Has the Quran Been Accurately Transmitted?

Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I'm standing here on behalf of my colleague Mike Fourier who's on leave and so he asked me to be here and just to welcome all of you to St Thomas' Anglican Church and I will hand over to Rudolf Boschoff.

Good evening everyone. Turn to the person next to you and say hello. I don't want you to sit and participate and be with somebody for the rest of this discussion without you knowing them. So just turn to the person again next to your left because everybody turn to the right and say this is my name.

If there's nobody next to you, on the right turn to the person behind you. Deadly cycle. Some people are facing the back of other people's heads. Excellent. Well we're here tonight to discuss the merits of the Quran and we ask the central question if it is created or uncreated.

And it's wonderful to have an opportunity for both of these friends of mine to have this discussion and I really say friends, I've known Yusuf now for six years and James as well and they really are friends and so if you find that the discussion gets spirited it's because they're both passionate and they're both big boys and they're also seasoned debaters so please do not be offended.

They know what they are doing and there's no malversions between them. So I just want to give you the structure of the debate. We're going to have a 25 minute introduction each. We had a coin toss and Yusuf won and he's opted for James to go first which means that we're going to start out with Dr. White who's all the way from Phoenix, Arizona in the United States and you can have a look at all of his things on, let that bike just go by, Alpha and Omega Ministries in the States and you can just Google James White Alpha and Omega Ministries and you will get to all of his resources, books, etc.

And then on my right, your left, is Yusuf Ismail. He's affiliated with the IPCI. He's also a seasoned debater and he's been with the IPCI since 18, no I'm just teasing, since whenever but he's also very well respected and seasoned debater as well so we also want to welcome him here tonight as we do James all the way from America.

So they've got 25 minutes each and then there's going to be a 12 minute rebuttal from each side and then what we're going to do is a 12 minute Q &A from each side so they're going to ask each other questions for 12 minutes and obviously it's going to be a question that is asked in less than a minute and then there will be a two minute reply so that gives time for approximately four questions.

Okay, so we'll do that and then if there's an opportunity we will see if we can do a 20 minute Q &A from your side so if you have something that you think about, 20 minutes? Okay, five minutes, 12 minutes for the audience as well and then we're going to have a five minute closing statement from each obviously because Dr. White went first he can have the last say and Yusuf will have the second last say.

So enjoy this and welcome and thank you so much once more for St. Thomas Anglican Church for hosting this. Please also, just from the audience itself, please do not clap, allow them to make their points, no takbirs, no amens, no hallelujahs, nothing like that because it really in actual fact bothers the speakers to keep their train of thought so please absolute silence and in the Q &A you are welcome to come and ask your question.

Be blessed and have a lovely night.

The Sunni Debate Over Whether the Quran Is Created or Uncreated

Alright, well it's excellent to be with you here this evening, thanks for coming out. I see a few people that I think I saw last evening, that's going to cause a problem, there we go, at the debate and this is a little bit more of a cerebral topic than last evening was and both Yusuf and I were mentioning that we are unaware of any Christian-Muslim dialogues or debates on this subject.

So what I like about that is we're not just repeating things we've done over and over again in the past. Hopefully we will add to the understanding in regards to the two different positions but obviously we recognize that there are also differing positions taken by individuals within each one of our traditions and within each one of our faiths so in the beginning we need to lay out what each one of us believes and I will attempt to lay out why I find this to be an important issue and hopefully you'll be able to follow along with that.

So a quick scan of the internet will provide numerous examples of Sunni Muslims. This is a discussion in regards to a Sunni belief. The stream of Shiism, Shia Islam, does not have this particular belief and so we're not dealing with that this evening, we're looking at something that is in the history of Sunni Islam primarily but we'll provide numerous examples of Sunni Muslims completely disregarding this issue as silly or even stupid.

It's for them, it's just not a relevant issue. Leading Sunni scholars will often identify this as an irrelevant topic today that was overblown in the past and would say that while it's something to be speculated upon, discussed, whatever else it might be it is not something that is definitional of one's belief in the Quran or issues along those lines.

Now many Muslims really have no idea why this belief is relevant to their lives today, it's rather esoteric we'll be honest and almost no Christians that I know of are even aware of the doctrine, its history or its relevance to our interaction with Muslims today.

So why would we be bothering with something like this this evening is really I think a perfectly frank and relevant question. Most Christian Muslim discussions never get anywhere because they do not deal with foundational issues of knowledge and authority let alone the definition of terminology, words, things like that.

How we know and what we know specifically the issue of scripture and its interpretation very very often our debates and our discussions go right past each other because the one side will use one standard in interpreting their scriptures and the other side's scriptures and then the other people will return the favor and the result will be the kind of dialogues and discussions that we are accustomed to seeing on the internet and other places like that where nothing really ever gets accomplished.

The historic Sunni understanding of the Quran as uncreated has deep impact upon how the Quran is to be interpreted and understood in fact I would say that in the development of classical Islamic theology within the Sunni tradition this had a great impact on how tafsir, tafsir is the commentary on the Quran how that literature developed I think it would have developed in a different direction and in a different way if there had not been an established orthodoxy in regards to this particular subject which I think would have an impact upon the discussion that we would be having this evening.

Muslims and Christians often use completely different standards in examining the other's scriptures and often that's done in ignorance we assume that the other side is going to utilize the same kinds of methodologies because we're both talking about books from the past the Old Testament being extremely ancient the New Testament being considered ancient literature the Quran is right on the cusp, right on the dividing line between the medieval period and the ancient period.

So exactly how you want to define that. But they were all written during a period of time where literature is distributed and copied by hand and so how do you interpret documents such as that? Oftentimes in ignorance we assume the other side is doing things the same way that we are to finally start making any progress at all we have to compare and contrast what we really believe about the inspiration, nature, and character of our respective scriptures.

Now again, I am a conservative, believing, reformed theologian and so that means I'm going to speak from that perspective when it comes to the understanding of the Bible and it's inspiration, it's inerrancy, it's authority and there's a lot of people that come from a much different perspective than that.

I recognize that but the same thing is true amongst Muslims. You'll get all sorts of understandings especially in Western Islam expressed in the academy. Now, the question at the top of the page makluh created or not created?

Something that is created is something that is brought into existence by the will of Allah using means or not using means depending on what you're talking about. So, created or not created? Al-Tabari is said to have expressed the belief.

Thusly here's from a Islamic source, a classical Islamic source the Quran is God's uncreated word. However, it is written or recited whether it be in heaven or on earth whether written on the guarded tablet or on the tablets of schoolboys whether inscribed on stone or on paper whether memorized in the heart or spoken on the tongue.

Whoever says otherwise is an infidel whose blood may be shed and from whom God has dissociated himself. Now, that's a fairly strong statement but you will know that it's quite extensive that is, that the Quran is God's uncreated word no matter what form that it's in whether it's in heaven, earth, how it's written who's written it, whatever else it might be.

That's a rather extensive assertion of the fact that the Quran itself is uncreated. And when it refers to a heavenly tablet it's referring to the belief that it has existed eternally not written a long, long, long time ago and existed since then but without creation, uncreated on the heavenly tablet.

And that that is the archetype of every representation we make of the Quran today certainly here upon the earth. Then we also have this quotation from the creed of Imam al-Tahawi. The Quran is the word of God that emanated from him without modality in its expression.

He sent it down to his messenger as a revelation. The believers accept it as such literally they are certain it is, in reality the word of God, the sublime and exalted unlike human speech, it is eternal and uncreated.

It is eternal and uncreated. This is from an introduction by Hamza Yusuf from the Zaytuna Institute in 2007. From the same source we have. We do not argue about the Quran. Rather we testify that it is the word of the Lord of the universe as revealed through the trustworthy spirit who taught it to the paragon of messengers, Muhammad.

It is the word of God the sublime and exalted. No mortal speech compares to it. And we do not say it is created. We do not say it is created. Then in G .F. Haddad's work The Uncreatedness of the Divine Speech in the glorious Quran all al-sunnah agree one and all that the Quran is the pre-existent pre-eternal uncreated speech of Allah.

Most high and notice the assertion here on the evidence of the Quran the sunnah and faith guided reason and faith guided reason. So here are some of the expressions of what the belief is actually stating in regards to the Quran.

Now what's interesting to recognize is that this is a subject that would not have been calmly discussed as I'm sure it will be this evening between myself and Yusuf Ismail between 18... starting with the belief in 1827 and then coming really... 827 A .D. and then really coming into fruition in 833 you had the Mithnah and this was a... in essence a crusade.

It was a inquisition. It was an inquisition would be the best term. And Caliph Abd Allah al-Mamun said he has no belief in Tawhid who says the Quran is uncreated. Now you're saying wait a minute. That's the opposite of what we were just reading.

Exactly so you have one of the Caliphs and he is today now. These were terms that weren't necessarily used at that particular point in time. But looking back upon this period in Islamic history certain titles and names have been attached to the various groups that at that time wouldn't necessarily have been using those particular words.

But the point is that there was a deep concern on the part of the Caliph that some people were saying that the Quran was uncreated and the idea was that this was considered to be an attack upon Tawhid.

Tawhid is the oneness of Allah and so if you have an uncreated entity such as the Quran which is the speech of Allah the Kalam Allah if it's uncreated but it is not identical to Allah you now have two uncreated entities and this was understood to be a violation of Tawhid or absolute monotheism.

And so you notice what he says he has no belief in Tawhid who says the Quran is uncreated. And this began an inquisition that resulted in beatings and executions imprisonments for a number of years until a halt was called to it.

And what is interesting is that then over the next century or so it is the position that was being attacked that becomes the orthodoxy so much so that in our own day within the past 20 years you have individuals such as an Egyptian scholar who suggested that the Quran needs to be placed in history as a human document and interpreted in that way who not only loses his job in Egypt but he is kicked out of Egypt and the scholars in Egypt try to find a way to divorce his wife from him because they consider him to be an unbeliever and a Muslim woman cannot be married to an unbeliever in that fashion.

This was within a relatively short period of time and so obviously the point is this was taken very very very seriously at that particular time in history. Now despite the oft repeated maxim that there is not a single fingerprint of man upon the text of the Quran the reality is quite different.

For anyone familiar with the study of ancient texts the Quran plainly assumes the knowledge of previous texts shows direct connection to historical events and hence betrays any claim to uncreatedness.

It arises out of the events of time. Now I can understand a way that you could say I understand a way that you could say that the Quran is still uncreated. I had nothing to do with the IPCI sign falling down.

I just want everyone to know that I was all the way up here. You all testify to that. Okay I may be fast but I'm not that fast. I just want everybody to recognize that you could say that if Allah is absolutely sovereign over all events then he could have decreed all these events that are then represented in the Quran.

But I would simply refer you and this will come up in our conversation to the conversation that Yusuf and I had in this room not all that long ago where he presented a fairly vigorous defense of a form of free will theism.

So I don't think that's the direction that we're going to be going this evening. But the point is the Quran plainly assumes knowledge of previous texts. For example the Quran narrates Lot's interactions with the people of Sodom and Gomorrah four different times in Surah 7, 26, 27 and 29.

Each time it is plain that the author assumes his audience already knows the story from a biblical perspective. It doesn't give any of the background. It just assumes that you already are familiar with what was going on why Lot was there why there were things going on.

It assumes that you already have the Old Testament narrative and story at hand. How could an uncreated document depend on a created document for its background and story. This is one of the questions that you would ask of this position.

In Surah 349 we read. And he will be a messenger to the children of Israel. Truly I have brought you a sign from your Lord. I will create for you out of clay the shape of a bird. Then I will breathe into it and it will be a bird by God's leave.

And I will heal the blind and the leper and give life to the dead by God's leave. Now the only way to make sense of any of this is to know what the background issues are. So for example here the Quran quotes from canonical New Testament sources.

So heal the blind and the leper that comes from the New Testament. But you may be going what's I will create for you out of clay the shape of a bird. Well that's from the Gnostic tinged 3rd century late 2nd century at most probably 3rd, 4th century document called the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

It is non-canonical it is non-historical. But the Quran utilizes it and mixes it in with the canonical information about the things that Jesus would do in a miraculous form. And so it's drawing from a non-inspired document.

I mean you could on one hand say that the Old and New Testaments were sent down by Allah and if you believe that then you could say well see it could assume that the Old and New Testaments would be given.

But here you have something that's not sent down it's not inspired. It is not even historically accurate. And that is the story of Jesus creating these clay birds and then breathing on them and they become alive.

He did that so as to get away from the fact that he had done that on the Sabbath and broken the Sabbath. It was a very strange story but it's found in Surah 349. Was that written in an uncreated fashion in eternity past?

In Surah 5, verse 10 then God will say O Jesus, Son of Mary remember my blessing upon thee and upon thy mother when I strengthened thee with the Holy Spirit that thou mightest speak to people in the cradle and in maturity.

And when I taught thee the book wisdom, the Torah, and the Gospel and how thou wouldst create out of clay the shape of a bird by my leave and thou wouldst breathe into it and it would become a bird by my leave and thou wouldst heal the blind and the leper by my leave and thou wouldst bring forth the dead by my leave.

Again, all these stories from the life of Jesus plainly then brought together with Gnostic inspired apocryphal stories that have no basis in history whatsoever. They have no connection to the first century at all.

And here you have another thing connected in and that is that you might speak to the people in the cradle. That's from the 5th century Arabic infancy gospel. So this is written long after the days of Jesus and long after the other story and these are all mixed together.

How does this happen if the Quran itself is uncreated. This places the Quran in history and sheds a lot of light upon the understanding of the author and what sources he had to draw from. But then we have the most human story in the Quran.

In my opinion of all the stories found in the Quran the one that strikes me as fully human in origin one deeply tied to the events and desires and even sinfulness of the author of the Quran is that of Zainab bin Josh found in Surah 33 verses 4 through 6 and verses 36 through 39.

I don't have time so many to summarize the story as follows. Muhammad adopted a man named Zaid who was known as Zaid bin Muhammad the son of Muhammad but it was an adopted relationship. Zaid married Muhammad and Muhammad's cousin Zainab bin Josh.

At some point Muhammad visited Zaid's home while Zaid was not there. Zainab was dressed only in a shift and Muhammad saw her beauty and was taken with her. According to both al-Tabari and al-Kurtabi which are both highly esteemed and respected historical sources in classical Islam Zaid offered to divorce Zainab but Muhammad said keep your wife.

However Zainab knew of Muhammad's desire for her so she divorced Zaid. In Arabic law one could not marry the divorced wife of one's son. It was considered incestuous. So this revelation came down. Muhammad goes into a trans-like state.

Aisha was there at that particular point of time. When he comes out of that trans-like state he says smiles and says who is going to go tell Zainab that she is to be my wife. It not only functionally did away with adoption.

In Surah 33 verses 3 through 4 you were forbidden to any longer do what had been done with Zaid called him Zaid bin Muhammad Zaid the son of Muhammad. You were no longer allowed to consider those individuals and call them by the name of their adopted father.

You were supposed to call them by the name of their original father or if not if you didn't know who that was then you had a problem. But that's what you're supposed to do. And this has had a tremendous impact upon the practice of adoption within Islamic society.

But aside from that because that removed some of the problem it commanded Muhammad to fear Allah rather than men. Because obviously men were going to object to this and that he was to marry Zainab. In fact Aisha says in Hadith literature she was very concerned that Zainab was going to lord over the other wives because she was the only one that was commanded to marry Muhammad in the Quran itself.

And there is some evidence that that was the case. Now the number of offensive issues laid out in this story in light of the context provided by historians in the Hadith literature is very large when you consider what the Bible says about divorce when you consider the fact that God says he hates divorce when you consider the standard that is given by Jesus in the New Testament the whole story just screams that this is horrific for it to say that Muhammad needs to do this because of the great trouble that the people would experience about the divorced wives of their sons there was no great trouble.

It was a problem in search of a solution. But it certainly from a perspective of anyone who knows the Old and New Testament teachings is extremely problematic. But our focus is on the very very human nature of this alleged revelation from Allah and its bearing on the idea that the Quran is uncreated.

Are we really going to believe that eternally on a heavenly tablet were written words that were going to command Muhammad to marry Zainab bint Josh to bring about that divorce to marry her to change the adoption laws and how adoption is handled and all of these things just so the one man can have this one woman that was written in eternity.

It seems to me this is very plainly a very human concept only by maintaining a full belief in an extensive divine decree which determines all human actions could one assert that this very human story with all its lusts and sins and maneuvering was actually written on the heavenly tablet from eternity itself.

Because think about it if there is any room for free will then as it has been demonstrated many many times you wouldn't even know that someone named Zainab bint Josh would come into existence. There were literally millions of free will decisions that resulted in her living at that time in that place as well as everybody else involved in the story.

So unless you're going to get rid of that and that takes us back to where Yusuf and I were the last time we had a discussion here unless you're going to take a different perspective and that there is an exhaustive divine decree then at least you have a basis for saying it even though I think it would be a massive stretch to say that this was something that God would put into the heavenly tablet.

Well God didn't put it into the heavenly tablet. It had always been there. It's uncreated in the concept. Now Christians and Muslims have very different understandings of how scripture comes into the stream of history.

Many of the misfires that mar the history of Christian-Muslim dialogues and debates are due to fundamentally different understandings of inspiration and revelation. And so I want to look very briefly.

I only have two minutes but let me just mention some scriptures in your hearing that we can expand upon as we dialogue about this. So for example in 2 Peter chapter 1 verses 20 -21 knowing this first of all that no prophecy of scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.

For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man. But men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Now I may not even go to the other ones. I'll get to them later on. But I just want to really make sure that we think through what Peter says in these words.

Because in the Christian scriptures you have men speaking Peter says bring the parchments bring the cloak before winter comes. Because I'm going to be cold and people will look at that and say how can that be.

How can you say that that is theanustos it is God breathe. It is the very word of God. Well because the understanding given by scripture itself is that when we identify scripture as God's word we also recognize the mechanism by which he brought it to us.

And here Peter describes it as not being produced in the will of man. You don't just sit down one day and go. I'm going to write some scripture today. No instead men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

So they're speaking you can recognize the different style that the apostle Peter has from the apostle Paul. And even when they were using a scribe that changes the style that's there there is very clearly.

That human element of vocabulary and history and language and everything else it's plainly there but they are speaking from God as they're being carried along by the Holy Spirit. So what they say comes from God.

It's expressed in their language as they're being carried along by the Holy Spirit. So there is an intimate connection relationship between this process and history but the result is exactly what God intends it to be.

But it's expressed in this very important way. I think if we can do anything this evening if we can clarify where we're coming from on this very issue at least foundationally it might help in future encounters in being able to understand where the other side is coming from.

That's my hope this evening. Thank you very much for your attention. Ladies and gentlemen thank you so much for being so attentive and quiet. Thank you for your time. Now over to my friend Yusuf Ismail.

I seek protection in God from Satan the accursed in the name of God. Most gracious most merciful. I want to thank the church for allowing us the opportunity to have this engagement. This is probably the ninth engagement I'm having with James if you take into account the double debates we've had since 2013.

And I want to thank all of you for attending this particular discussion. Let me start up with the debate. Has the Quran eternally existed now from the perspective of the Muslim the main source from which all principles and ordinances of Islam are drawn from are in fact the Quran.

In fact the Quran is an infinite noun from the root word Qara 'a which means signifies he collected together or he brought things together. It signifies some form of recitation. Thirdly the Quran in fact identifies itself by name.

This is unlike other religious scriptures such as the Bible it identifies itself as a Quran and more so in the numerous passages it identifies itself as a word of God. It identifies itself as a reminder.

A dhikr inna nahnu nazzalna dhikr wa inna lahul hafizun. It is for us to collect and collate the Quran. So the Quran identifies itself. Identification of the witness in any system any situation in law is in fact imperative and you see this in numerous passages of the Quran.

In surah 6 verse 92 this is a book which we have sent down bringing blessings and confirming the revelations of what came before it. Surah 17 verse 105 surah Bani Israel we have sent down the Quran in truth a Quran which we have divided into parts in order that you may recite it to men in intervals.

We have revealed it by stages. So in other words identifying that the Quran is a process revealed at a time in history within history addressing the needs of man. Now anyone seeing those passages would appear to seem to suggest that it is as if God is speaking unless we have some other connotations.

Now James is correct he is correct at the outset and I second the point that for a Muslim the debate is of no real value either to Muslims or to Christians. And I'm going to explore the fact that in reality the question is not more of a question to discuss but more of a counter challenge and I'll explain the context behind which that comes from.

I mean the issue of whether the Quran is eternal or not or uncreated was actually a theological debate that emerged in the 9th century. The Mu'tazilas held that the Quran was created. James highlighted that whilst a variety of Muslim theologians like the Asharites the Asharis considered that the Quran was in fact uncreated and co-eternal with God and therefore uncreated but I mean many scholars like for example Imam Shokani would ask the question what do you mean when you say created uncreated what do you really mean.

And nobody has been able to define this particular point in time from the Mu'tazilite perspective createdness from their idea referred to the fact that the Quran was created rather than having existed in some form of tablet with God in eternity past and so the dispute over what is the case became a significant point of contention as a philosophical debate in early Islam.

Now when I say early Islam I'm not speaking about the time of the Prophet or the time of the Companions or the time of the early Salaf. This is during the Abbasid period when these philosophical debates were happening which was unheard of during the time of the Prophet nobody asked him is the Quran created or uncreated.

Nobody bothered for them. The Quran was essentially a book of guidance for humanity at large addressing the social ills and problems and providing particular solutions. And so the Islamic rationalist philosophical school the Mu'tazilites held the position that if the Quran is God's word logically God must have preceded his own speech and I'm going to unpack this as we go on and they argued that the Quran expresses God's eternal will but the work itself must have been created by him at some point in time.

Now for us this philosophical debate I would argue in the 21st century whilst important in an academic context is purely moot and has as James has been said blown out of proportion and I'm going to tell you why it's insignificant for a Muslim but why the question may be significant for a Christian more particularly as a counter-response or a counter-rebuttal to the idea of the eternality of the Logos.

You see from a Muslim perspective when Christians say that the Logos is eternal thereby divine Muslims would argue that is shirk and a Christian in retrospect will say well you have the same view of the Quran so by extension you are also engaging in shirk.

So from that aspect perhaps the question may be significant but beyond that there is no particular you know there is no real substance behind the actual issue of the question. When you look at revelation in general the Quranic perspective is all revelation is progressive.

There were previous revelations also progressive and each of them marks a stage in the world's spiritual history. So the Quran we have no problem operates within the history of humanity because it is there to provide guidance and solutions for the perspective and development of man.

The same principle with the Injil the same with the Zabur the same with the Torah same principle applies and of course it is meant as guidance for humanity. This is a Muslim scholar by the name of Fazlur Rahman and he states in his book Islam and Islam in Modernity that the Quran maintains the otherness and the objectivity and verbal character of the revelation but equally rejects its externality vis-a-vis the Prophet meaning as he goes on continuing that the Quran is a divine response to the Prophet's mind to the moral and social situation of the Prophet's Arabia tackling the oppression of the Meccan aristocracy.

This divine message he goes on broke through the consciousness of the Prophet from an agency whose source was God and that's essentially the point. Therefore he mentioned the issue of Zaynab which we may discuss in the rebuttal session.

Zaynab. The issue of Zaynab and the marriage to Zayd was very much something which was which was contextually in the time of the Prophet a reference to previous revelation. Contextual historically specific.

No problem in respect of that revelation versus inspiration. James made a point about the whole difference between the Muslim and the Christian understanding of revelation. In Surah 42 verse 51 the Quran states that there are three distinct kinds of revelation.

It is not vouchsafe to any mortal that he should speak to God except by revelation or behind a veil or by sending a messenger and revealing by his permission what he pleases. It identifies three distinct patterns and modes in terms of which revelation comes from.

The Muslim position is that God dictates and the Prophet is made to pronounce. The Christian perspective is you are inspired. But if you are inspired Rudolf and James can't write the same thing. But you can be inspired to write about the particular issue.

Now here is a question. Can any human author remain consistent in his teaching and preaching for a period of over two decades. Anybody and for 23 years the Prophet practiced and preached in Islam. We have no example of any compromise.

You can bring up the verses of Quranic. We can deal with that. But the Quranic message is consistent throughout. One other important point is that the narratology of the Quran defines conventional literature all literature because it is not linear it is not chronological it is not biographical not about any outside agnostic would be able to discern that.

The style is as if God is speaking. For example surah 49 verse 13. Oh mankind we created you from a single pair. We made you into nations and tribes that you may recognize each other. Surah 3 verse 43.

This is part of the tidings of things unseen which we reveal unto thee. Who is we. What does it sound like. It sounds as if God is speaking. Even if you are an atheist it sounds as if God is speaking.

And that is distinct from the what I would call the once upon a time story. Once upon a time narrative. Now contrast that and speaking about inspiration we look about the once upon a time narrative. Genesis chapter 1 verse 1.

In the beginning once upon a time God created the heavens and the earth. John 1 verse 1. In the beginning once upon a time was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. Now after the death of Moses the servant of the Lord it came to pass.

So it happened once upon a time. Now after the death of Joshua it came to pass. So it happened once upon a time. Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled that there was famine in the land once upon a time.

Now it came to pass. So it happened once upon a time after the death of Saul. 2 Samuel chapter 1 verse 1. Now King David was old stricken in years. Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia. Now it came to pass.

So it happened once upon a time in the 30th year in the 4th month in the 5th day of the month. Can you see the stylistic rendering. There is clearly a distinction. Anyone can see that that there is a kind of a once upon a time biographical narrative which is distinct from the Quranic narrative which seems to suggest that God himself is speaking.

Even if you don't accept it you can clearly see that I've got a copy of the Harper Collins study bible the new revised standard version in 1971. These scholars basically listed the books of the bible and they basically gave a narrative in terms of who they assessed to have been the respective authors.

And they go on to suggest. Author. Genesis one of the five books of Moses. Exodus generally credited to Moses book of Ruth. Author not definitely known perhaps Samuel. 1 Samuel author unknown. 2 Samuel.

Author unknown. 1 Kings author unknown. 2 Kings author unknown. 1 Chronicles author unknown. Probably collected and edited by Israel. So the point is you are basically assuming inspiration to books which are anonymous.

Now I'm going to give you an example and I know time is limited but could I have some volunteers here. Anyone. Sir would you mind I'm not going to do a magic trick it's just basically to confirm some particular passage.

I want you to just follow through with Isaiah 37 and I'm going to basically read Isaiah 37 from here and you confirm whether it is correct or not. I'm going to start from verse 1. And it came to pass when King Hezekiah heard it that he rent his clothes and covered himself with sackcloth and went to the household of the Lord.