Jesus and Muhammad – BIG Differences!

There is a significant difference between the founders of the world’s two greatest religions – Christianity and Islam. The differences are significant and cannot be ignored if you believe the religion is or should be a reflection of its founder.  Let’s examine the facts, the truth of each founder, and the influence they have on the world they impact.

We’ll start with Islam:  Muhammad was a sinner. In Suras 40:55, 47:19, and 48:1-2, Allah tells Muhammad to ask for forgiveness for his sins (translated frailties in some translations.) Certain sins of his are mentioned in Bukhari 1:234 and 8:794-796, which include cutting off people's limbs, burning out their eyes, and making them die of thirst. Other mention of his sins are found in Bukhari 1:19, 711, 781, 3:582, 4:319, 7:1, 8:319.

Arthur Jeffery, a noted theologian of the early-mid 20th century and author of extensive historical studies of middle eastern manuscripts, summarizes the biography of the prophet Muhammad by Ibn Ishaq as follows: "He organizes assassinations and wholesale massacres. His career as tyrant of Medina is that of a robber chief, whose political economy consists in securing and dividing plunder."

Jerry Rassamni, author of From Jihad to Jesus, asks a reasonable question to Muslims... "If Islam's prophet, who is purported to be the model of purity for Muslims, was not in a perfect state of perfection [mutma'inaah], then what hope do other Muslims have in achieving the stage of perfection?" He further asks, "Shouldn't the fruits of a prophet of the Almighty be mercy, benevolence, and brotherhood instead of cold-blooded murder?"

The founder of Christianity... Jesus, was without sin (Acts 10:38; 1 Peter 1:19, 2:21-24; 1 John 2:1, 3:5). Even his enemies, those who betrayed and crucified him, acknowledged his perfect life (Matthew 27:3-4; Luke 23:14-15). This is an important theme in the Bible, but as previously mentioned in this series of articles, it is also confirmed in Islamic teaching (Bukhari 4:506).

Jesus lived the perfect life for us all, for humanity. He did what no human could ever do – rise to live a perfect sinless life, without a single negative, wicked thought or action. This gives profound meaning to his claim to divinity since no one else has ever achieved human perfection since the pre-sin days in the Garden of Eden. His sacrificial death on the cross for the sins of humanity become even more poignant when we consider his divine origin. The Bible says that Jesus gave his life that others may live in a sin-filled world, set apart to Him, with the eternal hope of everlasting life.  

Modern Islam is generally considered to be free of racism. However, Muhammad himself owned slaves, including a black slave named Anjasha (Bukhari 3:711, 6:435, 8:182, 8:221, 9:368).  In fact, the only places in the world where slavery is practiced today is in Islamic countries.

Slavery was a common practice in the ancient world. Indeed, the Bible seems to acknowledge it as common practice. But Christianity teaches that all people are created equal (Genesis 1:27; Galatians 3:28). And the Bible specifically condemns the slave trade (1 Timothy 1:9-11).

Consider Jesus, the sinless prophet... in contrast to Muhammad on these key issues:

• was never forgiven, because he had no sin,
• killed no travelers in cold blood,
• never told us to kill anybody,
• was not prejudiced against classes of people,
• did not own slaves,
• did not succumb to the devil and was not bewitched (Matthew 4; Luke 4)
• had high moral standards (never said forcible sex was OK),
• promised to pay the penalty for your sins,
• suffered and died for ALL humanity,
• has no tomb for he rose from the dead, and
• sits enthroned in Heaven at the right Hand of God the Father
• is the eternal Prince of Peace.

Muhammad by his own admission was merely a mortal man (Sura 18:110), and never performed a single miracle (Suras 3:183-184, 17:90-95, Bukhari 6:504, 9:379). The Quran itself acknowledges that Muhammad's opponents challenged him with, "Why is not an angel sent down to him?" to settle the matter of his prophethood (Sura 6:8-9). But Muhammad could not deliver. Yet Jesus performed numerous miracles before many witnesses (Mark 7:37; John 10:38, etc) Jesus' miracles are even confirmed in the Quran (Sura 5:110-113).

Muhammad said of himself that he could do nothing for you (Sura 11:31), but only Jesus can forgive your sins (1 John 2:1-2).  In addition to being powerful, Muhammad was wealthy (Bukhari 3:495), which brings into question his true motive. But Jesus was a lowly itinerant rabbi whose motive is not in question. Jesus' status is important because he could relate to the common person of any time:

He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering...Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows...He was pierced for our transgression, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed...We all like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53).

We do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. (Hebrews 4:15).

Jesus' influence came not from wealth or political power, but from his words and actions that challenged people's very concept of truth (Mark 1:27; John 18:38). He said,

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except 

through me.(John 14:6) (ONE-WAY!  Through Jesus, the Christ.  NOT any other way, not Muhammad).

Let's consider further the subject of prophecies. One thing that has convinced many of the true identity of Jesus is the evidence from fulfilled prophecies. Jesus fulfilled every single prophecy related to his life and his activities, many made hundreds, even thousands of years before his birth. While some of the prophecies are subtle, many are precise—including his place of birth, and the details of his life and death. Jesus even predicted his own death and resurrection (Matthew 16:21; Acts 10:40.

Abdul Saleeb, who converted to Christianity from Islam, says the two primary things that convinced him that Jesus is more than just a prophet were first, the character of Jesus the man, and second, the' amazing fulfillment of prophecies related to Jesus. This element of prophecy, which is such an important part of Christianity, has no parallel in any other religion. Jesus is the focus and turning point of all of history.

Why would anyone be a follower of Muhammad, or anyone else, when you could be a follower of Jesus, the Savior of the World?

It is clear, with minimal research, that Christianity and Islam are incompatible worldviews. One is right and true... the other is wrong and misleading people to their eternal destruction if they don’t see the truth. The evidence demands every person’s attention.  Think of these words from the inspired Holy Bible...

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the anti-christ—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also...I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. (1 John 2:22-23, 26)

Islam... which has captured millions of souls in its vice-like grip, is a false religion and offers no hope of salvation, restoration and peace with the one true God.

________________________________________

The Authenticity, Accuracy and Inerrancy of The Holy Bible

Like the Quran for Muslims, the Bible for Christians is considered to be the "Word of God." But Christians do not mean exactly the same thing as Muslims when they use that term. Believers in the historic foundations of the Christian faith [followers of Christ] believe that the Bible is "inspired" of God, and believe that the original manuscripts of the Bible are without error – "inerrant" and "infallible." 

They also accept the view that the Bible has come to us from human writers whose unique personalities and literary styles are evident in the style of the text. Christians also acknowledge that the Bible of today, while extremely faithful to the original texts, is subject to slight variances.  However, any such variance is minor and never changes the inspired message God conveys to humanity.

Muslims have been taught that the Bible has been grossly corrupted. Many non-Muslims wonder about this possibility as well. Therefore, it is appropriate to submit the Bible to rigorous scholarly evaluation. This is a vital exercise because the Christian faith rests on the reliability of the Bible. With that objective in mind, let’s touch on a few key points.

Yusuf Ali, the famous modern translator and defender of the Quran, has said that the earliest date for an Old Testament manuscript is 916 AD. This is quite wrong. In 1947 there was a discovery of ancient biblical and non-biblical manuscripts now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. These manuscripts contain portions of or complete copies of every Old Testament book except Esther. They have been reliably dated from 250 BC to 68 AD (Dead Sea Scrolls).

In addition to the Dead Sea Scrolls, there are other manuscripts of the Old Testament that date before Christ. Yet it is the remarkably extensive discovery in the Dead Sea Scrolls that confirms that the modern day Old Testament has been unchanged since before the time of Christ.

The Dead Sea discovery verifies that today we are in the possession of the Old Testament that Jesus read and used in his ministry. And Jesus himself testified as to the correct books of the Old Testament and to their accuracy and authenticity. (Here are just a few of many examples: Matthew 5:17-18, 12:40, 13:14-15, 19:3-9, 23:35; Luke 16:31, 24:44; John 5:46-47, 10:35. Jesus' testimony is an important substantiation that the Old Testament was consistently preserved up to his time. Absent any contrary evidence, the belief that the Old Testament has been reliably preserved is well warranted.

The Dead Sea Scrolls also contain what many scholars believe are fragments of New Testament books, including Mark, Acts, Romans, 1 Timothy, 2 Peter, and James. The fragments are small enough that some scholars are skeptical. But the importance of the discovery is that it adds to already existing evidence that the New Testament was written in the first century, after Christ died on the cross. The modern Bible agrees with the earliest manuscripts, so we have an unbroken chain from very early in the Christian era.

While we do not have the original New Testament manuscripts, we do have over 25,000 ancient copies of New Testament manuscripts, or pieces thereof. Careful analysis by scholars can compare the various manuscripts and reproduce the originals with great precision. Only about 40 lines of text in the New Testament are in debate, and these do not affect any Christian doctrine.

Since there are numerous extant New Testament manuscripts from hundreds of years before Muhammad which agree with the modern Bible, the Muslim charge that the modern Bible has been changed is a hollow and vindictive claim. Thus, the Bible (Old and New Testaments) being read during Muhammad's time and hundreds of years prior is the same Bible the world has available today.

There is no longer any real doubt that the New Testament is what it claims to be—a reliable record of Jesus and his apostles written by eyewitnesses and interviewers of eyewitnesses of Jesus. Scholars are convinced that the entire New Testament was written between 40 and 70 AD. 

In addition to the manuscript evidence itself, there are many quotations from the New Testament by the early church fathers (from 97 AD to 325 AD). These quotations allow reconstructing all but eleven verses of the modern New Testament — even without any manuscripts themselves. This evidence should be significant to Muslims, since these attestations are from hundreds of years before Muhammad was even born. 

Yusuf Ali, the aforementioned Muslim scholar and critic of the Bible, has said that the New Testament of today is not the same as in Muhammad's time. Wrong again. The accumulation of evidence proves that the case is really closed in this matter. The New Testament has been reliably preserved through the ages.

A final charge by Muslims is that the Apostle Paul changed the message of Jesus. There is absolutely no evidence for such a claim. Besides, there are simply too many well-attested ancient manuscripts for this to be even remotely possible. Further, Paul's message was both checked and approved by the original apostles (Galatians 1-2; 2 Peter 3:15-16)! By the way, the Bible is easier to verify than the Quran, because unlike the Quran there has never been any wholesale destruction of ancient manuscripts. The historical evidence is vast for biblical scholars as well as opponents of Christianity to investigate. There is nothing hidden or swept under the rug with regard to the Bible's origin.

Also significant for Muslims is that the Quran itself has a high view of the Bible, indeed proclaiming it as without error! While this will be a bit tedious for non-Muslim readers, it is important to document that the Quran does indeed support the Bible in key areas. The information was compiled by Dr. William Campbell and outlined in his book The Quran and the Bible in the Light of History and Science. I encourage any Muslim readers to obtain a copy of this book or at least look up these passages for yourself in the Quran:

• These passages show that the Torah was true at the time of Jesus: Suras 3:48-50, 5:44-49, 5:110, 19:12, 61:6, 66:12.
• These passages show that the Torah and the Gospel were true and unchanged at the time of Muhammad: Suras 2:91, 3:3, 4:162-163, 5:44-49, 6:154-157, 9:111, 10:37, 12:111, 35:31, 40:69-70, 46:12, 46:29-30.
• There are 24 passages in the Quran where Muhammad actually quotes or appeals to the Torah and/or the Gospel.
• 55 other verses say that the Torah or the Gospel are good. Some of these include Suras 3:187, 4:47, and 5:46-48.
• No one has ever brought forth a copy of the Torah or Gospel that differs from the one we have now.
• Sura 10:94 specifically says, "If thou wert in doubt As to what We have revealed Unto thee, then ask those Who have been reading The Book [the Bible] from before thee: The Truth hath indeed come To them from thy Lord: So be in no wise Of those in doubt."

See also: Suras 2:41, 2:136, 5:68, 2:285, 3:3, 3:70, 3:184, 5:44-46, 5:77, 6:34, 6:91, 10:34, 10:37, 11:110, 17:2-4, 17:14, 19:12, 19:30, 20:52, 21:7, 23:49, 25:35, 28:2, 28:43, 28:52, 29:46, 32:23, 37:117, 40:53, 41:45, 45:16, 48:23, 56:78, 57:25-27, 62:5, 98:4.

But the unjust deny the communication of Allah (Surah 6:33). Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah, they shall have a severe chastisement; and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution (Sura 3:4).

The logic and reasoned conclusions are unavoidable. The Quran says that the Bible was true at the time of Muhammad. The manuscript evidence unequivocally verifies that the Bible we have today is the same as the one in Muhammad's time (and before). So Muslims who say the Bible is corrupted are either mistaken or else the Quran is wrong. Since Muslims cannot accept that the Quran is wrong, the Bible must be accepted as reliable and true as validated in the Quran. 

Let's summarize the evidence as to why the Bible can be trusted. There are four important approaches to considering the evidence for the reliability of the Bible:

Manuscript Evidence. Regarding the New Testament, the evidence supports the view that all of the New Testament was written by eyewitnesses or other contemporaries of Jesus, and that it has been reliably preserved. There are no abrogations or destruction of manuscripts as there have been in Islam.

Archeological Evidence. Over 25,000 sites have been discovered that pertain to the Bible. As Nelson Glueck, renowned Jewish archeologist said, "It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." This is really an amazing testimony for the Bible.

Prophetic Evidence. Some 2000 biblical prophecies have already been fulfilled, including over 350 about Jesus—with no prophetic failures. The probability of just 16 predictions being fulfilled without an error is 1 in 10 to the 45th power. 

Do you know what 1 in 10 to the 45th power looks like expressed numerically?  Here it is... 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000... a quattuordecillion!  For more than 2000 predictions to be correct without a failure is an inconceivable probability number!!! There is nothing at all like this “singular piece of evidence” in any other religious book or in any other sector of human experience or endeavor!

Statistical Evidence. The Bible contains 66 books, written by approximately 40 different writers, over 1600 years, on 3 different continents, in 3 different languages, on thousands of different subjects—with no errors or contradictions. 

Norman Geisler in his book written with Abdul Saleeb discusses this, and emphasizes that from his 40 years of studying the Bible he has concluded that every so-called error or contradiction is a red herring. Yet there is one beautiful central theme in the Bible: God's redemption of mankind from sin won for the whole world by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So, regarding the Bible, there are multiple reliable witnesses, many of whom did not know each other, whose stories can be corroborated. This compares to the Quran, which was revealed by one very violent man who, according to Islamic sources was bewitched (Bukhari 4:400, 4:490, 8:400), and in which are found numerous confirmed errors and contradictions.

These are the facts that support the Christian view that The Holy Bible is indeed the one and only inspired message from God to humanity that has ever existed. 

The only apparent reason why Muslims claim that the Bible has changed is that there is so much contradictory content in the Quran that they want the Bible to suffer the same flaws and failures. There is no evidential basis for any claim that the Bible is anything but inspired, authentic, accurate, trustworthy and reliable.  It is the true message from God!

If the Bible is true, and it is, then Allah is not God, Muhammad was not his prophet, and the Quran is not a message from God.

The Anamorphic Quran

How much do we really know about the historicity of the Quran?

Is the Quran that Muslims rely on today the correct one, the original? Evidently not. We know for example there has been a purge of variant Quranic texts. This occurred in the year 653, about 21 years after Muhammad's death. 

But here's another fact: According to Robert Spencer (in his book Did Muhammad Exist), "There are reasons to believe that the Quran took its present shape not in the seventh century but later, even centuries later. The Arabic alphabet in which the Quran is written did not yet exist in the early seventh century, so it is improbable that Muhammad's secretaries, [if brought back to life] would be able to recognize a modern edition of the Quran as part of the so called holy text that was dictated to them in fragments during Muhammad's lifetime... that is, if such dictation even occurred.

Muslims today are taught that the Quran is perfectly preserved, word-by-word, syllable-by-syllable, and letter-for-letter. Indeed, they think that the Quran is the actual, literal (and pre-existent) word of God. Muslims think so highly of the Quran, that one could say that they worship it. In this sense, all Muslims are fundamentalists. It has been said that the closest comparison to it in Christianity is Christ himself.

However, let’s consider the evidence to see if this assumption is valid. The history of the Quran is most interesting. For the benefit of any Muslim readers, I will liberally document essential points from reliable Muslims resources.

Muhammad claimed to begin having revelations from God when he was 40 years old. It is generally believed that Muhammad was illiterate, which Muslims think is a testimony to the miracle of Quran.

People memorized things Muhammad said or they wrote them down on palm leaves, rocks, and bones (Bukhari 6:509). Bukhari also records that Muhammad "allowed some variation" regarding the recitation of the Quran (Bukhari 3:593, 601, 4:442, 6:514, and 9:640).

There was no organized manuscript of the Quran prior to Muhammad's death (Bukhari 6:509). Shortly after his death, it was noticed that some of the people who had memorized parts of the Quran were being killed in tribal conflicts. Some verses did not survive as the people who remembered them died or verses were otherwise lost (Bukhari 4:62, 6:509-11, 527, 550, 552).

It is not known for sure how many scribes were involved in compiling the Quran. But there were four known companions of Muhammad who were involved in the process: Masud, Salim, Mu'adh, and Ubai (Bukhari 6:521, 526). Even though these men were all authorized by Muhammad himself and each version was widely accepted, these versions of the Quran were not identical.  What are the implications of this discontinuity?

Muslims today are taught to accept the Quran without the benefit of any scientific validation. This is in sharp contrast to the Bible, which has been subjected to rigorous scientific inquiry. Also, interestingly, it is in contrast to ancient Muslim scholars, who at the time were willing to look more objectively, albeit critically at the Quran. 

One such critic as Sallam, a scholar who studied under the famous masters of the Qufan and Basran schools.  Sallam was renowned as a philologist, a jurist, and an authority on the Quranic sciences included in Kitab Fada'il-al-Qur'an. He claimed that many verses had fallen out of the Quran, that a lot of the Quran had in fact been lost. For example, Aisha, the prophet's favorite wife, asserted along with Ubai Ibn Ka'b, one of Muhammad's closest companions, that the chapter of the parties (Sura 33) had at one time contained two hundred verses compared to the 73 in the current Quran. Aisha even claimed that many of the codices had been intentionally altered.

These facts seem to raise serious questions about the authenticity of the Quran, and its claims to be a revelation from God.  If verses were dropped out of the Quran, it's also likely that other verses were added.  In the early days of Islam, quarrels among those working to write the Quran often resulted in one group leaving out content authored by rival groups and substituting their own verses.   Muslim scholars have not attempted textual analysis and criticism of the Qur'an since AD 934.  Those who persisted in using variant texts of the Quran, in an attempt to get the true meaning of Muhammad’s thoughts were severely punished for their efforts. 

It is widely known among Muslim scholars that changes were made to the closing words of various verses. For example, when the Prophet said, 'And God is mighty and wise' ('aziz, hakim), a scribe by the name of  Abdollah Abi Sarh suggested writing down 'knowing and wise' ('alim, hakim), Muhammad agreed with the changes. Having witnessed a succession of changes of this type, Abdollah became disillusioned and renounced Islam on the grounds that the forming Quran, if truly from God, could not be changed at the mere prompting of a scribe such as himself. Muslims dispute this account,. but it raises interesting questions does it not?

Another interesting aspect of the Quran is that there were verses in the original version of Muhammad's Quran that have been abrogated, that is, eliminated from the text altogether.  In fact, the Quran itself justifies this practice (Suras 2:105-106, 13:39, 16:101, 22:52).  This practice is unique among world religions.  No other religion with a book of sayings and thoughts of the religions founder have so liberally changed its content... or made it up to suit their purposes.  The question must be asked... If Allah cannot get it right the first time, is he really all-wise?

Modern scholarship is bringing new light to the Quran. The oldest Quran manuscript known was discovered in 1972 in Yemen. This text apparently has words changed and verses and chapters rearranged from the Quran that is available today. Complicating the issue, this old text does not contain the dots over the Arabic letters, which suggests some variant meanings of the words. In 2007 a German author Cristoph Luxenberg published a controversial work entitled The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran. Luxenberg claims that much of the original Quran was written in Syriac-Aramaic rather than Arabic, as most Muslims assume. Arabic was not a written language until after the Quran was first put to writing. Reading the Quran in Syria-Aramaic changes many passages in the Quran.   

Muslims claim that the literary style of the Quran is evidence of its divine inspiration. But if that is a valid test, they would have to accept that the writings of Homer and Shakespeare as divinely inspired as well. But even Muslim sources recognize that the Quran is not always as eloquent as is claimed. The Iranian Shiite scholar Ali Dashti contends that the Quran contains numerous grammatical problems. He says... "The Quran contains sentences which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries..." 

The German scholar, Salomon Reinach, stated... "From the literary point of view, the Quran has little merit. Declamation, repetition, puerility, a lack of logic and coherence strike the unprepared reader at every turn. It is humiliating to the human intellect to think that this mediocre literature has been the subject of innumerable commentaries, and that millions of men are still wasting time in absorbing it."

Historian Edward Gibbon described the Quran as "an incoherent rhapsody of fable, and precept, and declamation, which sometimes crawls in the dust, and sometimes is lost in the clouds."

McClintock and Strong's Encyclopedia states, "The matter of the Quran is exceedingly incoherent and sententious, the book evidently being without any logical order of thought as a whole or in its parts. This agrees with the desultory and incidental manner in which it is said to have been delivered."

The German critical theologist and Semitic scholar Ernest Renan points out, "The book (the Quran) seems to us declamatory, monotonous, and boring. An uninterrupted reading of it is almost unbearable."

There are several things found in the Quran about Christian theology that are quite plainly wrong. Sura 5:116 says that Christians believe that Mary is God. Sura 9:30 says that Jews believe that Ezra was the Son of God. It confuses the angel Gabriel with the Holy Spirit (Sura 2:97,98 versus Sura 16:102).  There is no evidence that Christians and Jews ever believed these things. What seems to be the most likely explanation why things like this are in the Quran is that there was no Arabic translation of the Bible in the time of Muhammad. Muhammad picked up bits and pieces of Christian and Jewish theology from hearsay and gnostics, and just got it wrong.  Not the sort of thing one would expect from a man claiming to have received a revelation from God.

In conclusion, it is clear that Muslim belief in the word-for-word/letter-for-letter preservation of the Quran is incorrect. Even Muslim scholars know that! It is also clear that the claim of an error-free Quran is incorrect. There are hundreds of contradictions and inaccurate statements in the Quran.

Even IF the Quran of today were a carbon copy of the one originally dictated by Muhammad, it does not logically follow that it is from God. Irrespective of the quality of today's copy, the internal and external inconsistencies in the Quran disqualify it as being a true revelation of the One True Holy God.

The Nature of Man and the Concept of Salvation

Christianity insists that man is fallen, that we are "dead in our sins" and that we are in fact incapable of standing up to a holy and righteous God. 

Islam, on the other hand, says that humankind is weak and forgetful but not fallen. Islam teaches that man is capable of righteousness—all he has to do is just do it. This marks a defining difference between Islam and Christianity. The difference has far-reaching implications.

First, examine the evidence. All of history is a testimony to the sinfulness of man. Let’s be honest, in examining ourselves, we often only do good if it suits our mood, feeds our ego or fulfills an agenda. We certainly do not always love God above everything else, nor love our neighbor as ourselves. None of us keeps all of the Ten Commandments all the time. Parents do not need to teach a child to be bad (selfish or mean); it comes quite naturally to all humans. Everyone has a conscience, and if we are honest we must acknowledge how far short we fall of God's perfect standard. As a result, we must face the reality that we fall far short of standing upright before a Holy God.

The Bible says that whoever stumbles at just one point of the law is guilty of breaking all of it (James 2:10). Consider this example... An agnostic person considers himself to be a moral person, therefore expressing doubt about sinfulness. When asked this question, "If someone goes into a store a hundred times without stealing anything, but one time does steal something, is he guilty or innocent?" "Guilty!" the agnostic exclaims.

So it is. We are all guilty and deserve punishment. But we are not just guilty once. We are all guilty all the time!

We never have perfect love, justice, or acceptance. We often live as if God does not matter. Our faith is continually subject to wavering. We constantly are inclined to trust ourselves rather than God. We are always subject to feelings of revenge, lust, hatred, jealousy, and covetousness. Selfishness dominates our daily lives. We stubbornly deny truth in favor of what we wish were true.

Hypocrisy is such an obvious problem that it is a common complaint toward even religious people. Our narrow-minded attitude is a perpetual trap for prejudice and indifference. While we are perhaps not as bad as we could be, sin touches every aspect of our lives. Sin is exceedingly corrupting.

Interestingly, while Muslim doctrine denies man's sinful nature, the Quran agrees with Christian doctrine at least in one place, Sura 12:53: "And I call not myself sinless; surely [man's] self is wont to command evil, except those on whom my Lord has mercy." It sounds an awfully like the Bible, but Muslims seem to put no weight on this passage. Instead, they insist that Muslims naturally gravitate toward the good.

Jerry Rassmamni, author of From Jihad to Jesus, asks, "If Islam gravitates toward good, as the Muslims claim, then why is it that in Pakistan, a Muslim country of 140 million, only one million file their tax returns annually? Why are the 'basically good' tax evaders prodding Pakistan's government into near bankruptcy and depriving Pakistan's poor of basic government programs? And why do the majority of refugees in the world spill out of Muslim countries? The perceived goodness of Muslims is an illusion."

In addition to its theological implications, the variant views on the nature of man have significant sociopolitical implications. As expressed by the late Chuck Colson of Prison Fellowship ministries who said... "The Islamic worldview denies the sinfulness of man, which gives rise to utopian visions: If man is corrupted by society, then those who come to power can create the perfect society by strictly enforcing Islamic law."

Ironically, the Muslim view of man is not unlike communism, which is based on the notion that man is basically good, or at least can be perfected by government. But nation states based on such utopian concepts have always been failures and are particularly oppressive to its citizens.

The difference between Islam and Christianity on the nature of man is not trivial. If Christianity is correct on this point, the practices of Muslims are futile because their efforts will not get them a right standing before the True God. 

Only an acceptance of Christ's finished work of the cross [sacrifice] as a substitutionary payment for humanities sins will get anyone into a relationship with God. If Islam is correct, the whole purpose of Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection was a worthless scam.

The nature of man, man’s sin, brings us to the matter of Salvation.  Islam, from the Biblical–Christian perspective, has an incomplete view of both the holiness of God and the sinfulness of mankind. 

Given man's sinful nature and the gap it creates between us and a holy God, Christianity teaches that man cannot earn salvation. Nor can God just wink at sin. We need a savior who will bridge the gap and who will pay the penalty for us. Salvation is only in Christ's finished work on the cross and our subsequent acceptance of His Plan of Salvation (Acts 2:38) that God considers our blemishes healed. This is what Christianity is all about... restoration of our relationship to the Holy God.

As it says in the Bible, in the sight of a Holy God all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:5-7). But God demonstrated his love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). That is good news indeed.

But Islam denies all of this. It even denies that Jesus died on the cross at all (Sura 4:157) this in spite of overwhelming evidence both from the Bible and from historical sources outside the Bible. It denies that Jesus conquered death by his bodily resurrection, an historical event acknowledged by rigorous critical scholarship. Islam must deny these things because their religion is based on the idea that you can earn your way to heaven.

Christianity teaches that our salvation is a free gift through faith alone in Jesus Christ and specifically “not by works” (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 4:1-3; Titus 3:5-7; 1 Corinthians 1:29). Islam teaches that one gains entrance into heaven by ones works in addition to faith (but not faith in Christ). These are clearly opposing positions.

Christianity insists that belief in Christ is the only way to heaven. Rejection of Christ dooms us to the eternal punishment we deserve as rebellious sinners. (Mark 16:16; John 3:16-18, 36; John 10:7-10; John 12:48; John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Galatians 1:6-9; Philippians 2:9-11; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-10; 1 Timothy 2:5; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:22-23; 1 John 5:12-13.) While this may seem unfair in one sense, in another sense it is the ultimate in fairness. God provided a way for sinful man, who otherwise falls helplessly short, to be forgiven and to come into communion with Him!

Because the Christian doctrine of salvation through Christ alone so often draws accusations of intolerance from non-Christians, it may be helpful to say a bit more about it. One thing that this doctrine does not say, is that those who have never heard of Christ are automatically doomed. It is also clear that it is not Christians who can judge, but only God. God alone can know the heart of each individual. God loves everyone, including non-Christians, and he wants everyone to come to the knowledge of a saving faith (1 Timothy 2:4). But it also clear through this doctrine that anyone who consciously rejects Christ is rejecting God's offer of reconciliation. In this case, one gets what he wants, an eternity without God.

Islam is equally exclusive in its claims, as it teaches that only Muslims will go to heaven (Bukhari 4:297). Islam similarly insists that anyone who rejects their Allah and his apostle (that is, Muhammad) is condemned to hell. So, again, the two religions are at loggerheads.

While Christians believe that salvation is assured through faith and faithful living, Muslims never have assurance of salvation (except probably through martyrdom in a jihad—Sura 9:20-22). Islam teaches that at the end of your life, Allah weighs your good works against your bad works on a scale. In general, if your good works are adequate, you get to heaven (Sura 23:103). But even then it is not assured because Allah can let anyone in he chooses (Sura 9:15, 27). Muhammad himself expressed doubts about his own salvation (Bukhari 5:266, 9:131).

Man is sinful. As put by Jerry Rassamni, author of From Jihad to Jesus, "Although the [Islamic] law is verbose and enslaving, it is powerless to justify a person before the Almighty. No matter how many times a beast washes in the river, it remains a beast, and no matter how long a log soaks in the water, it will never become a crocodile. In the same manner, no matter what humankind does in its own strength, they remain sinners in the sight of a holy God." 

Only Christianity offers a solution. God sent his only son Jesus to live the perfect life for us, and to suffer the punishment for man's sin. There had to be a sacrifice... punishment for sins in some way, even though mankind proved his inability to satisfy God's demands adequately. In this way God reconciled his demands for obedience while exercising his mercy toward sinful men. Only the Messiah, whom even the Quran called perfect (Surah 19:19) is righteous enough to take away the sin of the world.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son—that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life (John 3:16).

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; and he who does not believe the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him (John 3:36).

Muslims must be willing to ask themselves... How do you deal with your guilt? Through our conscience and the law we all know we are guilty before God. Do you really think that your Five Pillars will be sufficient before an all-powerful God to get you to eternal life? External obedience to the law does not make a person spiritually clean.

If the Bible is correct, the only conclusion is that belief in the teachings of Islam does not lead to eternal life but to rejection by God and eternal damnation for all adherents of Islam.

Islam’s view on the Nature of God

Islam is set up to specifically oppose Christianity on every important doctrine. For example, Christianity teaches that God is a Trinity—one God revealed in three persons (or manifestations). Islam, however, vehemently denies the Trinity as blasphemy (Suras 4:171, 5:17, 5:72-75). Accepting the Christian view of God is the only unpardonable sin in Islam, and condemns one to hell. While Islam has a high view of Jesus, it denies his divinity or that Jesus was the Son of God (Suras 9:30, 10:68, 19:35, 43:81-83).

There is a law of logic called the "Law of Non-Contradiction," which says that two contradictory things cannot both be true. At least one of them has to be false. This point of tension regarding the nature of God between the two religions is so great that it is clear that at least one of them must be false. Either the Trinity is a correct description of God as Christianity proclaims, or it is a false description of God as the Quran proclaims.

Muslims, as well as others, who have not studied the evidence for the deity of Christ find it understandably hard to accept Jesus as both 100% man and 100% God. Christians do not take belief in the deity of Christ on blind faith. The evidence itself has convinced many a skeptic. Simon Greenleaf, a professor of law at Harvard in the 1800's— a man who is considered the greatest authority on legal evidences in history —became a Christian after a thorough examination of the evidence.  Anyone truly interested in religion should examine the evidence for yourself, the evidence demands a choice, a personal decision... for or against. If Jesus is truly who he claimed to be, then all humanity lives under the specter of judgment.

Muslims hold many mistaken views of Christian doctrine. Contrary to several passages in the Quran, Christians do not hold to three Gods! The Bible makes it very clear that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 43:10; Mark 12:29; 1 Corinthians 8:4, 6). Rather, there are three aspects to God's nature... the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Also, Muslims think that the Christian term "Son of God" means that God the Father had carnal sexual relations with Mary, producing Jesus. That is incorrect. The term Son of God is a symbolic term only, implying the unique relationship Jesus has to God the Father.

There are other differences between the two religions as to the nature of God. To Muslims, God is distant and unknowable. His relationship to man is that of master and slave. He is not the personal God that Christians know and trust.

The God of the Bible is described as being love itself (1 John 4:7-21). The God of the Bible goes out of his way to find a single lost sheep (Matthew 18:10-14). And the God of the Bible opens his arms to offer comfort and assurance (Deuteronomy 1:31; Hosea 11:1-4; Isaiah 40:11; Matthew 11:25-30), as a father would for his children. This concept of God is absent in Islam.  Islamic theology holds that God is good because he causes good. But goodness is not part of his essence.

Another very important difference is that the God of the Bible is holy — that is perfect in all respects and set apart from sinful humanity. He is perfectly moral, perfectly just, perfectly faithful, perfectly loving, all-knowing, etc. Another synonym for holy is pure (Hebrews 7:26).

But the God of the Quran does not always come across as holy. He changes his mind, changes his promises, and does not offer assurance of salvation. Allah is arbitrary (Suras 4:116, 5:18, 9:15, 25:51). Also, Allah deceives people (Bukhari 8:577 and 9:532). 

Compare this to the God of the Bible, with whom it is impossible to lie (Hebrews 6:18) or to treat people unfairly. The God of the Bible is not arbitrary, but rather is perfect in his justice. If you do a search of the words holiness or holy as applied to God, you will see how dominant this concept is in all of Scripture.

Muslims today say that Allah is merely the Arabic word for God. While this is true, it is not the whole story. There is substantial evidence that Allah has roots in pre-Islamic paganism. There were 360 idols (gods) worshipped in Mecca at the time of Muhammad. The supreme god of the Quraish tribe (from which Muhammad came) was Allah. Muhammad's father's name was Abd-Allah, which means "slave of Allah." This supports the notion that the concept of Allah has its roots in pagan gods.

While not substantiated, some people say that Allah has elements of the pagan moon god, a dominant deity in pagan Arabia. To this day, the crescent moon is a symbol of Islam, and Muslims use a lunar calendar. 

The Quraish tribe had a custom of praying five times a day to Mecca, had pilgrimages to Mecca, and had a sacred month. These things are an integral part of modern Islam. Such practices also tie Islam to pre-Islamic paganism. Actually, Islam appears to be an amalgamation of paganism, Judaism, Christianity, other world religions, accentuated by a healthy dose of power and politics.

In the modern world, Muslims recognize that Allah is not the God of the Bible. The evidence for that is the continual persecution of Christians in Muslim countries. Countries such as Malaysia have decreed that Christians may not even use "Allah" in their Bibles, books, or hymns. They often confiscate non-Muslim literature that uses the word "Allah." Why would Muslims take such a harsh view of Christianity if they thought they worshipped the same God as Christians?  Those who say that Christians and Muslims worship the same God are incorrect. 

In the two religions, God is defined differently and has different and contradictory attributes. The views of God between Islam and Christianity are incompatible.