims believe Allah sent to Jesus, often considered to be the gospels of the New Testament

“I’m not convinced the Quran was talking about the gospels in the New Testament. Maybe it was referring to another book given to Jesus, one that we don’t have anymore.” I was proposing a view that I had heard espoused by Muslim debaters.

“There were other gospels, to be sure, but they all came much later, in the mid-second century or afterward. The four gospels in the New Testament are all first century, right after Jesus. That’s one reason why the early Christians chose them.”

I tried advancing my case. “But what if the Injil was another gospel, one revealed to Jesus, and it was lost after his death?” “There are at least two critical problems with that, Nabeel. First, it’s pure conjecture. ‘What if ’ is not much of an argument if there is no evidence. Second, you know the Quran tells Christians to ‘judge by the Injil.’39 That means they still had it in Muhammad’s day. The Injil is not a lost scripture.”

I sat up to consider this point. “Well, even if they’re the best, that doesn’t mean they’re any good.” “True, but these books were written shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion, in the lifetime of the disciples. That’s far better than most other biographies. For example, the main biographies about Alexander the Great were written around four hundred years after his death.40 If we are confident we know anything about Alexander, we should be exponentially more confident in what we know about Jesus.” “If we are going to learn about Jesus’ life, we must turn to the gospels because they are the most likely to be accurate.” “Yeah, but being better than other biographies doesn’t mean that the gospels are trustworthy.” “You’re not getting me. It’s not just that the gospels are temporally closer to Jesus than other biographies are to their subjects, but they are so close that eyewitnesses were still alive at the time. Given that the gospels were circulating within Christian communities, the eyewitnesses must have heard them and contributed to them.” I smiled. “That sounds like conjecture to me, David. Where’s the evidence?” “Well, early church fathers record that this is exactly what happened. According to Papias, an author writing around AD 100, the gospel of Mark is based on Peter’s eyewitness testimony.41 Papias also refers to John and Matthew as disciples.42 So it’s more than conjecture that eyewitnesses contributed to the gospels; it’s recorded history that they actually produced t...

“It turns out that during an excavation, archaeologists found an inscription dating from the time of Jesus that mentioned a second Lysanias, one who was the tetrarch of Abila. This proved that skeptics are sometimes too quick to criticize Luke and that Luke was a reliable source of ancient information.”

Insistent, David responded, “Nabeel, with the level of skepticism you’re proposing today, I’m not sure you could hold to any beliefs. We’ll see when we get there, but for now, do you realize we’re just working with levels of probability? There’s no such thing as absolute certainty, not in the real world.” “Yeah, that’s true.” “Good. So, the best explanation by far is that the gospels are a reliable source for Jesus’ life, unquestionably more reliable than anything else we have. Can you at least agree to that?”

“I don’t know, Nabeel. Even science is inductive, relying on observations and best explanations, not always deductive conclusions. I don’t think what we’re discussing is too conceptually different.”

Historical Jesus: Jesus as he can be known through historical records

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s book, Jesus in India.

Shroud of Turin: A controversial relic, it is often believed to be the burial cloth of Jesus himself, supernaturally bearing his image

“After the flogging, victims were nailed through their arms to a crossbeam. The nails would go right through the median nerve, causing extreme pain and incapacitating the hands. A seven-inch nail would then be driven through both feet, and the crucifixion victim would be made to hang from his arms, a position that makes it nearly impossible to breathe. He would have to use his little remaining energy to push against the nail in his feet so he could breathe out. He could breathe in as he sagged back down, but he would have to push back up before breathing out again. When all his energy was drained and he could not push up any longer, he would die of asphyxiation.”

I felt my face flush. From my earlier conversations with David, I knew arguing against the textual integrity of the New Testament was difficult, but that was not what I found embarrassing. Rather, it was clear to me that Abba was cherry-picking verses to defend his views. I decided to speak up. “Abba, I think they’re saying that, unless we have good reason to discredit a specific verse, it might be inconsistent to use ones we like and ignore the ones we don’t like.” Abba turned to me, utterly stunned that I would contravene his authority. He looked betrayed, and I regretted my words.

I let these words sink in. Soon, Abba indicated that it was time to leave. I wanted to stay and talk some more, but Abba was firm. The silence during the ride home served to echo Mike’s concluding words. It seemed to me that if I wanted to hold onto an Islamic version of Jesus’ crucifixion — whether through the substitution theory or the theistic swoon theory — I would have to discard history.

It was then that I noticed something for the first time: the books Abba had on Jesus’ life were all polemical.

Historical method: Criteria and techniques used by historians to systematically investigate the past Criterion of multiple attestation: A principle of the historical method that posits that a recorded event is more likely to be historically accurate if it is recorded in multiple independent sources Criterion of early testimony: A principle of the historical method that posits that early accounts of an event are more likely to be accurate than later accounts, all else being equal

Having argued sufficiently for the first fact, Mike proceeded to the next. “Fact number two: The empty tomb. An impressive 75 percent of scholars who study the subject acknowledge the empty tomb.” Mike explained that there were multiple reasons to believe that Jesus’ tomb was empty a few days after his crucifixion. First, the Christian movement was founded on the principle that Jesus had been raised and was no longer dead. Christianity began in Jerusalem, and if Jesus’ body had still been in the tomb, the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem could have easily ended Christianity by parading Jesus’ body throughout the city. That they didn’t do it lends weight to the position that the tomb was empty.

Asbab-an-nuzul: A body of Islamic literature purporting to detail the circumstances of specific Quranic revelations

Nafl: Optional prayers designed to invoke the help of Allah or draw the worshiper closer to Him

Synoptics: A collective term for the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke

It was called The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, and though this book was also written by McDowell,

Khutba: A sermon, usually the Muslim Sabbath sermons on Friday

Tauheed: The Islamic doctrine of Allah’s absolute unity and self-reliance

Later, I revisited the doctrine of the Trinity with a fresh perspective. What do Christians mean when they say God is three in one? Three what in one what? I looked it up in a book called The Forgotten Trinity by James White, and it all made more sense after I realized a triune entity was possible.

Doctrine of the Trinity: The belief that God is one in being and three in person Being: The quality or essence that makes something what it is Person: The quality or essence that makes someone who he is

Dawah: The practice of inviting people to Islam

Substitutionary atonement: The doctrine that Jesus is able to take and pay for the sins of man.

Soteriology: The doctrine or study of salvation

“God is not forcing ‘some random person’ to suffer for our sins. He is paying for our sins Himself.” I was confused. “Who is the son?” “We are the son, and God is the father. We have incurred a debt against God, and we can’t pay Him back. So in His mercy, He pays our sins for us. The wages of our sin is death, and He died on our behalf, balancing the accounts.”

Muslims believe that salvation is a matter of doing more good deeds than bad. To me, sin was bad, but not that bad.

For me, as for most Muslims, an uncritically reverential and fulsome assessment of Islam was a given.

Even though every Muslim would quickly admit that Muhammad is human, in theory fallible like any other man, they often revere him as flawless. To that end, Islamic theology has accorded him the title al-Insan al-Kamil, “the man who has attained perfection.”

Mike started. “Nabeel, I have a question for you. I have heard it said that Islam was spread by the sword, but you’re saying Muhammad engaged in only defensive battles. Can you tell me why your position is more accurate?” This question was common enough, so I quickly responded, “The Quran teaches la-iqraha fi-deen.”77 Imams often recited the Arabic for an extra air of authority, so I did the same. “This verse is translated ‘there is no compulsion in religion,’ and Muhammad followed the Quran so closely he was practically a living version of it. It would make no sense to say that Muhammad spread Islam by the sword when he preached that there is no compulsion in religion.”

“But Nabeel, there are other verses in the Quran, like ‘slay the infidels wherever you find them.’78 How do we know the verse you quoted takes precedence?” Fortunately, I had heard this issue explained in a recent khutba, so I had a ready response. “That verse refers to a very specific circumstance, when the polytheists of Mecca had breached a contract with Muslims. It’s not a general principle. The general principle is peace.” Then Mike asked his most simple, yet most devastating, question: “How do you know that?” “I’m sorry?” “How do you know the historical context of the Quran?” “From hadith, books that record traditions about Muhammad.” “But how do you know those are trustworthy? Keep in mind, Nabeel, that I’m a historian. These are questions I ask of historical documents, even when critically investigating Christianity. I can rely on the gospels because the four of them were written very soon after Jesus’ life, in the community of eyewitnesses.

“Mike, you don’t know the people that you’re questioning. These were great men and women with sharp intellects and honest hearts. It is by virtue of their character that the hadith are reliable.” “You’re right, Nabeel,” David interjected. “Mike doesn’t know these people. But what he’s saying is that neither do you. The sources are just too late, and we have no reliable way to test the character of the people who passed on the stories.”

Even the earliest records of Muhammad’s life are altered versions of previous stories that were also altered.

This was not the picture of Muhammad I had come to know. It was raw, far less flattering. Here was an unfiltered, or at least a less-filtered, version of Muhammad. What’s more, there was a cross-reference to another hadith in Sahih Bukhari that elaborated even further: 9.111. I retrieved volume nine from Abba’s bookcase, found hadith 111, and read through it.

I was shocked. Was Sahih Bukhari really saying Muhammad contemplated suicide?

These stories came from sources that built the historical foundations of Islam. How much could I dismiss without causing the foundations to crumble?

Put another way, I realized that if I kept denying the reliability of the traditions, I had no basis for calling him a prophet in the first place. I could no longer proclaim the shahada, not unless there was something else, something other than history, that could vindicate Muhammad. There was only one way out of the dilemma: the Quran.

Imagine my incredulity when I discovered an answer to the Quran’s challenge, Al-Furqan al-Haqq. Translated “the true measure of discernment,” it is a book that responds to the challenge of the Quran by writing Christian teachings in Quranic style.96 This book apparently reproduced the Quranic style so effectively that some who recited it aloud in public areas were thanked by Arab Muslims for having recited the Quran itself.

Bucailleism: The technique of referring to the Quran for miraculously advanced scientific truths in order to defend its divine origin