ifiipiifefe

m

:&

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

OR

The Influence of the Old and New Testaments
on the Religion of Mohammed

BEING
THE ELY LECTURES FOR 1897

BY
HENRY PRESERVED SMITH, D.D.

NEW YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1897

Copyright, 1897, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS

flbtSS"
r~\ _

TROW DIRECTORY
PRINTING AND BOOKBINDING COMPANY
NEW YORK

THE MEMORY OF
PRESERVED SMITH
AND
LUCY MAYO SMITH

THE ELY FOUNDATION
The lectures contained in this volume were deliv
ered to the students of Union Theological Seminary
in the spring of the year 1897, as one of the courses
established in the Seminary by Mr. Zebulon Stiles
Ely, in the following terms :
" The undersigned gives the sum of ten thousand dol
lars to the Union Theological Seminary of the City of New
York to found a lectureship in the same, the title of which
shall be The Elias P. Ely Lectures on the Evidences of
Christianity. "The course of lectures given on this Foundation is to
comprise any topics serving to establish the proposition
that Christianity is a religion from God, or that it is the
perfect and final form of religion for man.
' ' Among the subjects discussed may be : The Nature
and Need of a Revelation ; The Character and Influence
of Christ and His Apostles ; The Authenticity and Credi
bility of the Scriptures, Miracles, and Prophecy ; The Dif
fusion and Benefits of Christianity, and The Philosophy of
Religion in its Relations to the Christian System.
"Upon one or more of such subjects a course of ten
public lectures shall be given, at least once in two or three
years. The appointment of the lecturers is to be by the
concurrent action of the Faculty and Directors of said
Seminary and the undersigned, and it shall ordinarily be
made two years in advance. ' '

PREFACE
The importance and the timeliness of the subject
treated in these lectures are sufficiently evident. As
to the method of treatment, I leave the reader to
judge. The references given are sufficient to show
how far I have gone to the sources. The citations
from the Koran may be thought too extensive. My
only defence is that I could not well have left any
out ; in fact, I have considerably reduced the num
ber contained in the first draft of the lectures.
The Arabic words transcribed are not numerous,
and the most of them are already current in Eng
lish. I have not thought it necessary to make any
change in these, nor to attempt an exact transliter
ation. I have been favored with the loan of books from
the Tale University library, the library of Union
Theological Seminary, and the library of the Theo
logical Seminary at Princeton. It gives me pleas
ure to acknowledge this courtesy in this public
manner. Lakewood, N. J.

CONTENTS

SCTURB PAGE
I. The Apostle op Allah  1
II. The Common Basis in Heathenism . . .38
III. The Koran Narratives  '60
IV. The Doctrine of God  98
V. The Divine Government  132
VI. Revelation and Prophecy  166
! VII. Sin and Salvation  199
Till. The Service op God  231
IX The Future Life  266
X. Church and State  290

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
LECTURE I.
THE APOSTLE OE ALLAH
In the seventh century of our era Christianity
seemed triumphant over its enemies in the Eastern
Empire. Paganism was destroyed, the heresies had
been overcome, the faith had received its full definition
in what was supposed to be the final creed. The bish
ops and monks, at least, might be justified in suppos
ing that the kingdom of God was already established.
In the reign of Heraclius the political situation was
almost as promising as the ecclesiastical. For that
monarch, with almost Eoman energy, repulsed the
Persians, the hereditary foes of Byzantium, and ex
tended the bounds of the empire almost to the point
which they had reached in the days when the state
was Eoman in fact as well as in name. In this pe
riod of triumph and of apparent prosperity no one
could have foretold the appearance of a new power
upon the scene — a power which would threaten the
whole fabric of civilization and change the map of
the known world. Yet such a power appeared, over
came the armies sent against it, and with unexampled

2 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
rapidity took possession of the fairest provinces of
the East.
Until this time Arabia had not played a leading
: part in the drama of history. All earlier knowledge
; of this country shows its inhabitants to be scattered
! tribes separated by their deserts and by their mutual
, hostility. Persia and Byzantium had indeed welded
the clans nearest their borders into petty kingdoms
which they used each to annoy the other. But of
Arabia as a single power they did not dream. Oc-
; casional forays of the bold desert dwellers in search
of booty they were accustomed to suffer. Now there
came the invasion of a new created nation. The
scattered Bedawin were fired by a single purpose.
Attila, the Scourge of God, was overmatched by
Chalid, the Sword of God, and this terrible weapon
hewed the devoted provinces of the East with tire
less energy. Syria and Egypt fell at a single blow.
Babylonia and Persia followed in an instant. In less
than half a century from the time when Mohammed
fled with a single companion from Mecca, the arms of
his followers were triumphant from the Oxus to the
site of Carthage. In another half century they had
crossed the borders of India on the east, and to the
west were checked only by the waves of the Atlantic.
Their conquest of Spain and invasion of France are
facts familiar to you, as is the battle of Tours or
Poitiers by which Charles Martel preserved to Europe
Eoman Christianity and the civilization with which
it was allied.
That such a movement deserves the attention of
all students of history, is the merest truism. Its

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 3
political importance alone, however, would not make
it the proper subject of this course of lectures. What
makes it appropriate for this place and this occasion
is its religious character. In this, to be sure, it is not
unique. Many, I might say most, of the great move
ments of history have been religious. But few if any
have shown their religious character so distinctly as
the one before us. It calls itself by a religious name
when it calls itself Islam, for Islam means resignation
to the will of God. The war cry of the clans which
crushed the arms of Byzantium was a profession of
faith — " There is no God but Allah, and Moham
med is the Apostle of Allah." Islam has never denied
or outgrown its religious character, for the same pro
fession of faith is to this day repeated by one-tenth
of the human race. Politically we may think it no
longer formidable, but religiously it seems as strong
as ever. With obstinate confidence in its own posses
sion of the truth it resists the preaching of the Chris
tian missionary, while itself sending missionaries into
heathen lands. Because of this tenacity it must be
reckoned with as a living force. Its dynasties may
become extinct ; its kingdoms may fall into the
hands of foreigners ; but ideas do not yield to force.
They are not subjugated by the heavier artillery or
crushed by the stronger battalions. Material forces
enable Great Britain to govern the empire of the
Great Mogul ; they put Holland into possession of
the Malay archipelago, and give France control of Al
giers. But the real power which holds the hearts of
the people in all these regions is the idea of Allah
and His Apostle. For a long time now we have

4 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
flattered ourselves with hopes of the regeneration of
the East, because a few young men in Constantinople
have a varnish of Western education and of Western
manners. The illusion has vanished and we see that
the mass of the people are living in the ideas of a
thousand years ago. There may be a more agree
able, there could scarcely be a more convincing, ex
ample of the tenacity of religion.
In a certain sense, our own time is able to appre
ciate the nature of this force as no preceding age has
appreciated it. We have begun to see that there is a
science of religion — a science which deals both with
the history and with the philosophy of religion. And
yet it is too much to say that this point of view is
universally recognized. Even in the case of Islam,
the attempt is still made to account for the phenomena
by supposing some other force behind them. The
most recent life of Mohammed * tries to explain his
movement as a social rather than a religious revolution.
Social distress bulks so largely in our own philosophy
that we are tempted to give it an equally large place
in the thoughts of other times. It is a sufficient
present answer to this theory to say that we hear
nothing of social claims in connection with the rise and
spread of Islam. The cry of the hosts which subdued
Asia was not for freedom of land or for relief from
feudal burdens, either of taxation or service ; it was
not a demand for liberty or equality. Some of these
things were more or less distinctly involved; but
they were only indirectly involved. The formulated
demand of the Moslem army was for the recognition
* Grimrae, Mohammed, Erster Teil, Das Leben, Munster, 1892.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 5
of Allah as the one God, and of Mohammed as His
Apostle. They brought a creed for their watchword,
and offered a Bible as their boon. This is where we
may easily find the strength of Islam to-day. You
may talk to an intelligent Mohammedan of the benefits
given by modern progress. He will acknowledge that
the civilization of Europe has some material advan
tages ; but, in his heart, he will say that these are only
the temporary enjoyments of a transitory world, and
he will thank Allah that He has given him the better
part in the promise of the world to come. To this
day Mecca numbers among its inhabitants men who
have emigrated from the countries where they enjoyed
peace and security under Christian rule — emigrated
because they could not feel at home under such rule,
in spite of its material advantages. These men de
sire more than material advantages—" They desire
to study the sacred sciences in a sacred place, to
live in the neighborhood of celebrated and pious
scholars or devotees, to do penance for former trans
gressions, to cleanse their filthy lucre by using it
partly in religious works, or to spend their last days
and to die on holy ground." This is the testimony
of a man * who had unusual opportunities to know
whereof he affirms. And all observers who have
become acquainted with the real life of the people
in Moslem lands confirm this testimony. The lead
ing force in Eastern society is still religion.
What has been said is enough to show the impor
tance of a study of this great religious movement.
The inquirer into the history of mankind cannot
* Snouck-Hungronje, Meklca, II., p. 5.

6 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
ignore this striking episode. In any of its numerous
aspects, Islam will repay investigation. But it is
obvious that, for a single course of lectures, we must
limit our field ; and, for the present course, it is my
purpose to consider only the beginnings. The his
tory of a quarter of the globe through a period of
thirteen centuries, is an immense subject. Internal
and external wars, the rise and fall of dynasties,
revolutions, crusades, philosophies, and theologies —
these would require many volumes for their adequate
treatment. To get a clear impression, we must limit
our field ; and the best place to begin is at the begin
ning. We do not ignore the fact that the Islam of
to-day is in many respects different from the Islam
which emerged from the wilderness twelve centuries
ago. It may be true, as has been claimed, that one
who studies the Koran and thinks himself acquainted
with the Islam of to-day, is as far wrong as he would
be who should study the Gospels and think himself
acquainted with the Christianity of Hildebrand or
of Pius the Ninth. We need to caution ourselves at
this point, and not to assume that what is true of
Mohammed and Omar is true also of the now rul
ing Sultan. But, when all is said, we know a good
deal about a system when we know its beginnings.
The stream is purest at its source. Principles are
simpler when they first show their activity. Later
developments may obscure them, but cannot change
their essence. The later developments are better
understood by the mastery of the earlier and simpler
stages. And what is true in general is true, in a
very special sense, of the movement before us. The

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 7
religion of Mohammed developed with great rapidity.
During the lifetime of its founder it passed through
the stages which Christianity took three centuries to
traverse. In one sense this is a disadvantage. The
growth would have been more healthy if it had been
more deliberate. But it adds to the importance of
the earliest period when this period contains so much.
It is only the natural result that the dogmatic system
of Islam not only assumed its final shape at a very
early date, but that it adhered to one type with great
tenacity. Development there was; but the develop
ment early became sectarian. The official, orthodox
dogma overcame the sects, and this orthodox dogma
was only the codification of ideas already prevalent
in the first century of the Flight. For these reasons
knowledge of the origin of Islam is the knowledge
of the whole system, more truly than is the case in
any other of the great historic religions.
But we must still further limit our inquiry. A gen
eral sketch of the rise of Mohammedanism would no
doubt be of great interest, but it would still require
more space than we can give it. We must choose some
one of its many aspects, and fix our attention upon
this single point, in the hope that the smallness of the
field will conduce to clearness in the picture. Now,
the point which I propose to examine is the influence
which the Old and New Testaments have exerted
upon this religion which is neither Judaism nor
Christianity, though it shows such curious resem
blances to both. These resemblances force them
selves upon the notice of even the most superficial
observer. Never was there a religion so little original

8 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
as this one. The dependence of one religion upon
another is, however, not a rare phenomenon. Eelig-
ious ideas emigrate more rapidly than the religions
of which they are a part. All the religions of which
we have competent knowledge, not excepting the
religion of Israel, show foreign influence. The gods
and myths of Greece were emigrants from Asia;
Judaism borrowed from Babylonia; Christianity built
upon the foundation inherited from Judaism. It is
not strange, therefore, that Islam should use both
Jewish and Christian ideas. So far from the lack of
originality being a reason for ignoring the study of
this religion, we may say that it is a special reason
for studying it. Here is a great fact — the migration
of religious beliefs. It is set before us in a striking
example. Every consideration urges us to its close
and attentive examination.
In examining the dependence of Islam upon the
earlier religions we are met at the outset by one
capital difficulty. Islam we know ; the sources flow
for us with greater copiousness than is true of any
other religion. But the Judaism and Christianity
of Arabia are almost unknown quantities. There
was Judaism in Arabia. We suppose that it con
formed in general to the type of other post-biblical
Judaism. But how far it may have been affected
by its surroundings is hard for us to say. There
was Christianity in Arabia. But of its character
we are even more ignorant than we are of Arabian
Judaism. It seems quite certain that it was not the
Christianity of the Greek Church. In all prob
ability it existed in the form of some of the sects

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 9
stigmatized by the theologians as heretical. The
type of heresy represented, however, can be only
faintly conjectured. Now, in this state of ignorance,
we are obliged to seek some fixed point, and this
fixed point can be no other than the Bible. What
ever the Judaism of Arabia had, or had not, we are
safe in assuming that it had the Hebrew Bible. In
like manner, it is true of the Christianity of Arabia
that it had a Bible, which, for the most part, was the
same as the one which we ourselves hold sacred.
For the comparison which we propose to make, the
only practicable thing to do is to note what Biblical
features appear in the religion of Mohammed. It is,
of course, perfectly legitimate to note the form which
these features assume in their new combination. If
these are such as appear elsewhere in the Judaism
of the Talmud, it will be perfectly legitimate to as
sume that Talmudic influence was at work. If the
New Testament influences appear clouded by the
tendencies which show themselves in the Apocryphal
Gospels, we shall conclude that these tendencies
were at work among the nominal Christians of Arabia.
Nevertheless, the features which we seek are Biblical
in their substance and their origin. Our two known
quantities are the Bible and the sources of Islam.
It is significant at the very outset to notice that
Mohammed, the founder of Islam, designated him
self by two words borrowed from the Scriptures.
One was borrowed directly in the Hebrew form —
naby — and was intended to rank him with the Old
Testament organs of revelation, the prophets of that
dispensation. The other, rasul, was the translation of

10 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
the New Testament word which we render apostle,
and was equally intended to class him with the or
gans of revelation in the Christian Church. We see,
therefore, that the very terms in which the founder
of the new religion announced himself expressed his
adoption of Hebrew and Christian ideas. And that,
with the words which he adopted, he had the Biblical
idea is made plain by many passages of the Koran :
" We have sent thee with the truth, as a bringer of
tidings and a warner." * The prophets and apostles
are well described by this word, for it was their work
to warn their people of the judgments of God. It is
evident, therefore, that Mohammed's starting-point
was the fundamental position of revealed religion —
that God speaks through chosen men, to make His
will known to the world. This position is the key
to his activity.
There are thinkers, however, to whom it is incom
prehensible that a man should, in all honesty, put
forward a claim to speak as the messenger of God.
They are compelled to seek some ulterior motive for
his activity. The whole mediaeval world was of
course incapable of understanding the Prophet of
Islam. The only thing which those centuries could
see was that Mohammed was the deadly enemy of
their civilization. They could explain his impulse
only as the direct act of Satan. In truth, the hordes
of fierce and savage warriors which poured from
Arabia and overran a large part of the known world,
must have made upon their victims the impression
* Koran 2"3, of. 48», 6". It should be noticed that God is uni
formly the speaker in the Koran.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 11
that hell had let loose all its demons. According to
the prevalent theory of Christian writers down to
very recent times, therefore, Mohammed was the
most distinguished instrument of Satan.* Anti
christ is one of the names frequently applied to him.
At the present day we may fairly regard this view as
antiquated. Satan is not a preacher of truth, and we
can hardly doubt that Mohammed was sincere in
preaching the truth.
The seventeenth century had another explanation
of the career of Mohammed. This explanation is
explicitly stated in a treatise by the celebrated Dr.
Prideaux, entitled, " The True Nature of Imposture,
Fully Displayed in the Life of Mahomet." t The
polemic nature of this tract (for it is little more) is
sufficiently indicated in its title. The author con
ceives Mohammed to be moved by a desire to regain
ancestral honors and wealth, which had been lost by
his family. " These considerations meeting with an
ambitious, aspiring mind, soon put him upon de
signs of raising himself to the supreme government
of the country; and being a very subtile, crafty
man, after having maturely weighed all ways and
means whereby to bring this to pass, [he] concluded
none so likely to effect it as the framing of that im
posture which he afterward vented with so much
* The reverse opinion— that the Mohammedans were God's instru
ments of punishment for heresy or schism — was also maintained.
Cf. Keller, Der Geiste'skampf des Christentums gegen den Islam,
1896, pp. 12, 56.
t My copy is of the seventh edition, London, 1818, but the pref
ace is dated 1696-97.

12 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
mischief to the world." * The author of the treatise,
therefore, supposes Mohammed to go deliberately to
work and frame a new religion as a means to the
royal power. Substantially the same theory was car
ried out in the Bampton Lectures of 1784, which
have for their subject : " A Comparison of Mahomet-
anism and Christianity in their History, their Evi
dences and their Effects." In these lectures it is
throughout assumed that the founder of Islam was an
impostor, who, " by the mere force of a bold and fer
tile genius, assisted by a concurrence of circumstances
universally auspicious to his design, was enabled to
obtain the most unbounded empire over the minds,
as well as persons, of a very large portion of man
kind." t It is interesting to note that the position
taken by these writers, who were moved thereto by
the desire to defend Christianity, was also taken by
Voltaire, who embodied it in his tragedy : " Le Fan-
atisme, ou Mahomet le Prophete." $ By the author's
own letter of dedication, this tragedy was directed
against an imposture which brought into play the
hypocrisy of some and the fury of others. In the
play itself Mohammed is made to confess the ambi
tion that is his motive. He is made to see with the
?Prideaux, I. c, p. 7.
t Joseph White, Sermons preached before the University of Ox
ford in the year 1784 at the Lecture founded by the Rev. John
Bampton, M.A. Second Edition, London, 1811, p. 47. Cf. also
p. 85, where Mohammed is described as the impostor " whose false
and impious pretences to divine revelation were . . . crowned
with success."
% (Euvres Completes de Voltaire, 1785, Tome III. The Tragedy
was first acted August 9, 1742.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 13
eye of a modern historian, and discovers that Persia
is feeble and Byzantium tottering. It is now the
turn of Arabia to step upon the scene of action, and
erect a monarchy upon the ruins of these. To secure
this end a new religion is the best means, and for this
end it is invented.*
Neither the English churchman nor the French
sceptic had the key to Islam. Both judged the mo
tive from the event. History shows us, however,
very few instances in which the course of great move
ments was foreseen by those who originated them.
Mohammed was no exception to the rule ; in fact, he
had less than the average prescience of what was to
come. To show this, we need only look at the out
line of his life.
It seems well established that throughout his early
manhood, and until middle life, Mohammed showed
no special ambition and no special capacity. We
know very little of this period of his life, except that
he was an orphan and poor, until his marriage with
Chadija placed him in easy circumstances. He had
established a character for honesty, for he was called
the Faithful. But his religion was the religion of his
city, as is abundantly shown by the fact that he
named a son Abd Mendf for one of the heathen dei
ties. When about forty years old t the crisis of his
*0p. tit. Acte II., Scene V.
1 1 give the traditional data. Great uncertainty hangs over Mo
hammed's early life, especially over the chronology. For the
epithet Faithful see : Das Leben Mohammed's nach Mohammed lbn
Ishak bearbeitet von Lbn Hischam, iibersetzt von Dr. Gustav Weil.
Stuttgart, 1864, I., p. 94, and Sprenger, Leben Mohammeds, I.,
p. 526. The name Abd Menaf for Mohammed's son is given by

14: THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
life came. He passed through a severe spiritual
conflict, and, at the end of it, came forth as a preacher.
He began to reason with his countrymen concerning
righteousness and a judgment to come, and, at real
risk to himself, denounced their idolatry as contrary
to the will of God. Before attributing interested
motives to such a man we should have clear and con
vincing proofs. As to his personality, the impression
made upon us by the records of this early ministry,
and to a considerable extent confirmed by his later
history, is that of a modest, retiring man. He was,
even when in possession of power, rather reticent,
shrinking from prominent activity, lacking in deci
sion. The internal conflict from which he suffered
was brought about by what he felt was a call to
preach. His conscience urged him to obey, but
his natural timidity held him back. In all this he
betrays no deep-laid scheme of any kind. He
would apparently have been satisfied with the con
version of his native city, and would have been con
tent to leave the government in the hands of the
chiefs who already possessed it. The singleness of
his motive was indicated moreover by his steadfast
ness through years of neglect, contempt, abuse, and
even persecution. The Meccans had no special ob
jection to his religion so long as it was simply a per
sonal matter. They would have been quite content
to have him get salvation in his own way, if only he
would not preach against the publicly established
Miiller, Der Islam im Morgen-vmd Abendlande, I., p. 48; and the
tradition that Mohammed offered a white sheep to the goddess Uzzah,
by Wellhausen, Skizzenund Vorarbeiten, III., p. 30.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 15
worship. But it was precisely this which Moham
med felt called to do. The chiefs of the Meccans
came to Abu Talib (Mohammed's uncle and protec
tor) and complained of the preaching, whereupon the
uncle remonstrated with his nephew. Mohammed
supposed that he was going to lose the protection of
the clan, in which case his life would not have been
safe for an hour. Nevertheless, he said, with tears in
his eyes : " Though the sun at my right hand and the
moon at my left were to command me to give up this
matter, I would not give it up."*
In this persistence in his calling Mohammed is not
unworthy of being compared with the Old Testament
prophets. He reminds us of Jeremiah, who was com
manded to preach though he was told that the kings
of Judah, and the princes, priests, and people would
fight against him. The parallel with some of the Old
Testament prophets is the more exact in that Moham
med was apparently slow of speech. In his private
life he was taciturn. That when he spoke in public
he had difficulty in expressing his thought, seems
evident from the phenomena of the Koran. The fre
quent repetition of the same thoughts, and even the
same phrases, shows lack of facility. In many pas
sages we are compelled to think that he was not able
to express his thought with clearness. He is fond
of figures and metaphors, yet he rarely succeeds in
carrying one out consistently. He was far from being
a natural orator, and he would have been strangely
self-deceived if he had supposed that his eloquence
would make his countrymen subservient to his de-
*Weil, Ibn Hischam, I., p. 125.

16 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
signs. And his experience is just in line with the
other evidence on this head. His countrymen had
small patience with his harangues. They stigmatized
them as the ravings of one possessed, or as the fables
of the ancients. Putting these indications together
we must agree with an eminent authority on this sub
ject * when he says : " He was not a master of the
language — which explains the frequent repetitions in
the Koran. He composed with difficulty ; he rarely
found at once the word which correctly expressed his
thought. He tried it therefore in different ways, and
hence we find the same ideas recur continually in
the Koran, only in different words. More than one
example shows us that the prophet did not find
the appropriate form until after repeated attempts."
The matter concerns us here only so far as it affects
the sincerity of Mohammed. All the indications point
him out as one of the last men to attempt a career
which should make him play the part of an orator.
Looking at him more closely, it may be confessed
without hesitation that Mohammed was not a man after
the pattern which most commends itself to us. His
personality is one of the most difficult to comprehend
in all history, for it seems to us to unite contradic
tory traits. Frugality and lavishness, temperance
and sensual grossness, indecision and firmness, gen
tleness and cruelty, piety and treachery, all appear
by turns ; and the opposites are often in immediate
juxtaposition. It is difficult for us modern men of the
Aryan race to combine these features in a single pict-
* Dozy, Essai sur I'Histoire de Vlslamisme, Traduit par Chauvin,
Leyde et Paris, 1879, p. 119.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 17
ure. It is no more than a commonplace to say that a
Semite, a Bedawy, an Arab brought up in heathenism,
must be measured by the Semitic standard of twelve
hundred years ago. That, measured by this standard,
he was no ordinary man is clear from the influence
which he exerted during his life, and which has only
increased since his death. To the present day, the
Prophet enters into the life of his followers to an ex-
tenb difficult for us to imagine. Nearly all books
written by Moslems contain in the preface a eulogy
of Mohammed — even works of the imagination like
the Arabian Nights. Once a year the birthday of the
Prophet is celebrated by the Moslem world, and it is
the universal custom to hear the story of his life, or
poems in his praise. The number of biographies of
him is very great ; almost every Arabic author of note
has written one. To cast a slur on the name of Mo
hammed in a Moslem country will excite a mob much
more certainly than blasphemy of the name of Jesus
will excite one in any Christian country. The Ara
bic press continues to issue yearly new biographies or
books of devotion, in which the exemplary character
of the Prophet is set forth for the imitation of the
faithful. Even in Mecca, where one would expect
feeling to be made callous to this theme by long use,
the recitation of a poem in his honor calls forth sighs
and tears of longing : *
" My heart yearns, O Apostle of God, to thee,
But Ah ! I am heavy laden with my sins ."
It need not be denied that in this devotion there is
*Snouck-Hurgronje, Mekka, II., p. 74.

18 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
something of superstition. The Bedawin, like most
people in a comparatively low state of civilization,
are prone to reverence saints. And when we read how
the people in Mohammed's campaigns would take the
water in which he had performed his ablutions and
rub it on their hands and faces, we confess that he
was the object of an unreasoning devotion. But this
is recorded only of the later years of his life, when
his following was increased by the scarcely converted
desert tribes, to whom a prophet was only a sooth
sayer or magician under another name. The early
and more intimate companions of the Prophet were not
of this class. Omar impresses us as one of the san
est, clearest headed men that ever lived. Abu Bekr,
also, though a man of tender religious sensibilities,
possessed a sober and practical common-sense, far
removed from fanaticism. That this was not mere
superstitious devotion to a supposed wonder-working
wizard which Mohammed called forth, is evident from
others besides these intimate friends. When Saad
Ibn Eabia lay on the battle-field in the article of
death, he said to a friend who watched by him : " I
am dying ; greet the Apostle of Allah for me and
say : God reward thee for what thou hast done for
us, as He rewarded the other prophets. Greet also
the Helpers for me and say : God will not forgive
them if harm comes to their prophet." In one of the
campaigns Zeid Ibn al-Dathana was taken captive
and brought to Mecca, where he was put to death.
Just before he was executed one of the spectators
asked: "Would you not rather be with your family
and that Mohammed should be in your place here? "

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 19
The reply was : " I would not have Mohammed
pricked with a thorn if thereby I might be in safety
with my family." Nowhere was this loyalty more
evident than when there was a real grievance. In one
of his later campaigns Mohammed disposed of the
booty in a manner that quite overlooked the claims
of his veteran followers. Their murmurs came to his
ears, and gathering them around him he spoke a few
words of recognition. All hearts turned to him and
the Helpers * broke down in tears, crying : We are
content with our portion and our lot. Another ex
ample recalls to us the chivalry of Uriah the Hittite. '.
Abu Chaithama came home from the army to fetch
grain. The day was hot, and his wives had pitched
the tents in the shade of his garden. They also
Sprinkled them for coolness and prepared refreshing
meat and drink. He looked at it all and said : " The
Apostle of Allah is exposed to the sun and the wind
and the heat ; and shall I spend my time with my
wife in the cool shade before a spread table ? That
is not right. I will not enter your tent but follow
Mohammed." He turned away and as soon as his grain
was ready he mounted his camel and went his way.t
These examples, which might easily be multiplied,
show that it was not mere superstition which drew
followers to the Prophet. They felt that this man
had brought them real benefit, and their hearts were
drawn not only by the benefit they had experienced
but also by the qualities of the man. Some of these
* The Helpers (Ancar) are the people of Medina who welcomed
Mohammed when he fled from Mecca.
t These examples are taken from Weil, Ibn Hischam, pp. 31, 71,
252, 261.

20 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
qualities we can appreciate. For one thing, he was
modest in his opinion of himself. When he first came
to Medina and saw the people fertilizing the pistillate
palms with sprigs of the staminate blossoms, he re
marked that it might be as well not to do it. Here
upon some of the people left off, and when their crops
of dates came short, they naturally reproached him.
He made no defence, but confessed that he was
fallible except where divinely guided. Although his
followers persisted in discovering miracles wrought
by him, he expressly declared his inability to work
them, and that in a passage which reveals his great
desire to work them : " I cannot provide myself with
what is useful or [ward off] what is hurtful except as
God wills. If I knew the secret things I would de
sire great good, and evil should not touch me ; but I
am only a warner and bringer of tidings to a people
who believe." * According to an early tradition he
deprecates extravagant honors : " Praise me not as
Jesus the son of Mary is praised ; call me the servant
of God and His Apostle." t When one of his follow
ers and a Jew were disputing about the comparative
merits of their respective prophets, Mohammed said :
" Do not put me above Moses." He had, moreover,
a distinct sense of his own sinfulness. Ayesha asked
him : Do none enter Paradise except through the
favor of God ? No ! he replied, none enter but through
God's favor. The question was asked and answered
* Koran 7'% and cf. 6" et at. In Bochari, III., p. 149, Mo
hammed intimates that his judgment in legal decisions is not in
fallible. t Cited by Goldziher, Mnhammedanische Studien, II., p. 279.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 21
three times. Then she said : You, also, O Prophet,
will not you enter but by God's compassion ? Putting
his hand upon his head he replied : I also shall not
enter unless God cover me with His mercy.* The
consciousness of sin was, in fact, the starting-point
of his religion. His prayers always contained a peti
tion for forgiveness. He desired the intercession of
his friends, as he in turn interceded for them. That
he also laid the case of his enemies before God, and
invoked punishment upon them need cause us no
surprise, f
Mohammed was gentle and considerate in his inter
course with men. He rebukes himself in the Koran
because in his anxiety to conciliate a nobleman, he
once turned away from a poor blind man who wished
to inquire of him.J A poor negro who swept the
mosque at Medina died and was buried without the
Prophet being informed. On hearing of it later, he
rebuked those who had neglected to tell him, inquired
for the grave, and prayed over it as he was accus
tomed to do for his friends. § The support of his
household Was often a matter of anxiety to him, but
he was always mindful of those more needy, so that
it was not without ground that his followers called
him the protector of orphans and the defence of the
poor. More surprising, in an oriental, is his kindness
toward animals. Although the dog is unclean of the
* Mishcat id Masabih (English translation), I., p. 280.
t Bochari, I., p. 140; II., p. 14.
X Koran 80' f. This is the traditional occasion for the passage.
Grimme objects to the tradition, but I see no sufficient reason for
rejecting it.
§ Bochari, II., p. 84.

22 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Moslem, as he is to the Jew, yet Mohammed praised
the man who showed kindness to a thirsty dog.* He
promised a reward also to the man who watered a
stray camel, and, consistently with this, he threatened
a woman with hell because she had starved a cat.t
Quite as prominent as his kindness was the good
sense he showed in matters where, if he were a fanatic,
he might be expected to be extreme. At one time he
inclined to ascetic devotion, and stood in prayer so
long that his feet swelled, or so long that their skin
cracked and they bled. But when his followers
showed similar excess of zeal, he restrained them,
saying : The body has a claim on you4 Although not
without superstition himself, he discouraged it in
others even where it might have seemed to his advan
tage to connive at it. The day that his infant son
Ibrahim died, there was an eclipse of the sun. The
Moslems were inclined to connect the two events.
But Mohammed said : "No! the sun is not eclipsed
for the death of any human being ; eclipses are among
the miracles of God ; when you see them, engage in
prayer." If Mohammed shows many attractive personal
* " When a man journeys and his thirst consumes him and he
comes to a well and drinks, then comes away and sees a famished
dog gnawing the dirt in his thirst, and says : This animal is in the
condition in which I was ; then fills his boot and holds its mouth
and comes and gives the dog to drink— God rewards such a man
and forgives him. The people said : O, Apostle of Allah, do we
receive a reward in the matter of animals? He replied : Eor every
animal [literary : for every moist liver'] there is a reward."— Bochari,
III., p. 71. Cf. also Wellhausen's Vakidi, p. 327.
t Mishcat, II., p. 42.
X Bochari, II., pp. 41, 226.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 23
characteristics, he shows also many that are repul
sive, especially to our age. That they were not ob
noxious in the eyes of his own age is evident from the
very devotion which we have been considering. The
standard of the times was not very elevated. After
the battle of Ohod, Hind, the wife of one of Moham
med's enemies, sought out among the slain the body
of Hamza, Mohammed's uncle, who had fallen in the
Moslem cause. Having found it, she cut off the nose
and ears, which she made into bracelets. She then
tore open the trunk and cut out the liver, which she
had vowed to eat. Although she was not able to
carry out the vow, the whole scene casts a lurid light
upon the state of society in which Mohammed grew
up. In such a society, the faults which are so prom
inent to us did not attract serious attention. It is
always difficult to say just how far a man should be
judged by the standard of his own times. But we
may fairly claim that any indulgence granted to Bibli
cal heroes on this plea should be granted also to Mo
hammed. The state of Arabia in the seventh century
was not unlike the state of Canaan two millenniums
earlier. The assassinations prompted by Mohammed
should be judged as we judge the deeds of Ehud and
Jael. His slaughter of the Jews stands by the side
of Joshua's extermination of the Canaanites. His
indulgence in wives was not more profuse than
David's, and fell far short of Solomon's luxury. Like
David, he coveted his neighbor's wife, but he did not
murder her husband, and he did not take possession
of her until she had been divorced. He cursed his
enemies, but so did the Psalmist ; and the plea made

24 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
for the Psalmist, that the objects of his imprecations
were the enemies of the cause of God, was precisely
the plea that Mohammed would have made in all
sincerity. These things are not said as a justification. Tried
by any standard the Prophet of Mecca falls short of
perfection. But if we are to appreciate his work we
must not let his faults blind us to his real character.
That character is defined when we say he was a sin
cerely religious man. " Did you know what I know
(he is reported to have said) — did you know what I
know of the future state, you would laugh Uttle and
weep much." * This sentence gives us the key to his
life and to his power. He had a vivid sense of the
great verities — the being of God, the evil of sin, the
future life. He succeeded in impressing these upon
the movement of which he was the head, and they
make it what it is — one of the great religions of the
world. Before we proceed further it will be necessary to
define the sources from which we get our knowledge
of Islam. The difficulty which confronts us is the em
barrassment of riches. Islam has a long history and
a copious literature. In the course of its history it
has developed sectarian differences, as great as those
which divide professing Christians. Seventy-three
sects of Mohammedans were long ago counted, and
in the number was found the fulfillment of a proph
ecy ascribed to Mohammed.t But as we have limited
* Mishcat, I., p. 327.
t The tradition appears in different forms : " The Banu Israel
were divided into seventy-two tribes, and my people will be seventy-

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 25
our inquiry to the origin and early stages of Islam,
sectarian differences do not concern us. For this in
quiry, one document is of the very first importance
and that document is, of course, the Koran. This
book is recognized by all parties of Moslems as the
foundation of their faith. Even if there were doubt
as to its integrity and its authenticity it would still
be of prime importance for the history of Islam. But
there is no reason to suspect either its integrity or its
authenticity. The assurances we have on this point
are very complete. The prime fact is that the reve
lations were committed to memory by a large body of
converts during the life of Mohammed. He empha
sized this as a meritorious act, and thereby increased
the number of living custodians of the word. The
book was formally edited and published soon after
his death, and when divergences began to appear in
the copies of this edition, a new one was published
with new safeguards for its correctness. There can
be no reasonable doubt that the copies in our hands
correspond very closely with this original, and that
this original does not vary in any important partic
ular from the text recited by Mohammed himself.
This does not mean that we have the complete body
of what he published. Some revelations have prob
ably perished ; others were worked over and changed
by Mohammed himself. But we may rest assured
three. Every one will go to hell except one." — Mishcat, I., p. 50.
The more elaborate form gives the Zoroastrians seventy sects, the
Jews seventy-one, Christians seventy-two, and Islam seventy-three.
Dozy, V Islamisme, p 196. Haarbriicker, Schahrastani's Religions-
partheien und Philosophenschulen (1850), I., p. 3. The tradition is
no doubt an invention.

26 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
that what we have in this volume represents his
thought as he uttered it during some part of his
career. It is well known that the Koran is regarded as the
Book of God, in the strictest sense. God appears
throughout as the speaker, and the devout Moslem
has the most exalted idea of its excellence. " People
are not assembled together in mosques to read the
Book of God without light and comfort descending
upon them ; the favor of God covers them, angels
encompass them round about, and God reckons them
among His angels." * This tradition, ascribed to
Mohammed, correctly represents his idea, and that of
his followers. He is reported to have said further :
" The most illustrious of my followers are those who
know the Koran by heart, and those who pray in the
night." t When a number of Moslems had fallen
in battle, those among them who knew the most of
the Koran were most honored in their burial. Omar
expressed surprise that one of his governors should
appoint a freedman to an important office. When
told that the man knew the Koran, he approved the
appointment. Mohammed challenged his contempo
raries to produce a single chapter equal to his in ex
cellence, and it is now an article of faith that the
challenge cannot be met. All these are indications of
the fundamental importance of this book.
When we come to the Koran for information, how
ever, we are much perplexed, for we find it to be a
book without form or plan. It is a collection of dis-
* Mishcat, I., p. 55. f Ib;d ; p 264.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 27
connected compositions, which were uttered at inter
vals during a period of more than twenty years. When
they were written down, no pains were taken to indi
cate date or occasion of composition. Fragments of
different dates were joined to make a single chapter,
or new sections were interpolated in chapters already
complete. When the final redaction was made, it
was altogether mechanical in its arrangement. The
only principle discoverable is that the longest chap
ters come first and the shortest last. Within the
several chapters the transitions are abrupt and with
out apparent motive, and when we add that the
repetition of set phrases is a standing feature, we are
not surprised that, to the Western mind, the book is
unattractive and its study anything but a pleasure.
For our present purpose, however, these drawbacks
do not weigh so heavily as they would if our purpose
were purely historical. For a life of Mohammed, it
is a great disadvantage not to be able to date the
suras.* But our present inquiry is less concerned
with the progressive stages of the Prophet's thought,
than with the total of his religion. We might almost
say that it is not of so much importance for us to
discover what he meant as it is to discover what his
contemporaries supposed him to mean. For it is
this which has made Islam what it is. What they
supposed him to mean we can generally discover, for
* A sura is one of the divisions (chapters) of the Koran. The
word seems to be borrowed from the Hebrew, where it meant a row
of stones in a wall. The principle of arrangement, if we may
call it so, is not applied with absolute rigor. The first sura is a
short one.

28 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
exegetical tradition is, in its main features, constant.
In one respect we are better off than the exegetes
themselves, for they are under a dogmatic bias from
which we are free.
Second to the Koran — but second to it alone— we
have another source for the knowledge of Islam in
a great body of traditions concerning the Prophet.
To understand the place which it occupies we need
only recall the position of the Moslem community
after the death of Mohammed. Up to that time, he
had been accustomed to answer every question that
arose. He was the law. When he was taken away,
they still had a law in the Koran. But this was not
enough. No book of rules can provide for every case
that may arise. Mohammed, moreover, had always
left something to oral teaching. It was not his inten
tion that the Koran alone should be the rule of life.
His own example was to be a guide, as is expressly
stated in the Koran itself.* In a tradition, he is
reported as saying: "What I have commanded to
believers outside the Koran is equal in quality to
the Koran itself, or even greater." t Whether the tra
dition is authentic or not, it undoubtedly represents
the consensus of Mohammedan opinion. From it we
can understand the anxiety to preserve the remem
brance of Mohammed's deeds and words.
The necessity of collecting the traditions was not
simply private or personal. Questions arose con-
* " The Apostle of Allah is an excellent pattern to him who
fears Allah and the Last Day." (33=-.) The tradition confirmsthis.
— Bochari, II., 152.
t Mishcat, I., p. 48.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 29
cerning the state. Public law and administration
had to be dealt with in just the same way as
matters of individual right and wrong. If these
questions were not answered by the Koran, they
must be answered in some other way. Here, too,
the most natural recourse was the precedents set by
the original ruler. There was, to be sure, a possi
bility of arguing by analogy, and so of making the
written law cover cases which were not directly pro
vided for. But analogy is not always convincing,
and the jurists early showed their distrust of it.*
Even with the best will in the world, the Koran could
not be made to decide every question that arose.
These considerations show the importance which
tradition early assumed in the public and private
life of the Moslem. It is not different in other relig
ions. The Jews have their Talmud for an authority
along with the Bible. The early Church recognized
Apostolic tradition as part of the rule of faith, and
even those modern churches which have discarded
tradition, find the need of Confessions, Canons, and
Books of Discipline. In hke manner there stands by
the side of the Koran a body of tradition, almost
equally venerated and more exactly obeyed. The
process in this case stands in the clear light of his
tory. When, immediately after the death of Moham
med, all Arabia seemed to revolt from Islam, attempts
were made to treat with Abu Bekr for new conditions
of peace. But the Caliph was like iron in maintain
ing what the Prophet had imposed — " If they with
hold a kid from that which the Prophet required of
* Cf. Goldziher, Die Zahiriten (1884), p. 5 ff.

30 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
them, I will declare war," was his declaration.* The
precedent was decisive. Henceforth the example of
the Prophet was law to the whole of Islam.
The consequence could easily be foreseen. The
intellectual activity of the new religion was turned
to two subjects — the study of the Koran and the
collection of traditions. This was the beginning of
Moslem science, and seldom has science had more
devoted disciples. For two centuries the tradition-
ists pursued their task, undisturbed by the storm of
war which raged about them. They collected and
preserved from the Helpers and Companions all that
these could remember of the sayings and deeds of
the Prophet. They took at second, third, and fourth
hand all that was alleged to have come from the
Helpers and Companions. The result was an enor
mous mass of material, which the more earnest and less
biassed minds saw must be proved and sifted. Of
the zeal in collecting, we have an example in Gabir
Ibn Abdullah, who went a month's journey to hear
a single tradition.t Not a few journeyed from one
end of the Mohammedan world to the other for the
sake of this knowledge. What was done in the way
of testing and editing may be judged from the state
ment of Bochari that from six hundred thousand
traditions he had selected only a Uttle over seven
thousand.:): ?Kremer, Kulturgeschichte des Orients unter den Chalifen
(1875), I., p. 14.
t Bochari, I., p. 25.
X The system of traditional science is set forth by Professor
Salisbury in a paper entitled Contributions to our Knowledge of

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 31
It is apart from our present purpose to go at
length into the subject of tradition. Yet to illustrate
the pains taken by Mohammedans in preserving the
recollections of then: prophet, I will venture to quote a
single example. It reads as foUows : " Adam Ibn Abi
Iyas teUs us that Shayban tells us from Mansur from
Mujahed from Taus from Ibn Abbas (God be pleased
with both of them) that the Prophet (God bless and
save him) said on the day of the surrender of Mecca :
There is no more [duty of] Flight, but the Holy War
and the Intention ; and when you are called to the
Holy War, then go ! " * The substance of the tradi
tion is here a saying of the Prophet. But it might
be as well, an action of his or a refusal to act, or his
silence. The meaning of the saying here given is
that, whereas before the conquest of Mecca, there
rested upon believers an obligation to flee from that
city as Mohammed himself had done, the obligation
was now abrogated. But the merit of the action
will be acquired by him who engages in war with
unbeUevers, or who sets his mind to accomplish the
end which could formerly be reached only by flight,
that is, to avoid temptation to apostasy. The im
portance of preserving such a dictum will be seen at
once.
the Science of Muslim Tradition in the Journal of the American
Oriental Society, Vol. VII. (1860), pp. 60-142.
Six collections of traditions enjoy favor among the Moslems. I
cannot claim acquaintance with any but Bochari, for which I have
used the vocalized version, Bulak, without date. I cite from this
by volume and page, as the traditions are not numbered. I have
read, also, Captain Matthew's English translation of the Mishcat-ul-
Masabih, Calcutta, 1809, 1810, two volumes, quarto.
* Bochari, IV., p. 35. The same tradition, II., p. 197.

32 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
EquaUy important is it that the dictum should be
known to come from Mohammed. And it was with the
desire to assure this, that the traditionists preserved
in every case the chain of witnesses who reported the
tradition. In the case cited, the saying went through
six hands before it reached the author who put it on
paper. It is obvious that defective memory or lack
of veracity on the part of any one of these would
vitiate the credibility of the tradition. The Moham
medan authors are well aware of this, and the critical
activity which resulted in the rejection of so large a
number of traditions consisted largely in an exami
nation of the credibility of the narrators. That the
editors were not free from bias in their decisions is
only what we might expect. They were novices in
the science of criticism, and could hardly be expected
rightly to weigh tendencies which our own time has
only begun to appreciate. In truth the Hadith*
must be regarded with marked scepticism, so far as
it is used as a source for the Ufe of Mohammed.
The forgery or invention of traditions began very
early. The Companions were not always too scrupu
lous to clothe their own opinions in the form of anec
dotes. The greatest number of traditions are related
by men who were very young when the Prophet came
to Medina. One of these defends himself for re
membering so many things that others could not re-
callf — a case where self-excuse is self-accusation. To
* Hadith is the technical term for a tradition of whatever kind.
Sunna is customary law, generally, but not necessarily, based on
tradition. Cf. Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien, II., p. 11.
t Bochari, III., p. 2.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 33
invent what would cast honor on the name of the
Apostle of God would seem to those times a merito
rious fault, if fault at aU, while there would be even
stronger temptation to suppress anything that would
not comport with his reputation. The same Com
panion (Abu Horaira) who defended himself for the
profuseness of his memory, also confessed that he had
two sorts of recollections; one sort he was accus
tomed to relate, but it would have been as much as
his life was worth to relate to others. These natural
tendencies were magnified by the party spirit which
early became rife in Islam. Each party counted
among its adherents immediate f oUowers of Moham
med. Each was anxious to justify itself by an appeal
to his words and deeds. It is only the natural result
that traditions with a notoriously party bias were cir
culated at an early day. A traditionist of the first
rank admits that pious men were inclined to no sort
of fraud so much as to the invention of traditions.*
The jurists moreover found that new legal prece
dents were almost a necessity, and (as in other sys
tems of law) fiction was used as a means of adapt
ing old laws to new cases. The jurists therefore en
couraged the multipUcation of traditions without any
close inquiry into their authenticity.
From our point of view, therefore, many traditions,
even if weU authenticated to external appearance,
bear internal evidence of forgery. For example, we
read that the Apostle of Allah said : " The resurrec
tion wiU not take place until people kill their own
*See the citation, Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien, II.,
p. 47. 3

34: THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Imam [or divinely appointed ruler] and kill one
another with swords and until a tyrannical king shall
reign." * There is an evident reference here to the
killing of AU and the succession of the Ommayads to
the throne. An orthodox Moslem would see no ob
jection to the probability of Mohammed's uttering
such a prediction. His criticism could hardly be
expected to question it ; while to us it bears evident
marks of a later date.
I may give here an anecdote which iUustrates the
way in which the pious mind shrinks from too sharp
criticism, or indeed from any criticism, of the docu
ments which it has been accustomed to regard as sa
cred. A leading authority on the Hadith was once
lecturing on the evidence for and against doubtful
traditions, when a friend dropped in at the exercise.
On being asked the subject of discussion, the lect
urer replied : I am inquiring into the reUability and
unreliability of certain scholars. "Are you not
ashamed before God," asked the intruder, " to slan
der men who have already been in Paradise a hun
dred or two hundred years ? " The lecturer broke
down in tears, and said : " Oh ! if my ears had only
heard these words before I began my work, I would
never have composed it ! " The book fell from his
hand and he was so much moved that he could not
continue the lecture.t
Where the pious feeling enlists itself on the side
of tradition we can hardly expect criticism to be very
radical. The leading Moslem traditionists were men
* Mishcat, II., p. 533.
t Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien, II., p. 272 f.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 35
of this cast. Bochari never recorded a tradition
without performing the ablution, and a prayer of four
prostrations. He sincerely desired to get at the truth,
and it is greatly to his credit that he brought himself
to reject so large a proportion of the literature which
he had been taught to regard with reverence. But
we cannot suppose that his work or that of other edi
tors Uke-minded with him is final.
Our conclusion is that for the life of Mohammed
this great body of material must be used with great
caution. But when the interest is rather in the first
generations of Moslems than in Mohammed individ
ually, the case is somewhat better. It has already
been remarked of the Koran, that what the early be
lievers supposed it to mean is nearly as valuable to
us as what it actuaUy means, or as what Mohammed
intended it to mean. In the same way we can say of
the traditions — what the early Moslems suppose
Mohammed to have said is nearly as valuable for us
as what he actually did say. For we are concerned
with the formative period of his religion, and this
period extends beyond his death. Let me suppose
in illustration that some Christian at the end of the
second century had gathered and recorded for us all
that oral tradition had to say of the words and ac
tions of Jesus Christ. Seven thousand such frag
ments would be of priceless value. We could not be
sure that in more than a small fraction of cases the
tradition was reliable. The material could not be
used for a Ufe of Christ without great caution. Oral
tradition is a doubtful thing. It is liable to suspicion
in an increasing ratio as it passes through three, four,

36 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
or five mouths. Yet such a coUection would reveal
to us the thoughts, beUefs, and customs of the early
Church, and in this regard it would be beyond price.
Such a collection we have for Islam. Bochari, the
editor to whom I have alluded, lived through the first
half of the third century of the Mohammedan era (he
died a.h. 256). We cannot doubt that, with the care
he took, the material he gathered was aU considerably
older than himself. It is not too much to assume
that the traditions represent the views of the first
hundred years after the death of Mohammed, and we
may therefore use them to form our picture of prim
itive Islam.
So much it was necessary to say in order to justify
the use of the traditions in our inquiry. We must
not come to them, however, with extravagant expec
tations. We are inclined to suppose that the Bibli
cal element in these wiU be large from the fact that
so many converts were early made from both Judaism
and Christianity. But the expectation is disap
pointed. For one thing, the interest of the compilers
of tradition is very different from our own. They
have preserved what is of secondary importance to
us, 'while doubtless much of what they have discarded
would be to us a welcome source of Ught. It seems,
moreover, that the Koran had already, even in the
first century of Islam, fully impressed itself as the
supreme law, so that the tradition, while it iUustrates,
does not often add anything to its essential contents.
The Koran remains the chief source of our knowl
edge. The purpose of this lecture is fulfilled if it has set

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 37
before you the nature of the problem with which we
have to deal. The plan of the lectures sufficiently
shows the order which the inquiry wiU foUow. The
plan itself indicates the close connection of Islam
in its structure with the system which prevails in
Judaism and in Christianity. If the plan proves to
be in accordance with the facts presented by the
sources already described, I shall consider that the
inquiry is both interesting and profitable.

LECTUEE II.
THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM
No religion has been successful which did not bor
row something from the predecessor which it tried to
displace. The Church discovered this when it adopt
ed and consecrated heathen festivals, heathen shrines,
and even heathen divinities, making them into Chris
tian feasts, Christian altars, and Christian saints.
Islam had a similar experience. Its immediate pred
ecessor was a heathenism from which Mohammed
turned away and which he would have entirely sup
pressed had it been possible. But, without himself
reaUzing what he did, he was driven to borrow from
heathenism. We readily see how this came about.
He was brought up in heathenism — until he was forty
years old he conformed to its customs. Whatever
reUgion he had until that time was connected with
the worship of the Meccans. We have no reason to
doubt that he was a sincerely religious man, when he
sacrificed a kid to Uzza at the Kaaba, or when he
caUed a son Abd Menaf for one of the false gods.
When his new convictions came, he gave up what
ever was contradictory to them. Probably he tried
at first to make a clean sweep of the old religion. He
gave up the sanctuary, for at Medina he made Jeru-
38

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 39
salem the point toward which the prayers of the be
lievers should be directed. But even this was a strain
on his habit. So after a time the Kibla was changed
to the Kaaba again. Partly this may be accounted
for by his experience with the Jews. When he came
to Medina he felt that he could gain them to his party.
He was convinced that his religion and theirs were
one in substance, and of course he saw no reason why
they should not at once unite with him. In this he
overrated his knowledge of their reUgion, and under
rated the obstinacy of their convictions. When he
saw that his hopes were not likely to be reaUzed, he
changed the Kibla. That his motive was to gratify
his affection for the ancestral sanctuary rather than
to aUenate the Jews, is evident from the Koran, which
says : " We have seen thee turning thy face about
towards the [different parts of the] heavens, and We
wiU cause thee to turn to a Kibla that will please thee.
Therefore turn thy face in the direction of the sacred
House,* and wherever you are, turn your faces in its
direction, and those who receive the Book wUl know
that this is the truth from thy Lord ; and God is not
ignorant of what they do." The plain implication of
the passage is that Mohammed was restless under his
own ordinance which fixed the Kibla at Jerusalem.
His heart yearned toward the ancient sanctuary.
His desire was gratified by the command to make
that again the central point of his religion.
Although the motive in this was so largely per
sonal, yet there is no doubt that it was a real step
toward gaining the Arabs. The new Kibla was to
?Literally, Mosque, or place of prostration. The passage is 21S9.

40 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
them a notification that the new religion was to be
national. The reconciliation between Mohammed's
belief in the genuineness of Judaism and his belief
in the genuineness of the Kaaba, was effected by
an ingenious use of Abraham. How he came to
this is difficult to make out. The theory of Moslem
writers that the heathen Arabs already knew Abra
ham as the builder of the Kaaba must be viewed
with suspicion. Still there is a possibility that
Abraham, or an Abraham was known to the Mec
cans and connected with their worship.* The motive
of Mohammed is evident All great religious leaders
have sought points of union with the past. It seems
to them evident that a purer faith was accepted
in the earlier ages, and they claim therefore to be
restorers rather than originators. Such was the claim
of Mohammed. Christianity and Judaism both had
made Abraham the Father of the Faithful. The
Old Testament account makes him a builder of
altars. What more natural than that Mohammed
.should suppose him the founder of the Kaaba?
Later tradition was not content with even this an
tiquity. It supposes the sacred building to have
been first erected by Adam in imitation of the
heavenly sanctuary which he had seen in Para
dise before his expulsion. It also affirms that this
* The Station of Abraham is mentioned in tradition as though it
were a part of the Kaaba (or possibly a name for the whole Kaaba)
before the conquest of Mecca. Cf . Bochari, I. , p. 97, where Omar
says that he suggested to Mohammed the words (Kor., 2119) : " And
take the Station of Abraham as a place of prayer." The Station of
Abraham is the name now given to a part of the area of the Haram
at Mecca.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 41
heavenly House is located just over the earthly Kaaba.
But these refinements are later than the time of Mo
hammed, who was satisfied to carry the sacred place
back to Abraham.*
The Kibla — that is, turning the face to a particu
lar point of the compass in worship — is itself an in
stitution of great antiquity. It is perhaps never ab
sent from early rehgions. When men have a dis
tinct place in which their Deity dwells, they natural
ly turn toward that place in paying their devotions.
One of the gravest accusations against Israel is that
they turn their faces to the sun and their backs to
the Temple of Yahweh.t The prayer of Solomon in
timates that worshippers even in distant lands would
pray toward the temple.^ The custom of Daniel is
well known. The institution of the Kibla is there
fore ancient in Judaism and very likely goes back to
Semitic heathenism. In Islam it is really a survival.
For Mohammed made God's dweUing-place to be
heaven, and there was no real meaning in an earthly
sanctuary. He himself says : " To God belongs the
East and the West ; wherever you turn, there is the
face of God." And again : " Piety does not consist
in turning your faces toward the East or toward the
* Judaism also locates the heavenly throne just above the earthly
Temple, and this seems to have been adopted by Mohammed. Eor
in the Night Journey he went first to Jerusalem and thence ascended
to heaven. The Mohammedan tradition which ascribed the first
building to Adam, allows that this structure was destroyed in the
Deluge and rebuilt by Abraham.
t Ezek. 817, where the text has been purposely changed to obscure
a drastic phrase.
J 1 Kings 8. Cf . Dan. 6»>.

42 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
West. Pious is he who beUeves in God and the
Last Day." * But custom was too strong for logic, as
has often been the case in other religions.
To custom also, aided by a sense of expediency, we
must attribute the retention of the Kaaba itself as a
fetish — I know of no other word that will fit the case.
For the Kaaba is one of the sacred stones of which
Semitic religion knows so many. The process by
which they become sacred is vividly brought before
us by the experience of Jacob. The wayfarer has a
dream in which a divine being appears to him. On
waking, he associates the divinity with some con
spicuous stone — perhaps the one which he has used
as a piUow. The stone, becomes an object of wor
ship. It receives the oblation of oil or a vow of the
tithes. From this time on, the stone and the God
are identified; the more ignorant worshippers iden
tify them absolutely, the more intelligent say that
the God dwells in the stone, which therefore becomes
a Beth-El. A number of such idols or fetishes are
known to have existed in Arab heathenism. Dhu-1-
Chalaga, a white stone, once an~13oif4s now the
threshold of a mosque at Tabala, where it was for
merly worshipped. Dusares of Petra, a stiU more an
cient example, is described as a black, rectangular, un
cut stone four feet high and two feet thick. One of the
names for it seems to have been kaaba. t The prevalence
of stone worship among the heathen Arabs is attested
by the Moslem writers, in that they were compelled
* Koran 2">», »».
t The examples are from Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten,
III., pp. 42 f., 46; cf. also pp. 50, 54.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 43
to invent a theory to account for it. The theory is
thus given by the earnest biographers of Mohammed
whose work has come down to us : * " Others believe
that the beginning of idolatry among the sons of
Ishmael was that the Meccans, when their land be
came too straight for them, spread abroad over the
country, and aU took stones from their sanctuary [the
Kaaba], out of reverence for their temple, and they
set them up wherever they formed a settlement ;
and they walked around them as they used to go
about the Holy House. This led them at last to
worship every stone that pleased their fancy; and
their descendants, who forgot the earUer faith, aban
doned the reUgion of Abraham and Ishmael and
worshipped idols and feU into the errors of the
people who had preceded them." The tradition is
interesting as showing how easUy historical theory
exactly reverses the facts, and also as showing the
Moslem's inabihty to comprehend the religion of his
ancestors. But here it interests us especiaUy as
giving unbiassed testimony to the existence of stone
worship before Islam.
The Kaaba is such a Beth-El. It is in fact called
the House of God. But let us not be misled by this
name, and by the fact that the Kaaba is a building, into
supposing that it was a temple. The God resided in
it only as Uzza resided in the tree which was identi
fied with her. The four walls which constituted the
original building were only an extension or enlarge
ment of the sacred stone. No special emphasis was
ever laid upon the room within these walls. The
* Ibn Hischam, Uebersetzt von Weil, I., p. 39.

44 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
walls themselves were the sacrum. And, when the
roof was added, the building was a cube — simply an
enlarged block. The black stone near one corner was
most sacred, but the whole cube was an object of
worship.* The house of the God was added in the
curtain which was stretched over the structure, and
which is still annually renewed. In aU this — the
sacredness of the stone, the cubical form of the
sacred object, and the tent which was stretched over
it — we see remarkable resemblances to Hebrew antiq
uity. Jacob's stone at Bethel has already been
alluded to. But this is not the only sacred stone of
Hebrew history. In Jacob's covenant with Laban
we find another, and in fact the Maggeba appears to
have been a regular accompaniment of the altar of
Yahweh down to a comparatively late period.t We
remember also that the Most Holy part in both Tab
ernacle and Temple was a cube in form ; that over
it Was spread a tent in the desert ; and that the cen
tral point even in the Temple of Solomon was a
peculiar rock.
All these remarkable parallels are due to survival
from early Semitic heathenism. Mohammed in his
rejection of the idols should have rejected the Kaaba
as well. Omar used to say, after the death of the
Prophet, when he stroked the black stone of the
Kaaba : " I know thou art only a stone and canst
neither harm nor help ; and had I not seen the
Apostle of Allah do this I would never do it." But
* On other instances in which the sacred object was a building, cf .
Wellhausen, I. c, p. 39 f.
t Cf. W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 185 ff.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 45
custom was too strong for logic. The reverence with
which Mohammed had learned to regard the sanctu
ary in his youth clung to him in his manhood, and it
carried the sanctuary and the Kibla into Islam.
Various puritan sects have arisen in Islam winch have
tried to carry out the logic of the Prophet, to do away
with the sacred stone, and to destroy the whole sanct
uary. But the result has been only to establish the
superstition the more strongly.*
The rites of the pilgrimage are also an instance of
resemblance which is not dependence. They orig
inate in Semitic heathenism, from which common
source they passed over into Hebraism and into Is
lam. The pilgrimage is caUed by the name haj — the
same word was used by the Hebrews for the yearly
festivals.t The Arabic lexicographers define it as a
visit. But it seems originally to have been the pro
cession or dance around the sacred stone or the altar.
A Psalmist speaks of going about the altar, and an-
* Snouck-Hurgronje, Mekka, I., pp. 49, 60. The later tradition
declares that Allah gave Adam a model of the Kaaba in curtains
of light, pitching it on the spot on which the Kaaba now stands.
This tradition is doubtless influenced by the Biblical account of the
command given to Moses concerning the Tabernacle and the pattern
which was showed him in the mount. Ex. 2540. Cf. Prideaux,
Life of Mahomet, p. 56. On the covering of the Kaaba in heathen
times, Snouck-Hurgronje, Mekka, I., 5. The theologians find a
reason for kissing the black stone in the legend that it was origi
nally a jewel from Paradise, which has become black by contact .
with sinful men. At the last day it will receive eyes and tongue
and will bear witness for the believers.
It is interesting to note that the Heavenly Jerusalem is also a
cube (Apoc. 21'8).
fExod. 12", 23», Lev. 23" and often.

46 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
other was accustomed to lead the procession on festi
val occasions.* David danced before the ark. So we
find in Arabia that the worshippers walk around the
Kaaba and run between Safa and Merwa, two other
sacred spots in Mecca, t The number of circuits is
seven, % which reminds us of the prominence of seven
as a sacred number in Judaism. The theologians are
ready with a theory that Adam was the originator of
this custom, having seen the angels march about the
throne of God in Paradise.
Other customs of the pilgrimage show notable
analogies with those enjoined in the Old Testament,
the analogies being due to their common heathen
source. One of these is the shouting of the pilgrims.
When the Haj reaches the sacred territory its mem
bers shout Jjahbgdlca — at Thy service ! This shout
ing is caUed by a name derived from the root from
which we find in the ~Bib\e_^HcdJsh^A. The Halle
lujah also is a shout of greeting. The verb means
to shout just like the corresponding Arabic verb. If
the circuit of the sacred object was originally a
dance, the shouting was the song that accompanied
it. But all festivals are noisy occasions. So late as
the time of the Psalms, worship is described as
" shouting aloud to God." § In the sacrificial ritual
* Ps. 266, 42\
t On the rites of the pilgrimage as now performed, cf . Burton,
Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina. I have
only the Tauchnitz edition (1874), in which the third volume is de
voted to Mecca.
X Mohammed used to make three out of the seven with a quick
step, the others more deliberately.— Bochari, II. , p. 148.
§ Ps. 81'. On the word hallal and its meaning, cf . Wellhausen,

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 47
both of Arabia and of Phenicia, the name of the
God was shouted by the worshippers. The Arabic
custom therefore was not borrowed (as Sprenger
thinks), from Israel, but was a part of primitive
Semitic worship which passed over into Israel and
into Islam.
To our view the characteristic rite of the Hebrew
religion was sacrifice, and this rite, as we know, is
found in nearly aU religions. In Arabic heathenism
it existed in a very primitive form. The victim was
not burned upon an altar — the blood was smeared on
the sacred stone or poured out at its base. The ap-
pUcation of the blood to the altar (or on the most
sacred occasions to the Ark, the special seat of the
divinity), continued in the Old Testament religion
down to its latest development. In Islam, though
the rite was retained,* the appUcation of the blood
to the sacred object (the Kaaba itself, of course, would
have been the proper object), was lost. The meaning
of sacrifice is therefore totally obscured. For we can
hardly doubt that its early significance was in mak
ing the God partake of the feast, either by himself,
or in the communion with the worshippers. In re
jecting this idea, Mohammed was consistent with
the general trend of his theology. God is, to him,
supersensuous, and He cannot partake of food. On
this the Koran has a very explicit declaration. The
sacredness of the blood disappears — except that it
cannot be eaten. There is no longer any idea either
Skizzen, III. , p. 107 ; Sprenger, Leben Muhammed's, III. , p. 527 ;
W. B. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 411.
* Cf . below, on the Service of God.

48 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
of expiation or communion connected with the rite.
We should expect the rite to be done away. But it
survives. Its merit is in fact emphasized, as is usu
ally the case with unmeaning rites. But its merit is
solely that it is obedience to a command of God.* It
does not disprove Mohammed's independence of Juda
ism in this matter, that the theologians bring the
great sacrifice at Mecca into connection with Abra
ham's willingness to sacrifice his son.t
In connection with the pilgrimage we notice, as
another survival, the shaving of the head. For
Islam, it is assumed to be a part of the pilgrimage
(Kor. 2192 ). The references to it in Arabic heathen
ism are unambiguous, % and we see that the shorn
hair is an offering to the God of the worshipper. In
the Old Testament also the Nazarite shaved his head
at the completion of his term of devotion, and the
hair was burnt upon the altar. In Islam the rite
now completes the pilgrimage, and its significance is
apparently exhausted in marking the passage from
the " holy '' to the " common " state of life. This was
true to a certain extent in Judaism, where shaving
the head marked the accomplishment of any vow.
The original sacrificial meaning stiU shows itself in
another rite, which has survived in Islam and is en-
* The traditions on the merit of sacrifice are given by Hughes,
Dictionary of Islam, p. 552.
t Mohammed said (according to a tradition) that the sacrifices are
conformable to the laws of Abraham.— Hughes, p. 552b. The com
plete divorce of the rite from its early meaning is seen in the
fact that the sacrifice of the Haj is offered in the valley of Mina—
not at the Kaaba.
X Cf. Krehl, TJeber die Religion der Vbrislamischen Araber, p. 14.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 49
joined in tradition though not in the Koran. When
a clnld is seven days old its head is shaved, and a
goat is sacrificed, that is, slain, and the flesh dis
tributed to the poor. We are expressly told that in
heathenism the same custom prevailed, and that the
blood of the slain animal was rubbed on the child's
head.* This points to a dedication of the child to
the God, and the shaving of the head must have had
the same meaning. An analogue is circumcision,
which also has survived in Islam though not enjoined
in the Koran.
The list of customs which have survived from
Semitic heathenism in both Hebraism and Islam is
not yet complete. One of them is the changing of
clothes by the pilgrim when he enters the sacred
territory. This is not expressly enjoined upon
Israel, but when they appear before God at Sinai,
they are commanded to consecrate themselves and
wash their clothes. The Psalmist exhorts to wor
ship in " the beauty of holiness," by which he means
vestments consecrated to the service. It is an ex
pression of the same idea, when the priests are com
manded to conduct their serviee in sacred garments.
Ezekiel is especially clear, for he enjoins that when
the priests go into the outer court to the people, they
shaU put off the garments in which they minister
and put on others.t The same regulation passed
into the priestly Tora. We cannot doubt that we
have here a custom of Semitic heathenism which has
survived into the later religions. In Israel it was
* Buraida, cited by Hughes, Dictionary of Mam, p. 554.
fEzek. 44>».
4

50 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
specialized because a distinct order of priests was
developed. OriginaUy it was the whole people who
were subject to this regulation. Islam has therefore
more nearly preserved the original usage. We may
note, in this connection, the law which forbids inter
course of the sexes during the pilgrimage — a law
which has its counterpart in the Old Testament.*
The sacredness of a particular territory is one of
the ideas originating in Semitic heathenism and sur
viving into the revealed religions. In his farewell
pilgrimage, Mohammed said : " God consecrated
this land in the day in which he made heaven and
earth, and it is consecrated with His consecration
until the day of resurrection. And killing was not
lawful in it to any before me, and it was lawful to me
for one hour of one day only. And it shaU be con
secrated with God's consecration until the day of
Besurrection — its brambles shaU not be cut, nor its
game hunted, nor shall one pick up a lost article
without advertising it, nor shall its fresh herbage be
gathered." t This was simply the contmuation of
the heathen regulation. We find, besides Mecca,
other sacred tracts mentioned in heathen times —
hima is their name — within which animals could
pasture at will and none could molest them. Not
even stray animals could be reclaimed when they
* Kor. 21", cf. Ex. 191!. The priest at Nob refuses to give David
the sacred bread until assured that the young men have kept them
selves from women. — 1 Sam. 21*.
t Bochari, II., p. 197. At the suggestion of Abbas, the Prophet
made an exception in favor of the cutting of certain fragrant rushes \
cf. W. E. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 134; Snouck-Hurgronje,
Mekka, I., p. 23.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 51
had once crossed the boundary of the hima. The
land was sacred to the God who had his dwelUng
in it, and whatever came into contact with the land
partook of the sacredness. It was not only the prop
erty of the God; it partook of his inviolability, so
that whoever injured it was guUty of sacrilege. As
we are not studying Arabic heathenism, we need not
stop to inquire whether the earliest idea was that the
God dwelt in the territory and therefore made it
sacred, or whether it was the territory that was
sacred, and therefore, the God dwelt in it. What
interests us is that the primitive idea passed over
into Judaism and Islam — and, indeed, into traditional
Christianity. The sanctuary of God is a sanctuary
for men — those in danger find an asylum there.
Joab, when he knows his life to be threatened, flees
to the altar and lays hold of it, and although in his
case the asylum was not respected, this is the ex
ception that proves the rule. The cities of refuge
humanely provided in the later legislation for the
protection of the manslayer, were doubtless originally
seats of worship. The asylum has in them survived
the sanctuary. It is not improbable that the pro
vision for the cattle of the Levites in the " suburbs "
of their cities is a relic of the same idea.* The
Levites are consecrated persons. Their cities with
the territory about them are sacred. The only cattle
that can be allowed there must be the property of
the sacred persons. It does not seem far-fetched to
suppose that the Sabbatic year rests upon the same
basis. The whole land of Israel belongs to Yahweh ;
*Num. 35J.

52 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
His property in it is, therefore, shown by its being
left uncultivated — the hima was always left in its
natural state. To plough the hima is profanation. It
was, of course, impossible to ordain that the land of
Israel should be left uncultivated all the time, for its
people had become cultivators. But the recognition
of its sacredness might be made one year out of seven.
This ordinance has had no influence on Islam ; but
the idea of holiness, or sacredness, which shows itself
in Islam is evidently the same which appears in these
various provisions of the Hebrew Law.
There are a number of heathen customs which
have maintained their place in Islam, but which are
tolerated rather than authorized. Sacred trees still
have a sort of worship paid them. There are traces
of such also in the Old Testament. It is, at least, a
curious coincidence, that the tree of Uzza was an ora
cle, and that in Israel we have a tree of the diviners*
The worship of the dead has left traces in the cus
toms of Israel and in the customs of Islam. The
Jews builded the tombs of the prophets, and so do
the Moslems to the present day.t With the sacred
fountains at Kadesh and elsewhere, we may compare
the sacred well Zemzem at Mecca, whose character
was left undisturbed by Mohammed.
We shall have occasion to notice that the name of
* Judges 937. The coincidence is pointed out by Krehl, Religion
der Vorislam. Araber, pp. 75, 78 f.
t Images of Abraham and Ishmael are said to have been wor
shipped in the Kaaba. — Bochari, II., p. 147. This is perhaps a de
duction from the alleged foundation of the sanctuary by them. On
saint-worship in Islam, cr. Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien,
II., p. 281 ff., and I., p. 229 ff.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 53
God adopted by Mohammed is one of the names cur
rent in Arabia before his time, and that it is the
same name used in Hebrew and Syriac. He had no
need to borrow it from any other source than Arab
custom. The name must have existed among the
primitive Semites before the rise of the Hebrew re-
Ugion. The characteristic greeting of Islam is Salaam !
This is weU known to be identical with the Hebrew
Peace ! (Shalom.) Our first impulse is to derive
Mohammed's custom from Judaism. But this would
probably not be correct. In the desert the state of
nature is a state of war, and every stranger is taken
for an enemy. The most appropriate assurance when
men meet is that it is peace. So we explain the cus
tom in Hebraism, and we suppose the state of Arab
society had given rise to the same custom in primitive
times. The salutation would be a survival in both
Judaism and Islam. The Meccans were accustomed
to use another form ; * but this does not prove that
Mohammed adopted his from the Jews.
The fact that the Arabic and the Hebrew are so
closely related, and that the state of society in
which the two languages were spoken was so nearly
the same, causes a similarity in phraseology which
may deceive us. We are likely to suppose there was
borrowing, when, in fact, there was none. Or, again,
* According to Wakidi, Umair, who came from Mecca to Medina
ostensibly to treat with Mohammed for the ransom of prisoners,
used the salutation: "A Pleasant Morning,-" Wellhausen, Mo
hammed in Medina, p. 75; cf. Goldziher in the Z. D. M. G., 46,
p. 22.

54 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
there may have been borrowing before the time of
Mohammed. In either of these cases it would be
wrong to argue for Biblical influence on Mohammed,
on the ground of resemblance. For example, the con
junction of riches and chUdren as marks of prosper
ity is found in the Koran : * " Like those who were
before you — they were more powerful than you and
surpassed you in riches and in children." This and
similar expressions remind us of the Psalmist's lan
guage : " Whose beUy thou fiUest with treasure, they
are satisfied with chUdren," and other passages to the
same intent. The resemblance is the more marked
in that both Bible and Koran thus describe the
wicked in their prosperity. But there is probably
no dependence. It is the Semitic idea which puts
large possessions and numerous offspring side by
side as elements of good fortune. Another resem
blance is found in the foUowing : t " Those who deny
Our signs [or accuse Our verses of falsehood] and
show themselves proud against thee — for these the
gates of heaven shall not be opened, nor shaU they
enter Paradise until a camel shall enter the eye of a
needle." In spite of the simUarity to a well-known
saying of the Gospel, it is probable that there is no
direct influence to be assumed. The proverbial
phrase was current before Mohammed (perhaps even
before Christ), and Mohammed used it without any
knowledge of the Gospel precedent. The same cau
tion which is advisable in arguing from these cases is
true of such resemblances in language as the follow
ing : " Every soul must taste of death." % " God puts
* Koran 910, cf. Ps. 17 14. t Ibid. 739, cf. Matt. 19». X Ibid. 3,8».

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 55
before you as a parable a man who is the slave of
[two or more] incompatible masters, and the one who
belongs to a single master — are they alike ? " * This
readily suggests the assertion that it is impossible to
serve God and mammon. Again, the comparison of
those who hear and obey with those who hear but do
not obey, seems to find an echo in the following : " Is
he who has founded his walls upon the fear of God
and His power better, or he who has founded his walls
upon the edge of a crumbling precipice and falls with
it into the fire of hell ? " f With the Psalmist's asser
tion that God derides the plotters against His Anoint
ed, compare : " God mocks at them, and leaves them
perplexed in their disobedience." % We must admit
that in such passages there is always a possibility of
BibUcal influence. But the other possibiUty — that
the resemblances are due to the other causes I have
named— is constantly to be kept in mind. The
strength of the argument to be based upon the re
semblances depends somewhat upon the context of
each particular passage. When we read in the ac
count of Pharaoh, § that Moses said : " Your hearts
became hard after this, and were like the rock or
harder," we suspect from the connection that Mo
hammed's language is affected by Biblical influence.
But in the other cases cited we are not warranted in
assuming, as the cause of the resemblance, anything
more than the general Semitic cast of thought and
language in both Bible and Koran.
Before we leave this part of the subject it will be
* Koran 39»», cf. Matt. 6«. f Ibid. 9"°, cf. Matt. 7«-*7.
X Ibid. 2» § Ibid. 2G9.

56 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
legitimate to inquire what narrative material Mo
hammed took from Arabic heathenism. The Koran
is a book nearly as large as the New Testament* It
would be difficult to fill so large a book with the sim
ple dogmas and maxims of Islam. We are not sup-
prised to find in it considerable narrative material.
But very little of this material is drawn from Arabic
sources— that is, from sources outside of Judaism and
Christianity. Except two stories of some length
there is nothing more than brief allusions. Among
the brief aUusions, I count what is said of Lokman
the Sage.t For although this extends to ten verses,
the verses are filled with a sermon of Mohammed's
rather than with the story of Lokman. The verses
throw no Ught upon the source of Mohammed's in
formation, but it is evident that Lokman had already
received in tradition a place among Arab heroes.
Scarcely more than an aUusion is what is said
concerning the army of the elephant. The event to
which the account refers, is the destruction of the
Abyssinians, which took place some forty years before
the call of Mohammed— tradition dates it in the year
of the Prophet's birth. The Abyssinians had a trib
utary kingdom in southern Arabia, and attempted to
extend their power. In the vicinity of Mecca the
army was compeUed to halt, apparently by an epi
demic of small-pox, by which, and by the Bedawin, it
* It contains about eighty-five per cent, of the number of words
in the Arabic translation of the New Testament published by the
Am. Bible Society.
t Koran 31"-18. On the speculations of the commentators, cf.
Maracci, Refutationes, p. 547.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 57
was wholly destroyed. Mohammed's account, which
is contained in one of his early suras, is as foUows : *
' ' Dost thou not see how thy Lord wrought with the army
of the elephant ?
Did He not turn their cunning into confusion ?
And send upon them birds in companies,
Which threw upon them stones [like] graven seals,
And left them Uke stubble where cattle have grazed ? "
Later writers have enriched the story with many
details, none of which can be considered historical.
The only historic fact we discover is that the army
was defeated. Popular story ascribed their destruc
tion to an army of birds which threw pebbles upon
them. Whether the language — graven seals — impUes
that Mohammed beUeved the stones to be engraved
with the names of those for whom they were destined
is not certain. But it is evident that he was inter
ested in the history solely for its reUgious bearing.
A concern for history as history would have been
unintelligible to him. What he valued was the illus
tration of the power of God.
He was moved by the same religious interest in
selecting the two longer stories from Arabic history
to which I referred above. These are the stories of
Ad and Thamud which he uses a number of times.
It is indeed almost an abuse of language to speak of
these legends as history. Ad, described as a people
of southern Arabia, may be wholly mythical. Thamud,
on the other hand, is the name of a tribe which really
* Koran 105. The Abyssinian King rode an elephant, whence the
title of his army,

58 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
existed. The feature of their civilization which stands
out prominently in Mohammed's description, is that
they make rock dweUings like those of Petra : " And
ye hew the mountain into houses," * From the tra
ditions of Mohammed's expedition to Tabuk, it seems
quite certain that these " houses " are the rock tombs
at Medain Salih, visited and described by Doughty.t
They had probably been seen by Mohammed in one
of his earher journeys, for they he on the caravan
road from the Hejaz to Syria. The impression made
upon his mind was very strong. A people once pow
erful enough to sculpture the mountains has disap
peared by an act of God — this was the fact that was
so startlingly told by these wonderful remains. This
fact exactly suited his scheme of history. His was
not the first religious mind to despise details and to
construct history to fit a theory. In this case he
filled in the bare outlines given by tradition with de
tails suggested by his theory. Ad and Thamud are
made to conform to the scheme already impressed
upon him by the Biblical narratives. What this
scheme is, is told us in his own words : \
" Have they not travelled in the land and seen the end
of those who preceded them, though they were more nu
merous than they, and more powerful, and [though they]
had more imposing monuments in the land ? But what
they had gained was of no avail. When Our Apostles
brought them clear credentials, they rejoiced in what
knowledge they [already] possessed ; but that which they
scoffed at came upon them. And when they saw the pain
* Koran V. f Doughty, Travels in Arabia Deserta.
% Koran 4082-85.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 59
sent by Us, they said : We believe in God alone, and we
disbelieve in what we [hitherto] associated with Him. But
the faith which they professed when they saw the pain sent
by TJs, did not profit them. Such was God's method with
those of His creatures who have passed away, and thus the
unbelievers perished."
This is the phUosophy of history according to Mo
hammed. It needs no argument to show that it is
suggested by the Bible. What interests us here is
that it is appUed not only to the Bible stories, but
also to the legends received from Arabic tradition.
Like the Kaaba, the pilgrimage, the Kibla, the narra
tive material taken from heathenism was transformed
by the new theology. The theology was strong
enough to weld the apparently incongruous material
into one system.

LECTUEE III.
THE KORAN NARRATIVES
The dependence of the Koran upon the Bible —
whether the dependence be mediate or immediate we
do not now inquire — is evident at a glance. There
is not a page whose language does not remind us of
the Old Testament or of the New. This is partly
accounted for by the similarity of the Arabic lan
guage to the Hebrew, and also by the resemblance of
the civilizations represented in the two books. As
was noticed in the last lecture, not every verbal
parallel can be taken as an evidence of dependence.
To the examples there given we might add the fol
lowing: We read in one instance a threat against
evil-doers, which will be accomplished " though their
cunning were such that mountains would be moved
by it." * We need not suppose a reminiscence of a
New Testament phrase. The figure is natural to one
who lives in a mountainous country. Again, the evil
doers are said to devour the heritage of the orphan.]
The phrase is strikingly like some of those with
which we are famiUar in the New Testament, but it
does not follow that it is borrowed from that source.
So those who expend their money in tlie sight of men
* Koran 14".
t Ibid. 4n, I cite the Koran always from Elugel's edition.
60

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 61
are strikingly like those who do alms that they may
be seen of men* but the phenomenon of ostentatious
almsgiving is probably witnessed in all religions, and
the identity of phenomena has produced the resem
blance of language.
These reservations are not numerous or important.
For considerable portions of the Koran we cannot
be in doubt. Nearly aU its narratives are Biblical
stories. But in no case are they exact translations
of the BibUcal text. Quotations even of a single
verse are not easy to find. The most diligent search
does not discover more than two or three. The
reasons for this are obvious. For one thing, there
existed no Arabic translation of the Scriptures in the
time of Mohammed. The Jews or Christians from
whom he got his information were obliged to give
the stories in their own words. But besides this,
the Prophet evidently worked over the material he
received, to fit it to his own purpose. He was not a
historian, but a preacher. He used the history to
convey a lesson. He may have had the idea that he
could entertain his hearers and attract them by relat
ing these histories. If so, he was disappointed. The
Meccans openly preferred a reciter of fairy-stories
who set up as his rival — perhaps a lesson to those
who think the pulpit succeeds if it entertains its
hearers. How far Mohammed indulged the hope of
making his message attractive by putting it in the
form of stories, it is not easy to say. For the most
part the narratives were made strictly subordinate
to his main purpose, and we can understand the nar-
* Koran 442, cf. Matt. 6'.

62 TEE BIBLE AND ISLAM
ratives only as we keep the purpose in mind. To
warn his hearers of the wrath to come — this is his
main aim, and this explains his choice of material, as
well as the form in which the material is presented.
As has already been remarked, this purpose is seen
in his use of material from other than Biblical
sources. The two histories which he takes from
Arab antiquity are cast by him in Biblical form. As
he tells them, both relate that a prophet was sent to
his tribe. The tribe rejects the prophet and is pun
ished. These brief sentences give the key to a large
part of what we find in the Koran. His own experi
ence is the light in which the author sees aU history.
The only proof necessary to adduce for this propo
sition is the choice of material.
The Old Testament stories used by Mohammed
are those of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Joseph, and
Moses. These are all from the Pentateuch, and some
of them are repeated a number of times. The de
struction of Sodom is given eight times, as is the ac
count of the flood. The creation and faU of Adam
are recounted five times, while there are no less than
thirteen somewhat extended references to Abraham.
It must be evident from this that the Pentateuch
furnishes the largest part of the material borrowed
for narrative purposes. From the rest of the Old
[Testament he takes Saul, David, and Solomon, and
he has allusions to Elijah, Job, Jonah, and Gog and
Magog. But none of these receives anything like
the space given to the characters taken from the
Pentateuch. To illustrate what I have said of Mohammed's

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 63
motive and his method of treatment I wiU quote
one of the accounts concerning Noah. It reads as
follows : *
" We sent Noah to his people [to say] : I am a plain-
speaking warner, to tell you that you must not serve any
but Allah. I fear for you the punishment of a distressing
day. The chiefs of his people who disbelieved, said : We
see that thou art nothing but a man like us, and we see
that thy followers are only the basest of us, men of rash
resolution. We do not discover that you are better than
we — in fact we think you to be liars. He replied : 0 my
people, if I have received a commission from my Lord, and
He has given me a special grace which is unknown to you,
do you think that I shall force it upon you when you are
unwilling ? O, my people, I do not ask riches — my reward
depends on God alone, and I will not drive away those who
have believed ; they shall meet their Lord. But I see you
to be a people in ignorance. Moreover, 0 my people, who
will be my helper against God if I drive these away ? Will
you not consider ? I do not say that I have the treasures
of God [at my command], and I do not know the secret
things ; nor do I say that I am an angel, nor do I say [as
you would have me] that God will not bring good to those
whom your eyes despise — God knoweth what is in their
hearts. In case I should do this thing I should be a wrong
doer. The chiefs replied : O, Noah, thou hast disputed
persistently with us — bring now upon us what thou hast
threatened, if thou art truthful ! He said : God alone can
bring it upon you when He will, and you cannot thwart it.
My advice will not profit you, if I wish to advise you, when
God wills to lead you astray. He is your Lord and unto
Him you shall be brought [at the last Day]. Do they say :
He hath invented it [i. e., his message] ? If I have invented
it, then the guilt of it rests upon me — but I am innocent of
what you do. Then it was revealed to Noah : No more of
* Koran U"-s°.

64 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
thy people will believe than have believed already, but do
not be distressed at what they do. Make an ark in Our
sight and according to Our revelation and do not speak
to Me concerning those who sin — they shall certainly be
drowned. Then he made the ark, and whenever the chiefs
of his people passed by, they scoffed at him. He said : If
you scoff at us, we shall scoff at you as you are scoffing —
then shall you know upon whom shall come a punishment
that shall disgrace him, and upon whom an abiding punish
ment shall fall. [So they scoffed] until Our command
came and the fountain broke forth.* We said : Place in it
two of every kind, and thy family (except the one on whom
the decree has passed) and those who have believed — but
the believers were few. Noah said : Embark ! In the name
of God shall be its sailing and its mooring ; my Lord is the
Forgiving, the Compassionate. And it sailed with them
on the mountain-like waves, and Noah called his son who
stood aloof ; My son ! come with us and be not of the un
believers. He replied : I will betake myself to a mountain
which will save me from the water. Noah said : Nothing
to-day will save from the decree of God unless He take pity.
Then the waves came between them and he was drowned.
Then came the command : O, Earth, swallow up the water,
and, O Heaven, cease [from rain] : and the water was di
minished and the decree was carried out, and [the ark] rested
on al-Judee,t and it was said : Away with the wrong-doers I
" Then Noah called to his Lord and said : My Lord, my
son belonged to my family ; and Thy promise is true and
Thou art the most just of judges. J God replied : O Noah,
he was not of thy family. It were an unrighteous deed [to
* Literally, until the oven boiled. As the word which ordinarily
means oven also means a. fountain on occasion, there is no need to
suppose Rabbinic or Persian influence.
f A mountain in Mesopotamia.
X Noah is pleading for his son, though he does not express his
petition in so many words. God replies to the unspoken prayer,
intimating that the son has cut himself off by his unbelief.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 65
spare him], so do not ask of me that of which thou hast no
knowledge ; I warn thee lest thou be of the ignorant.
Noah said : My Lord, I take refuge in Thee from asking
that of which I have no knowledge ; unless Thou forgive
me and take pity on me I shall be lost. Then the com
mand was given : O Noah, descend in peace from Us, and
blessings upon thee and upon peoples yet to come from
those with thee— but there are peoples whom We shall cre
ate, upon whom a grievous punishment shall come."
You wiU agree with me that the Bible story is used
in this passage only to furnish a framework for a
sermon to Mohammed's contemporaries. The details
of the story, those which in the Old Testament make
it so realistic, are absent. We hear nothing of the
wickedness of the sons of God in marrying daughters
of men — which in Genesis gives a reason for the cor
ruption of the earth. The violence, which is the
specific sin mentioned there, does not appear in the
Koran. We hear nothing of the size of the ark, or
its material. The duration of the rain, the time of
the subsidence of the waters, the sending out of the
birds, the sacrifice at the end of the voyage, and the
gift of the rainbow are all passed over in silence. On
the other hand we hear an extended dialogue between
Noah and his people, of which the Bible gives us no
hint. One hint indeed we find which might give rise
to this conception. It is contained in the New Tes
tament where we find Noah described as a herald of
righteousness* It is this hint, as I suppose, which
was worth more to Mohammed than all the Old Tes-
* II. Pet. 26. The Christian tradition in the Apocalypse of Paul
(Walker, Apocryphal Gospels, 1873, p. 491 ; Antenicene Fathers,
1886, Vol. VIII., p- 581), where Noah says : " I ceased not to
5

66 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
tament details. With this hint he reconstructed the
history along the lines of his own experience. The
sinfulness of the antediluvians now becomes idolatry.
Noah is the Warner sent to turn them to the one God.
In the dialogue we hear the voices of Mohammed
and the Meccan aristocracy. As in the case of Mo
hammed, it is the aristocracy who oppose the preached
word. Noah is told that only the lowest men hear
him — just as at Mecca it was mostly slaves and freed-
men who made up the infant church. Noah must
hear that he is a man and not an angel — the implica
tion being that he is not fit to be a divinely sent mes
senger. Such was one of the objections made to
Mohammed. He is obliged to declare that he is not
seeking earthly reward — an avowal elsewhere made
by Mohammed for himself. He is urged to dismiss
his followers ; he refuses, and then is challenged to
bring the threatened punishment. It is scarcely
necessary to read between the lines to discover that
Mohammed had just this experience. So far does
this go that Mohammed really faUs out of the rdle in
one verse, where he replies to the accusation that he
had invented his message. At least it sounds as if
he had forgotten for the moment that he was person
ating Noah. In one of the parallel passages he
shows a similar lack of historic imagination where
the aristocracy of Noah's time are made to say to the
people : " Do not abandon your Gods, do not aban
don Wadd and Suwa', and Yaghuth and Ya'uk and
proclaim to men : Repent, for, behold, a deluge is coming ; and no
one paid heed, but all derided me.'- For Jewish tradition, Wiinsche,
Midrasch Koheleth, p. 130.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 67
Nasr." * But these false Gods are Gods of the Arab
tribes who lived in the time of Mohammed. The
commentators, who could not suppose their Prophet
guilty of an anachronism, have had great difficulty in
explaining how the Gods of Noah's time survived the
Flood and continued to be worshipped in Arabia.!
The problem causes us no perplexity. We see how
Mohammed identifies himseU with his predecessor
Noah so fuUy that he hardly distinguishes what is
proper to each personage. It is an artistic fault. But
it testifies to the rehgious earnestness of the man, that
he cannot get out of his mind the idolatry which is
the crying sin of his people.
In another verse Mohammed reveals to us some
thing of his experience — I mean the one where God
commands Noah not to be distressed at the smaU
number of those who believed. He himself was no
doubt often perplexed and grieved at the smaUness
of his foUowing. In his perplexity he could only say
that it was the wiU of God and therefore must be
right. So far, the story has been freely remodeUed on the
BibUcal basis. But now we come to a feature which
reaUy contradicts the Biblical data. Noah is represent
ed as having an unbelieving son. To this we may add
that in another passage his wife is also represented as
unbeUeving and as perishing : " God sets forth as an
example to those who disbelieve the wife of Noah and
the wife of Lot ; they were married to two of Our
righteous servants, and were unfaithful to them — their
husbands did not avail for them with God, and the
* Koran 7125f- f Cf. Wellhausen, Skizzen, III., p. 11 ff.

68 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
command went forth : Enter the Fire with those who
are entering therein." * These divergences show
how freely Mohammed treats his sources. For the
preaching of Noah and the scoffing of his contempo
raries he had authority in Jewish or Christian tradi
tion. But no one has yet pointed out a precedent
for the particulars we are now considering. We are
authorized in supposing that the preacher drew on
his own experience for these as for other matters of
detail. And we do not have far to seek for the ex
perience. Doubtless there were families in Mecca
which were divided — father against son. In fact, we
hear of such in the traditions, and we know that Mo
hammed's own nearest relatives did not believe on
him. It is not unlikely that he found here the only
precedent he needed in order to suppose members of
Noah's family unsaved in the great catastrophe.
The Biblical character which next claims our atten
tion is Abraham, whose importance to Mohammed
is greater than that of any other Biblical character.
Whether he were already adopted in the legends of
the heathen Arabs, as has been supposed, is very
doubtful. Mohammed makes him the builder of the
Kaaba, and therefore the founder of Mecca ; but this
may be a construction of his own. The other inci
dents of Abraham's history given in the Koran are
the following : He disputed with someone about the
true God, and was the victor ; he prayed for evidence
of the resurrection, and was commanded to cut four
birds in pieces, to lay the pieces on separate hill-tops,
and then to caU the birds. On following out the di-
* Koran 66'°.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 69
rections, the pieces flew together and the birds were
restored to life. He entertained the angels who were
sent to destroy Sodom, received from them the prom
ise of a son, and interceded for the preservation of
Sodom, though without success. He refused to adore
the idols of his father ; for this he was thrown into
the fire, but came out unharmed. He was driven
from home by his father. He was commanded in a
dream to sacrifice his son (whose name is not given),
and was about to consummate the sacrifice when he
was aUowed to substitute an animal.* A point em
phasized is that he was neither Jew nor Christian,
but (if I may so say) a simple believer without the
sectarian marks which distinguish, and therefore di
vide, these : " O People of Scripture ! Why do you
dispute concerning Abraham? The Tora and the
Gospel were not revealed until after his time — do you
not comprehend? Abraham was neither Jew nor
Christian, but he was a hanif, he was resigned, and
he was not one of the idolaters." t The word hanif
lias given rise to much speculation. For our present
purpose it is enough to note that in the Koran it
means turning aside from idols. It is the appropriate
word to describe a man Uke Abraham who abandoned
the false Gods and became a monotheist. It is this
characteristic which makes Abraham of so much im
portance to Mohammed. He sees in him his prede
cessor and model. The Jews and the Christians had
received revelations in written form— this is what he
* Koran 2«° ff, 11"* ff, 15" ", 51m-», 21™ f, 37"», 19*7, 37100 «.
Abraham is mentioned in twenty-six different suras
| Ibid. S»«-«.

70 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
recognizes in calling them people of the Book. But
the result had been to produce division and mutual
recrimination. "The Jews (he says) say: The
Christians have no firm foundation ; and the Chris
tians say : The Jews have no firm foundation. Yet
they read the Scripture." * The only way to put an
end to the disputes of these sects is to go back to the
simple monotheism of Abraham. In this theory Mo
hammed was the pioneer of church union, and his is
not the only attempt to unite two bodies of behevers
which has resulted in forming a third.
But this is aside from our main purpose. Moham
med regards Abraham as his model, and describes
himself in the terms which he applies to Abraham :
" Who has a more excellent reUgion than one who re
signs himself to God while doing good works, and
who follows the faith of Abraham as one who turns
aside from idols [literally, as a hanif] — for God took
Abraham as His friend ; " " The nearest of men to
Abraham are those who foUow him, and this prophet
[Mohammed] also is one of them." f In taking this
position, Mohammed was only following the precedent
set by the Apostle Paul. In justifying himself for
giving up the Jewish Law, whUe stiU claiming to be
long to the true seed of Abraham, Paul argued by the
example of Abraham. It was conceded that Abra
ham was a true believer, the Father of the Faithful.
But if this be so, religion cannot consist in the ob
servance of the Law, for the Law came into force
long after Abraham's death. For the true believer it
must be enough to go back to the simplicity of Abra-
* Koran 2 ". f Ibid. 41M, &".

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 71
ham's reUgion. The argument of Mohammed is just
the same, only he does not set it forth with the same
array of logic. To the Jews who insisted that he
must become a Jew in order to be saved, and to the
Christians who insisted that he must become a Chris
tian in order to be saved, Mohammed made the per
tinent reply that Abraham lived the Ufe of faith before
the coming of either of their codes. The essentials
of religion must consist in such faith as Abraham
had, and this (according to his light) Mohammed
adopted and preached. To him, just as truly as to
Paul, Abraham was the Father of the Faithful.
How much direct New Testament influence led to
this view of Abraham ? In the meagreness of the
sources we are not able to answer "this question with
positiveness. In general, Mohammed does not show
much famUiarity with the thought of the Apostle
Paul. But I am incUned to think that some New
Testament hint concerning the position of Abraham
as the Father of Believers had come to him. It
needs only a hint of that with which we are in sym
pathy to give us a flood of Ught. As showing that
there was New Testament influence we may note that
we find Mohammed calling Abraham the Friend of
God — a point mentioned both in the Old Testament
and in the New, but more distinctly brought out in
the New.*
For other features of the Koran picture we must
consult both Bible and tradition. Even then we dis
cover that Mohammed dealt freely with his sources.
The incident of the birds and the night covenant was
*Is. 41s; James 2-3.

72 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
unintelligible to him, as it doubtless is to many a Chris
tian reader as well. But he could use it as a proof
of the resurrection — something of which he felt the
need in his preaching. He therefore transformed it
into something quite different from the BibUcal story.
In regard to the dispute concerning the power of God,
the Koran teUs us only of an anonymous opponent
who claimed to be the giver of life and of death —
and therefore to be God. Abraham replied : My
Lord makes the sun to rise in the East, do thou make
it rise in the West ? — whereat the infidel was put to
confusion. In this story we have the tradition of
Abraham's dispute with Nimrod, which was current
among Jews and Christians before Mohammed's time.
It was especially pat to Mohammed's purpose because
it confounded the idolater.
Another legend current among both Jews and
Christians was useful in the same line. It makes
Terah, Abraham's father, to be a dealer in idols.
One day Abraham was left in charge of the shop, and
a woman came with an offering of food. Abraham
set it before the largest idol, broke all the other idols
and put a club in the hands of the large one. When
his father asked about it he said : the idols quarrelled
over the food ; then the largest one became angry,
took the club and broke the rest in pieces. Terah
declared this to be impossible because the images
could not move, whereupon Abraham convicted him
out of his own mouth, which confessed him to be a
worshipper of that which had no power. Neverthe
less Abraham was brought before Nimrod and thrown
into a fiery furnace, from which he was saved by a

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 73
miracle. Mohammed had no objection to taking a
story from tradition rather than from the Biblical
text — if indeed he knew the difference. That he took
this one from a Christian source is indicated by the
fact that he calls Abraham's father by the name
Azar, which is quite simUar to what we find in a
Christian writer, though quite unhke the Hebrew
Terah.* The Book of JubUees, which circulated
largely among both Jews and Christians, knows the
story of Abraham's controversy with his father about
the idols, so that there is no difficulty in attributing
Mohammed's knowledge to Christian tradition.t
But it is clear that we cannot trace aU the feat
ures of Mohammed's Abraham to preceding authori
ties, either Jewish or Christian. The main incidents
came originally from the Bible — so much is evident.
Some of the variations or additions can be account
ed for on the theory that they are borrowed from
Jewish or Christian sources outside the Bible. But
others cannot be so accounted for, and can, in the
* Athar is the name of Abraham's father in Eusebius according to
Sale, note on 6". He probably got his knowledge from Maracci,
Prodromus ad Refutationem Alcorani (1698), Pars IV., p. 90, which
is also cited by Geiger, Was hat Mohammed cuts dem Judenthum
Aufgenommen (1833), p 128. Maracci only says : apud Eusebium
in Historia Ecclesiastica. The story of Abraham and the idols is
found in Midrasch Bereschith Rabba, Uebersetzt von Wiinsche, Par.
38 (p. 173). It is quoted also by Geiger, I. c., p. 124. Among
Christian authorities Jerome, Questiones Hebraicce in Genesim (on
Gen. II29), Op. ed. Vallarsius (1767), III., c. 323, cf. IV., c. 779,
speaks of Abraham's being thrown into the fire.
t Ewald, Jahrbiicher, III., p. 3. Griinbaum, Neue Beitrage zur
Semitischen Sagenkunde (1893), p. 96, says that the story is also
given by Ephraem Syrus.

74 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
present state of our knowledge, be attributed only to
Mohammed himself, working under the belief that
Abraham was for him a predecessor and a model.
As we have seen, Mohammed's scheme of history
is writ large in these stories of former prophets. Ac
cording to him, the past ages are a series of prophetic
crises. In each one, a prophet has been sent to his
people to warn them against sin. His usual experi
ence is that his hearers refuse the message and mock
or persecute him. Not long after, the calamity over
takes them and they perish. The prophet, with a
few followers, is spared. In each of these cycles, the
account is colored by Mohammed's own experience.
Even the tribes of Arabia which have perished, have
perished for the same reasons, and their prophets
speak the language of rebuke and warning just like
their brethren of the Biblical history. This con
stant iteration is one reason for the tediousness of
the Koran. But a little reflection will show us that
something of the same monotony is found in all
preaching. The truths of religion are comparatively
few and simple. The prophet is not infrequently
accused of repeating himself. Even an Isaiah was
mocked for bringing line upon line and precept upon
precept, here a little and there a little, as though he
were teaching children just weaned from the milk.
We shall not be surprised to find in the Koran the
same lesson repeatedly enforced when we remember
how long the prophet of Mecca addressed deaf ears
and unbelieving hearts. The sameness of the lesson,
whatever the particular incident which illustrates it,
makes it unnecessary for us to go at length into all

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 75
the material. There is one character, however, to
which we must devote a little time, and that is Moses.
From what has been said about Abraham, it is
evident that Mohammed would have formulated his
scheme of the world's history about as foUows : There
has always been in the world one true reUgion. This
has been revealed without substantial variation to
different prophets from Adam down : " [God] has
established for you the reUgion which He command
ed Noah, and that which We revealed to thee, and
that which We commanded Abraham and Moses and
Jesus, saying : Observe the true religion and do not
be divided among yourselves." * When the Jews and
Christians insisted on the confession of their faith as
necessary for salvation, Mohammed instructed his
foUowers to say: "We believe in God and in what
has been revealed to us, and in what was revealed to
Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the
twelve tribes, and in what was given to Moses and to
Jesus, and what was given to the prophets by their
Lord. We make no difference between them and we
are resigned to Him." The position could scarcely be
stated more clearly, and the choice of Noah, Abraham,
Moses, and Jesus is a particularly happy one, and
shows that Mohammed had really grasped the Bibli
cal scheme — for these men stand at the opening of
the great epochs of sacred histoiy.
The name of Moses, the one to whom we now
come, occurs in thirty-four suras of the Koran, and
his history is given at length in a number of these. t
* 42", cf. 2I3°.
j. 238-i<>35 7101.154^ 20s-", 269'66 are the most extended. Somewhat
briefer are 271 ", 28238, lO1692.

76 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The fact that it is given so many times should caution
us against seeking the origin of the variations from
the Biblical text in Eabbinical or Patristic sources.
It is not likely that Mohammed received the account
from an informant more than once. Having it once
in his possession, he felt at liberty to treat it accord
ing to the varying exigencies of different times. The
account which is earliest in point of time (to all ap
pearance) is comparatively brief, and it shows that
the Prophet was moved, as in aU his earlier preaching,
by the thought of God's judgment : " Has the story
of Moses come to thee ? When his Lord called him
in the sacred vaUey of Tuwa [He said] : Go to
Pharaoh the arrogant and say to him : Wilt thou be
come pure ? I wiU guide thee to thy Lord, and thou
shalt fear Him. Then he showed him a great mir
acle. But Pharaoh accused him of deceit and was
rebellious. He turned his back, exciting disorder.
Then he collected the people and said : I am your
Lord most high ! But God destroyed him with the
punishments of this world and of the world to come.
Verily this is a warning to him that fears God." * For
the purpose of the speaker this is an admirable epit
ome of the story of Moses. It shows just the points
which Mohammed wished to emphasize, that is :
those paraUel with his own case. Even here he does
not adhere strictly to the Biblical account, for we
nowhere read that Pharaoh claimed to be God. This
is borrowed evidently from Mohammed's informant,
and the same feature is found in fact in Jewish
authorities. * 79 15-58

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 77
In the more extended accounts which Mohammed
elsewhere gives, we find details taken from Christian
as weU as Jewish sources, besides some which are
due to the narrator's own imagination. From Jewish
tradition he asserts : that Moses refused all Egyptian
nurses; that the people at Mount Sinai demanded
to see God, and on seeing Him fell dead, but were
revived by divine power ; and that they refused to
accept the covenant until the mountain was lifted up
bodily and held over them.* The information that
the golden calf, through the magic of its maker,
bellowed, is found in Eabbinical sources, and a similar
affirmation is made of another golden calf in a Chris
tian writer of the tenth century.t Mohammed makes
the magicians of Pharaoh repent and confess the true
God. This is perhaps a legitimate deduction from
the Old Testament account, in which they are said to
recognize the finger of God.J No Jewish document
has been found which makes the deduction, but we
know of a Christian apocryphon, now lost, which was
entitled : Liber Pcenitentiaz Jamnoz et Mambrce. Jamnes
and Mambres, I hardly need say, are the traditional
names of the magicians.§ We are justified, there
fore, in supposing this item borrowed from a Chris
tian source.
There remain a number of data which are due to
* 28", 2S3,S0, 7"°.
t 7146, 2090. On the Rabbinical authorities cf. Geiger, Was hat
Mohammed, etc., pp. 155-172. The lowing of the golden calf at
Gilgal on the day of Elisha's birth is spoken of in the Book of the
Bee, Budge's translation, p. 70.
X Ex. 816, English version 819; Koran 20" ".
§ II. Tim. 3s, cf. Dillmann in P. R. E.!, XII., p. 365.

78 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Mohammed's own imagination, or which simply wit
ness to his ignorance of the Bible account. Thus :
he gives the plagues at one time as five and again as
nine in number ; * he makes Haman one of the coun
sellors of Pharaoh ;f he supposes the buildings of
Pharaoh to have been destroyed, and that the mur-
murers against Moses returned to Egypt ;% yet, in
another passage, he seems to affirm that Israel pos
sessed the country of Pharaoh after him.§ That
Moses repented of having kiUed the Egyptian is a
minor addition which we can easily account for, and it
is not a serious error that Pharaoh's wife is made to
care for Moses, instead of his daughter. || Confusion
of Moses with Jacob is the evident cause of the
assertion that Moses served eight years for a wife,
and a similar confusion of Egypt with Babylon shows
itself when Pharaoh orders the people to make brick :
" that I may make a lofty budding, so as to become
acquainted with the God of Moses — though, indeed,
I think him to be a liar." T
Almost all these departures from the Biblical nar
rative occur in late chapters, and they show what
has already been remarked, that as time went on,
the preacher became less careful (if, indeed, he ever
was careful) of historical accuracy, and adapted his
material more freely to the purpose in hand. In the
use of this material we can see the influence of his
own changed circumstances. Few characters in his
tory have experienced a greater change of fortune
than fell to the lot of Mohammed in going from
* 71305 17103_ f 2838. | 7133, 258,
§ 26"-". || 28"' " <. f 28"' ss.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 79
Mecca to Medina. At Mecca he was the proscribed
preacher of a new religion. His followers were few
in number, and the majority of these had fled to
Abyssinia. His persecution by the leading men of
the city took away from him every occupation of a
secular nature. Even the public proclamation of his
message was forbidden after a time. All that was
open to him was meditation, prayer, and the encour-i
agement of a very narrow circle of friends. With the
removal to Medina all this was changed. The cares
of administration were thrust upon him. His life
became a life of activity instead of contemplation,
and his sermons necessarily dealt with the concrete
issues of the hour.
The reason for calling attention to this fact at just
this point is that one of the longer histories of Moses
in the Koran can be understood only from this situa
tion of the Prophet. It is really a polemic against
the Jews. We have reason to believe that Moham
med came to Medina with great expectations, based
on the fact that a considerable part of the population
was Jewish. He sincerely believed his religion to
be the same as theirs. He was sure that he was the
legitimate successor of their prophets. What would
be more natural than that they should join his com
munity, or at least that his followers and they should
unite on a common basis of recognition ? With this
idea he made Jerusalem his Kibla, and assimilated
his doctrine to theirs. But he was speedily unde
ceived. The Jews were wholly guided by their
Rabbis, who had no mind to a prophet born out of
Palestine. They refused to see the marks of their

80 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
expected Messiah in the Meccan adventurer. They
were, moreover, conscious of their intellectual supe
riority. They had studied the sacred Books which
were in their hands. Mohammed conceded the
authority of these Books, but he was only slightly
acquainted with their contents. In arguing from
them the Jews had an evident advantage, and often
put the Moslems to silence. At last Mohammed was
obliged to forbid his followers to argue with the
Jews, and he accused these of concealing portions of
their revelation.
This certainly could not conduce to harmony, and
Mohammed early realized that he had to deal with
men less open to conviction than the heathen. The
Jews, on their part, did not see the danger of trifling
with a man who was in dead earnest, and who now
had the sword in his hand. Their more instructed
men would lay traps for Mohammed in their talks
with him, and when he betrayed his ignorance, as he
would naturally betray it in such circumstances, they
would go away and in their own circle make merry
over his laughable blunders. Arab satire travels fast,
it travels far, and it bites hard. We can easily con
ceive the situation of a prophet in a mixed community,
ridiculed in couplets that were in the mouths of all
who were hostile or who were lukewarm. The insults
were the harder to bear in that they were directed
against beliefs which had become sacred to him. They
seemed to him blasphemies against the Holy Ghost
and he never forgave them. The expatriation of one
Jewish tribe, and the extermination of another, were
only part of his answer.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 81
It was before the open breach came that the follow
ing review of the history of Israel was delivered :
" O Children of Israel ! Remember My grace which I con
ferred upon you [when I said] : Keep the covenant with Me
and I will keep the covenant with you ; and fear Me and
believe in what I have revealed in confirmation of what you
already possess,* and be not the first to disbelieve. And
do not sell My wonders for a small price, f but fear Me. Do
not cover up the truth with falsehood, nor conceal the
truth which you know. % But observe prayer and give alms
and bow with those who bow down. Will you command
men good actions but forget them yourselves ? § Yet you
read the Scriptures ; do you not comprehend ? Practise
therefore patience and prayer — this is difficult except for
the humble, who are mindful that one day they must meet
their Lord and that they are to return to Him.
"O, Children of Israel! Remember My grace which I
have conferred upon you, in that I have distinguished you
above the worlds ; and fear the day when one soul shall not
pay the debt of another, nor shall its intercession be received
nor a ransom be accepted nor aid be given. And [remem
ber] when We saved you from the tribe of Pharaoh who in
flicted upon you a grievous calamity in that they slew your
sons while they preserved alive your daughters (this was a
severe trial from your Lord ); and when We divided the sea
for you and delivered you, but drowned the host of Pha
raoh while you looked on. But when We gave the promises
* That is, the Scriptures.
t An accusation elsewhere made against the Jews, reminding us
of Paul's charge that the idolaters exchange the truth of God for a
lie. Possibly Mohammed thought the Jewish scribes forged verses
which they sold as Biblical.
X This means : the Jews deny that their Scriptures contain what
Mohammed says they contain.
§ Paul also accuses the Jews of teaching the Law to others, at the
same time violating it themselves, Rom. 2.
6

82 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to Moses forty nights, then you took the calf in his absence
and transgressed. Yet We forgave you, thinking perhaps
you would be grateful. We gave Moses the Book and the
Distinction,* that you might be rightly led; and Moses said
to his people : 0, my people ! you have wronged your own
souls in taking the calf ; repent in presence of ,your Cre
ator or else kill each other f — this were better for you with
Him — He will forgive you, He is the Forgiving, the Com
passionate. And when you said : O, Moses, we will not
believe in thee unless we see God clearly, the thunderbolt
struck you while you gazed, but We brought you to life
after you had died, thinking perhaps you would be grate
ful. And We shaded you with the cloud % and sent you the
manna and the quails, saying : Eat of the good things with
which We nourish you (they did not harm TJs but it was
their own souls that they harmed). And when We said:
Enter this city and eat of it abundantly whenever you
choose, but enter the gate bowing down and asking forgive
ness — We will forgive your sins and will certainly prosper
those who do well — then the evil-doers substituted a word
different from the one which was commanded them, and we
sent upon the evil-doers a pestilence for their iniquity. And
when Moses asked water for his people, We said : Strike
the rock with thy staff ; and there broke from it twelve
fountains, every one knew his drinking place [and We
said] : Eat and drink of the sustenance given by God, and
do not deal unjustly in the earth, creating disorder. And
when you said : O, Moses, we cannot bear this one kind of
food, ask of thy Lord that He bring forth for us of the
* The book which distinguishes between right and wrong. Pos
sibly Mohammed thinks of the Mosaic tradition (the Mishna) which
expounds the regulations of the Law more exactly.
t Or, Kill yourselves. The sense is obscure. The Arab com
mentator makes it mean mortify your lusts, but that is hardly Mo
hammed's intention. I suspect a reminiscence of the fact that the
Levites fell upon the idolatrous people and slew them.
| Evidently the pillar of cloud.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 83
fruits of the earth, vegetables and cucumbers, and garlic
and lentils, and onions, he said : Will you prefer the worse
to the better 1 Return to Egypt and you shall have what
you ask. And they were smitten with abasement and pov
erty and returned with the anger of God upon them. This
was because they disbelieved in the signs of God and killed
the prophets wrongfully; this it was in which they rebelled
and transgressed. Those who believe, though they be Jews
or Christians or Sabeans — whoever believes in God and the
Last Day, and does good, receives a reward from his Lord.
Pear shall not come upon them nor shall they be grieved.
' ' And when We made a covenant with you and lifted
the mountain above you, saying : Receive with steadfast
ness what We have brought you and remember what it
contains — perchance you will be God-fearing — then you
turned back ; and had not the grace of God been upon you
and His mercy, you would have been lost. You know who
of you transgressed the Sabbath, and We said to them :
Become abhorred apes ! Thus We made them an exam
ple to their fellows, and to those who should come after
them and a warning to those who feared God. And when
Moses said to his people : God commands you to sacrifice a
heifer ; they replied : Art thou making a mock of us ? He
said : I take refuge in God from being one of the ignorant !
Then they said : Pray thy Lord for us that He would ex
plain to us what sort of a heifer it should be. Moses re
plied : She is to be neither old nor young, but of a medium
age, therefore do what you are commanded ! They said :
Pray thy Lord to tell us plainly of what color she should
be. He replied : It is commanded that she should be of a
bright red, a color which pleases the beholder. Then they
said : Pray thy Lord to describe her plainly to us — we have
cattle that look alike, and we would be guided if God
please. Moses replied : It is commanded that she be not
broken to till the ground or to water the fields, sound*
and without spot. They said : Now thou bringest a true
* Not approached by the male.

84 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
message. So they sacrificed her, but they were near not
doing it. And when you killed a man, and quarrelled con
cerning the deed (but God brought to light what you were
concealing), then We said : Touch the dead man with a
part of the heifer ; thus God brings to life the dead, and
shows you His signs — perchance you will comprehend.*
But even after this your hearts were hard, even like rock
or harder, for there are rocks from which streams spring,
and there are those which open and let the water flow ; and
there are [hearts] which bow in fear of God, and God is not
unmindful of what you do. " f
When we read this tremendous indictment we see
that the Biblical facts are used for a purpose. And
they are used with skUl. The Jews could not deny
the most of the facts here recited. They were guUty,
or at least their fathers were guUty — as charged.
The position of Mohammed is precisely the position
of the New Testament, as shown in the speech of
Stephen. Mohammed had no such orderly knowl
edge of the history as Stephen had, but he uses what
knowledge he had in just the way in which Stephen
used his. The climax of Stephen's discourse is the
real burden of Mohammed's: "Ye stiff-necked and
uncircumcised in heart and ears ! Ye do always re
sist the Holy Ghost ; as your fathers did so do ye.
Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute
. . . ye who received the Law as it was ordained
by angels and kept it not!" Whether there was
some knowledge of the New Testament position on
Mohammed's part we cannot certainly say. As a case
* The implication is that the murdered man was raised to life long
enough to testify against his murderer.
+ 239.69.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 85
of history repeating itself, the parallel is certainly
interesting and instructive. The similarity extends
further than the two discourses. In each case the
discourse showed that the breach was at hand. The
Jews could not deny the guUt charged by Mohammed
or by Stephen. It did not follow that they would be
converted. The divergence was already hopeless.*
Turning now to the New Testament, we discover
that only two of its histories are known to Moham-
* For the sake of completeness, we may notice that Mohammed
has some other incidents not yet traced to their original. He knows
of a time when the Children of Israel were commanded to enter a
city in a certain way, but they changed the word which was com
manded. The Mohammedan commentators say that out of wanton
ness they went in in an indecent posture and instead of saying hitta
(forgiveness) they said hubba, a grain of corn. For this they were
punished, apparently with a pestilence. This is simply a conjecture
on the basis of the Koran text. I am inclined to see in the passage
the incident of the spies. The people were commanded to enter
the land (the distinction between land and city is easily lost) and to
act righteously there. The spies substituted their evil report for the
command of God. The people then, having first refused to go, in
sisted upon going wilfully and were smitten. The resemblances are
not very marked, but the Biblical story might give rise to what we
find in the Koran. (This identification is not original with me.)
Again we have the story of the violators of the Sabbath who were
changed into apes. The only Rabbinical parallel yet pointed out is
the Midrash that a part of the people of the Tower of Babel were
changed into apes, demons, and evil spirits. Cf . Hirschfeld, Jiidische
Elemente im Koran (1878), p. 65, who cites Talmud, Sanhedrin
109 a. Possibly the Arabs in Medina had turned this story against
the Jews before the coming of Mohammed. It is scarcely necessary
to point out that the narrative of the red heifer has mixed two
Mosaic ordinances — the sacrifice of the red heifer in the Book of
Numbers (chap. 19) and the Deuteronomic enactment (chap. 21) that
a heifer should be slain to atone for a murder the author of which
is unknown.

86 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
med. These are the history of John the Baptist,
and the Ufe of Jesus. John is a prophet, and, like the
other prophets, receives a book, that is, a revelation.*
Zachariah, his father, is also once mentioned in the
list of prophets. Elsewhere he comes in incidentally,
in connection with the birth of his son. Zachariah's
prayer and its answer are recounted somewhat at
length, following in the main the narrative of Luke.
John is a prophet entirely after the pattern of those
already known to us from the Old Testament.!
Concerning Jesus, the first fact that we meet is
that he is not mentioned in the earliest group of
suras. But as very few Biblical characters are men
tioned in this period, the fact may have no special
significance. Mohammed's thought at this time was
much upon the approaching judgment. The few his
tories to which he alludes are those which enforce the
lesson of God's chastisement, the destruction of
Sodom, the overthrow of Pharaoh, the judgments on
Ad and Thamud, the catastrophe of the Lord of the
Elephant. These are almost the only events to which
he alludes. The Ufe of Jesus presents no feature
which would bring it into relation with these events,
so that although there are distinctively Christian
*1913, 3a4.
t It may be, as supposed by Sprenger (Leben Muhammed's, II.,
184), that Mohammed thought John the founder of the sect of the
Sabeeans (or Mandaeans). But this is not proved by the fact that he
describes John as receiving a book. He conceives that all the
prophets receive sacred books : " If they accuse thee of falsehood
[remember that] the apostles before thee were accused of false
hood, they who brought signs and Psalms and an enlightening
Book," 318'.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 87
features in these early revelations, they present no
natural opening for a life of Jesus.
Again : it is noticeable that Jesus is nearly always
mentioned in connection with Mary. It almost
seems as if Mohammed were more impressed with
Mary than with Jesus : " [Remember] her who kept
her virginity, and We made her and her son a sign
for the worlds " is said in one of the earliest passages
in which either one is mentioned.* In another, of
the same period, Mohammed gives an account of
the Annunciation and of the birth of Jesus without
mentioning him otherwise than as the infant,^ until
at the close, apparently as an afterthought, he adds :
" This [that is, the infant] is Jesus, son of Mary, the
Word of Truth, concerning whom they are in doubt." J
StiU another reference of this period is the following :
" And We made the son of Mary and his mother a
sign, and We gave them an asylum in a lofty place,
stiU and weU-watered." § We can hardly be mistaken
in finding here a reference to the Revelation of John,
where the woman who gives birth to the man child,
flees into the wilderness where " she has a place pre
pared of God that they may nourish her." Perhaps
this passage of the Revelation was already brought
into connection with the Flight into Egypt. In any
case, up to this point there is no indication of the
pre-eminence of Jesus, but rather a tendency to hold
up Mary as the chief character. A further evidence
*21".
+ 1916-34
J This translation makes a slight change in the pointing. I sup
pose the sense to be the same as in i'".
§ 23M, cf. Rev. 12IS.

88 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
of this is the space given to the life of Mary. In re
lating this, Mohammed draws from sources outside
the Canon. His own property we can see only in his
calling her the daughter of Imran and the sister of
Aaron * — doubtless a confusion of Mary with Miriam,
the names being identical in Arabic.
Concerning her, we hear that she was dedicated by
her parents to the service of God, and thus came into
the care of Zacharias, to whom she was assigned by
the sacred lot.f She resides in the Temple, where
she is fed by the angels. She is visited by the angel,
who announces that she is to become the mother of
Jesus. A spring of water breaks forth at her feet
and a palm-tree suppUes her with dates. The infant
Jesus speaks to vindicate his mother.]: The most
of these detaUs can be identified in the Apocryphal
Gospels which have come down to us. According
to these, Mary was dedicated to God by her parents
when three years old and taken to live in the Temple.
There she was fed by the angels. When fourteen
years old she was assigned to Joseph, from whose rod
there came forth a dove. In her need, a palm bends
down to supply her with dates and a spring flows at
her feet.§ We do not find in any of these sources
* 192».
t " Thou wast not among them when they threw their reeds to see
which of them should care for Mary, nor wert thou with them when
they disputed," 339.
X The main references are 3mM, 19"".
§ These incidents are narrated in the various Apocryphal Gospels,
cf. the volume in the Antenicene Christian Library containing
translations of these by Walker, American edition of the Antenicene
Fathers, Vol. VIII. Some of them are also found in the Book of
the Bee, translated by Budge.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 89
that Jesus speaks immediately after his birth, but a
similar incident is narrated in a Syriac Christian
source,* by which (indirectly) Mohammed was pos
sibly influenced.
The prominence of extra canonical sources seen in
the life of Mary is less marked in the life of Jesus.
When we are told, however, that he made birds of
clay and that when he blew upon them they became
alive, we remember the similar account in the Apoc
ryphal Gospels. Mohammed has also an extended
account of Jesus bringing a table with food from
heaven for his disciples. On the face of it, this seems
to be derived from the institution of the Supper, with
reminiscences of Peter's vision at Joppa. We hear
in general of Jesus's miracles, that he healed a man
blind from his birth, and a leper, and that he raised
a dead man to life. Beyond this, Jesus is affirmed to
be a prophet, the Word of God and His Spirit, and
one who received a Book of revelations.
Mohammed was compeUed to define his position in
regard to Jesus, first by the assertions of the Meccans
and then by the claims of the Jews. We know of the
dilemma proposed by the Meccans from the foUowing
passage : f
' ' And when the son of Mary is proposed as a likeness, then
thy people turn their backs to him and say : Are our gods
better, or is he ? They say this only out of contention, and
verily they are a contentious people. In truth he was only
a servant on whom We bestowed Our grace, and We made
him an example to the Children of Israel. (If We had
* The Life of Ephraem contained in Uhlemann's Syrische Chres-
tomathie gives a similar incident.
1 43"-65.

90 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
willed, We would have produced from you angels to succeed
you in the earth. ) And he is a sign of the [approach of the]
Hour.* Therefore do not dispute concerning this but fol
low — this is the straight path — and let not Satan turn you
away ; he is your declared enemy. When Jesus brought
signs and wonders he said : I bring you true wisdom, and
I will make plain to you a part of that concerning which
you dispute ; fear God and obey. God is my Lord and your
Lord, therefore serve Him— this is the straight path. But
the sects disputed among themselves. Woe to those who
do evil ; for them is the punishment of a day of torture."
The most natural interpretation of this passage is
the one suggested by the commentators. Mohammed
had threatened that the idolators should be cast into
hell and with them their false gods. The Meccans
knew enough of Christianity to say that Jesus also
was an object of worship. They therefore held up
the dUemma — either all objects of worship besides
Allah were not cast into hell, or else Jesus, whom
Mohammed held up as an example, must go with
them. In either case Mohammed had spoken falsely.
This is the meaning of their question whether Jesus
was better than their gods.
The reply is, in effect, that Jesus was only a man
like the other prophets, and that he himself called
men to the worship of the one God. As to his
alleged divinity, not all even of the Christians are
agreed about it, and in the difference of opinion it is
best to adhere to that of which we are fully con
vinced, namely : that there is but one God, and that
Jesus was an Apostle like Abraham and Moses, but
not worthy of higher honor than they.
• Jesus's second coming will precede the judgment.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 91
The temptation at Medina was of another sort.
There Mohammed was trying to win the Jews, to
whom Jesus was an abomination. It would have
been one obstacle removed if he could have taken Je
sus out of the company of Abraham and Moses. But
Mohammed was firm in the position once taken.
While stiU denying the divinity of Jesus, he reaffirmed
his Apostleship. The following are all from Medinan
suras :
"And Jesus the son of Mary, said to his people : O,
Children of Israel ! I am the Apostle of God to you, testi
fying to the truth of what you have already received in the
Tora, and bringing you tidings of an Apostle to come after
me whose name is Ahmed. But when he showed them
miracles they said : This is evident magic." *
' ' Then [after Noah and Abraham] We sent Jesus the son
of Mary, and We gave him the Gospel, and We placed in
the hearts of those who followed him, tenderness and com
passion. ' ' f
"[The Day when God assembles the Apostles] He will
say: O, Jesus, Son of Mary! Remember My grace bestowed
upon thee and thy Mother, when I strengthened thee with
the Spirit of Holiness, that thou shouldst speak to men
when in the cradle and when full grown. And I taught
thee the Book and the Wisdom and the Tora and the Gos
pel. "J
This passage is foUowed by an account of the mir
acles ; other passages of this period also affirm that
Jesus performed miracles, that he received the Holy
Spirit, and that he was an Apostle sent with a Book.
Mohammed adhered therefore to the position once
taken. But with the same persistency he refused to
*618. t57ST. JS109.

92 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
go further and acknowledge that Jesus was more than
a prophet. The knowledge that the Christians af
firmed a Trinity in the Godhead found no response
in his heart except one of denial. We can scarcely
wonder at this. The knowledge seems not to have
come to him until his system was settled in his own
mind. His mind was unschooled in theological defi
nition and could apprehend the doctrine only as
Tritheism, and therefore as a modification of the
polytheism which he was opposing. Some have in
deed found a Trinitarian tendency in his adoption of
the name Rahman for God. But this is unlikely, for
the vigor with which he rejected the Christian doc
trine is evident. The following passages cannot
leave any doubt in our minds :
' ' The Jews say : Ezra is the son of God ; and the Chris
tians say : The Messiah, Son of Mary, is the son of God.
This word of theirs in their mouths is like the word of
those who were unbelieving in old time. God has declared
war against them. Why should they lie?"*
"They are unbelievers who say that the Messiah, the
son of Mary, is God. The Messiah said [on the contrary] :
0, Children of Israel, serve God, my Lord and your Lord ;
whoever associates anything with God [as an object of
worship], God has shut Paradise against him, and his
abode is the Fire, and the evildoers have no helper. They
are unbelievers who say : God is one of three. There is no
God but One, and if they do not cease saying this a pain
ful punishment shall overtake the unbelievers. . . .
The Messiah, Son of Mary, was only an Apostle who was
preceded by other Apostles. His mother also was truthful
[and would not permit such an assertion]. They were both
accustomed to eat [mortal] food." f
* 930. + 516-".

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 93
" O, ye who possess the Scriptures ! Be not extravagant
in your religion, and do not say concerning God anything
but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was
the Apostle of God and His Word which He communicated
to Mary, and a spirit from Him. Believe therefore in God
and His Apostles and do not say : Three ! Cease doing it,
that will be better for you. One God alone is God. Par
be it from Him that He should have a son ! To Him be
longs what is in heaven and what is on earth — and God
suflices us as an administrator. The Messiah, Son of Mary,
did not disdain to be a servant to God, nor do the angels
who draw near to him." *
These passages, with others, show the sharp recoil
in the Prophet's mind from the doctrine of the Trin
ity. But we should remember that the Trinity, as he
supposed the Christians to teach it, was made up of
Father, Son, and Mary. Thus only can we interpret
his constant association of Mary and Jesus, and his
very sparing mention of the Holy Spirit. Among
the Christian sects of the East, Mary was early lifted
to the throne of heaven. " Her cultus is [still]
equally in vogue among orthodox and heretics." f It
was in Arabia that the CoUyridians invested her with
the name and honors of a goddess.]: This reflection
throws Ught upon a passage of the Koran where God
is represented as saying to Jesus at the Last Day :
" O, Jesus, Son of Mary ! didst thou say to men : take
me and my mother as gods besides Allah ? He wUl
reply : Far be it ! It does not belong to me to say
*4169_
f Kattenbusch, Leh/rbuch der Vergleichende Confessions- Kunde
(1892), I., p. 464.
X Gibbon, Decline and Fall, Chapter L. Cf. Sale, Preliminary
Discourse, § II.

94: THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
what is not true. Thou knowest whether I have said
it. Thou knowest what is in my soul." * This pas
sage seems to show conclusively that Mohammed con
ceived of the Christian Trinity as made up of AUah,
Mary, and Jesus.
Now such a Trinity would seem the more distinctly
heathen to him, because the heathen also related their
gods in families. The Meccans had a considerable
pantheon. The question of the relationship existing
between its members had probably already occurred
to them. If not, it was forced upon them by Moham
med's claim that two Gods could not coexist without
war. The natural theory, as we see in other polythe
istic religions, is that the gods make a famUy. Not
only was this the theory of the Meccans, it was a point
at which Mohammed at one time made concessions to
them, though he afterward retracted. This experi
ence made him more than ever determined to main
tain the absolute unity of God. A number of passages
which deny that God has chUdren are directed prima
rily against the Meccan doctrine. It is probably so
with the early profession of faith : " God is One ; the
seU-existent God ; He begets not and is not begotten ;
and nothing is to be likened to Him." And again:
" He it is to whom belongs the kingdom of heaven and
of earth, and He has not taken any as son, nor has He
an associate in the kingdom. He created all things,
and determined them by His decree ; yet they take
as gods besides Him things which do not create, but
are themselves created." f And once more : " They
say : The Compassionate has a son. Far be it from
* 5"6. f Sura 112, and 25".

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 95
Him. Nay, these are honored servants. They do
not anticipate Him in speaking, and they perform
His commands. He knows what is before and what
is behind them, and they can intercede only so far
as He gives permission, and they tremble with fear of
Him. Should one of them say : I am a God besides
Him — such an one We will reward with Gehenna.
Thus we reward the evUdoers." * It is abundantly
evident that this is directed against the gods of the
Meccans. But having taken this position in regard
to the daughters of God, as they caUed their goddesses,
no way was open to him to acknowledge the sonship
of Christ. In truth, he shows no desire to recognize
it, and in one place goes so far as to say that, at the
affirmation that God has a son, the heavens are ready
to be rent in twain, the earth to cleave asunder, and
the mountains to fall into ruin.f
One thing more must be noticed in this connection.
In regard to the death of Jesus, Mohammed took
what is known as the Doketic position. His lan
guage is this : " They [that is, the Jews] say : We
slew the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Apos
tle of God.J But they did not slay him, and they
did not crucify him, but a likeness was presented to
them, and they who disputed concerning him were in
doubt — they had no certain knowledge, but followed
an opinion. They did not kiU him in reality ; God
raised him to Himself. God is almighty and wise.
* 21»6-30. 1 19" '•
X Of course the Jews would not call him either the Messiah or
the Apostle of God. Mohammed gives the sense of their claim as
it lay in his mind.

96 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
There are none of the people of the Scriptures who
will not believe on him before their death, and in the
day of resurrection he will be a witness against
them." * It is clear from this language that the doc
trine adopted by Mohammed came from those Gnostic
sects which denied that Jesus was really crucified,
holding that Judas was substituted for him, and nailed
to the cross, while Jesus ascended directly to heavemf
The variations of this view held by the different sects
do not here concern us. What interests us is the
motive of Mohammed in adopting it, as he did, at a
comparatively late date. In earlier chapters he al
ludes to the death of Jesus in the same terms which
he employs in speaking of the other prophets. %
It is perhaps significant that Mohammed so often
reproaches the people of the Scriptures with their
differences and disputes. He had primarily in mind,
we may suppose, the disputes between Jews and
Christians. But it is not unlikely that he also knew
of the differences between the Christian sects. If so
we may conclude that he had become aware of the
different views of the death of Jesus, and that he was
compelled to choose between them. The motive in
adopting the one on which he finaUy settled was fur
nished by the Jews at Medina. The passage before
us shows that the Jews taunted him with the claim
that they had put to death one of the Apostles whom
he claimed as a predecessor.§ Now, in his general
* 4'56 '. f Cf. Herzog, P.R.E.8, IX., p. 247. % 19".
§ An interesting parallel is found in the language used by the
Jewish King Dhu Nowas to the Christian inhabitants of Nagran :
" The Greeks know that our fathers, who were priests and Pharisees

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 97
scheme, Mohammed found no room for the early death
of a prophet. In the cases already discussed, the
prophet was uniformly delivered, whUe the unbelievers
were destroyed. The life of Jesus as it is given in
the Gospels does not conform to this scheme. The
theory that Jesus offered himself for His people did
not commend itself to him if he ever heard of it, nor
would it reaUy answer the argument of the Jews.
The relief sought was found in the Doketic doctrine,
which was therefore adopted. In this way the life of
Jesus was brought into harmony with Mohammed's
general scheme of history as already exempUfied in
the account of the earlier prophets.
Our study of this evening has shown us the method
and the aim of one reUgious leader. It shows him
wUling to take historical material wherever he could
find it, to serve the great end he had at heart. It
shows him moulding the material according to his own
experiences, and making it serve the edification of
his own followers. In all this I conceive that we are
discovering something like a law of spiritual progress.
In the next lecture we shall approach the more
distinctly theological part of our subject, in looking
at Mohammed's doctrine of God.
and lawyers in Jerusalem, crucified a man in Jerusalem ; and they
smote and mocked and killed him because they saw and were con
vinced that he was not God. Why will you cherish your delusion
concerning this man ? " The siege of Nagran was in the century
before Mohammed's call, and while the (Ethiopic) account from
which this language is quoted is comparatively late, we have no
reason to suspect Moslem influence. Cf. Fell, Die Christenver-
folgungen in Siidardbien, Z.D.M.G., XXXV., p. 56.

LECTURE IV.
THE DOCTRINE OF GOD
Mohammed, like other reformers, raised his voice
in conscious opposition to the existing system. In
one of his first revelations he is bidden to say : " 0,
you that disbeUeve ; I wUl not serve what you serve,
nor do you serve what I serve. . . . You have
your religion and I have mine." * The point at
which he was consciously and most distinctly in op
position to his contemporaries was the unity of God.
There is no God but Allah, was, and continues to be,
the watchword of Islam. The infidels are most often
described as those who associate other beings with
Allah as objects of worship. In the sura just quoted
Mohammed seems, indeed, to say that the Meccans
did not worship the same God which he worshipped.
But it is plain from other passages that he did not
deny that AUah was one of the deities in their pan
theon. He meant that their worship was so vitiated
by its polytheistic character that it was no true wor
ship. Allah, like Yahweh, tolerates no partners.
"Thou shalt have no other gods in My presence"
was with him, as with the Hebrews, the first com
mandment, and he appreciated it to the full. The
declaration of God's unity : " God is One ; the Self-
* Sura 109.
98

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 99
existent God ; He begets not and is not begotten ;
and there is none like to Him," may be put beside
the declaration of Moses : " Hear, O Israel, Yahweh
our God, Yahweh is One ; and thou shalt love Yahweh
thy God with all thy mind and with all thy soul and
with all thy strength." The oneness of God is a
reason for the exclusive nature of the worship paid
to Him. The Biblical statement that Yahweh is a
jealous God is simply the affirmation of the truth
known to Mohammed, that Allah admits no partners.
With him, as with the Hebrew law-giver, there was a
conviction of the infinite worthiness of the one God,
a worthiness which admits none to comparison with
Him. Mohammed was not the first of the Arabs to recog
nize this truth. There is a very strong current of
tradition to the effect that in this case also there
were Reformers before the Reformation. Reflecting
men had become dissatisfied with the popular re
ligion. Some of them had sought refuge in Judaism
or Christianity. Others were not drawn to these
reUgions, but adopted monotheism and abandoned
the worship of idols. An example is Zaid Bbn Amr,
of whom Mohammed's earUest biographer says : " He
adopted neither Christianity nor Judaism, but he gave
up the religion of his people ; he abandoned the idols,
kept himself from what was strangled, from blood,
from what was offered to idols and from infanticide.
He professed to worship the Lord of Abraham."*
This Zaid was known to Mohammed, who, on hearing
* Weil, Das Leben Mohammed's nach Mohammed Ibn Ishak bear-
beitet von Ibn Hischam (1864), I , p. 108.

100 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
of 4iis death, said : In the Resurrection he wiU form
a communion by himseU.* Several such hanifs as
they are called — the same word is appUed to Abraham
as we saw — are mentioned in the time of Mohammed.
Some of them joined him, some rejected him. They
are an indication that the more earnest spirits were
already breaking away from heathenism.
The difference between them and Mohammed is
that they were content to work out their own salva
tion and let other people alone — to go to heaven their
way, and let the others go to the other place their
way, as a modern writer describes toleration — where
as Mohammed felt the impulse to preach against idol
atry. This it was which roused the Meccans. Their
religion was a part of the standing order, and to
change it meant revolution. /Mecca owed its impor
tance and its wealth to the fact that it was an empo-
\ rium. Its trade was secured by its being an asylum
\ in which tribes otherwise hostile could meet in safety.
!The visible pledge of asylum was the presence of the
'gods of all the tribes at the Meccan sanctuary. To
^demand that these gods should be destroyed and
Allah alone worshipped, was to demand the overthrow
of their social and poUtical institutions, and, as they
regarded it, such a movement would be followed by
financial ruin, f Their first theory was that the demand
could come only from a man possessed by a devU.
But as Mohammed showed much method in his mad
ness, they took active measures against him, so that
at last he found safety only in flight.
Mere negations, however, do not triumph. The
* Sprenger, Leben Muhammed's, I , p. 83.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 101
creed of Islam is indeed there is no God but Allah.
But behind this creed, which is negative in form, there
lies a positive conception of the character of Allah —
a conception which was clearly set forth by Moham
med, which attracted his foUowers, and which is still
the real belief of aU reflecting Moslems. Even in the
earliest suras, AUah is a definite and active person-
aUty. Mohammed would heartily have accepted the
statement of the Westminster Shorter Catechism :
" There is but one only, the living and true God."
Note the following Koran passages :
"He is God, besides whom there is no God. He is the
Knower of the secret and of the manifest. He is the Merci
ful, the Compassionate. He is the King, the All-Holy, the
Complete, the Protector, the Guardian, the Almighty, the
Ruler, the Glorious. Par from Him be that which they
associate with Him. He is God, the Creator, the Maker,
the Fashioner — all excellent names are His. Whatever is in
heaven and on earth praises Him. He is the Almighty, the
All- wise." *
' ' Say to them : To whom belongs the earth and all that
is in it— do you know ? They will say : It belongs to Allah.
Answer them : Will you not then praise Him ? Who is the
Lord of the seven heavens, and the spacious canopy ? They
will say : Allah. Answer them : Will you not then fear
Him ? In whose hand is the rule of the universe, who pro
tects, but against whom no one protects — do you know ?
They will say : It is Allah. Answer them : Then why will
you be bewitched [by idolatry] ? Verily, we have sent them
the truth, but they are liars. ' ' f
BibUcal paraUels to several of these predicates
readily suggest themselves. But in order to get a
*592M4, t2366-9!i.

102 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
clearer view of the doctrine of the Koran, we shall be
obliged to adopt some sort of arrangement under
which we can group together the great variety of
dicta probantia. Let us note, then :
1. The God of Mohammed is Allah, the God al
ready known by name to the Arabs. In the passage
just quoted, Mohammed conducts a dialogue with his
adversaries in which they show themselves no stran
gers to Allah. It would be precarious to build on
such a passage a theory that Allah was already rec
ognized as the supreme God of the pantheon. But it
at least shows that the heathen knew Him by name,
and that they could not seriously object to the doc
trine of the Prophet as new and unheard of. Proba
bly they had never reflected on the subjects on which
he questioned them. In early religions the question
of creation, for example, is not raised ; the world is
taken as it is, and no theory of its origin is formu
lated. When the question is raised, the Meccans are
more Ukely to answer AUah than anything else,
because Allah is the most general name for God.
The word means simply the divinity, and could be ap
plied to any God. Hobal was Allah at Mecca, and
another God was Allah at Taif. Two Arabs might
swear by Allah, and each have his own divinity in
mind, just as Abraham and Abimelech might both
swear by Elohim, though the Elohim of Abraham
was Yahweh and the Elohim of Abimelech was an
other. It is not necessary to assume, therefore, as some
have done, that there was already a fully developed
doctrine of Allah Taala—Qod Most High— among

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 103
the Arabs before Mohammed* The case was not
different from that of the Hebrews. When Yahweh
announced His proper name, he was careful to iden
tify Himself with the Elohim already known to the
people and to their fathers. The only difference is
that Mohammed contented himseU (at least finally)
with the general name, while the Hebrew kept both
names, though insisting that Yahweh is the only
Elohim. As a visible and substantial evidence that Allah
was not an unknown God, Mohammed retained the
ancient sanctuary of the Kaaba. So long as he was
at Mecca he seems to have had no hesitation in this.
When he went to Medina he tried to make a change.
But he was obUged to return, after no long time, to
his original position. As evidence that it was his
original position, we have Sura 106, apparently an
early one, in which he exhorts the Koreish to invoke
the Lord of this house. In other religions we see the
tendency to identify the newly revealed God with
one already known. Even the Apostle Paul inti
mates that the God whom he preaches at Athens is
one already worshipped there.
The proposition that Allah is the only God does
not necessarily mean that the other so-caUed gods
have absolutely no existence. This was too radical a
step to take all at once. Mohammed conceded the
existence of spirits or demons who had seduced men
to their worship. The Arabic word for these beings is
Jinn (coUective), and as we have no exact equivalent
it is better to retain this word in translation : " But
* Dozy, Essai sur VHistoire de I'Islamisme (1879), p. 5.

104 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
they give associates to God, the Jinn, whom He cre
ated ; and out of ignorance they falsely attribute to
Him sons and daughters. Far be this from Him!
He is exalted above what they ascribe to Him." * In
another passage, the false gods are questioned by
Allah at the Judgment, and avow that they have
misled their worshippers ; and again we are told that
the idolaters worship only Satan the rebellious, f It
is not mere dramatic imagery intended to emphasize
the evil of polytheism that is presented in these pas
sages. Mohammed admitted that the false gods have
a real existence. What he denied was not their
reality but their divinity — their power to help or
harm. We find in this a distinct parallel to both Old Tes
tament and New. It wUl suffice to quote Leviticus 17' :
" They shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to the
satyrs (se'irim, the desert demons) after which they
have [heretofore] gone astray." In Deuteronomy
also we read that they sacrificed to demons (shedim)
instead of God.| For the New Testament, we have
Paul's assertions that the things which the GentUes
sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God." §
The belief in spirits which infest the desert is very
old among the Semites — indeed beliefs of this kind
are found among all nations. It was therefore nat
ural that Mohammed should identify these beings
* @100_
t 2862f and 4"'.
X With Lev. 17' cf. 2 Chron. II15. With Deut. 32" cf. Ps. 1063'.
Gunkel combines with these Ps. 40s where the idols are called
rehabim: "evil beings, enemies to man."
§1. Cor. 102°.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 105
with the divinities worshipped by the heathen Arabs.
It is not unlikely, however, that he was also influenced
remotely by the Biblical statements just quoted.
2. The God of Mohammed is also the God of Jews
and Christians. This also is indicated by the name
(Allah, Al-Uah), which is found in Hebrew (Eloah,
Elohim) and in the Christian Syriac. The identity is
not only clear from the name itself, but from direct
assertions of the Koran : " Debate with those who
have the Scriptures only in the most honorable man
ner . . . and say : We believe in what is re
vealed to us and in what is revealed to you ; your
God and our God are one God, and we are resigned
to Him." * The doctrine of Mohammed is like the
doctrine of Christianity in its universalism. AUah is
not the God of a particular race only; He is God of
the, whole earth. This was also the doctrine of the
Old Testament in its latest stages. The religious
impulse seems to find in the oneness of God the
unifying principle of human history. Hence comes
the necessity of finding our God in the God of the
fathers. The paraUel between Abraham, Moses, and
Jesus, which Mohammed extended to himself was
another expression of the continuity of the one God —
a God who has never left Himself without witness.
By some one of His prophets He has repeatedly
caUed men to repentance and obedience. That in
this respect Mohammed occupies ground which is
more distinctly Christian than Jewish, needs no dem
onstration. 3. This God enters into personal relation with
*29,s.

106 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
those who believe on Him. He Himself is a person
— there is no pantheism in the Koran. The Gnostic
sects which swarmed in the farther East had not
penetrated Arabia with their emanistic speculations.
At least we find no trace of their influence in the
theology of Mohammed. God and the universe ap
pear to him as sharply distinguished as man and the
world. Not even in polemic does he betray any sus
picion of pantheism. The whole impression made
by what he says, and by what he does not say, is to
the effect that he could not even conceive of a God
without personality.
To a certain extent, his view was anthropomorphic.
If we mean by anthropomorphism every ascription
of thought or feeling to God, then all religions except
Buddhism are infected with anthropomorphism. Is
lam, or at least the Koran, is not extreme in attribut
ing a human form to God. To speak of His hands (as
is done a few times) is almost unavoidable in describ
ing His activity. Beyond this He does not receive
bodily members. That the traditions are more
pronounced than the Koran, is only what we should
expect, but how far we can rely upon these is diffi
cult to decide. We shall have no hesitancy in ac
cepting tradition where it makes Mohammed say that
in Paradise the believer shall see God, for this is a
hope common to other believers. On the whole the
anthropomorphism of the Koran is not more pro
nounced than that of the Bible.
Now, as to the communion which exists between
God and his worshippers — we must recognize this
also as a principle of all religion. Even in heathen-

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 107
ism the gods enter into personal relations with their
worshippers : " They take the Satans as their pro
tectors besides Allah, yet think they are guided
aright ; " " Allah is the protector of those who be
lieve; He brings them from darkness into light.
But as for those who disbelieve, their protectors
are the devils ; they bring them from Ught to dark
ness." * The word translated protector (wali) means
the next of kin, who has the right and the obligation
of blood revenge — the go'el of the Old Testament.
Mohammed's conception is precisely that of Job, who
regards God as his " Redeemer " in exactly the sense
in which this passage speaks of protectors. Moham
med allows that the idolaters have entered into the
relation of clientage (if I may so say) to their gods.
The protection promised is of no avail, not because
the relation does not exist, but because the protec
tors have no power to carry out what they have
promised. In the next world the worshipped and
the worshippers shaU alike be brought to confusion
On the other hand the God and Protector of Moham
med is all powerful, and therefore, able to carry out
His promise.
The sense of loyalty to God is expressed in the
frequent use of the term my Lwd, in which the
speaker embodies his claim on God, and God's claim
on him. In the earliest group of suras this term is
used about three times as often as the name Allah,
and thus shows the vivid sense of God's presence
with which the Prophet entered on his mission. In
* 7a8 and 2M8 '. The word Taghut used for the false gods is
obscure ; but there can be no doubt of its meaning in this context.

108 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
the choice of the term he was doubtless under Script
ural influence, for God is Lord of all both in the Old
Testament and in the New.* The vividness of Mo
hammed's faith, which impels him to say my Lord
does not cause him to forget the claims of others.
God is the Lord of Abraham, of Moses, even of the
unbelievers.t In the prayer which in Islam takes the
place of the Lord's Prayer — the Fatiha — He is the
Lord of the worlds.% But He is also the one to whom
the believer cries for help.
4. Allah is the Creator. This is a conception
which can be adequately held only in a monotheistic
reUgion. Polytheism, so far as it has a doctrine of
creation, thinks of the universe as modified by the
strife of many gods. But where God is one, crea
tion and lordship go together. Mohammed followed
¦ Biblical precedent in emphasizing their union. One
of his most frequent arguments is that Allah is Crea
tor and therefore Lord, or even that He is Creator
and therefore the only true God. There is no sus
picion of the eternity of matter in the Koran. In a
tradition we find this question put to Mohammed :
" O, Apostle of Allah, where was our Cherisher
before creating His creation ? " He replied : " God
was, and nothing was with Him, and God created
* The word Rabb, Mohammed's word for Lord, is not used of God
in Hebrew. In Aramaic it is said to be so used by the Mandxans
(Michaelis, Lexicon Syr. sub voce). This is another indication that
Mohammed's ideas were derived from some " heretical " source.
1 51M, 7916, 51*, cf . 6910.
X I1, cf. 69". The word for worlds (or ages it may be) is bor
rowed from the Aramaic, whether Christian or Jewish is impossible
to tell. Cf. I. Tim. 1".

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 109
His imperial throne upon water." * The reference of
the last clause is so obviously to the account in Gen
esis, where the Spirit of God brooded on the face of
the waters, that we may assume Biblical influence on
the tradition. Probably the influence extended to
Mohammed himself, for his account of the creation is
largely borrowed from the Bible. For example, we
are told that : " God creates what He will ; when He
decides upon a thing He says : Be ! and it is." f
The BibUcal parallel is familiar. Another feature of
the BibUcal account found in the Koran, is the ac
complishment of the work in six days : " And it is
He who created the heavens and the earth in the
space of six days, while His throne was on the
waters." % An evidence of Mohammed's freedom in
treating BibUcal materials is found, however, in his
assertion that God was not affected by fatigue § — an
evident rejection of the Old Testament word that
God rested the seventh day. Moreover he does not
seem to be clear as to the order of the six days'
work : He says in one passage : " Will you disbe
lieve in God who made the earth in two days . . .
and made the mountains which tower above it, and
Who arranged provision upon it in four days, suf
ficient for those who ask. Then He ascended to the
heavens when they were yet smoke, and said to them
and to the earth: Come, willingly or unwiUingly ! They
repUed : We come willingly. And He divided them
into seven heavens in two days, and communicated
to each heaven its order, and We decked the lower
* Mishcat, II., 650. f S'S W!.
X ll9, cf. 50", 574. § 5037.

110 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
heaven with lamps and guardians — this was the de
cree of the Almighty, the Wise." * By counting the
two days first mentioned as part of the four, we can
make out the requisite total of six. But even then it
is impossible to find traces of the BibUcal arrange
ment, in which the creation of the heavenly bodies
takes place on the fourth day. But from the religious
point of view Mohammed had thoroughly adopted the
doctrine of the Bible, as the following somewhat ex
tended quotation will make plain :
" It is God who raised the heavens without visible pil
lars ; then He ascended to the throne, and made the sun
and moon obedient [to His will], so that each runs to its
appointed goal. He regulates affairs and makes plain His
signs, that you may be sure of the meeting with your Lord.
And it is He who spread out the earth and made in it
mountains and rivers ; and of every fruit He made two
kinds. He makes the night succeed the day — in this are
signs for people who reflect. And in the earth are tracts
[different though] bordering on each other : vineyards and
fields and palms, in groups or isolated. They are supplied
with the same water, yet We make the quality of one bet
ter than that of another — verily in this are signs for people
who understand. . . . It is He who shows you the
lightning, an object of terror and of desire, and who brings
up the clouds heavy with rain. The thunder celebrates
His praise, the angels also, moved by fear of Him. He
sends the thunderbolts and smites whom He will. Yet all
the while men are disputing concerning God, though He is
the mighty in power. To Him sincere prayer should be
made, and those whom men invoke besides Him shall not
answer them in any respect, any more than one stretching
out his hands to the water which he cannot reach to bring
it to his mouth. The prayer of the unbelievers is only loss.
"41 '8 -11).

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 111
All that are in heaven and in earth bow to God willingly or
unwillingly — even their shadows bow morning and evening.
Who is Lord of heaven and earth ? It is God. And will
you take as protector those who cannot benefit or harm
even themselves ? Are the blind and the clear-eyed alike ?
Is the darkness the same as the light f Will they give God
associates who create as He creates, so that the creation is
confused between them ? [Nay !] God is the Creator, He is
the One, the Victorious. "*
The passage shows how creation and government
are intertwined. Although not parallel to any single
Biblical text, it is full of Biblical allusions. God is
in both Old Testament and New, the Creator of
heaven and earth; He makes the sun run its ap
pointed course ; He spreads out the earth and what
grows upon it ; and He also makes fast the mountains.
Further : it is He who created the fruit trees, as
weU as herb for the service of man, bringing forth
bread out of the earth. He brings up the thunder
storms also, and smites the Egyptians with this as
one of His visitations ; and He is of course the giver
of rain.f The figure of the thunder as the voice of
God which we find in the Old Testament is not re
peated by Mohammed, but in every other respect his
conception of Allah as the master of the storm is
parallel to that of the Bible. And so we may say of
the conception that the creation is for the benefit of
man, whose gratitude should lead him to worship
his Creator. AU created things adore Him. Not
* 1324 13-n
fFor the Biblical phraseology consult Gen. 1>>", Ps. 19s, 104",
Is. 42s, Ps. 657, 10414, 29. Other passages will suggest themselves
to the reader.

112 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
only does the thunder chant His praise, and the
angels bow before Him, aU things on earth join with
them : " All that are in heaven and on earth praise
God, His is the kingdom and He is the Ruler over
all." *
It is also in accord with Biblical ideas that the cre
ation should be used as evidence of the character of
God. It is, first of all, an evidence of His power.
When men scoffed at the idea of a resurrection as
being a thing impossible, Mohammed pointed out
that to bring men from dust the second time would
not be difficult for Him who created them out of clay
at the first. The creation is an evidence that God
can do (and therefore wiU do) what He promises or
threatens. The argument is the same used by Deu-
tero-Isaiah. When the people are faint-hearted con
cerning the promises of God, this prophet reminds
them that the promises come from the One "who
made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone,
and spread abroad the earth by HimseU." Moham
med was more concerned with the doubts of unbe
lievers than with the discouragements of believers,
but in bringing his message to his people, he reminds
them that the power shown in creation may be turned
upon them in chastisement.
The creation is, further, an evidence of God's
knowledge. He that made all things must certainly
know all things. There is perhaps no attribute which
is more frequently mentioned than this. He is the
Knowing, the Wise, or, God is a discerner of what they
do, have become to Mohammed stereotype phrases
*64'.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 113
with which he rounds off his periods. That he was
not unmindful of their significance is seen from the
more extended propositions such as the following :
" Do they not know that God knows what they con
ceal and what they discourse about in private, and
that God is the knower of secrets." * Again : " Three
do not sit in secret converse except that He makes
the fourth, or five without His being the sixth ; and
whether there be few or more, He is with them where-
ever they are. In the day of resurrection He wiU tell
them what they have done — verily God is omnis
cient." f The Biblical parallels are too numerous to
quote. The particular kind of knowledge which the
Psalmist finds wonderful when he says : " Thine eyes
saw my formless substance and in Thy book aU was
written in the days when it was taking shape " % is
also emphasized by Mohammed. And where the
New Testament gives the fall of a sparrow as within
the omniscient eye, Mohammed adduces the fall of a
leaf.§ 5. God not only creates, He also governs. The
kingdom of heaven and earth is His : " Yerily your
Lord is the God who created the heavens and the
earth in six days ; then He took His seat upon the
throne, making the night darken the day, which [in
its turn] follows swiftly ; and the sun and moon and
the consteUations are obedient to His command. Do
not creation and rule belong to Him ? Blessed be
God, Lord of the worlds." || The mind of the speaker
sees in God the great efficient cause of all. He is
* 9", cf. 21»». t 58", cf. 3".
X Ps. 139'6, cf. Koran 139. § 659, cf. Matt. 10J9. |[ 7".
8

114 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
the active mover of the constellations and the sea
sons. In another passage He is said to sit upon the
throne conducting the affairs of the universe. He not
only gives rain, driving the clouds as He wiU ; He
rules in the affairs of men : " O God, Ruler of the
Kingdom, Thou givest the kingdom to whom Thou
wilt, and Thou takest away the kingdom from whom
Thou wilt. Thou strengthenest whom Thou wilt, and
Thou humblest whom Thou wilt, and in Thy hand is
good ; Thou art omnipotent." * We are reminded of
the Song of Hannah ; " Yahweh makes poor and makes
rich : He makes low and also raises on high." How
far God employs second causes we need not now
stop to inquire.
6. As the ruler of the universe, God is also the
God of history. The principle of His government is
very simple : He rewards those who obey and He
punishes the disobedient. This implies some reve
lation of His will. As we saw in Mohammed's treat
ment of his narrative material, all history falls into
epochs, each of which rounds out the same cycle. God
first makes His will known by a prophet. Men either
receive the message and obey, or they reject it
and are destroyed. It may not always be necessary
that a prophet interpret the wiU of God. Creation
is itself a revelation : "In the heavens and the earth
are signs for those who believe ; in your creation
also and in the animals which are dispersed [over the
earth] are signs for those who are firm in their faith ,
and in the succession of night and day, and in the
portion which God sends down from the heavens,
* 325, cf . I. Sam. 27.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 115
with which He revives the earth after its death, and
in the direction of the winds — in these are signs for
people of intelligence." * There is in nature there
fore a revelation of God. Whether this alone is a
sufficient guide does not appear. The Prophet
seems not to have raised this question. In history,
as he saw it, God was accustomed to send additional
revelations by the hand of His messengers. From
this point of view His justice becomes manifest — He
gives men the alternative of obedience or disobedience.
He can rightly punish those who disobey and He can
rightly reward those who obey.
It follows therefore that Allah is a God of justice.
Here again, Mohammed had a practical rather than a
speculative interest. It had never occurred to him
(apparently) to inquire whether right or wrong are
dependent on the wiU of God. If the question had
been put to him he would very likely have answered
in the affirmative. God is an absolute monarch ; He
does what He pleases. So far Mohammed would have
said that the wUl of God is the ground of right and
wrong. But it is nevertheless the constant assump
tion of the Koran that God is a morally perfect char
acter. His action is such that it meets our idea of
right.f Though none can restrain or caU Him to ac
count, yet He does not punish without cause. If we
fail to find perfect justice in His dealings with men in
this present Ufe, we must turn to the future when all
* 454"5.
t " The Apostle of God said : When God created the creation He
wrote a book which is near Him upon the imperial throne, and
what is written in it is this : Verily My compassion overcomes My
anger." — Mishcat, I., p. 563.

116 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
wiU be made plain. The thought of the Day of Judg
ment is therefore indispensable to our idea of God's
justice. That day completes the purpose of creation .
" Did you reckon that We created you in sport, and
that you would not appear before Us ? " * This is
one of God's questions at the Judgment. It impUes
that the purpose of creation is attained only in the
final apportionment of reward and punishment. With
out this, the creation of man would have been a vain
act. God does not always act according to our desires
or hopes. This is a matter of universal experience.
The explanation of it in the Koran, as in the Bible, is
that God proves men : " Verily, We proved them as
we proved the owners of the garden, who swore that
they would gather its fruits the next morning. They
swore without reservation, but while they slept there
came a visitation from the Lord, and in the morning
it [the garden] was like a field of stubble." t Such
an experience is sent to try the state of man's heart ;
he must learn from it that he is not independent of
God. The conclusion is plain, and is expressed in
language which agrees almost verbaUy with an exhor
tation of the New Testament : " Do not say concern
ing anything : I will do it to-morrow, without adding
if God icill, and remember thy Lord when thou hast
forgotten Him, and say: Perhaps my Lord will
guide me to the accompUshment of this affair." %
The alternations of fortune in the experience of the
Moslem community are explained as a part of their
probation : " We make the days [of good and evil
* 23'". 1 68" ". X 1853, of. James 4'5.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 117
fortune] to alternate among men, that God may know
those who believe, and may take from you martyrs
for Himself." * Were constant good the lot of man
he would become insupportable : " If God gave pro
vision in abundance to His servants they would act
insolently in the earth. He therefore apportions ac
cording to His wiU— He knows and sees His ser
vants." f God's purpose is plain : " We will prove
you by iU fortune and by good, as a test, and unto TJs
shall you be brought." $ The thought is distinctly
Biblical. Abraham is tested by the command to offer
his son. So the Koran says in giving an account of
the same incident.§ That Mohammed so understood
the experience of Job, to which he also aUudes, is
made probable by the concluding sentence of that
passage : " We found him possessed of patience." ||
How thoroughly Mohammed adopted the doctrine is
seen in his statement that even the game which came
in sight of the pUgrims to Mecca was sent to prove
them, to discover whether they would obey the law :
" That God may know him who fears Him in his
heart." ^[ Apparent cases in which God's actions
cannot be explained on our ideas of justice are there
fore only apparent. He acts in a mysterious way
sometimes, but in the end aU will be plain, and we
shall see the wicked punished and the good rewarded.
The reward of those who do well is affirmed on
almost every page of the Koran. The great burden
of Mohammed's preaching is the Day of Judgment.
This day will result in endless pleasure for the good,
*3134_ t*2»6. J2136.
§37106, cf. 2"8. || 38". t593-

118 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
as it wiU bring endless pain to the evil : " Shall I
tell you what is better [than the pleasures of this
world] ? Those who fear God shall possess in the
presence of their Lord Gardens in which are peren
nial streams, and pure wives, and the good favor of
God ; God has regard to His servants." " Those who
fear God shall dwell in the midst of gardens and
fountains, partaking of what their Lord gives them ;
they are the ones who did well in their earUer [that
is, their earthly] Ufe." * God, therefore, does not
desire to bring men into evil. After speaking of the
future Ufe, the speaker adds : " These are the won
ders of God which we recite to thee ; God does not
desire injustice to the universe." t The passage re
minds us of Ezekiel's declaration, that God does not
desire the death of the wicked, and the resemblance is
the more marked in that both cases imply that the
prophet is sent because God does not desire to do
injustice. His desire is rather that man may have
opportunity to repent. Nevertheless, He must take
cognizance of men's actions. This is one evidence of
His superiority over the idols : " He who is mindful
of every soul with regard to what it has earned — will
they take others besides such a God ? " $ Here is
where His omniscience most nearly concerns us.
Because He is all-seeing, He can vindicate justice :
" How wiU it be when We assemble you to a Day
concerning which there is no doubt, and every soul
shall be paid what it has earned, and none shall be
treated unjustly ? " §
As for God's justice in punishing, we may find it
*3«and5116'. t3,M. J 1333. §3M.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 119
even in the present world. Historically it appears in
the destruction of Pharaoh and other wrong-doers in
the past : " God seized them for their sins, and God
is strict in taking account." * Elsewhere God is de
scribed as quick in reckoning, so that He does not fail
in determining the just dues of each one : " We will
estabhsh the scales of equity in the Day of Resurrec
tion, and no soul shaU be wronged in any matter ;
were it the weight of a grain of mustard seed, We will
pay it, and We are sufficient as accountants." | The
phrase grain of mustard seed makes us suspect New
Testament influence, but it may be only a proverbial
phrase, of whose New Testament origin Mohammed
had no knowledge. The conception of the scales of
justice is found in the Bible, though also found in
extra-Biblical sources. In the Bible it is generally
the men who are weighed instead of their actions.
The figure is natural and appropriate in either form.
The specific statement that God calls men to account
is also BibUcal.:):
Because of His justice God hates the evil : " Those
who disbeUeve will be summoned [and told] : The
hatred of God is greater than your hatred of each
other [was] when you were invited to the faith and
disbeUeved." § The path in which the believer de
sires to be led is the path of those with whom God
is not angry. The IsraeUtes who murmured at the
manna, returned with the anger of God upon them.
When a believer kills another believer, his portion
*3». t2i48.
X Compare Rom. 1412, I. Sam. 2:i, Ps. 6210, Dan. 5".
§ 4010.

120 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
will be hell fire : " God is angry with him and curses
him and prepares for him a grievous punishment." *
Similar language is used of the Israelites who were
changed into apes and swine, and also of the hypo
crites at Medina, f How closely it foUows Biblical
precedent, I need scarcely say. In the Old Testa
ment, God is a just judge, and as such is angry every
day. When the people worship the golden calf His
anger burns against them.t In the New Testament
also, the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.
7. Strict justice would result in the extermination
of the race : "If God should take men in their sin,
He would not leave upon the earth a living creature.
But He grants them delay tiU a fixed term. When
their term shall come it will not be delayed or ad
vanced an hour."§ God is therefore long-suffering;
He does not hasten His punishment. This is the ex
planation of a fact which probably perplexed Mo
hammed as it had perplexed the Biblical writers. We
see that in this world wicked men often enjoy good
fortune for a long time. The perplexity does not
arise merely from the inequality in the lot of the good
and the bad. The prolongation of the Ufe of a wicked
man gives him a prolonged opportunity to do the
evil things that God hates. Why does not God
speedily cut such men off? Two answers are pos
sible. God may be giving them the opportunity to
repent ; or, on the other hand, He may be allowing
them to fill up the measure of their iniquity, so as to
* 495, cf . 258. t S65 and 486.
X Ex. 32'°, Ps. 7", and Rom. l'». § 16ra.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 121
earn the more complete and exemplary punishment.
Both these solutions of the problem are presented in
the Bible, and Mohammed also seems to have enter
tained both, though he does not sharply distinguish
between them. The passage quoted above seems to
say only that a strict administration of justice cannot
be carried out, because no one could stand before it.
It agrees with the Psalmist who says : " If Yahweh
should closely watch iniquities, O Lord, who could
stand ? " * On this side, God's mercy is simply a
concession to human weakness. But that He also
spares men in order that they may repent, while not
directly stated, is implied in many passages which
speak of Him as mercUul and gracious, as inviting
men to repentance and Himself loving to turn to
those who turn to Him. But we find also the theory
that the wicked are spared in order that they may
(like the Amorites) fiU up the measure of their iniq
uity : " Let not those who disbelieve reckon that the
long Ufe which We grant them is a good to them. We
grant it only that they may increase their guUt, and
they shall receive a shameful punishment." t
Although this threat is uttered against those who
persist in their iniquity, there is a distinct doctrine
of forgiveness taught in the Koran. Sins committed
before the coming of the revelation are passed over
with indulgence, because allowance is made for the
state of ignorance. There is here a very close parallel
to Paul's declaration that God overlooked the times
of ignorance, but now calls on all men everywhere to
repent.:]: A striking parallel with a Biblical passage
*Ps. 1303. t3"-, cf. Gen. 15<6. I Acts 1780, cf. Kor. 59a.

122 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
is found again where the justice and the mercy of
God are placed side by side : " The revelation of the
Book from God, the Mighty, the Wise ; the one who
forgives sin, accepting repentance, strict in His pun
ishments, the Bountiful, besides whom there is no
God." * The BibUcal parallel which I have in mind
is of course the Name proclaimed before Moses in
Horeb : " Yahweh, a merciful and gracious God, slow
to anger and plenteous in kindness and truth, keeping
kindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and trans
gression and sin ; but who will not pronounce inno
cent — visiting the iniquities of fathers upon children
and grandchildren, upon the third generation and upon
the fourth." f In the case of Mohammed, at any rate,
there seems to be no consciousness that justice could
conflict with mercy. In other words, there is no
theory of an atonement. The words expiation and
redemption may be said to exist in Arabic but they
have sunk to almost trivial importance. In certain
cases of transgression, a sort of equivalent must be
paid. If a man breaks his oath, he must, as an ex
piation^ feed or clothe ten poor men, or free a slave.
If either of these be beyond his power he must fast
a certain number of days. Redemption is used of a
similar fine or satisfaction. In no case is there an
intimation that this is more than a punishment in
flicted for the sin. It is nowhere brought into rela
tion with the wrath of God. Atonement or propitia-
?401"3. fEx. 346'7.
X The word used is Kaffara, corresponding to the Hebrew Kap-
poreth. Fidya, redemption, is also from a root used in Hebrew.
But Arabic usage seems independent of Old Testament influence in
this case.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 123
tion in the sense in which they are understood in
Christian theology do not appear in the Koran.
That goodness is one of the attributes of God must
be evident from what has already been said. This
goodness extends to all His creatures : " There is not
a living thing in the earth whose nourishment is not
dependent upon God. He knows its abiding place
and its resting." * Even the birds are sustained in
their flight by Him.f He adapts His burdens to
those who carry them : " We do not lay upon any
soul more than it can bear." % The consequence is
given in the words : " If you remember the favors
of God, you wiU not be able to count them." § In a
number of passages the Koran rises to the affirmation
of the love of God. But the objects of His love are
those who do well. The sublime declaration of the
New Testament : " God commendeth His love toward
us in that, whUe we were yet sinners, Christ died for
us," seems to be without paraUel in the sacred book
of Islam.
Here is where Mohammed and Christianity (at
least in the orthodox form) part company. Up to
this point, his idea is essentially the theism of the
Bible. He may be said (as he has been said) to main
tain the separation of God from the world with more
precision and rigor than does Judaism even. || But
in substance he holds the Biblical idea of God, and
he would not have objected to the definition current
among us — that God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and
unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness,
*118. t67". J6lr'3.
§ 16'8, cf. Ps. 406. || Dozy, L'Islamisme, p. 315.

124 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
justice, goodness, and truth. Moreover he holds to
God as a present personality, " nearer to man than the
vein of his neck." * But he was not led to the thought
that God could or would come to man by an incarna
tion. As we saw in the last lecture, this doctrine was
probably not fairly presented to him. He learned of
it as the deification of a man, rather than as the in
carnation of God. In this form he could not help re
jecting the doctrine. Nor on the side of the media
torial work of Christ did he have any leaning toward
the Christian view. The necessity of bridging over
the chasm between God and the world — a necessity
that appeals very strongly to some minds — seems not
to have existed for him. We should remember that
the doctrine of mediation was associated with what he
must class as idolatry. In the Eastern Church, the
mediation of saints and angels is held very strongly
even to the present day, and leads to the excessive
devotion paid to them and to their pictures, f In
heathenism the subordinate divinities are intercessors
with the higher gods. The whole idea of mediation
therefore presented itself to Mohammed under an un
favorable aspect. This was especially true after he
had made his experiment at compromise with the
Meccans. There was a time when he tried to make
use of this doctrine of mediation, to produce some
thing on which he and his countrymen could unite.
His plan was to recognize the three Goddesses, upon
whose worship the Meccans laid the most stress, as
daughters of Allah and mediators with Him. Every
worldly motive urged him to such a compromise, and
*5015. f Of. Kattenbusch, Confessionskvm.de, I., p. 461.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 125
he probably flattered himseU that he would thereby
secure the essentials of his system. The Arabs have
been willing to forget what actually took place. It
seems probable that a formal agreement was made,
by which the Meccans recognized the supremacy of
AUah, while Mohammed and his foUowers were to
allow the worship of the three Goddesses as inter
cessors with Allah. AU that has come down to us, is
a tradition to the effect that Mohammed, in reciting
the fifty-third sura of the Koran, included in it these
words : " Do you not see Lat and Uzza and Manat,
the third besides ? These are the exalted maidens *
and their intercession is to be hoped for." The Mec
cans who were present were surprised and delighted
at the mention of their divinities and at the close of
the recitation all prostrated themselves, following the
example of the Prophet. The tradition goes on to
say, that in the evening he was visited by Gabriel
who heard him repeat the sura and disavowed the
compromising words. Mohammed was convinced
that he had been misled by Satan and he at once
adopted the true reading and published it the next
day in the words : " Do you not see Lat and Uzza
and Manat the third besides ? Shall you have sons
and He have daughters ? t That were, indeed, a
wrong division. These are but names which you
and your fathers have named ; God has not delegated
* The word is obscure and the Arabs themselves are divided as to
its meaning. I choose among the meanings (or conjectures) the word
most appropriate to the context. The authorities are given by
Sprenger, Leben Muhammed's, II., p. 45 ff. ; Muir, Life of Ma
homet, II., p. 150 ff.
t Daughters are inferior to sons in the view of the Arabs, cf . 43'6.

126 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to them any power. [The unbelievers] follow only
conjecture and what their souls desire, though there
has come to them guidance from their Lord." * So
far tradition ; whatever the actual course of events,
it seems probable that Mohammed made a serious
attempt to introduce authorized mediators of a divine
character into his religion. But the scheme would
not work. His idea of the unity of God was too
absolute to admit even subordinate divinities. After
this experience, he was careful to defend the strict
oneness and transcendentality of God.
The incarnation and the mediatorial work of Christ,
therefore, fall (for him) under the same condemnation
with the heathen ideas which he rejected: "Men
serve, besides God, that which cannot harm nor profit
them, and they say : These are our intercessors with
God. Say to them : WiU you inform God concern
ing what He does not know either in the heavens or
in the earth ? Praise be to Him ; He is exalted
above what they associate with Him." " Men say :
The Compassionate has taken a son. Far be it from
Him ! Rather, these are honored servants ; they do
not speak to Him before He speaks to them, and they
do according to His commands. He knows what is
before them and what is behind them, and none in
tercede except for the one for whom permission is
given, and they constantly tremble in fear of Him." f
Intercession is here denied on two grounds : the in
tercessors cannot tell God anything He does not al
ready know ; and no created being dares to speak to
Him without His permission, which permission will
* 53;9-23. 1 10", 21M-2».

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 127
not be given in case the intercession concerns a man
with whom He is already displeased. It is in accord
with this that we read : " And warn those who fear
God that they shaU be gathered to their Lord ; be
sides Him they have neither protector nor interces
sor."* But, like the most of us, Mohammed was not al
ways entirely consistent. On this point he was led
to modify his position. Probably his own experience
furnishes the explanation. He was himself often
asked by his foUowers to pray for them. He found
satisfaction also in praying for those he loved. His
experience of the value of intercession in this world
led him to beUeve that in the other world he would
be aUowed thus to help his followers. The traditions
report him as saying that in the Day of Judgment he
wiU intercede even when the other prophets declare
their inabUity. It is possible that these traditions t
are colored by the views of later times. But we are
tempted to allow them some weight, because some
Koran passages seem to allow the intercession of
those to whom God gives permission, by which he
means the greater prophets — those who had founded
reUgions. These would be aUowed to intercede for
their foUowers and to bring them into Paradise.
AU this shows how far Mohammed was from enter
taining the ideas of incarnation, atonement, or medi
ation, as these have been developed in Christian the
ology. It has been supposed by some that he made
one attempt at postulating a difference of persons (to
use the established theological term) in the Godhead.
* 651 and cf. 245. t Cf. Mishcat, II., p. 603 ff.

128 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
In one group of suras, he uses predominantly the
name Rahman as a name of God. As the word oc
curs in Hebrew and Aramaic, it is probable that he
borrowed it. It is a perfectly good Arabic form how
ever, and occurs in inscriptions from southern Arabia
which are apparently older than the time of Moham
med.* It means the Compassionate and is used as an
exact equivalent for the name AUah. Thus : Rahman
punishes the wicked ; He sits on the throne ; His
signs [or revelations] are recited to men; to Him
Satan is disobedient ; and at the Last Day men shall
be congregated to Him.f There is here no trace of
a second person of the Godhead, a Divine Mediator,
or an Emanation from the Supreme. AU we can
base on the phenomena, is the theory that Moham
med wished to introduce another name for God, per
haps because Allah was the name associated with the
old heathenism. Possibly the mistake he made in
the concession to the Meccans, caused in his mind a
revolt even against their vocabulary. Rahmanan was
the name of God the Father among the Christians of
Southern Arabia. Its meaning was appropriate to
his purpose. The choice was therefore a good one,
and the motive of the choice was honorable. But the
obstacles were too many. The smaU but earnest
band of Moslems were already attached to the old
name. They had taken up the cause of Allah and
* The adjective form rahmani occurs once in the Old Testament,
Lam. 410. For the Talmud cf. Levy, N. H. W. B. sub voce, and
Geiger in Z. D. M. G., XXI., p. 488 ff. The latter also discusses
the Syriae use. For the inscriptions, Glaser, Skizze der Geschichte
Arabiens (1889), pp. 4, 13.
t 19"\ 20', 19i9' 45' 8S.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 129
His Apostle. Rahman they knew not. In their per
plexity and in the renewed and bitter persecution
which came upon them, Mohammed had enough to
do to hold on to what he had already attained. The
attempt to introduce the new name was therefore
abandoned with the words : " Call upon Allah, or call
upon Rahman; by whatever name you call upon
Him [He hears] ; aU beautiful names are His." * In
all this there was no inconsistency, and no near ap
proach to Christian doctrine.
One thing more must be said. The name which
our Lord adopted and by which He taught us to call
upon God was our Father. Mohammed nowhere
rose to this assurance of faith. God was his Lord,
his Protector, his Cherisher, but so far as I can dis
cover, he never caUs Him Father. It is likely that,
in this respect also, the Prophet was restrained by
the heathen conceptions which expressed themselves
in similar language. We have some evidence that
the primitive reUgions of the Semites, like those of
other races, looked upon the God of a particular tribe
as the father of the tribe.t The physical and ma
terial sense in which this was understood, would pre
vent Mohammed's adoption of a similar conception.
And it is doubtful whether the Christianity of his
day was capable of giving him a clear presentation of
the BibUcal idea. To the early Church, God was the
supreme Lord who, so far from condescending to
man, must be invoked through the saints, the mar
tyrs, and the angels. The confession of faith was
" the recognition of God as the One, the Supramun-
* 17110. fW. B. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 31 ff.
9

130 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
dane, the Spiritual, the Almighty. God is the Creator
and Ruler of the world and therefore the Lord." *
This was probably as much as Mohammed ever heard
from Christian sources. To this height he rose; we
can hardly blame him for not rising higher.
Reviewing what has been said in this lecture, we
are entitled to say that Mohammed made a great ad
vance over the doctrine of God (if we may caU it so)
held by his contemporaries. AU the indications point
to the low esteem in which the heathen Arabs hold
their gods. " When the oracle at Tabala forbade the
poet Imraulcais to make war on the slayers of his fa
ther, he broke the lot and dashed the pieces in the face
of the god, exclaiming, with a gross and insulting ex
pletive : 'If it had been thy father that was kUled,
thou wouldst not have refused me vengeance.' " t The
incident is characteristic of heathenism. The gods,
being gods of particular tribes, are of Umited power,
and, consequently, limited reverence is paid them.
They stand on much the same plane with their wor
shippers, whose kinsmen, feUows, allies, they are.
Mohammed had the view of a God more exalted, more
powerful, infinite in His perfections (or at least be
yond any human standard), and, therefore, more wor
thy of reverence and adoration. When Mohammed
first came to Medina, his new followers used to say in
their prayers, " Peace be to Allah," using the saluta
tion with which they were accustomed to greet their
friends. Mohammed commanded : " Do not say :
Peace to Allah! for Allah Himself is peace. Say,
* Harnack, Grundriss d. Dogmengeschichte'1, p . 35.
t W. E. Smith, op. cit, p. 47.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD 131
rather : Eternal life belongs to AUah, and mercies and
goodness." * The incident iUustrates how the con
verts brought with them the old famiUar way of
regarding God, and how Mohammed inculcated a
worthier estimation, and a more becoming devotion.
It is no doubt a mistake to put God too far away from
us, and Islam, especiaUy in its rigid theological sys
tem, as developed after the death of Mohammed,
made this mistake. But, on the other hand, famUiar-
ity breeds contempt, and the Ught-minded Arabs
were inclined to this extreme. The old fear of the
gods had largely disappeared. Mohammed renewed
the fear of God by showing a God worthy of being
feared, the fear of whom could become genuine rev
erence. The idea of this God came to him from the
Bible, but colored by the Jewish or Christian con
ceptions current in that age. It was perhaps inevi
table that his idea should faU short of the Biblical
fulness. Had it been more adequate, it would per
haps have been less adapted to the people to whom he
made it known. The wonder is that, unlettered as he
was, himseU the chUd of heathenism, and receiving
the BibUcal conception through so imperfect a me
dium, he was able to assimUate so much, and to pre
sent it so powerf uUy to his equaUy rude and untaught
countrymen. * Bochari, L, p. 187.

LECTURE V.
THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT
In the last lecture we saw that in the system of
Mohammed, God is the Ruler of the universe. He
is the King, the Lord of the ages. Like the Bibli
cal writers, Mohammed conceived this very literally.
To him God is the active mover of the constella
tions and the seasons. Our notion of second causes
or of a fixed law of nature had not entered his mind.
God works by means of His creatures, but His di
rect command passes upon them for each of their
acts. In this sense he delegates a part of His
power to man. In the account of the creation of
man, God says that He is about to place a vicegerent
on the earth ; and again : " Do you not see that God
has made subservient to you what is in the heavens
and what is in the earth ? " * The doctrine, as you
discover, is that of the Bible. Man is the ruler
over nature, and nature is created for man's use and '
benefit. The existence of inteUigent creatures who are
strictly obedient to God makes no difficulty with His
government. But when we assert the freedom of
these creatures, there is implied a possibUity that
they may act contrary to His command, and a prob-
• Koran 31", cf . 288.
132

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 133
lem emerges. As soon as we assert the existence of
sin the problem becomes acute. For sin is the free
dom of the created wiU asserting itself against the
wUl of the Creator. This is the great question with
which philosophy has wrestled since first man began
to reflect upon his relation to the universe.
The question assumes its largest proportions in
monotheism. In polytheism there is no single wUl
which claims to rule the sum of things. The gods
are necessarily Umited in power, because there are
several of them. In duaUsm the solution is found by
assuming an eternal conflict between two powers — a
solution which projects the shadow of evil into the
infinite both before and behind. For Mohammed,
with whom we have now to deal, this solution had no
attractions, and he does not betray an acquaintance
with it even in his polemic.
The most religious minds seem to answer our prob
lem by determinism — that is, they cling to the sover
eignty of God and let the freedom of the creature
exist only in appearance. Even in heathenism this
theory asserts itseU. The Greeks in their theology
found room for an all-deciding fate against whom
Zeus himseU was powerless. The heathen Arab
saw in what went on around him the working of Des
tiny — a power that rules the world and accompUshes
its will in spite of gods and men. The Bedawy
(says Wellhausen) is the independent man — " hia
own arm helps him, and his brother ; no god assists
him ; he commends his soul to no saint. Allah is to
him fate, and nothing more : Fate is generally spoken
of without qualification — not as the decree of Allah.

134 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
But the conviction that all is decreed and predestined
spurs on the Arab hero and poet to do what he has
undertaken without consideration of danger. ' Fear
not to march against danger, for the danger which a
man tries to avoid is just the one that he meets ' —
the dog bites the one who is afraid of him. FataUsm,
U we may caU it so, does not lead the Arab to fold
his hands in his bosom. On the contrary, it is the
source of desperate energy — it is of no use to avoid
death; therefore Forward! And, further, the cer
tainty of death is a motive to give freely and not to
be anxious for the morrow ; ' I know that an evening
is coming, after which no fear and no want can befaU
me; then I shall make the House of Truth a long
visit. Why, then, should I take care for that which
decays and falls into ruins? Let others foul their
watering-places ; I wUl keep my camels ready to slay
for the guest.' " *
We have heard so much of Moslem fatalism that we
are accustomed to ascribe this doctrine to Mohammed.
But this extract shows that it was already current
before his time. Not unlikely the popular idea of it
is derived from later literature. You remember the
story of Ajeeb in "A Thousand and One Nights."
Ajeeb was shipwrecked on an uninhabited island.
Seeing a boat approach, he screened himself from
observation and watched. He saw a party land and
enter a subterranean dweUing, prepared with great
care. There they left a young man and departed,
concealing the only door to the hiding-place. The
young man is one for whom an astrologer has pre-
* Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, III., p. 195.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 135
dieted death at the hands of Ajeeb on a day cer
tain — now near at hand. The father takes this means
of protecting his son. But fate is inexorable. Against
his own wiU, Ajeeb strikes the fatal blow and the
prophecy is fulfilled to the letter. As the writer says
in an apt quotation :
"We trod the steps appointed for us : and the man whose
steps are appointed must tread them.
He whose death is decreed to take place in a certain land,
will not die in any land but that." *
More impressive perhaps, and preserving more of the
primitive sense of that Destiny which broods over
the world, are such stories as that of the City of Brass.
The traveller through the desert sees in the distance
a lofty city waU. He approaches it, but meets no
living being. He enters its streets and walks through
its palaces. Spacious haUs open before him, shaded
courts, lofty pavUions. But aU are empty. If the
inhabitants can be said to exist, they exist only in the
form of statues, having been turned into stone by an
inexorable decree. And the visitor fails not to find a
tablet graven with an admonition which recites the
shortness of Ufe, the vanity of worldly pomp and
pleasure, and the certainty of fate. He reads and is
overcome by emotion. He bursts into tears or falls
in a swoon. And when he recovers, he goes forth in
sadness reflecting on the lot of man.t
What I am trying to show is that the fatalistic
*Lane, A Thousand and One Nights (1877), I., p. 136; Beirut
edition of the text, I., p. 42.
t Ibid., III., p. 109 ff.

136 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
doctrine of which we now speak runs through Arab
literature. It is found in the early poets ; it is found
in the later story-teUers. The latter are, to be sure,
influenced by the theologians, and these claim to rep
resent the mind of Mohammed. But we must not
too readUy assume that they correctly represent the
mind of Mohammed. It is not impossible that they
are under a bias. In Islam, as in other religions, the
fiercest battles have been fought over this very ques
tion of predestination and freedom. The two ele
ments of the problem being really irreconcilable, two
parties arose, according as one factor or the other
was emphasized. When Greek philosophy was made
known to Moslem thinkers under the Abbaside Ca-
Uphs, there came into prominence a rationalistic
school of theologians caUed the Motazilites, that is :
the Seceders. We are not here concerned with their
theology in general. The point which interests us is
that they denied an absolute decree or predestination
on the part of God. They did this with the desire
to protect the responsibiUty of man as a free agent,
and also with the desire to establish the justice of
God. For they reasoned that, if the actions of man
are done in accordance with an unalterable decree,
there is no justice in punishing. They caU them
selves therefore believers in the Unity and Justice of
God. Their teaching on this point is set forth by a
native authority * in these words : " They affirm that
man has freedom and that he is the originator of his
actions, both good and bad, and that he is therefore a
* Schahrastani's Religionspartheien und Philosophenschulen,
ubersetzt von Dr. Th. Haarbrucker (1850), I., p. 43.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 137
being who deserves reward and punishment in the
next world for what he has done. But [they affirm]
that God cannot be brought into connection with evil
and unrighteousness and unbeUef and disobedience
[as their cause]. For as He is righteous when
He brings forth righteousness, so He would be un
righteous if He were the cause of unrighteousness."
So far the MotaziUtes. Their opponents took their
stand on the divine omnipotence and did not shrink
from the conclusion that God is the author of sin,
and that man has no power over his own acts.* Al
though the school which finally prevailed tried to
mediate, its members rescued for man only the sem
blance of freedom. The accepted Mohammedan the
ology is undoubtedly deterministic.
For this reason we must look with suspicion on
some of the traditions which ascribe to Mohammed
high predestinarianism. We have already found
reason to beUeve that traditions were invented by the
adherents of the different theological schools, in order
to secure the Prophet's name for their doctrine. One
such tradition, as I beUeve, has done much to form
our idea of Moslem f ataUsm. It is the one given by
Palgrave in these words: "When God resolved to
create the human race, He took into His hands a mass
of earth — the same whence aU mankind were to be
formed, and in which they after a manner pre-existed.
Having divided the clod into two parts, He threw the
one-haU into heU and said : These to eternal fire and
I care not ; and projected the other half into heaven,
* Schahrastani, I., pp. 92, 102. Dugat, Histoire des Philosophes
et des Theologiens Musulmans (1878), p. 45.

138 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
adding : These to Paradise and I care not." * So far
as this tradition makes the impression of brutal
indifference on the part of God, we need not hesitate
to say that it misrepresents the mind of Mohammed.
The impression made by the whole body of traditions
on this subject is very different. Even the one which
is nearest in form to the one just quoted, and which
may be a modification of the same tradition, has a
different tone : " God created Adam and struck him
on the right side and brought out white children —
you would say they were pearls ; then He struck his
left side and brought out black children, you would
say they were coals. Then God said : Those of the
right side are towards Paradise, and I have no fear ;
and He said of those of the left side : They are tow
ards heU and I have no fear." f The words trans
lated I have no fear may indeed mean I have no con
cern in the matter. But they may mean also : I have
no fear that their actions wUl not bear out what I
have determined concerning them. This latter is at
least a plausible interpretation, as we see from another
tradition, which is given in immediate connection
with the foregoing, and which is reported thus : " God
took an engagement from the family of Adam, and
brought out a family from the back of Adam and scat
tered them before Him. After that God spoke to
them in his presence saying : Am not I your Creator?
They said : Yes, we bear witness to Thy Godhead —
* I have cited from Hughes's Dictionary of Islam, p. 148, where
the passage is ascribed to Palgrave, who gives the reference, Mish
cat, Bab-ul-Qadr. I do not find the tradition in the English Mishcat.
f Mishcat, I., p. 36.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 139
that they might not plead ignorance on the Day of Res
urrection." This tradition is quite opposed to the
doctrine of arbitrary election. The evident endeavor
is to supply a reason for men's final sentence. The
reason why the unbeUevers are condemned is that
they have acted contrary to the profession which they
made in their pre-existent state — hence God can
justly punish them for apostasy. This tradition is
moreover almost identical with a Koran verse : " God
took the descendants of the sons of Adam from their
backs, and made them testify against themselves :
Am not I your Lord ? They repUed : Yea, we testify.
This was that you might not say at the Resurrection :
We were forgetful in this matter, or should say : It
was only that our fathers were idolaters aforetime and
we are their posterity ; wUt Thou destroy us for what
the Uars have done ? " * We may also cite here
another tradition : " Mohammed was asked about the
chUdren of idolaters, whether they would go to heaven
or heU. He repUed : God knows best what their ac
tions would have been ; it depends upon this." In
another place he says that infants are born with nat
ural reUgion ; their parents give them the special turn
of Jew or Christian, t Once more we are told that
when a beUever is examined after death, he is shown
the place prepared for him in the Fire, which God
has exchanged for a seat in Paradise. Here is no
absolute predestination, but provision for a double
possibiUty, the final decision depending on the ac
tions of the individual.
Mohammed, according to these indications, was
* Koran 7'" (. \ Bochari, II., p. 95.

140 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
not what we should call a fataUst. In fact, he was
not a systematic theologian. 'He knew nothing of
phUosophy, and the endeavor to teach it to him would
probably have failed. But he was a man of religious
conviction. His statements on the doctrine before
us are to be interpreted by his religious, not by any
dogmatic, faith. All of us who have a living faith in
a Uving God accept His sovereignty over the universe.
So far as this is in us, we interpret the experience
of our daily lives in conformity with His rule over
the universe. Our comfort in adversity is that our
Father does all things well, and our joy in prosperity
springs from the thought that it is He who is active
in providing for our wants. The religious leader en
courages and comforts his followers by this faith. If
they lose heart, he points them to God who is able to
help, and who surely wUl not abandon the right. If
they meet misfortune, he gives them the assurance.
that even this is in God's plan for them. When they
are successful he makes the success confirm theU faith
that God is working for them. In all this, emphasis
is naturally laid upon the almighty power and the all-
determining will of God. Mohammed's declarations.
on this point are to be explained along these Unes.
They are not philosophical propositions concerning
the universal scheme of things. They are the ap
plication of a living faith to the particular circum
stances of an individual experience. When his situ
ation was gloomy or even (to human eye) desperate,
he was compeUed to take strong hold on the power
and grace of God. He says : " Every condition is
best for the believer. ... If he is pleased, he

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 141
thanks God ; and U his condition is bad he has pa
tience, for which he is rewarded." This is not the
statement of a theory of the universe. It is an ex
pression of religious trust, a trust which traces one's
individual lot to the goodness of God. It reminds
us of the Biblical assertion that aU things work to
gether for good to them that love God, to them who
are the called according to His purpose.* Again we
read in a tradition : " Seek for that which will benefit
you, and ask God for assistance, and do not tire in so
doing ; and if any misfortune befaUs you do not say :
If I had done so and so ; but say : God ordained it,
and He does what He wiU — because the word if opens
the DevU's business." t This was a practical philos
ophy of human life. It was not intended to be a spec
ulative reconcUiation of sovereignty and freedom.
If the speculative question was ever forced upon
Mohammed, he probably declined to answer it. He
came once upon a company engaged in debating about
fate ; and he became angry, so that he was red in the
face, and said : " Has God ordered you to debate of
fate, or was I sent to you for this ? Your forefathers
were destroyed for debating about fate and destiny.
I adjure you not to argue on these points." % This
tradition seems to me much less likely to have been
invented than some of the others we have been con
sidering, and it therefore seems to me more nearly to
represent the mind of the Prophet. He had no idea
of laying upon the doctrine of the divine decrees the
emphasis which was afterward laid upon it by the
dogmatic theologians. We shall bear this in mind in
*Rom. 828. t Mishcat, II, p. 517. 1 Ibid, I., p. 31.

142 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
examining the statements of the Koran — and the
Koran is here, as elsewhere, our most valuable source.
At the beginning of his mission the mind of Mo
hammed was occupied with the great thought of the
Day of Judgment. Nearly aU the earliest suras dweU
upon this subject. The terrors which usher in the
Day are described with great variety of imagery, and
these descriptions are followed by a picture of Para
dise with its bliss, or of Gehenna with its torments.
The implication of this whole series of revelations is
that man is responsible. He is punished or rewarded
for his actions, and these (we may conclude) are within
his own power. The terms in which the evU-doers are
described generaUy express an activity. When the
angels say that they are sent against a people of evil
doers, we notice that it is an active participle of the
most active form of the verb that is used. The same
people are described a little later on as transgressors
— those who pass beyond the due bounds. Thamud
turned with disdain from the commandment of their
Lord ; Pharaoh, and before him, the people of the
cities which were overturned for their sin, disobeyed
the messenger of their Lord.* He who receives his
book in his left hand at the Judgment has his indict
ment formulated in these terms : " He did not be
lieve in God Most High, nor did he emulate others
in feeding the poor.'' f It agrees with these words
of action that jinn and men are created only to serve
God but that they disobeyed.:): Man was created up
right, therefore, but sought out many inventions.
Even where it is said that man was created with nat-
* Koran 51s* 34' «¦ 69"- 73' 6. f M"3 !- t »156-

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 143
ural infirmities, it is implied that these do not inter
fere with his responsibiUty. The plain and obvious
interpretation of these passages is in Une with the
declaration of Ezekiel, who rejected with indignation
the thought that the chUdren are punished for the
sins of the parents, and who proclaimed with aU his
energy : The soul that sinneth it shaU die.
We find it distinctly asserted in a second group of
passages, that recompense is according to works :
" Those who believe and do good works receive an
unstinted reward " — " these receive a garden in which
the streams flow perenniaUy." * This is set forth fig
uratively in the words : " He whose scale is heavy shaU
have a Ufe of delight, but he whose scale is light,
his dwelUng is the abyss." "On that day a man
shall be told what he brought forward and what he
kept back — yea a man shaU be witness against him
self, though he proffer his excuses."]- Whether there
is a specific reference here to sins of commission and
sins of omission as is sometimes supposed, it cannot
be doubted that the enumeration of sins is in order
to a proportionate punishment. Those who are con
demned will know that it is because of what they
have done : " Every soul is a pledge for what it has
gained — but the men of the right hand when in the
garden shall ask the evil-doers : What thrust you into
the Fire ? They wiU reply : We were not in the
habit of prayer and we did not feed the poor, and we
used to enter into idle discourse with the vain talkers,
and we used to deny the coming of the Judgment
Day." % Quite in accord with this is the foUowing :
* 84s5, 85". f 1015 f, 7513 !. % 74« ff.

144 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
" Has [the unbeliever] not been told of what is in
the rolls of Moses and of Abraham, who was faithful,
namely : that no soul is burdened with the burden of
another, and that a man receives only that which he
has wrought, and that he shall certainly be shown his
work ? Then shaU he be recompensed with a com
plete recompense." * As Mohammed professes to
quote here from the earlier Scriptures we may look
for a Biblical reminiscence. And we find a close
parallel in a New Testament passage which declares
that each man shall bear his own burden, and in that
connection we read : " whatsoever a man soweth, that
shall he also reap."
The same doctrine is virtuaUy contained in the fre
quent exhortations to repent which we find in this
early period. There have been preachers who called
men to repentance, though convinced that men had
no ability to follow the call. But we must remember
that Mohammed had no theological training. With
him the natural supposition is that when he called
men to turn from their evil ways, they had some
power of choice in the matter. So we interpret the
questions addressed to the unhappy inhabitants of
hell—" Why did you not believe ? " or, " Why did you
not reflect ? " or again, " Why were you not grate
ful ? " f Even Pharaoh has the possibility of repent
ance, for Moses says to him : " Wilt thou purify thy
self, that I may direct thee to thy Lord and thou shalt
fear Him ? " $ It is to the same effect when we find
two alternatives set before man, that he may make a
choice : " We led him to the two roads, but he does
* 53" ", cf . Gal. 65' '. 1 5657' 6!' 69. J 7919.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 145
not climb the ascent. How wUt thou know what is
the ascent ? It is the setting free of the slave, and the
nourishment of one's orphan kinsmen in the day of
famine, or the feeding of the poor who cleaves to the
dust."* If at this period of his activity the Prophet had
had the doctrine of absolute predestination in mind,
it is probable that he would have asserted it in con
nection with some of these passages. But he does
not assert it, even in expressing his idea of God's
method of working. What we find emphasized is
not God's decree, but His knowledge : " Does not the
unbeliever know that God sees ? " — " Doth he not
know that when what is in the graves comes forth
and what is in the breasts is brought to Ught, in that
day their Lord wiU be informed concerning them ? " f
Another expression of the same thing is the figure of
the heavenly book. There are passages in which this
is apparently the book of fate, but these are later.
The primary conception was of a book of record. It
is said of the one who receives his book behind his
back : " He thought indeed that he would not be put
to grief ; but his Lord was observant of him." This
record is made by the angels : " And verUy there are
over you guardians, holy scribes who know what you
do." % In a passage which probably refers to the ac
tions of men, God says : " They indeed did not fear
an accounting, and accused Our revelation of false
hood. But we registered everything in a book. Taste
then ! We wiU only increase your punishment." §
To the same effect are the passages already alluded
*9010-16. f 9614 and 1008 ". f 84" f, 82'°. § 7828 ".
10

146 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to, in which God is said to try men. For this period
further, the assertion that God directs men does not
mean that He exerts irresistible grace. The verb is
used of one who puts travellers in the desert on the
right path. He points out the road, as Moses pointed
it out to Pharaoh. It does not f oUow that the direc
tion wiU be effectual. In the early revelations, which
we are now considering, God is not said to lead men
astray. He knows those who go astray and He
knows those who let themselves be guided,* is the
utmost that is affirmed.
As we turn to the later sections of the Koran we
notice first, that the view we have been considering
is still affirmed : " Observe prayer and give alms ;
whatever good you lay up in store for yourselves you
shall find in the presence of God." f The verse re
minds us of the New Testament exhortation to lay up
treasures in heaven. "O, you who believe; you have
the care of your own souls ; do yourselves no harm !
Whoever goes astray after you have been rightly
guided — you shall aU be brought to God and He wfil
inform you of your actions." X The doctrine of rec
ompense is here sharply asserted, and it is assumed
that there is a possibUity of going astray even after
* 68'. There is an apparent exception to this statement in 74M
where God is said actively to lead astray. But this is an interpola
tion of a later date. In another instance (91'. 8) as commonly in
terpreted, God is said to create the soul and inspire it with evil and
with good. But as the word translated inspired may also mean
taught, it is safer to suppose that the verse is no exception to the
consensus of these early suras ; and that the meaning is simply that
God gives the soul a knowledge of good and evil.
t2104. {S104-

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 147
once being guided into the right path. Again we
hear : " O, Men, the truth has come to you from your
Lord ; whoever lets himself be guided does so to
his own benefit, and whoever goes astray does so
to his own hurt." * That God is a ready reckoner
is frequently affirmed and also that He is just —
not wronging one " even to the snapping of the fin
gers, "f God tests men moreover, and He puts their
actions upon record just as was affirmed in the ear
lier period.:}:
But in this later period we find a distinctly more
pronounced theory that God's activity extends even
into the sphere of human choiee. We can see to a
certain extent how this problem became more com
plex as the Prophet advanced in his career. At first
he was controUed by the great thought of the Judg
ment and its near approach. This thought and the
consequent duty of warning men, absorbed him. For
the world about him, he assumed one simple thing —
that every one should repent and accept his message.
But as time went on, he was perplexed not only by
the delay of the Judgment — he never claimed to know
its exact date — but by the obstinacy of the unbe
lievers. A few men recognized his mission — enough
to show that there was something in his message. But
the majority were rendered apparently more obstinate,
for they passed from simple indifference to active
hostility. The problem of the divine will and the
human wUl assumed a practical meaning. It was
now a question whether God could allow His designs
to be thwarted. The little communion of Moslems
*10'»s. ft123. J 29% 5452.

148 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
looked to their Prophet to answer them this question.
For their relief and to strengthen his own soul, he
was compelled to assert that even the evil actions,
unbeUef, and persecutions, of the wicked are within
the plan of God.
This ground was apparently taken even at Mecca.
The experience at Medina only fortified the position.
For at Medina an infant state was struggling into ex
istence. The little community had frequent occasion
to realize that God's ways are not as our ways. Some
times, indeed, His care was notably manifest. But
quite as often the expectations of the believers were
disappointed. They were visited by fever ; they suf
fered from famine; they were disappointed by the
lukewarmness or even hostility of some in whom they
trusted. The Jews were a thorn in their side. In
stead of becoming converts or, at least, allies of the
Prophet, they plotted against him, murmured at his
claims, insinuated doubts of his mission, and provoked
his followers to break the peace. It is evident that
the problem of the universe was becoming more com-
pUcated. We are able to trace the working of the Prophet's
mind on one phase of this problem with considerable
distinctness. In the second year after the Flight he
fought a successful battle against the Meccans at a
place called Bedr. As the first pitched battle of
Islam, this encounter deserves a place among the de
cisive battles of the world ; for had the Moslems been
defeated it is not unlikely that their movement would
have ceased to be important ; and in this case the
face of the world's history would have been entirely

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 119
changed. The victory was the more remarkable, in
that Mohammed had only three hundred men against
nine hundred and fifty of the Meccans. The decisive
victory was taken at Medina to be a pledge of God's
presence and approval, and at the same time as a
foretaste of His judgment on His enemies. The eye
of faith even saw the angels engage in the battle on
the side of truth, and we may be sure that no ques
tions were raised when the Prophet used the event as
an Ulustration of God's wiU toward the believers.
The difficulty came when, a year later at Ohod, the
Moslems suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of
the same foe, upon which they had seen the ven
geance of God take effect at Bedr. On human rea
soning, indeed, the defeat was easUy accounted for.
The Moslems were overconfident. They disregarded
the advice of the wiser heads, and, instead of acting
on the defensive, rushed to the conflict against large
odds.* At the first appearance of success, the archers
posted by Mohammed to defend his left flank de
serted their station in the hope of booty. All this
makes us wonder that the defeat was not more com
plete than it actually was. But, in any case, it was
a bitter experience to men who had counted on the
continued favor of God. It became necessary for
Mohammed to explain the ways of God and this he
does, as foUows : " If you suffer from wounds, so have
other peoples suffered from the like ; and We make
the fortune of men in battle vary, that God may know
those who believe and may take from you wit-
* Seven hundred Moslems against three thousand Meccans, the
latter also better armed.

150 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
nesses * (God loves not the evil-doers) ; and that God
may try those who believe, and may destroy the unbe
lievers. Or do you think to enter Paradise before
God knows those of you who are zealous and stead
fast ? . . . A soul does not die except by the
permission of God [contained in] a definite decree." f
The speaker then points out that God is faithful to
His promise, but that the believers had been seduced
by the booty and had disobeyed their leader. He
then adds : " Their desires mislead them to think un
justly of God — thoughts of heathenism — in that they
said : Have we any part in this affair ? Say to them :
The whole belongs to God. They conceal in their
hearts what they do not reveal to thee, saying : If we
had had our way in the matter we [that is, our breth
ren] had not been slain here. Say : Had ye remained
in your houses, yet those whose death was decreed
would have gone forth to the places where they lie,
that God might search what is in your breasts and
might try what is in your hearts. God knows what
is in the breasts of men. As for those who turned
back on the day of encounter, Satan made them slip
for something which they had done. But God has
pardoned them — God is forgiving and forbearing. 0
Believers ! Be not like the unbelievers, who say con
cerning their brethren, when they travel or are on a
raid : If they had remained with us they had not
died, or they had not been slain. [This came to pass]
that God might place grief in their hearts — God
* Or, martyrs as it is ordinarily translated. Those who die in
battle are especially distinguished.
t 3134-139.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 151
giveth Ufe or giveth death, and God knows what you
do." * Making aUowance for a little incoherence, we
find here a fuU statement of the later position of Mo
hammed, a position which we may summarize under
two heads.
1. AU comes to pass by the decree of God. He
has ordained even the defeat of the believers, as He
inflicted similar defeat upon other generations : " How
many a prophet has there been with whom many
thousands have fought, yet they did not faint at what
came upon them in the cause of God, nor did they
grow weak nor submit — God loves the persevering.
Their only word was : Our Lord, forgive our sins and
our transgressions in the cause committed to us ;
establish our footsteps and help us against the unbe
lievers." f The old point of view, that this is for the
purpose of testing beUevers, is stiU held, but new
points of view are opened. The decree is made more
absolute. It sets the term of a man's life, so that he
wUl go to meet death at the appointed time, no mat
ter what efforts are made to detain him. Other men
might have remained at home on the day of Ohod,
but those whose death was decreed would have gone
forth to the field of death in spite of all. So we find in
other places : " Death wiU overtake you, even though
you be in lofty fortresses." The book of record now
becomes a book of fate : " None receives long life,
and the Ufe of no one is cut short, except it is [re
corded] in a book." $
2. We find more distinctly affirmed that God is
active in the unbelief of man. He now leads some
*3i48« f31:"". 148°, 351*.

152 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
astray, as well as leads some into the right path.
As we had reason to suppose that His guidance is
simply the pointing out of the right path, in which
men are free to walk or not, we might also think that
even if He presents misleading indications, men have
the ability to disregard these and still to find the
right path. But the weakness of man is such that
when God misleads him he is sure to go wrong. In
such a case there is no hope of the man, he is irrevo
cably lost. Such is evidently the teaching of the
Koran in the period we have now reached. " If thy
Lord had willed, all that are in the earth would have
believed. Wilt thou then force men to believe ? It
is not possible for a soul to believe except by permis
sion of its Lord." " God leads astray whom He will
and leads aright whom He will ; He is the Powerful,
the Wise." " Whom God leads astray, for him thou
wilt not find a road." " And why should you be di
vided concerning the hypocrites, when God has over
turned them on account of what they have done?
Wilt thou direct those whom God has led astray?"*
Yet, although the action of God may be supposed to
be irresistible in such cases, we find a certain syner
gism (to use a theological term) allowed. Man co-oper
ates in his own salvation, and man also has part in
his own destruction. God conducts to HimseU him
ivho repents,] but the wicked are not directed because
they will not be : " How shall God guide aright a
* 1099 f, 144, 4'«- 9°, cf. 7659 ', "Whoever will, let him take the
path to his Lord ; but ye will not unless God wills," and Jno. 1239 :
" Therefore they could not believe."
t4212.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 153
people who disbelieve after once believing and testi
fying that the Apostle is true, when [also] evident
proofs have come to them ? God will not guide the
people who do evil." *
On this last point we find a variety of statements.
In some cases men are said to be blinded by the se
ductions of the world : " Cease from those who use
their religion as a sport and a pastime, whom the life
of the world has beguUed ; and remind them that a
soul is corrupted by what it has acquired." f But
this life of the world is ordained of God for this pur
pose. Moses prays thus : " O Lord, Thou hast given
Pharaoh and his nobles pomp and riches in this
world to make them wander from Thy path ; Our Lord,
destroy their riches and harden their hearts, that they
may not believe until they see exemplary punish
ment." X IQ other passages God is more directly ac
tive on the hearts of the wicked : " There are those
who come to Usten to thee, but on whose hearts We
have placed veils lest they should understand, and in
whose ears deafness ; and if they should see every
kind of sign they would not believe in it — so that
they would [even then] come disputing with thee and
saying: Verily this is nought but old wives' fables."
" These are they whose hearts and hearing and sight
God has sealed : they are the heedless and without
doubt they shall be the losers in the world to come."
And again : " When thou recitest the Koran, We
place between thee and those who do not believe in
the world to come, a thick veil, and We have placed
on their hearts coverings that they may not under-
* 380. + 609, 13°. t 10s8.

154 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
stand, and in their ears deafness ; and when thou
namest thy Lord, the Only One, in the recitation,
they turn away in disgust." * In these and other pas
sages we must not lose sight of the possibility that
God's activity is conceived of as the infliction of
judicial blindness. By the divine ordering, the man's
sin becomes a cause of further sin: "That which
they have done has covered their hearts " we read in
one place ; and again : " We turn away their hearts
and eyes [from the truth] because they do not believe
in it at the first, and We leave them to wander about
in their disobedience." f
On the other hand, Satan is the agent who brings
men into sin, though not without the divine permis
sion. He himseU was tried by God and disobeyed.
He then asked a reprieve from his sentence for a
time, that he might become the tempter of men. He
received permission and began his career with our
first parents : " Satan made them slip from Paradise
and brought them out from the place where they
were."]: And he is still active : " Those of you who
turned their backs in the day of encounter — this was
only because Satan caused them to slip, for some
thing which they had done." § The passage is note
worthy because the new temptation was a penalty for
sin already committed. But whatever takes place,
all is so thoroughly in the plan of God that He is
said to have created men for this purpose : " If thy
Lord had willed He would have made mankind one
people. But [as it is] they wiU not cease disputing,
* 625, 16110, 1741 ". t 8314, 6"°.
X 2M. § 3149.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 155
except the one on whom thy Lord has mercy. And
for this He created them, and the word of thy Lord
shaU surely be accomplished [to wit] : " VerUy I will
fill Gehenna with men and with jinn." *
If what has been said is correct, we must admit
that Mohammed held both sides of the doctrine we
are considering. He had the religious sense which
affirms God's absolute sovereignty ; at the same time
he had the moral sense which declares man's respon
sibility for his sin and the justice of his punishment.
The latter judgment was more prominent in his earlier
Ufe, the other was added to it at a later time. But at
no time was he a fatalist, for we mean by f ataUsm the
assertion of God's activity to the entire extinction of
human freedom. In holding on to the two apparently
contradictory propositions, he was in line with most
religious leaders — certainly in Une with the Biblical
writers. Every one of the sentences quoted from the
Koran can be paraUeled by a verse from the Bible.
The prophets, as preachers of righteousness, empha
size the self-origination of the sinner's acts. They
describe the evil-doers in the same terms of activity
which we have read in the Koran. Israel is " a sinning
nation . . . children who corrupt their way ; they
have forsaken Yahweh, they have rejected the Holy
One of Israel, they have estranged themselves, turning
backward."! Elsewhere the wicked are described
as violent, as corrupters, as oppressors, as shedders
of blood, as transgressors of the commandments.
The resemblance to the terms cited above is striking.
Another parallel is in the caU to repent and in the
* 1112», cf. 32'3. t Is. 1J.

156 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
assertion of the justice of God, both which could be
abundantly illustrated by quotation. God's knowl
edge of men's actions is spoken of in almost the same
terms employed by Mohammed — including the book
of record : " I saw a great white throne and Him that
sat upon it, from whose face earth and heaven fled
away, and there was found no place for them. And
I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing be
fore the throne ; and books were opened . . .
and the dead were judged out of the things which
were written in the books, according to their works." *
So thoroughly had Mohammed adopted the Biblical
idea that we should have no sense of incongruity
were we to find this passage incorporated bodily in
the Koran. In this, as in some other matters that
we have considered, he had apprehended and adopted
the Biblical position.
And in his later doctrine he was also in line with
Biblical assertions. The perplexities which beset
him were not unlike what the Prophets of Israel met.
It seems ludicrous to compare the battle of Ohod to
the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar. And
yet, on a smaU scale, the battle of Ohod was a test
of faith to the infant Islam quite similar in its effects
to the capture of Jerusalem as it appeared to beUev-
ing Hebrews. The Prophets were driven in this great
crisis to take a firmer hold on God as the ruler of
the universe. They were compelled to clarify their
view of the test imposed by calamity ; and they came
out of the conflict with the conviction that if God's
ways are not our ways, this is because His ways are
•Rev. 20"-13.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 157
higher than our ways. Mohammed's declarations
are a weaker echo of these. But they are enough to
show that he had apprehended and appropriated
their thought.
In other particulars than those just mentioned we
may discover Biblical influence. The sinner's de
struction of himself, for example, is affirmed in those
passages which speak of him that digs a pit and falls
into it himself, or of him whose violence comes down
on his own head. Again : it is " because men do not
like to retain God in their knowledge " that God gives
them up to a reprobate mind.* H men are said in
the Koran to be beguUed by the world so they are in
the New Testament: "The cares of the world and
the deceitfulness of riches choke the Word." f In
both documents also, Satan is the tempter. Where
the part of God is prominently in the mind of the
Biblical writer, he does not hesitate to say that God
blinds those who sin. Isaiah is commanded : " Make
the heart of this people fat [that is, stupid] and make
their ears heavy, and shut [literally, plaster over]
their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear with
their ears and understand with their heart, and turn
again and be healed." J The Biblical passage goes
beyond Mohammed in making the blindness an effect
of the preaching. The familiar texts which speak of
God's hardening men's hearts also have their parallel
in the Koran, and to the declaration of the latter that
God leads men astray we may compare : " Why, O
Yahweh, dost Thou make us to wander from Thy
way — dost harden our hearts so as not to fear
*Rom. l->. fMatt. 1322. lis. 6'°.

158 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Thee." * FinaUy, the purpose to fill Gehenna with
men and jinn reminds us that the wicked are sent
to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his
angels.f Our consideration of the divine government up to
this point has been mainly occupied with the prob
lem of sovereignty and freedom. Concerning these,
we find that Mohammed holds positions strictly anal
ogous to those held by BibUcal writers. He had ap
prehended the Biblical doctrine. Before leaving the
subject we may briefly consider his doctrine of de
mons and angels. For it is evident that these also
are subjects of the government of God, and their ac
tivity furnishes problems similar to those presented
by the freedom of man. In its strong sense of the
reality of intelUgent beings other than man, Islam is
in line with mediaeval Christianity and Judaism.
With the luxuriant fancy which has crowded Arabic
literature with superhuman agencies we have nothing
to do. But so far as they form a part of Moslem re
ligion we cannot pass them by.
Arabic heathenism peopled the desert with a class
of beings caUed coUectively jinn (the singular is
jinnee). We have no word which is exactly equiva
lent, so that it is best to retain the Arabic term. The
belief in the jinn goes back to the time when animals
were an object of superstitious reverence. The word
jann X is applied in the Koran to serpents, and the
identity of serpents and jinn was endorsed by Mo
hammed himself. At least a tradition tells us of a
*Is. 63". t Matt. 25".
X Used also interchangeably with jinn. The passage is 2831.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 159
young Moslem who on return from the wars had this
experience : He found his young wUe standing out
side the house, and in jealous anger Ufted his spear
against her. She told him to enter the house and
see what had driven her forth. He entered and found
a serpent coiled upon the bed. Transfixing it with
the spear he brought it into the court, where it writhed
awhile about the shaft and then died. But at the
same time the young man who was holding the spear
also feU dead, though not having received a visible
wound. Mohammed on being questioned declared
that this was & jinnee, and that many such who were
true behevers came into the houses of the Mos
lems. The proper method of treating them, he said,
was politely to entreat their departure. Only after
three days (the time for which it is obligatory to
entertain a guest) was it lawful to use violence
against them. We see that the line between ani
mals and demons (in the Greek sense) was not clearly
drawn. Of the beUef in this class of beings in the primitive
Semitic religion we have traces in the Old Testament.
The satyrs who danced among the ruins are clearly
allied to the jinn, and so are the shedim which we
have aheady had occasion to mention. In the ac
count of the battle of Ohod a jinnee named Hairy-heels
is said to have proclaimed the death of Mohammed.
As the satyrs of the Hebrew are also hairy beings,
this is a noteworthy coincidence. The night monster
Lilith which is mentioned with the satyrs and which
later Judaism classed with the Gbul belongs in the
same company, and so does Azazel of whom we hear

160 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
in the book of Leviticus.* Mohammed had therefore
a precedent for retaining this popular superstition in
his religion. It enabled him plausibly to account
for some things in heathenism, as we have already
seen ; and it furnished a basis for the more complete
scheme of angels and devils which he adopted from
Judaism and Christianity.
The early Church had an elaborate theory concern
ing angels and demons. An authority on Church his
tory defines the position of the Fathers as follows :
" In regard to the heavenly spirits who belong to the
upper world, and in fact constitute it, the orthodox
Fathers hold fast to the foUowing points : (1) that
they were created by God ; (2) that they are endowed
with freedom but are without material bodies ; (3)
that they had passed through a probation in which
part of them had persevered in good, others had
fallen ; (4) that the good spirits are organs of the di
vine government, and their actions are useful and
helpful to man and, indeed, belong to the means of
grace ; (5) that the actual evil in the world is to be
attributed to the evil spirits, especiaUy to their chief,
the Devil, and that these have almost unbounded
power on earth, but can only tempt man to sin, not
compel him ; and that they can be put to flight by
the name of Christ, the sign of the cross, and the sac
raments." f This describes exactly the position of
Mohammed except that, for the means of defence
here named, he would substitute grayer. This scheme
* Cf. W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 113 ff. The Bibli
cal references are Lev. 17*, Deut. 32", Is. 13", 34'4, Ps. 10637.
fHarnack, Dogmengeschichte, II, p. 125 f.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 161
was combined with the belief in the jinn in such a
way that it is not always easy to distinguish between
the various classes of supernatural beings. Some
times aU are classed as jinn. BoUs is said to be an
angel and he is also said to be of the jinn.* In gen
eral, however, the angels appear to be of higher rank.
From the allusions to the jinn in the Koran we
make out that Mohammed carried into their world
the division of believers and unbelievers. They, like
men, were created to serve but have disobeyed, and
their reprobation is described in the same terms as the
reprobation of men : " We have created for Gehen
na a great number of the jinn and of mankind, who
have hearts with which they do not comprehend, and
who have eyes with which they do not see, and who
have ears with which they do not hear — they are like
the brutes, yea, even more wayward: these are the
heedless." f The enmity of the evil ones among them
toward mankind, shows itself in leading men to idol
atry : " In the day when He shall gather them to
gether [He shall say] : O people of the jinn, you
have had too much advantage from men. Then will
their devotees say: Our Lord, we profited each
other, and we have reached the term Thou has set for
us. Then wiU He reply : The Fire is your abode for
ever." X
We have already noticed the Biblical parallel to
this doctrine. Another point of resemblance is the
theory of demoniacal possession. The Kahin or sooth
sayer in heathen Arabia spoke under the influence of
a jinn. The Old Testament belief that a man could
?Koran 232, 710, 18'8. f 7"a- J 6128.
11

162 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
prophesy by means of a familiar spirit is well known.
It is also well known that to the present day in Mo
hammedan countries an insane person is supposed to
be possessed by a jinnee. No clear line can here be
drawn between the jinn and the Satans. The latter,
however, are certainly borrowed from the older relig
ions. Their chief is Iblis, whose name is a corrup
tion of Diabolos, and therefore from a Christian
source. Iblis was an angel ; he refused to bow to man
because he was created of fire, while man was created
of clay — therefore, in his view, man was the inferior.
For this disobedience he was banished from Paradise.
In his further career, he became the tempter of man,
and will continue to practise his arts until the final
Judgment. The Satans are his helpers : " They turn
men from the path, when these think they are guided
aright."* We are told that Satan says to a man:
Disbelieve ! " But when he disbeUeves [Satan] says :
Verily I am innocent of thy transgressions : I fear
God, the Lord of the worlds." In the New Testa
ment also we hear of devils who believe and shudder.
Satan tried Job by sending calamities upon him.f
Although he has no power over those who commit
themselves to God,]: he insinuates evil thoughts into
the minds of believers when they are careless, so that
he made even Mohammed forget part of his mes
sage. § " He makes promises and excites desires,
but Satan promises only in order to deceive." II All
this is done in order to destroy men, though it is not
done without the permission of God ; and God's aim
in permitting it, is to prove men's faith and steadfast-
*4336. t384(MI!. 11 6'01. §66'. || 4119.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 163
ness. That this is in accord with New Testament
teaching, I need not stop to point out.* The mind
of Mohammed, like that of the Biblical writers, was
concerned with this as a practical matter. He, like
they, saw in the temptation to sin an evil personal
ity arrayed against the believer. Satan is a wolf
to a man, " as a woU to the sheep which seizes one
separated from the flock"f — just as in the New
Testament he is a roaring lion seeking whom he may
devour. And if we find the BibUcal doctrine adopted for
this class of beings, so we find it adopted for their
counterpart, the angels. These were created to adore
God, and they fulfil the purpose of their creation:
" To Him belongs what is in heaven and on earth,
and they who are in His presence are not too proud
to serve Him, nor do they tire ; they utter praise
by night and by day and do not cease." % How
thoroughly BibUcal this is, we see from Isaiah's vision
(where the Seraphim adore God) and from several
* An extra-Biblical assertion is that Solomon had power over the
demons. This apparently comes from a Jewish source, though
Geiger points out nothing earlier than the Second Targum to
Esther. While on this subject I may mention a theory which appears in
the Koran, that the shooting stars are heavenly darts thrown to drive
away the jinn who lurk near heaven to get information (Kor. 376 f).
A Christian source is pointed out by Harnack (Texte und Uhter-
suchungen, VIII, p. 117) in the words of Tertullian: " Since the
demons dwell in the air, near the stars, and in connection with the
clouds, they know what is preparing there, and so are able to proph
esy." In the clear air of Arabia, the shooting stars naturally
fitted into this view.
t Mishcat, I, p. 51. 121l9f.

164 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
passages in the Apocalypse. It is probably a remi
niscence of Isaiah's vision when the angels are de
scribed as having two, three, or four pair of wings.*
They carry the throne of God, as do the living creat
ures of Ezekiel's vision, t They are, moreover, the
messengers of God and the organs of revelation ; and
the Biblical influence goes so far that Mohammed
borrows the names Gabriel and Michael. In the
traditions it is uniformly Gabriel who brings the
Koran, and this is apparently the mind of the Proph
et, though only once in the Koran itseU does he name
Gabriel in connection with the revelations. You will
remember that Gabriel appears in the New Testa
ment as the bringer of God's messages.
Besides this, the angels have charge of the believer :
" Each one has attendants who succeed each other,
who guard him by the command of God."]: They
keep the record of man's actions : " When the two
beings meet seated at the right and left [of a man],
he does not utter a word that there is not for it a
watcher ready." § They are especially interested in
the believer's worship. When one is praying in the
mosque, the angels do not cease interceding for him,
and the Amen of the leader in worship is taken up
and repeated by them. || In heaven they intercede
for the believers : " The angels repeat the praise of
their Lord and ask pardon for those on earth."!
This goes further than the Biblical statements, which
only say in general that the angels have charge over
the believer and minister to him.** But the develop-
* Koran 351. f 40', 69". J 1312. § 50'6 '.
|| Bochari, I., pp. 146, 170. H Koran 423. ** Ps. 91", Heb. I14.

THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 165
ment is the same which we find in post-Biblical
Christianity. The results of our inquiry may be summed up in
a very few words. In Mohammed we see the relig
ious conception of a single Ruler of the universe
united with the moral conception of the Supreme
Judge. Without attempting to reconcile these, the
Prophet does not hesitate to affirm them and to
apply them to his own circumstances. He extends
them also to the extra-human communities which he
adopts partly from Arabic tradition, and partly from
Jewish and Christian belief. Throughout, he shows
dependence on Biblical ideas though without verbal
quotation of Biblical language.

LECTURE VI.
REVELATION AND PROPHECY
The present lecture will examine conceptions funda
mental to all religions, at least to aU the higher relig
ions. Granted the existence of a God, how is His will
made known to man ? It is obvious that He does not
speak audibly to all men. Although He makes Him
self known in nature, the majority of mankind are
too blind or too heedless to attend to this word. If
men are to know God they must have a more distinct
message. And this message is given by the voice of
men to whom God has communicated it, and whom
He calls to the office of His heralds. The doctrine of
such a message is fully adopted in Islam. Along-side
of the declaration that there is no God but AUah, we
hear the equally emphatic declaration that Mohammed
is the Apostle of AUah. Mohammed so described
himself, having borrowed the title, as weU as the idea,
from the earlier revealed religions.
The conception of prophecy is, in the case of Mo
hammed, complicated by the further idea that the
revelations given by a prophet constitute a book.
The two do not necessarUy go together. Take the
earlier prophets of Israel. Elijah and Elisha seem to
have felt no impulse to put their utterances into per
manent form. Their expectation was probably the
166

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 167
same to which the Book of Deuteronomy gives ex
pression—that God would provide a succession of
prophets for His people. Their guidance would be
continuous and constant ; the people would always be
able to appeal to a living organ of revelation. God
would always be in touch with them and they with
Him. Curiously enough the pubUcation of the very Book
which formulated this expectation of a constant suc
cession of prophets, introduced another conception,
which has now displaced the former both in Judaism
and in Christianity. Instead of looking to the man
of God and inquiring : what saith the Lord ? — we now
open the pages of the Book of God and inquire: what
do we find written ? The spoken word of God has
become the recorded Book of God. Mohammed re
ceived the idea in this form. With him revelation
and Scripture belonged together. Allow me to show
this in a few words.
In the first place, it is very doubtful whether Mo
hammed himseU could read or write. The question
has been debated more fuUy than its importance war
rants. The zealous Moslem is very willing to argue that
he could not, because the miracle of the Koran seems
thereby to be made the greater. Modern scholars,
whose culture is inseparably connected with books,
cannot conceive of a man of such influence being ig
norant. All that we know is, that when Mohammed
had occasion to write, he employed an amanuensis, and
that in one place in the Koran he is addressed thus :
" Thou wast not accustomed before this to read a book
nor to write with thy right hand — then the deceivers

168 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
were in doubt." * As in the immediate context he is
speaking of sacred books, he may mean no more than
that he had not been a reader of such books ; though
the general terms which he uses naturally imply that
he had no acquaintance with any books.
But if we hesitate to draw this conclusion, and so
leave the general question undecided, we may yet ac
cept the plain statement of the passage : Until a time
when he was fairly launched upon his career, Moham
med had not read the Bible.
This conclusion is confirmed by the contents of the
Koran. Although (as we have seen) a large part of
this book is derived ultimately from the Bible, yet in
no instance does it show, on the part of the author,
such exact knowledge as would come from the study,
or even the reading, of its text. He makes but one
or two quotations from it. Even when he professes
to give the substance of certain parts of it — as the
covenant between God and Israel — he reproduces
them very imperfectly. The stories he takes from it,
vary in a multitude of details from their originals.
He makes gross chronological blunders, as where he
identifies the Virgin Mary with the Old Testament
Miriam. He so misunderstood Judaism that he says
the Jews make Ezra the son of God — something which
even superficial acquaintance with the Old Testament
would have prevented. In a tradition it is related that
when he built his mosque at Medina, he was asked
?Koran, 29-'. Those who wish to see a fuller discussion of Mo
hammed's literary attainments may consult Noldeke, Geschichte des
Korans, p. 8; Goldziher, Die Zahiriten, p. 171; Sprenger, Leben
des Muhammed, II, p. 398.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 169
why he did not make it of more substantial materials.
He replied : " My temple shaU be Uke the tabernacle
of Moses, which was made of wood and straw." *
AU the evidence, then, goes to show that Moham
med's acquaintance with the Bible came from oral
communication with Jews and Christians. Although
our knowledge of Mecca during Mohammed's early
life is very imperfect we are tolerably certain that
there was no considerable number of either Jews or
Christians there. Of the Jews at Medina we have
ample knowledge, and U there had been either syna
gogue or church at Mecca the fact would doubtless
have been preserved by tradition. All that tradition
teUs us is that there were a very few Christians at
Mecca, the most of them slaves. It speaks also of
Waraka, a cousin of Chadija, Mohammed's first wife,
who was a Christian " and accustomed to write the
Gospels in Hebrew " — by which, no doubt, Syriac is
meant. This Waraka is made by tradition to recog
nize Mohammed as a prophet at the very beginning
of his career ; and it is possible that such a man ex
isted, and that he influenced Mohammed, f But the
desire of tradition to secure Christian recognition and
endorsement for Mohammed is so strong, that we are
obliged to be cautious in receiving this account as
though it was a historic fact. More weight may be
allowed to the assertion that there were Christian
slaves]: at Mecca to whom Mohammed's attention
was called by their chanting of the Scriptures.
* Sprenger, III, p. 14. Cf. Koran 2"', 930.
f On Waraka, cf. Bochari, I. p. 3.
JMuir refers to three such slaves all of whom became Moslems,

170 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Let us imagine a religious inquirer led to converse
with such slaves. We may assume that they had no
Arabic translation of the Bible. Their Bible was
probably in Syriac. Besides this, it is extremely un
likely that they had any books, even Syriac books, in
their possession. Books were a rare commodity and
not owned by slaves. But Christian slaves would
have some knowledge of the Bible, especially of those
parts of the Bible most frequently used in the public
service. This would include the Psalms and Gospels
quite certainly, for these were used in the churches
from very early times. Let us suppose their knowl
edge to be limited in amount and crude in quality.
The question with us is : What effect would their use
of Scripture have upon an inquirer Uke Mohammed ?
For one thing it would satisfy a want of his soul.
We can hardly help supposing that he was already
religiously awakened. He was dissatisfied with the
ancestral religion and longing for something better.
This desire would lead him to inquire for a wor
thy service of God. Liturgy is an important part
of every religion. Mohammed is dissatisfied with
heathenism ; he is seeking a way in which to serve
God. He comes across these young men and hears
their chant. Asking what it means, he is told that
they are celebrating the praises of God. On further
inquiry he is told that the words they use are forms
supplied by God Himself from His holy Book. It
seems to me that he would recognize in this service
Life of Mahomet, II, p. 122. It is interesting to note that Zaid, who
may be called a forerunner of Mohammed, was exercised about the
right way to worship God. — Ibn Hischam, I, p. 108.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 171
just what he was looking for ; that he would find this
an entirely worthy service, and would have a great
desire to adopt such a service for himself.
Now tradition assures us that for some time before
his call, Mohammed used to retire to a cave near
Mecca, and give himseU, for days at a time, to exer
cises of devotion. It does not seem fanciful to sup
pose that he was endeavoring to serve God after the
manner just described. In this endeavor we can see
that he would meet with some perplexities. The ser
vice of Jews and Christians, he had learned, is based
upon a divine book. This book was inaccessible to
him. If he could get a copy it would be useless to
him because in a foreign language. The broken
Arabic of his Christian friends would be inadequate
in form. In this perplexity, he would naturaUy throw
himself upon God. If God in His mercy would only
send him portions of His Book, as He had sent por
tions to the prophets, how gladly would he receive
them and use them in a service of praise !
Such desires would raise the further question — why
may not God send an Arabic prophet ? To Moham
med aU the world was organized in tribes like those
of Arabia. The tribe of the Jews had been favored
by God with more than one prophet. The tribe of
the Christians had had Jesus. It would not be strange
if Arabia should be visited by the divine grace. If
such a prophet were to arise he would be furnished
with such divinely appointed liturgical compositions
as the Psalms. Not that Mohammed would lay any
special stress upon their being written down. His
conception of a book was not like ours. We think of

172 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
a book as something to be read in a quiet corner, and
studied, and pondered over. To him a book was a
repository of words that were to be read aloud or re
cited. If its contents were known by heart, the writ
ten document was unnecessary.
As we well know, Mohammed called his revelations
Koran. A single chapter is a Koran, and the whole
collection is the Koran. The verb from which this
name is derived does not mean to read in our sense,
but to read aloud, to recite, or to chant — precisely the
act which is performed in the public service of the
Church, the Synagogue, and the Mosque. The pres
ence or absence of a written exemplar makes no dU-
ference.. The recitation is a qur'an just the same.
The words recited may be caUed a book, even although
they are not committed to paper. Mohammed makes
the infant Jesus in the cradle speak and describe
himseU thus : " I am the servant of God, He has given
me the Book and made me a prophet." * It would be
absurd to suppose the new-born babe holding a ma
terial book in his hand. What is meant is that the
infant prophet had the truth in his heart. With this
agrees the description of the Koran as " clear verses
in the breasts of those who have received knowledge " ;
and in another passage the revelation is sent upon tlie
heart of the Prophet himself that he should become
one of the warners.f
Let us look now at the tradition of the call of Mo
hammed. We must use it with a certain reserve, for
Ayesha, from whom it is received, was only eighteen
years old at the time of her husband's death, and the
?Koran, 19s1. f 2948, 26194.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 173
event of which she speaks took place before her birth.
All she could have heard was Mohammed's recoUec-
tions of his call ; and whether she was capable of un
derstanding clearly what he attempted to describe,
or of repeating his account without additions sug
gested by her own lively imagination, is a question.
However, the information is the best we have, and
we must make the best we can out of it. It reads as
follows :
"The first of the revelations which came to the
Apostle of AUah was a good dream ; and he did not
have a dream without there coming something like
the break of day. Then he liked to be alone and he
used to go to the cave of Hira and purify himself —
this [purification] was a performance of religious ex
ercises several nights — until he desired [to return to]
his family. And he used to provide himself with
food for these periods and did so again and again,
until [finaUy] the truth came to him. And he was in
the cave of Hira, and the angel came to him and said :
Recite ! He repUed : I cannot recite.* Then, said
he [that is, Mohammed] he took hold of me and
squeezed me to the utmost of my endurance. Then
he let me go and said again : Recite ! " The same
answer was given and the same action repeated a
second and a third time. At the last the angel re
peated these verses, which now constitute a part of
the Koran :
" Recite in the name of thy Lord who created,
Created man from a clot of blood ;
Recite ! Thy Lord is bountiful ;
* Literally : / am not a reciter.

174 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
He who has taught man by the pen :
Taught him what he did not know.
But man is rebellious
As soon as he sees himself becoming rich ;
Yet verily to thy Lord they shall return ! " *
The verses are in rhymed prose — a form which ex
tends throughout the Koran. We should note how
ever that in the earlier suras we have a much nearer
approach to a regular metre than in the later com
positions. In the revelation before us, the verses are
nearly equal in length and also short, so that the
rhyme and the rhythm strike the ear at once. These
early suras are aU well adopted for the cantillation or
intonation which prevails in the pubUc service of the
Oriental Church as well as in that of the Synagogue.
It must be confessed that the account of Moham
med's call is not altogether clear. But the main facts
seem worthy of credence. The first of these is that
Mohammed was deeply concerned on the subject of
religion. This is evidenced by his frequent and pro
longed visits to the lonely cave. There is a tradition
which even affirms that his religious anxiety brought
him to the verge of suicide. If this be true, it only
shows more clearly the depth of his emotion. The
next fact indicated is that he had a vision of the night.
This is not the only indication that his early revela
tions were received in the night. For the present it
is sufficient to note that tradition brings his earliest
experience of this kind into connection with a vivid
dream. Lastly we notice that the vision brings him
something which we suppose he would greatly desire,
* Koran, 961"8.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 175
that is, a form which he could use for the worship of
God. The endeavor to make the experiences of a religious
mind psychologicaUy intelligible is one frequently
made but rarely successful. It is doubtful whether if
we could cross-question Mohammed himseU, we could
explain aU his experiences. But tentatively we may
be allowed to construct from the data before us a story
such as he would tell us, and which would be logically
consistent. We suppose him anxious on the subject
of reUgion, convinced that the one true God does
reveal HimseU to His servants, and possessed by a
strong desire to know His way more perfectly. With
this on his mind Mohammed spends days in his cave,
meditating on these things and calUng upon God. At
last in the midst of the little sleep he aUows himself,
he has a vivid dream. A bright light seems to break
upon him. He sees a radiant form, which speaks and
gives him what he has sought. The evidence of the
truth of the vision is the stanza which remains in his
memory after he awakes, a form of words which he
can use in the praise of his Lord. If this were Mo
hammed's experience it was an experience which
brings him into the company of many others. For
many seekers after truth and beauty have confessed
that after long striving — a striving which has brought
them to despair — the object of their search has come
to them suddenly like the rising of the dawn.
The next sura in point of time is said to be one
that begins : " O Thou who art wrapped in a gar
ment ! " Tradition has fastened on these words, and
has invented a situation for them. It tells us that

176 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Mohammed was subject to epileptic fits, and that,
when he felt these coming on, he would have Chadija
wrap him in a covering so that he would be protected
from the air, or from the gaze of curious visitors. On
the basis of this tradition a modern scholar * has
buUt up an elaborate theory of Mohammed's epileptic
or hysterical disease. But the foundation is insuffi
cient. The tradition is buUt upon the single phrase
just quoted which describes the one addressed as
wrapped in a garment. But every oriental wraps
himself in a garment when he lies down to sleep.
All that we can legitimately conclude from the words
is that the revelation came to the Prophet when he
was asleep. " Awake, thou that sleepest ! " is the nat
ural meaning of the address, and we have here an
other evidence that these earlier revelations came as
visions of the night. The famous night journey to
Jerusalem is evidence in the same direction, f
Because his first visions were visions of the night,
it does not follow that all the later ones were of the
same kind. The statements are many to the effect
that the Prophet had visions also in his waking hours.
He would become apparently unconscious ; breathed
heavily ; the perspiration broke out upon him even
in a wintry day. % After such a fit, he would give an
answer to a question that had perplexed him, or
would recount a vision that he had seen. How far
* Sprenger in his Leben und Lehre des Muhammed.
t The night visit is alluded to 17'. It should be noted that two
suras (73 and 74) begin with an address to the one wrapped in a
garment. X Bochari, I, p. 3, II, pp. 117, 132, 186; Vakidi (Wellhausen),
p. 181.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 177
he was subject to physical disease, and how far these
extraordinary states may be explained as the result of
mental excitement, is difficult to say. We can readily
see the strong emotion which any one would feel at
the approach of a heavenly messenger. Any man of
ordinary sensibility, if convinced that he was about
to receive a superhuman revelation, would become ex
cited, and his emotion might produce physical effects
such as are here described for us. In order to ac
count for them, it is not necessary to suppose either
that Mohammed was epUeptic or that he was playing
a part. It is to our present purpose to point out that, both
in the matter of dreams and of waking visions, Mo
hammed's experience was simUar to that of the Bibli
cal organs of revelation. The importance of dreams
is evident upon the face of the Old Testament narra
tive. Jacob has a decisive revelation in a dream.
Joseph's dreams foreshadowed God's dealings with
him. The author of the Book of Job assumes that
God speaks to men " in thoughts from the visions of
the night when deep sleep falleth on men." So in
the New Testament ; the angel which encouraged
Paul stood by him in the night, the most natural in
terpretation of the words being that he appeared in
a dream. Without laying stress upon the cases where
the dream is sent to startle the unbeliever (as Pharaoh
or Nebuchadrezzar) it is clearly made out that, to the
Old Testament writers, the dream was one method
of revelation. Jeremiah, to be sure, speaks slighting
ly of dreams and seems to contrast them with the
voice which came to the prophet. But this we must
12

178 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
explain as a reaction against the abuse of dreams by
the prophets of his time.
And if the waking vision produced extraordinary
physical manifestations, or was accompanied by ex
traordinary physical manifestations in Mohammed,
the same is seen in the Old Testament prophets.
Balaam speaks of himself as falling down when he
had the vision of the Almighty. Ezekiel feU upon
his face when he saw the chariot of glory. So did
Daniel at the appearance of Gabriel ; and John, when
he had a revelation of the Son of Man, feU at his
feet like one dead. The phenomena are strikingly
aUke, though a direct connection does not seem to
exist. But it is time to look beyond these externals to the
substance of Mohammed's revelations. What was it
to which he was called ? To answer this question we
may look at one or two of these early chapters. One
has been already quoted. Another, to which aUusion
has been made, reads as follows :
" O, thou who art wrapped in a garment ;
Rise and warn !
And magnify thy Lord,
And cleanse thy garments,
And flee iniquity !
And do not spend with the desire of gain ;
And wait patiently for thy Lord !
When a blast is blown upon the trumpet
That will be a distressful day,
Not easy for the unbelievers. " *
* Koran, 741-10. The rhyme changes in the next verse, so that
this section is probably a revelation by itself.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 179
The message is evidently a command to preach.
" Arise and warn " is its key-note. The rest is inter
preted by this. In order to warn, he must himself be
an example of faith. That is, he must worship in an
acceptable manner, purifying his garments and call
ing upon the name of his Lord. It is this which was
emphasized in the first revelation. The Prophet is
there caUed upon to recite the praises of God, that
is, to spend the time in worship. In both, the com
mand is motived by the thought of the approaching
judgment. Man is rebellious and will be brought to
an account. The trumpet wiU be blown and a dis
tressful day ensue. These are evidently reasons for
the command to warn men of their danger. In this
respect, the call of Mohammed is Uke the call to the
Old Testament prophets. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the
prophets in general, are sent to rebuke a sinful
nation, to declare the wrath of God, and to threaten
approaching calamity.
H we desire further Ught upon what Mohammed
felt caUed to do, we may examine others of his early
compositions, for we may be sure that in them he
tries to carry out the command of God. What we
find on such examination is, that some of these are
forms of prayer. Thus :
" Praise be to God, Lord of the Ages,
The Compassionate, the Merciful,
King of the Day of Judgment :
Thee we serve and to Thee we cry for help,
Lead us in the straight path,
The path of those to whom Thou art gracious,
Upon whom is no wrath and who do not stray. " *
* Koran, 1, the well known Faiiha.

180 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
A profession of faith is a part of worship, so that
we put here the foUowing :
" God is one,
The Self -existent ;
He begets not and is not begotten,
And none is equal to Him." *
Evidently designed to be used in worship are some
others, as the fifty-fifth, which with its recurring re
frain reminds us of Psalm 136. Far more numerous
are the addresses designed to warn men of their dan
ger. For example :
" The desire of gain absorbs you,
Until you visit the tomb.
Yet you shall certainly know,
Then shall you certainly know !
Nay ! If you knew with clear knowledge
You would certainly see the flame ;
Then would you see it with clear eye,
In that day you shall be asked concerning
your pleasures." f
This one is somewhat vague in its description of
the expected punishment, though it is interesting for
its accusation of covetousness as the root of men's
evil actions. Usually the judgment is depicted with
vividness, as in the following :
" When the heavens shall open,
And shall hear their Lord and obey ;
When the earth shall be laid flat,
And shall cast away what is in it and be empty,
And shall hear its Lord and obey —
* Koran, 112. f 102^

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 181
O, man though thou strive hard against thy Lord, yet
shalt thou meet Him.
And he who receives his book in his right hand
Shall be judged leniently,
And shall return to his friends with joy.
But he who receives his book behind his back
Shall wish for annihilation,
And shall suffer the Fire.
Once he rejoiced amid his friends —
He thought he should not be moved.
Yet verily, thy Lord was observing him.

But what ails them, that they do not believe ?
And, when the Scripture is recited, do not bow ?
The unbelievers even accuse it of being false !
But God knoweth their secret thought.
Therefore bring them tidings of a severe punishment,
But those who believe and do well receive an unstinted
reward."*
These citations are enough to show what Mohammed
understood to be his mission. He had received a call
to worship God and to preach. This call he obeyed
to the best of his abiUty. Doubtless he had some
shrinking before appearing in public, as is indicated
in the tradition — where the angel uses force before he
secures obedience. In this also he wiU be found in
line with the BibUcal prophets. Moses seeks to be
excused from the work to which he is called, on the
ground of inability to speak, and Jeremiah pleads his
youth as a reason why he should not be sent to Judah.
This is, of course, a natural experience ; we can hardly
suppose that Mohammed was influenced here by his
Biblical knowledge. * Koran, 84.

182 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
In his later lUe, however, he elaborated the theory
of revelation more distinctly, and in the additional
detaUs we can clearly trace Biblical ideas. Up to
this point we have had only tradition to go upon, for
the mode of revelation. For the later period we
have more positive assertions in the Koran. As to
the objective reality of what he saw he never had any
doubt. But he was sometimes obliged to assure his
followers of it. So we have a description of his ex
periences in the foUowing :
" By the Pleiades when they set !
Your fellow-citizen is not astray or erring.
He does not speak his own fancy.
[What he speaks] is a revelation sent to him.
The Mighty in power taught it to him
The Possessor of strength. He stood erect
In the upper horizon ;
Then he drew near and condescended,
And was two bows' lengths [from him] or nearer.
And he made known to his servant what he made known.
The heart did not deceive concerning what it saw ;
And will you dispute concerning what he saw ?
He saw him another time,
By the sidra tree of the border,
Near which is the garden of abode ;
Then covered the sidra tree that which covered it,
The eye did not turn aside nor refuse [to look],
And he saw the greatest of the signs of his Lord." *
The language is obscure in places and is made more
so, rather than less, by the commentators. These
suppose the sidra tree spoken of, to be located in
heaven. It seems to me, on the contrary, to be on
•Koran, 531-18.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 183
earth, in fact to be a weU-known tree at Mecca, men
tioned for the purpose of locating the experience of
which the Prophet speaks. He saw this tree covered
with something — he purposely does not describe it
more exactly — probably a bright light such as was
spoken of in tradition and compared to the daybreak.
This miracle, upon which his eye was able to look
steadfastly, was one of the theophanies in his experi
ence. It is impossible not to see in it a reminiscence
of the burning bush in Exodus. At another time, the
Prophet teUs us, he saw a figure appear in the horizon
which descended to the place where he himseU was,
and talked with him. So in Israel the angel of Yah
weh caUs out of heaven,* or descends thence, as is
evidenced by his ascending in the flame of the sacri
fice when his errand is performed.! These analogies
would lead us to suppose the nameless being of Mo
hammed's vision also to be an angel. So he is caUed
by the interpreters, and later by Mohammed himself.
But I suspect that in the original meaning of this
sura, the one Mighty in power is AUah HimseU. If,
however, Mohammed did not clearly distinguish be
tween AUah and His Angel, we have another Biblical
resemblance. For, as we know, the Old Testament
presents the Angel of Yahweh speaking and acting
like Yahweh HimseU.
In his later revelations Mohammed speaks dis
tinctly of the angel who is sent to him. In one in
stance only is this aagel called Gabriel : " Say to
them : Who is the enemy of Gabriel ? It is he who
brought down [the revelation] to thy heart by. the
*Gen. 22"-16. f Judg. 1320.

184 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
command of God, to confirm what was before re
vealed, a guidance and good tidings to the believ
ers." * We recall that Gabriel is the messenger of
God both in the Old Testament and in the New. That
it was New Testament influence, rather than Old, which
led Mohammed to adopt him is evident from this very
passage. The Jews had the theory that Gabriel was
the angel sent with bad tidings to Israel, while the
bringer of good tidings was Michael. They therefore
refused to accept Mohammed, or rather made this
the ostensible ground of their refusal. Had he been
under Jewish influence he would have called the an
gel Michael rather than Gabriel.
We must note again that Mohammed in some cases
attributes his revelations to the Spirit : " This is a
revelation of the Lord of the Ages with which the
faithful spirit came down into thy heart that thou
shouldst be one of the Warners ; " " The spirit of
holiness brought it down from thy Lord in truth to
strengthen those who believe." f As Mohammed re
fused to adopt the doctrine of the Trinity, he could
have no idea of the Spirit as a distinct person of the
Godhead. He seems to have wavered between the
conception that the Spirit is one of the angels, and
the conception that it is an influence carried by the
angels to the prophets. The variations in his doctrine
do not concern us here. All that we need to bear in
mind is, that he had adopted the Biblical teaching —
that the Spirit is the Revealer — so far as this doc
trine agreed with his theology in general.
The fact once established in his mind that he was
* Koran, 201. f26i9i ', 16,M.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 185
commissioned as a Prophet, Mohammed drew certain
inferences, which became important parts of his sys
tem, and which we cannot ignore in treating his doc
trine of revelation. The first of these was that by
his call he became one in the line of prophets and
religious leaders, of which the world had already seen
several. This point has been already touched upon
in our discussion of the narrative material in the
Koran. As we there saw, the characters most prom
inently in his mind were the great founders of relig
ion, Noah, Abraham,- Moses, and Jesus. These formed
the chain of which now, by his election, he became
the concluding link. It went with this that his relig
ion was not new. He only claimed to reproduce what
had been revealed to his predecessors. Every relig
ious movement seems naturally to seek itself in the
past. Thus the Hebrews saw faith exemplified in
Noah and Abraham ; Judaism claimed Moses as its
founder; the Apostles pointed back to David and
Isaiah; the Reformers renewed the Christianity of
the Apostles. Mohammed's course is parallel with
these. And, hke them, he tried to link his religion
with earUer ones not only by his renewal of their
principles, but by their supposed prophecies of him.
This claim— that he was predicted in the earUer
Scriptures — is unmistakably, though not very fre
quently, put forward in the Koran. In a compara
tively late sura we find : " Jesus the son of Mary said :
O, Children of Israel, verily I am the Apostle of God
to you confirming the Tora which you already have,
and bringing tidings of an Apostle to come after me
whose name is Ahmed."* In another place he is
* Koran. 61'.

186 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
spoken of as " the vernacular * prophet whom they
find described in their own [books], in the Tora and
the Gospel." What predictions Mohammed himself
had in mind in these declarations seems impossible
to make out. The Arabic commentators do not hesi
tate to refer to him all the Messianic passages of the
Old Testament. The Messianic hope, as we know,
did not cease with the coming of Christ, and we can
scarcely wonder that Mohammed applied it to him
self. For the words of Jesus which he claims in the
passage quoted, tradition points to the promise of
the Paraclete in the Gospel of John. It is significant
that this promise had already been appropriated by
Mani,\ for there are some indications that Moham
med got his Christianity from a heretical source.
What interests us here is not the particular passage
in the Prophet's mind, but the general claim that he
was not only the legitimate successor of the earUer
Messengers of God, but was also foreseen and expect
ed by them as the " seal " or culmination of their
mission. Another inference from the firmly held belief that
he was a prophet, is prominently put forward in the
* The translation is only probable. Mohammed elsewhere em
phasizes the fact that he brings an Arabic revelation. The refer
ence here is 7156. Por a discussion of the passages of Scripture ap
plied by Moslems to Mohammed cf. Brockelmann, " Muhammed-
anische Weissagungen im Alten Testament," Z.A.T.W., XV. pp.
138 ff., 312, with remarks by Baeher, ibid., p. 309; also Goldziher,
Z.D.M.G., XIII, and Revue des Etudes Juives, XXX., pp. 1-23.
One Mohammedan author finds no less than fifty-one prophecies of
Islam in the Bible.
t Cf. Ilerzog, P.R.E.2, IX., p. 231. The passage in John is cited
by Ibn Ishak, cf. Weil's Ibn Hischam, I, p. 112.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 187
Koran, to wit : that his revelation, as embodied in
the Koran, is the same in substance with the sacred
books which had preceded. Remember that he made
the Booh an abstraction. He made it at least an in
tellectual and spiritual entity, not a material thing of
paper and ink. His revelations were generally writ
ten down, to be sure; they were collected at last
from fragments of papyrus and parchment and bones,
but also from the breasts of men. The record upon
which Mohammed reUed however was the memory of
his foUowers. Nevertheless he regarded his detached
fragments as parts of a transcendental unity which
he called the Book, and whose real existence was in
heaven. Looking more narrowly at what he says of this
Book, we discover that he has combined two concep
tions OriginaUy separate. In connection with the
great thought of the judgment, he had adopted the
theory of a book of record kept in heaven. In the early
suras there are several references to this book, which
seems to be either a record of actions or a record of
names* It needed only a little expansion of this to
make the book a book of fate containing the whole
of God's will for aU history. But a book of God was
also revealed to the Jews and Christians. They meant
by it, to be sure, an earthly codex. Yet the earthly
codex might be but the transcript of a heavenly orig
inal. According to Jewish tradition,! the Tora was
created before the creation of the heavens and the
* Koran, 782'-23, 834-9' 18-!°.
t Midrasch Bereschith Rabba (Wiinsche). p. 31. And cf. Weber,
Altsynagogale Theologie, p. 14.

188 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
earth. Indeed we see that the natural implication
of the phrase Book of God is that the original is writ
ten in heaven. The inference was made by Moham
med : " This is a noble Koran, in a carefully guarded
book, touched only by the pure, a revelation from the
Lord of the Ages." *
Mohammed's conception therefore may be defined
as follows : there is a great book of God's decrees,
written in heaven. From this book, portions are sent
down to the successive prophets. These are the
parts of the Book fitted for the guidance of men into
true faith, true worship, and right conduct. The
Pentateuch, the Gospel, and the Koran, are all ex
tracts from this original. They are therefore identical
in substance, and one corroborates the other. One
of the earliest of Mohammed's revelations alludes to
the rolls of Abraham and Moses, as containing a
warning simUar to the one just deUvered by him
self. It is unnecessary to suppose, with Sprenger,
that there is a reference here to pseudepigrapha
which circulated under these titles. The Pentateuch
might weU be described under the name of the roll of
Abraham or the roll of Moses. In later passages we
find it distinctly said that the Koran confirms the
preceding revelations : " Before this was the Book
of Moses, a guide and a gUt of grace, and this [Koran]
is a book Avhich asserts the truth [of the other] in
Arabic, that it may warn the evil-doers." f The atti
tude of the Prophet is weU brought out in what he is
commanded to say to the Jews of Medina who per-
* Koran, 567°-"», cf. 855! f., 8013 f.
t 4611, cf. 2s3, 69-, 12'", 3528f.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 189
sisted in asking him troublesome questions about the
Tora : " Say to them : We believe in God and what
is revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abra
ham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the [twelve]
tribes, and in what Moses and Jesus and the Prophets
received from their Lord. We make no difference
between them and we are resigned to Him." * Al
though Koran was the proper name of the portion
revealed to him, he seems in one instance to call the
whole body of revealed books by this name. This is
where he denounces the dividers who make the Koran
parts. The most natural explanation of the words is
that they refer to the Jews and Christians who, by
rejecting the later while accepting the earlier revela
tion, put asunder what Mohammed joined together.
The theory of Mohammed is a perfectly consistent
one, and when he had formulated it, he did not waver.
The Jews, we may well believe, made strenuous ef
forts to convict him of error, in that he represented
their Tora to be identical with his revelations. The
only effect on his mind was to strengthen the convic
tion of their obstinacy and deceit. We wonder a
little that he did not take more pains to acquaint
himself with the exact contents of Tora and Gospel.
Yet not a few theologians, before his time and since,
have been willing to rest in their a priori system, and
have ignored or denied those facts which conflicted
with it. The attitude of Mohammed is seen in the
anecdote that Omar brought a Pentateuch to Mo
hammed and offered to read out of it. The anger of
the Prophet appeared in his face and Omar desisted,
* Koran, 3".

190 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
saying : " God protect me from the anger of God and
His Apostle ! It suffices me that God is my Cherisher,
and Islam my religion, and Mohammed my prophet."
Then Mohammed said: "H Moses were alive and
knew my prophecy he would follow me." * The posi
tion of Mohammed is quite intelligible. The princi
ples of Islam were established ; for the faith of its
disciples the confirmation of these principles from
the Bible was unnecessary. On the other hand the
facts might be inconvenient. On either view, it was
best to let well enough alone.
It was not the facts of the older Scriptures alone
that were troublesome. The Koran itseU did not al
ways seem to bear out the character given it. It could
not be expected that a coUection of occasional leaflets,
published at intervals during more than twenty years,
should be free from inconsistencies or even contra
dictions. Such inconsistencies were admitted by
Mohammed himseU. Some of them he removed by
erasure. In some cases he laid the blame on his own
memory, and once he confessed that Satan had mis
led him. Finally he declared that God abrogated
some regulations by later enactments, f It is possible
that the theory of abrogation was at first invented to
account for discrepancies between the Bible and the
Koran. Two of the passages which state the theory
are in a context which has to do with the Jews ; and
the thought in Mohammed's mind seems to have been
something like this: "Should the Jews object that
* Mishcat, I. , p. 53.
t The theory, with a list of the abrogated verses, is given in
Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, p. 520.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 191
this revelation does not agree with theirs, we reply
that God is able to erase parts of His revelation — He
may do what He wiU with His own." The theory
once accepted was a welcome recourse, when dis
crepancies came to light in the Koran itself.*
It seems strange to us that Mohammed made no
forecast of the future. One would suppose that the
experience which led him to abrogate regulations
only a few years old, would show him that other laws
vrould need to be modified after his death. But this
seems not to have occurred to him. The necessities
of the hour absorbed his thoughts. La the main, no
doubt, he felt that the principles laid down by him
would be a sufficient guide for aU time to come. It
must be remembered also that he gave tradition a
part in the regulation of his community. In this re
spect he never took the Protestant position which
makes the Scriptures the exclusive arbiter in matters
of faith and Ufe. He would have accepted, rather, the
rule of the early Church in which ApostoUc tradition
had so large a part.
Koran and tradition together make up the infallible
rule of faith and practice in the Moslem Church. Of
the two parts, the Koran must always have the first
place — a clear sentence in the Koran, unless it is one
* The Koran passages are 2100, 1339 f, both of which are in con
nection with allusions to the earlier revelations. A tradition gives
a Koran verse which was not only abrogated but obliterated — Bo
chari, III, p. 190. The fact that the Tora did not contain some
things which ought to be in it on his theory, Mohammed explains
by saying that the Jews concealed them from the Moslems; " Our
Apostle has come to you revealing a great part of what you are ac
customed to conceal of the Book." 518.

192 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
that has been abrogated by another sentence in the
Koran, is decisive. This position of arbiter is parallel
to what is asserted of the older revelation : " We sent
down the Tora as a guide and a light ; by it the pious
prophets judged the Jews ; and the Rabbis and the
Scribes [still] judge by what is committed to them of
the Book of God, and are witnesses concerning it."
Mohammed goes on to give a summary of the Old
Testament lex talionis and adds : " And whoever does
not judge by what God has revealed, these are the
wicked." * A Uttle later in the same chapter Jesus
is said to have received the Gospel — "that the peo
ple of the Gospel should judge by what God re
vealed." Then comes Mohammed, who also has re
ceived a book and who is exhorted thus : " Then judge
between them by what God has revealed, and do not
follow their desires, turning away from what has
come to thee of the truth. To each of you we have
given a law and a plain path." f
This declaration puts the Koran into the same po
sition of supreme law for the Moslem which the Tora
occupies for the Jew, and which the Gospel occupies
for the Christian. The conception of the revelation
as law becomes especially prominent in the later
period of Mohammed's life. We can readily account
for this. At Medina the simple warner and bringer
of tidings had become the theocratic ruler and judge
over a small but heterogeneous community, unused to
a settled form of government. His decisions, there
fore, became precedents and his regulations became
laws. These were embodied in the Koran, which,
?Koran, 5" f. t5!2.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 193
in this period differs materiaUy in character from
the earlier revelations. The later suras are in a
sense the archives of the infant state. "The con
duct of the disaffected, the treatment of allies, the
formation of treaties, the acceptance of terms and
other poUtical matters [now] found a place among the
divine messages. Liberality in contributing toward
the expenses of war — the only object requiring a public
purse — is continually inculcated. The elements of a
code both criminal and civil are also introduced. Pun
ishments for certain offences are specified, and a mass
of legislation [is] laid down for the tutelage of orphans,
for marriage, divorce, sales, bargains, wills, evidence,
usury, and other similar concerns. Further, there
are copious instructions for the guidance of the be
liever in his private Ufe and special provisions . . .
regulating the intercourse of Mahomet with his sub
jects and with his own family." * This occasional
character of the Koran is most conspicuous in its al
lusions to the experiences of Mohammed himself.
Many of these are interesting for the gUmpse they
give us into the heart of the speaker ; as where he
betrays his great anxiety to work a miracle. Some of
them are comical ; as where he teaches etiquette to
the too famUiar or too noisy Bedawin : " O, BeUevers,
do not lift your voices above the voice of the Prophet,
and do not shout at him as you shout at each
other ; else your deeds are of no avail, though you
know it not. They who speak low in the presence
of the Apostle of God, these are they whose hearts
God has disposed toward piety." f And again : " O,
* Muir, Life of Mahomet, III, 295. f Koran, 4D2 '.
13

194 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Believers, do not enter the houses of the Prophet
except he invite you to eat with him ; and do so
without looking at his furniture. But when you are
invited, then enter ; and when you have eaten, then
go your ways, and do not be famiUar in your con
versation. This pains the Prophet, though he is
ashamed to tell you ; but God is not ashamed of the
truth. And when you ask anything of them [that is,
his -wives], ask it from the other side of a curtain —
this is more innocent for your hearts and for theirs.
It is not becoming in you to pain the Prophet, nor
to marry his wives after his death. This were in
the sight of God a great sin."* To bring in a divine
revelation in order to ease the jealous heart of a fond
old man, seems to us to border on blasphemy. And
when the same method is taken to justify him in
violating the rule which he had himself made on the
subject of marriage, f and again to vindicate his fa
vorite wife when she was the subject of scandal, we
are shocked and disgusted.
* Koran, 3363. The houses of the Prophet were a row of huts
around a court. Each wife had one, and Mohammed dwelt with
them by turns.
t Mohammed had ordered his followers to take not more than
four wives. He increased his own hareem to nine or more and
justified liimself by a revelation (SB49). He was seized with a pas
sion for the wife of his adopted son Zaid. Zaid divorced her, but
it was against customary morals for a man to marry the divorced
wife of an adopted son. After some wavering, Mohammed com
manded himself (in a revelation) to take her ; and of course he thus
set aside the old law (3337). In forbidding remarriage on the part
of the widows he might leave, he possibly had Jewish precedent in
mind, according to Sale, Prelim. Dis., who cites Mishna Sanhedrin,
to prove that the widow of a prince should not remarry

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 195
In view of such exhibitions of selfish weakness, our
impulse is to set down their author as a vulgar im
postor, whose aim from the beginning was to secure
enjoyment and influence by a forged and fraudulent
revelation. In doing this we should easily do him
an injustice. Even these exhibitions of weakness
may be explained as the defect of a quality. Mo
hammed had placed his trust in AUah, and he was
convinced that AUah had distinguished him by his
favor. It is of the essence of faith to believe that
God loves us and cares for us individuaUy. One of
the most pleasing suras of the Koran is the expres
sion of this faith :
"By the morning ;
By the night when it grows dark ;
Thy Lord has not forsaken nor rejected thee ;
And the future shall be better than the past.
Thy Lord will give thee and thou shalt be satisfied.
Did He not find thee an orphan and adopt thee ?
And find thee poor and enrich thee ?
Then do not oppress the orphan ;
And do not repulse the one who asks ;
And recount the mercies of thy Lord." *
In a mind whose early moral training has been de
fective we can see that such a faith may lead to seU-
deception. It is to be feared that not a few Chris
tians have taken virtuaUy the position of Mohammed
— that God so loves them as to indulge their weak
nesses even as an earthly father indulges a favorite
chUd. To pursue this subject would take us beyond the
* Sura 93, and cf . 94.

196 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
proper limits of this inquiry. We are here investi
gating the nature of the influence exerted by the
Bible on the religion of Mohammed. For the sub
ject of this lecture we may describe this influence as
follows :
1. Mohammed's general doctrine of revelation was
undoubtedly derived from the Bible. The doctrine
is that God reveals His will to chosen men who are
commanded to speak for Him, and who are called
prophets or apostles.
2. The revelation which the prophet receives is
brought by an angel. This method of revelation,
which is only occasional in the Bible, is made the rule
by Mohammed, for he identifies revelation by the
Spirit with this, because he makes the Spirit to be
an angel. In some cases he so completely adopts
the Biblical view that he gives the angel of revela
tion the name Gabriel.
3. He speaks always (when delivering the message
revealed to him) for God, using the pronoun of the
first person, not to express his own mind, but to ex
press the mind of God. In this also he follows Bibli
cal precedent, where, in the height of prophetic
speech, the ego of the prophet disappears before the
Higher Ego.* Here also, what is occasional in the
Old Testament has become the rule with Mohammed.
That the cause of God is identified with the cause of
the prophet, is the natural consequence of this view.
And in this connection we must not shut our eyes
to the fact that God's care for His cause is, in the Old
Testament, extended to the personal affairs of the
*Ewald, Propheten des Alien Bundes'2, p. 33.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY 197
prophet. Jeremiah was informed by revelation of
the intended treachery of his fellow-townsmen. Sam
uel was directed by revelation in making use of a sub
terfuge to deceive Saul, and thus to relieve his own
fear. God identifies Elisha's honor with His own,
and where the prophet relieves his feelings with a
curse, God makes the curse effective in avenging the
insult. Such examples show that Mohammed's pre
sumption is not altogether without precedent.
4. The revelation received by the prophet is re
garded by Mohammed as a transcript from a heavenly
original. In this he has gone farther than any ex
press declaration of the Bible, but it is not unfair to
say that the general thought is Biblical. Besides
what has aheady been said, we may notice that when
Ezekiel received his revelation, a roll was given him
by a heavenly hand. When he had eaten the book
(devoured its contents we should say) he was prepared
to speak to Israel* The meaning is that his proph
ecy was the communication of a heavenly original.
The author of the Apocalypse has a similar experi
ence in vision. On the basis of these passages the
idea of a heavenly original, of which revealed books
are transcripts, had arisen before Mohammed. Thus
Enoch has the heavenly tablets shown him in which
he reads "all the deeds of men to the latest genera
tions."! He is then able to embody these in his own
*Ezek. 2'», 31-4.
t Das Buch Henoch, von Dillmann (1853), Kap. 81, p. 51. In the
Book of Jubilees the Bible itself seems to be described as the
heavenly tablets. Cf . Das Buch der Jubilaen, Ewald, Jahrbucher,
II, pp. 237, 256.

198 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
book. But as Mohammed's idea of prophecy is more
distinctly BibUcal than that found in the Book of
Enoch, there is probably no direct influence here to
be discovered.
5. The sum of the revelations received by the
prophet makes up a rule of faith and Ufe. This idea
is also Biblical ; at least, this is the point of view
from which the New Testament regards the Old Tes
tament, though it at the same time formulates a
theory of abrogation similar to the one forced upon
Mohammed. Mohammed, therefore, held substantially Biblical
views of Revelation and Prophecy.

LECTURE VII.
SIN AND SALVATION
Some years ago it was the fashion to describe the
Protestant Reformation as based upon two principles.
One of these — the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures
as the rule of faith — was caUed the formal principle,
the other — justification by faith — was caUed the
material principle. The present tendency is to dis
miss this definition as having no particular value.
But I have the impression that it conveys a distinct
truth which is of wider application than is given it
in this one division of Church History. Every re
ligion — at least every positive religion — brings a
doctrine to which it demands assent. The first ques
tion which its preachers must answer is : how do you
know the doctrine to be true ? But no reUgion suc
ceeds without bringing more than a doctrine. Re
ligion must satisfy the craving of the heart, as well
as the curiosity of the intellect. The second question
which the Apostles of any religion must meet is :
what good do you bring?
Now the answer to the first question must define
the source of doctrine. In the Protestant Reforma
tion this source was defined to be the Holy Script
ures in their natural sense, independent of the tradi
tion of the Church. The answer to the second question
199

200 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
must define the salvation offered by the preacher. In
the Reformation this was defined as justification by
faith alone, that is, the grace of God imparted im
mediately to the believer, not conditioned by the
Church's ministration. Without pausing to inquire
how far these two answers are correctly labelled,
formal and material, let us notice that corresponding
answers are given in Islam. Mohammed preached a
doctrine, and was obUged to teU where he got it.
This he did in his assertion of divine revelation to
himself, at the same time justifying his claim by an
appeal to the earlier prophets. He offered also an
other boon — salvation. He was obliged here also to
define his position. This definition forms the sub
ject of the present lecture.
I have already said that Mohammed offered salva
tion. Salvation implies something from which one
must be saved, and this something is, of course, sin.
The doctrine of sin must be treated before we can
understand the doctrine of salvation. Our starting-
point is the nature of man. In this the position of
the Koran is very simple : man consists of a material
part, the body, and an immaterial part, the soul.
This was taken over from Arabic heathenism, where
the custom of offering sacrifices to the dead implies a
continued existence of the soul after the death of the
body. This separate existence of the soul however
seems to have been conceived of as shadowy and un
real — much like the unsubstantial and unsatisfying
state in which the Old Testament pictures the inhab
itants of Sheol. It was because this conception
failed to meet his idea of the future state, that Mo-

SIN AND SALVATION 201
hammed laid so much emphasis on the resurrection.
His leading thought was the thought of the Judgment
Day. But a judgment which should deal only with
the unsubstantial incorporeal shades would be itself
unsubstantial and shadowy. The thought of the Judg
ment is necessarily accompanied by the thought of
the Resurrection — thus only does it become a reality.
With the restored body, the whole man meets his
Maker, and both parts of his nature are punished or
rewarded for that for which both parts are respon
sible. This matter interests us here only so far as it
throws light on the nature of man. At the beginning
of his career, Mohammed found the doctrine of the
resurrection necessary, because he had difficulty in
conceiving the independent existence of the soul. It
seems as if the doctrine helped him in this respect so
that he was able partly to dispense with it in his
later teaching. What I mean is, not that he ever
gave up the resurrection or wavered in regard to it ;
but that when he had accustomed himself to the doc
trine of the resurrection, the soul itself had more con
sistency, it began to stand more distinctly for the
man. He never seems to have been troubled by the
question where the soul resides during the interval
between death and the resurrection. Tradition has
indeed busied itself with this question, as we should
expect. But the Koran has no intimation of a
middle state, such as we should find had it been a
matter of importance in the mind of Mohammed.
After the battles of Islam began, we find a distinct
assurance that the souls of beUevers enter at once on

202 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
the joys of paradise. This implies, of course, that
the soul is capable of its full lUe apart from the body.
The resurrection therefore would seem to be super
fluous. The soul is the man and can dispense with
the body, as it does in death and even in sleep.* Be
cause the soul is the man it may be spoken of when
the whole man is meant.
The souls which tremble in the day of judgment
are the souls reclothed with their bodies, that is, the 1
persons. When it is said that every soul shall taste
of death, evidently every human being is meant. The
soul being the active principle, is that which desires
good or evil,t just as in Hebrew ; the word for soul
is, in fact, the same in the two languages.
A close parallel with the Hebrew also is the Arabic
connection of the soul and the heart. The heart is
the seat of the soul — not the affections only, but the
intellect as well. What may be predicated of the soul
may be predicated equally of the heart. Thus : the
soul believes, or the man beUeves with the heart.]:
The heart is terrified ; it is the seat of the intelli
gence. God seals or covers the hearts so that men
do not understand ; the hearts of believers find peace
in remembering God.§ You wiU already have no
ticed the great similarity between these affirmations
* In 6:i0 God is said to take the souls in the night (that is, in sleep)
with the same language with which the angels are said to take the
souls at death, 661, cf. also 394S. Those who have been slain in
battle for the good cause cannot be called dead— they are the truly
living, though beyond our sight, 2"'.
t Koran 5323, 41".
X 10'°°, 16108.
§ 50™, 15", 6", 1398. -

SIN AND SALVATION 203
and the language of the Old Testament. It is not
probable, however, that there was direct dependence.
The simple psychology was common to Hebrew and
to Arabic thought before the rise of Islam.
The result which we have reached is important for
our present inquiry in two ways. First, there is no
trichotomy in man according to the Koran ; secondly,
the seat of sin is not the body alone.
There is no clear indication of a trichotomy in man.
It is indeed said that man's life or soul is derived
from the spirit of God. God Himself says to the
angels : "lam about to make man of clay, and when
I have formed him and breathed into him of my spirit,
then bow down to him."* In adopting this Biblical
language, Mohammed was probably ignorant of the
Christian speculation, which would see in it author
ity for a third element of the human personality, dif
ferent from body and soul. He speaks of the crea
tion of animals in language simUar to what was just
quoted, where he says that Jesus made birds of clay
and breathed into them so that they became alive.f
Mohammed seems to conceive of the breathing as the
method of introducing life into the creature. He no
where speaks of the spirit of man. Li this respect
the Mohammedan theologians have gone beyond
their master, and have learned from the Christians to
distinguish between the spirit and the soul of man.]:
But this is foreign to the Koran, which knows but one
immaterial part of man — the soul, which has its seat
in the heart.
* Koran 323, cf. 1523, 38". f 5"°.
X My wisdom comes from lane, Arabic Lexicon, p. 2827.

204 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The doctrine that the soul is the man, precludes
the idea that sin is the evil of the body — or that the
flesh is the seat of sin. This is not contradicted by
the prominence given to the desires as a source of
sin, for the desires pertain to the soul. Oriental
speculation on this subject seems not to have reached
Mohammed. If it reached him, it made no impres
sion upon him. In fact, as we have had occasion to
remark, he was no phUosopher or speculative theo
logian. The problem which confronted him was a
practical problem. Before him, scattered individuals
throughout the tribes — the Hanifs already alluded
to — had labored with it as a practical problem. They
sought a peace of conscience which the rites of hea
thenism could not give. Mohammed's interest was no
other. In him as in them, the sense of sin was aroused
experimentally. Hence came the long practice of
prayer and ascetic exercises in the cave of Hira.
When he found assurance, he found it in the sense
of pardon. The fact of sin and ill desert was not
thereby aboUshed ; it was rather established. The
thought of the Day of Judgment took strong hold
upon him, just because he so strongly realized the fact
of sin in himself. What he experienced in himself
he observed in others. The call to preach, of which
he was so vividly conscious, was based upon the con
viction that his contemporaries were in sin and under
the wrath of God.
On the basis of his personal experience Mohammed
believed in the universality of sin. He transferred
his own experience to other men and classed them
with himself. This we conclude from indirect in-

SIN AND SALVATION 205
timations rather than from express affirmations of
the Koran. He nowhere asserts categorically the
sinfulness of the whole race. He had to do with a
condition, not a theory. In a tradition he is report
ed as saying : " There is not of the sons of Adam ex
cept Mary and her Son, one born but is touched by
the devil at the time of his birth ; and the child makes
a loud noise from the touch." * The tradition is
doubtless influenced by some theory of natural de
pravity. But it does not affirm the transmission of
sin from father to son — the idea is rather that from
the moment of birth every human being is assailed
by Satan. The universaUty of actual transgression
does not necessarUy foUow.
It is in fact rather remarkable that Mohammed
should so fully adopt the Biblical account of the sin
of Adam, and yet not connect with it the doctrine of
the corruption of the race. Let me hasten to say
that he does not show any closer adherence to the
letter of the Bible in this than in the other Biblical
narratives, in fact the departures are rather more no
ticeable in this than in the others. His account is to
the effect that Adam and his wUe were created of
clay and placed in the Garden of Paradise, which is
in heaven. God commands the angels to bow down
to Adam as His vicegerent. AU obey except Iblis,
who refuses on the ground that Adam is his inferior.
Iblis is then expelled from the Garden because of his
arrogance, but receives permission to act as the
tempter of man. Adam and his wUe are commanded
not to eat of one tree in the Garden, and are warned
* Mishcat, I , p. 23.

206 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
against the wiles of Satan. Nevertheless Satan in
sinuates that the tree is forbidden to them because,
if they eat, they will become angels or immortal. So
they eat, and both tempter and tempted are cast down
to earth to Uve in mutual enmity until the day of final
doom. The story, which is given several times in the
Koran, may be said to embody Mohammed's theory
of the origin of sin. This was to him a very simple
matter — sin is disobedience to the commands of God.
It came into being when the pride of Iblis revolted
against a command of God. It was transmitted from
Iblis to Adam by way of suggestion, and in him its
essence was disobedience to the command of God.
That Adam was originally endowed with holiness and
lost it in his faU, is nowhere affirmed. No more is
such a solidarity of the race affirmed or assumed as
would make aU mankind sin in Adam and faU with
him in his first transgression.
Although we find no theory of an organic connection
between the sin of Adam and the sinfulness of the race,
yet the story of the first man is not unmeaning. It is
an example of the universal experience. AU men are
subject to temptation. This comes from their desires.
We read of the wicked : " In their hearts is a disease,
and God increases their disease " ; * and again : " EvU
is that which their souls have put before them." t In
this passage the soul seems put for the desires, as we
find it also in the old Testament. In the account
given of Joseph the hero himself confesses that " the
soul inclines to evil except my Lord have mercy." X
Elsewhere Mohammed is warned against him who
* Koran 29. t 583. X 1253-

SIN AND SALVATION 207
follows his inclination ; and virtue is said to consist
in restraining the soul from its inclination.* These
passages show that Mohammed was not far from the
New Testament treatment of concupiscence as the root
of sin. When desUe conceives, it brings forth sin.
These deshes are stimulated by the aUurements of
the world and the suggestions of Satan. In the great
Day, men and jinn wiU be asked : " Did there not
come to you Apostles from your own number, repeat
ing to you My revelations and warning you of this
day ? They wiU say : We testUy against ourselves —
the Ufe of the world beguUed us." f The result of
the natural constitution of things is that men go
astray. In this view of it, it is entirely correct to
speak of the lost estate of man. But this is not due
to the sin of Adam.
We have already noticed instances in which tradi
tion shows a nearer approach to Christian theology
than we find in the Koran. This is illustrated in the
subject before us. Mohammed is said to have re
lated a legend concerning Adam and to have added :
"So Adam denied and his chUdren have inherited
this vice : and Adam forgot and ate of the tree, and
his chUdren have inherited forgetfulness from him ;
and Adam committed a fault and his chUdren inher
ited crimes from him."]: This goes beyond any
thing in the Koran in its assertion of inherited de
pravity, and we are compeUed to suppose that it is
colored by the views of the traditionist. We find also
a story in the biographies which has obtained cur
rency in most modern accounts of Mohammed to this
* Koran 18", 791". 1 6!=». 1 Mishcat, I. , p. 35.

208 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
effect : When the Prophet was an infant (in another
form of the story when he was twelve years old), two
angels cut open his breast and took out his heart
which they washed with snow and then restored to
his bosom. The story in this form is undoubtedly
meant to teach that the infant's heart was thus cleansed
of hereditary depravity. But we are able to say that
the story in this form is comparatively late. As first
told, it was connected not with the Prophet's infancy
but with the beginning of his ministry. In this form
it meant only that when God called Mohammed, He
cleansed him from the guUt of his former sins — es
pecially from the idolatry which he had practised in
his earlier life. In this form we cannot find any ref
erence to the doctrine of original sin.
The origin of sin is in the conflict between the nat
ural desires of men and the command of God. " The
truth [has come] from your Lord ; whoever will, let
him believe, and whoever wiU, let him disbelieve." *
Whether the light of nature is enough to induce obe
dience we are not told. In practice the command of
God comes through the prophets. The sin which is
in the world is disobedience to these commands.
Those who disobey, foUowing the aUurements of the
world or of Satan, are lost. To realize how much
this word meant to Mohammed we must picture to
ourselves the condition of the traveller in the desert.
The pathless waste stretches out on every hand. The
wells are few and hidden in the sand. The pitiless
sun burns upon him from above and the heated soil
scorches his feet from below. The scanty water-skins
* Koran 18".

SIN AND SALVATION 209
are soon exhausted. Unless some friendly hand point
the way to water, the caravan must lie down and die.
Such is the condition of man in the present world.
He is a wanderer in a desert — in hopeless perplexity
unless he has a guide. La this sense all men are lost
unless God intervenes for their rescue.
That this was Mohammed's view we cannot doubt.
He had in his own heart an abiding sense of his need
of guidance. The only real petition in his model
prayer (the Fatiha) asks for guidance ; and he inter
prets the petition for us in the words : " Our Lord,
do not let our hearts wander, after Thou hast directed
us ; give us grace from Thee — Thou art the bountiful
Giver." * And a further commentary is afforded by
the traditions. Mohammed was asked what he was
accustomed to say in his private devotions. He re
plied : " I say : O God put my sins as far away from
me as Thou hast put the East from the West ; O God,
cleanse me from sin as the white garment is cleansed
from its filth ; O God, wash away my sins with water
and with snow and with hail." f I need hardly call
your attention to the Scripture affirmation that God
" has put our sins as far from us as the East is from
the West," and to the language of Job concerning
washing himself in snow water. The resemblance
may be owing partly to the traditionist, but there is
no reason to suppose that the sentiment is not genu
inely Mohammed's.
The sense of sin thus revealed is found also in Mo
hammed's companions. Abu Bekr asked Mohammed
to teach him a prayer to be used in his private devo-
* Koran 36. t Bochari, I, p. 167.
14

210 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
tions. The form given was : " O, God, I have
wronged my own soul with grievous sin, and none for
gives sins but Thou ; forgive me with Thy forgive
ness, and have compassion unto me— verily Thou art
the Forgiving, the Compassionate." * Abu Bekr was
of an emotional nature, and we are not surprised to
find such desires in him. But Omar, the man of iron
wiU and cool head, was affected with the same con
cern : " I heard the sobbing of Omar (says one of the
Companions), when I was in the last row [in the
mosque] as he recited : I show my grief and my
sorrow to God alone." f Others of the early Mos
lems wept when prosperity came to them, fearing
that they were receiving their recompense in this
Ufe. One of the Companions came to consult him,
and the Prophet said : Are you come to ask what is
goodness and what is badness? On receiving an
affirmative reply (says the narrator), he joined his
fingers together and struck them upon my breast,
that is, he made a sign toward my heart, and said :
Ask the sentence from thine own heart. This he re
peated three times and added: " Goodness is a thing
from which the heart finds firmness and rest, and
badness is a thing which throws thee into doubt,
though men may approve." J The sentence reminds
us of Paul's treatment of conscience, but it is not
quoted for that analogy. It is in place here, because
it throws light upon the mind of Mohammed and his
* Bochari, I, p. 187.
t Ibid., p. 162. Omar, was, of course, in the front row of those
praying. X Mishcat, II, p. 4. For some striking examples of the dread of
sin, see Kremer, Herrschende Ideen des Islam, p. 24.

SIN AND SALVATION 211
followers. We can scarcely interpret it otherwise
than as indicating a sincere dread of sin and a sincere
desire for righteousness.
We must conclude that the power of Mohammed's
message consisted in its appeal to the conscience. It
threatened punishment which was felt to be deserved.
It was therefore a message of salvation. And the
vividness of the sense of ill desert was such as to
paint a picture of impending doom, from which men
would be glad to flee. This doom was conceived of
either as a Day of the Lord — that is, a great catas
trophe such as had overtaken Sodom and destroyed
Pharaoh — or as the Day of final Judgment. As
to the great catastrophe, it is possible, even prob
able, that Mohammed's early preaching set a time
for its coming more definitely than now appears.
The present text of the Koran is rather guarded in
its language : " Perhaps a portion of that which you
desire to hasten is close upon you ; " " Men ask thee
concerning the Hour. Say : The knowledge of it is
with God alone, and how dost thou know whether it
may not be near? "* In a few instances we find ap
parently categorical statements that the Hour is near,
and that its signs are already discernible. It is prob
able that these were once more numerous. But the
urgency of his opponents that Mohammed should fix a
definite time for the punishment, taught him caution.
If there was some uncertainty as to God's inter
vention in an overthrow of the Meccan state, there
could be none as to the final Judgment. That was
certain, and its decision would be irreversible. In
•Koran 27", 33«.

212 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
that day repentance will no longer avail, and those
who are confronted with the list of their sins will
wish in vain for one hour of earthly life in which to
accept the message of their prophet. They wiU be
asked whether they had not had the opportunity to
repent ; whether apostles had not come to warn them
of their danger. They will be obliged to confess that
they have brought their punishment on themselves.
Salvation (this is the conclusion) is offered to men by
the apostles of God. It was offered to Adam after
his faU : " Adam received from his Lord words, and
repented (He is the Indulgent, the Compassionate) —
We said : Go down hence, and when there comes to
you guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance,
no fear shall rest upon such nor shall they be
grieved." * Adam thus received the words of grace
directly from God, and with them a promise of future
revelation to the race.
In what has been said thus far, you will discover
the substantial agreement of Mohammed with Bibli
cal doctrine. Aside from Paul, whose philosophical
discussion has perhaps unduly colored later theology,
the Biblical writers lay no emphasis upon the fall of
man in Adam. At the same time they assume the
prevalence of sin, and its practical universality.
Their conviction is based upon the testimony of
their own consciences. They feel, therefore, the
need of salvation. This feeling is quickened by the
preaching of the Prophets who proclaim a Day of
Yahweh, a day of calamity upon the evil-doers. In
the New Testament this Day of the Lord is com-
*Koran235'.

SIN AND SALVATION 213
bined with the final Judgment. The time is evi
dently thought to be near, though it is expressly
declared that no man knows the day nor the hour.
The emphasis of the message is laid upon the way of
escape provided by God Himself. This way of es
cape was apparently open to Adam and was indicated
by a promise made to him for his descendants. In
aU these respects, Mohammed took strictly Biblical
ground. Looking more narrowly at the idea of salvation as
set forth in Islam, we discover, first, that it is of
God's free grace. He has provided in His ordinary
administration of the world (that is, in nature) all that
man could require at His hands. But this has proved
insufficient. Man is ungrateful and inaccessible to
such evidences. God therefore adds something more,
in giving His revelation. Not that Mohammed draws
a definite line marking off God's goodness in nature
from His goodness in the scheme of salvation. He
speaks of the grace of God in both. This word*
means the state of mind which leads one to help or
pardon the undeserving ; grace, mercy, or compas
sion are our equivalents. This state of mind in God is
shown by His ordinary providence. The rain is an
expression of His grace, and the winds which bring
the clouds are its precursors. The succession of day
and night is adapted to the needs of man, and this is
of His grace. When trouble comes upon men they
pray to God, and He makes them taste His grace in
that He sends them relief. f
* Rahma ; the root is found also in Hebrew.
t Koran 2550, 28", 3035.

214 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Salvation is another evidence and outworking of
the same grace. The prophets of earlier times were
saved from the destruction which overtook the un
believers by a grace (or mercy) from God.* By the
same grace those who are admitted to Paradise are
saved, and they recognize the fact.t The special
proof of this mind on the part of God is the gift of
revelation. The prophet Salih remonstrates with his
people : " O, my people ! Do you not see ? If I
have received a plain sign from my Lord, and if
there has come to me from Him a grace [that is, a
revelation], who will defend me from Him if I rebel
against him?"]: In a nearly related sense the
prophet is himself said to be a grace from God. So
the angel of the annunciation, speaking for God,
says to Mary : " We have made him [Jesus] a sign to
mankind, and a grace from Us.§ Mohammed also is
addressed in the words : " We have sent thee as a
grace to the universe." The same word is applied
to the revelation when embodied in a book : " When
Moses' anger was appeased he took up the Tables in
whose characters was a direction and a grace to those
who fear their Lord. " II The " grace of God which
bringeth salvation " is a Biblical phrase which well
sums up the view of Mohammed as set forth in these
passages. But the grace of God does not limit itself to provid
ing the revelation which guides men into life. It is
also exerted efficaciously upon the hearts of men,
moving them to obey the revelation. I know not how
* Koran 7™, 11". f 3103, 7". 1 ll66.
§ 19". || 12>°», 71".

SIN AND SALVATION 215
otherwise to interpret those passages which pray for
direction, like the one already quoted — " Lord, let not
our hearts stray from the right path after Thou hast
once directed us." The revelation was already there.
What the speaker desired further was grace in the
Christian sense, that is : a positive movement of God
upon his heart. Again : " Were not the bounty of
God and His grace upon you, not one of you would
ever be pure ; bnt God purifies whom He wiU, and
God is the one who hears and knows." * The Prophet
is here exhorting his own followers and warning them
against foUowing the footsteps of Satan. He evi
dently means that something more than the revela
tion is the efficient cause of then; purification. In one
passage he classes himseU with those just addressed :
" Had not the bounty and the grace of thy Lord
been upon thee, a party of them had purposed to lead
thee astray [and succeeded]. But they shaU lead
astray only themselves, and shall not harm thee in
any respect. God hath sent down upon thee the Book
and the grace, and hath taught thee what thou didst
not know, and the bounty of God toward thee was
great." f It is evident on the face of the passage that
some trap was prepared for Mohammed from which
he escaped. He ascribed his escape to a special ex
ercise of grace on the part of God.
This is the place to inquire for the doctrine of par
ticular election. We must, however, be careful not
to put more into words than the author intended.
The general assertion that God chooses His instru
ments does not imply an absolute decree extending
* Koran 2421. X P>\

216 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to the lot of all mankind. The question of such a de
cree seems to have been brought home to Mohammed
by the Jews. They insisted that they were an elect
people, and the implication was obvious that God had
rejected the other nations. Against this implication
Mohammed asserted God's sovereign freedom. The
election of Israel he acknowledged : " God chose for
Himself Adam and Noah and the famUy of Abraham
and the family of Imran [the father of Mary] above
all the world." * But he refused to acknowledge the
validity of the inference drawn by the Jews. "If
God had pleased, He had made them [that is, man
kind] a single nation. But He lets whom He wiU
partake of His grace, and the evil-doers have neither
protector nor helper." t That is to say : true religion
is not a matter of race ; all mankind might have been
the favored recipients of revelation ; the preference
of one part over another rests in the wiU of God ; He
may and does admit others to His grace as well as
the Jews. The verse, therefore, vindicates the free
dom of God against a too narrow doctrine of election.]:
It reminds us that Paul reasons in a simUar way
The Jew claims that God has bound HimseU to save
* Koran 33n. t 42s.
X Against the maxim of the Jews to trust none but those of their
own religion, Mohammed says : " Say : Verily the Guidance is
God's Guidance, that any man may receive the like of what you
have received, or may even surpass you in the sight of your lord.
Say : Verily the bounty is in the hand of God ; He bestows it upon
whom He will, and God is liberal, wise. He distinguishes by His
grace whom He will, and He is the possessor of enormous bounty "
(366 '). It must be clear that the opposition is between the narrow
ness of Judaism, which recognizes no religion but its own, and the
breadth of a divine choice which is not confined within lines of race.

SIN AND SALVATION 217
those who are born under the Law ; Paul replies that
He has mercy on whom He will have mercy. This is
not an assertion of the absoluteness of the decree. It
is a protest against the narrowness of those who
limit the grace of God by the absoluteness of an elec
tion once made.
Still, the protest assumes the actuality of the decree.
The election is there, although no longer confined by
lines of descent. God not only chooses the prophets
as His distinguished instruments ; He chooses also
the other believers : " Of their [that is, the Prophets']
fathers, and of their chUdren, and of their brothers,
have We chosen, and have led them on the straight
path. This is the guidance of God by whom He
guides whom He wiU of His servants ; but if they be
come polytheists, what they have done will be of no
account. These are they to whom We have given
the Book and wisdom and prophecy ; and if they dis
believe in it, We will appoint for it a people who do
not disbelieve." * The divine choice is here asserted,
but it is not an absolute choice. Even those who are
chosen may become polytheists, thus faUing away.
In one passage, however, we find that the will of the
believer is dependent upon the divine will : " This,
now, is a reminder ; whoever will let him choose the
way to his Lord. But you will not will unless God
will."t Some other passages bearing on this subject
have already been quoted in the lecture on the Gov
ernment of God. What we there discovered is con
firmed here— that Mohammed had no rigid theory on
the subject. * Koran 687 ff + -jqii r

218 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The general theory of predestination (as we saw) is
an affirmation that the disbelief of man cannot really
thwart the wiU of God. On the side of faith, this
conviction is aided by the soul's consciousness of its
own weakness. The awakened man finds within him
self no ability to meet the commands of God. His
judgment concerning his own wiU is, that it is averse
to good and dead in sin. When he finds himself be
lieving in God and appropriating His grace, he feels
that this is not his own unaided act. The doctrine of
grace is a judgment founded on this experience. Sav
ing faith must be explained as the effect of grace. Mo
hammed's view is seen in the following, addressed to
believers: "God has made you love faith, and has
made it attractive in your hearts, and has made in
fidelity and vice and rebellion odious to you." * With
this compare the following : " We sent Jesus, the son
of Mary and gave Him the Gospel, and placed in the
hearts of those who followed him compassion and
grace ; " and again : " It is He who sent the Shekina
into the hearts of the believers to increase them in
faith after they had once believed." t The doctrine
of election, as far as it is held, is a part of the doc
trine of grace.
The same thing is true of the Scripture doctrine,
where it is apparently asserted that faith is a gift from
God, and where the believer is encouraged to work
out his own salvation because it is God who is working
in him to will and to do of His good pleasure. The
revelation alone does not save men. This is evident
from its different effects upon different men. To some
* Koran 497 and cf. 58s'2. t 572?, 48'.

SIN AND SALVATION 219
it is a savor from death unto death, to others a savor
from life unto life. No other, as I understand it, is
the position of Mohammed. In one place he says
directly that what has been revealed to him increases
the disobedience and unbelief of some who hear.*
In all these respects therefore the doctrine of Islam
shows Biblical influence.
The next thing to be noted is that the mark of sal
vation is faith. Up to this point we have discussed
the divine provision. This consists not only in a rev
elation of God's will, but also in efficient grace for
those who are to be saved. The evidence that the
grace has taken effect is that its subjects believe.
Those who believe are saved and those who disbelieve
are lost. These two classes appear on almost every
page of the Koran. The fundamental importance of
faith, however, is not so clearly marked in the earlier
suras as in the later. At first Mohammed seems to
have been under the influence of the Gospel descrip
tion of the judgment— where the saved and the lost
are distinguished rather by their works than by their
faith. They who have fed the hungry, clothed the
naked, visited the sick and the prisoners — these are
the ones who are welcomed to the place prepared for
them. So in the earUer chapters of the Koran we
find good works specified as the reason why some
enter Paradise. They are the ones who have kept
themselves pure, who have set the captives free, who
have nourished the orphans, and the poor.f Faith
appears, but it appears as one among many virtues.
As time goes on, its fundamental importance seems to
* Koran 5". cf . 9'« f. f 76s, 87" ', 92\

220 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
emerge more distinctly. The great obstacle which
met the Prophet revealed itself as unbelief ; and con
versely, the distinctive mark of those who accepted
the new religion was seen to be faith. After the very
earliest period of his ministry, therefore, he adopted
fully the declaration : " He that believeth shall be
saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned."
The Arabic word which Mohammed used to ex
press the idea of faith is essentially the same word
used both in the Hebrew of the Old Testament and
in the Syriac translation of the New Testament. He
used it to describe (historically) the state of mind of
the prophets, his predecessors, and those who followed
them. It is Abraham especially who is the example
of faith : " Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian,
yet he was pious, resigned, and not an idolater. The
nearest of men to Abraham are those who follow
him — that is: the Prophet [Mohammed] and those
who believe." " Who is more excellent in the matter
of religion than he who resigns himself to God, who
does good works and follows the way of Abraham
the pious, whom God took as His friend." * The
thought is evidently borrowed from the New Testa
ment. And our first definition of faith is taken from
the behavior of Abraham — lie was not an idolater.
That is to say : Faith is acceptance of the proposition
that there is no God but one. " Abraham said to his
father : I am pure from the service which you ren
der." f That Mohammed did not mean the mere in
tellectual faith, however, is evident from other pas
sages, such as the following : " The believers commit
* Koran 3M f, 4i". t 43M.

SIN AND SALVATION 221
themselves to God; and why should we not commit
ourselves to Him, when He has guided us on our
ways ? " * Other passages which speak of the believ
ers taking God as thek protector imply that then-
faith is trust in Him.t
The man who believes in God must believe the
messenger of God and his message. God and His
Apostle are often joined together as the object
of faith ; so are God and His revelation. Or, faith
may be spoken of as beUef in the Apostle or in the
revelation, where belief in God is implied. As with
us, beUef in the Word necessarily includes belief in
God. This faith is assent to the truth of the message.
The most frequent charge against the unbelievers is
that they accuse the revelation of falsehood. Exam
ples are so numerous that I need not quote. X
In other passages faith is defined as believing in
God and the Last Day,§ or simply as beUeving in the
life to come. Believers are once described as having
* Koran 14" '. f 5".
X It is perhaps an evidence of the affinity of Mohammed's doc
trine with that current among Christians that he found the Christians
the most ready to receive him : " Thou wilt find the nearest in friend
ship to the believers those who call themselves Christians. This is
because they have priests and monks, and are not arrogant. When
they hear what is revealed to the Prophet, thou wilt see their eyes
overflow with tears on account of the truth which they recognize,
while they say : Our lord, we believe ! Enroll us among those who
testify [to the truth]. And why should we not believe in God and
in the truth which has come to us, and [why should we not] desire
that our lord may place us among the righteous ? " 586 '. We can
hardly suppose the words to have been spoken without some basis
in fact.
§25'.

222 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
assurance of the life to come, and once as believing
in the unseen. The unbelief which opposed Moham
med made its stand on this point more obstinately
than on any other. That men should be restored to
life with fully reconstructed bodies after once becom
ing dust and mouldering bones, they would not believe,
and, indeed, they ridiculed so absurd a proposition.
The preacher had often to denounce the guilt of such
unbelief. Conversely, faith in the future Ufe is often
mentioned in connection with faith in God and His
Apostle : " Those who beUeve in the future life be
lieve [also] in the Koran, and are watchful unto
prayer."* And again : The believers, all of them,
believe in God and His angels, and His Books and
His Apostles — without distinguishing between the
Apostles — and they say : We have heard and we
obey! Grant us Thy forgiveness, O Lord; unto
Thee we tend." f Faith, then, is not a mere intel
lectual assent to certain propositions ; it is a dispos
ing of the will toward the Author of the revelation,
with a desn-e to obey His commands.
We can readily understand now, why faith and
good works are so often mentioned together. They
who believe and do good works is the most frequent
phrase descriptive of the righteous. More elaborate
descriptions are such as the foUowing : " The good
does not consist in turning your faces to the East or
the West. But good is he who believes in God and
the Last Day, and the angels and the Book and the
Prophets; and who for the love of Him gives his
property to his kinsmen, and to the orphans, and the
* Koran 62. t2'!85.

SIN AND SALVATION 223
poor, and the wayfarer, and the mendicant, and for
freeing slaves; and who observes prayer and who
gives alms, and [good are] those who fulfil their en
gagements when they have made them, and those
who are patient in misfortunes and distresses and in
the time of calamity. These are the righteous and
these are they who fear God."* Such descriptions
show that Mohammed had reflected on the connec
tion of faith and works. Faith and the fear of God
are also joined together, as are faith and repentance.
AU this convinces us that Mohammed desired to
awaken the affection of the heart and draw it toward
God. " Those only beUeve Our words f who, when
they are reminded of them, fall prostrate and utter
the praise of their Lord; who do not exalt them
selves ; whose bodies do not rest upon their beds,
because they caU upon their Lord in fear and in
desire." In practice, and when he had become ruler of a
state, the Prophet recognized that the profession of
the lips was aU that he could require from men. In
this he was doing what political leaders are obliged
to do. But what has been said, shows that his ideal
was very near the one set forth in the Bible. Where
he says that the hearts of believers find rest in mak
ing mention of God,| we are reminded of the Biblical
promises of peace to the beUever. The tradition
which declares that the intention makes the quality
* Koran 21".
t Our signs, where signs is put for the verses of the Koran. The
passage is 32,s r.
1 13'2".

224 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
of the action* is very near the Old Testament declar
ation that " as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he."
Again, a tradition gives the following : " Mohammed
said : None of you beUeves until he loves his brother
as he loves himself." f New Testament influence is
the more marked, that the Peshito has thy brother for
thy neighbor in the second great commandment. And
again : " None of you believes until I am dearer to
him than his father and his child. "J We remember
that Jesus also said : " He that loveth father or
mother more than me is not worthy of me ; and he
that loveth son or daughter more than me is not
worthy of me." Once more : " Mohammed said :
There is a piece of flesh in the body [of which it is
true that] when it is right, the whole body is right,
and when it is unsound the whole body is unsound."§
Out of the heart are the issues of life is the parallel
declaration of the Gospel.
Islam is another name for faith ; or, where a dis
tinction is made, Islam is the outward profession ;
Iman (faith) is the inward state. Mohammed says
of the Bedawin : " The Arabs say : We beUeve.
Say to them : Nay you do not believe, you should
say rather : We have accepted Islam,! for faith has
not yet entered your hearts." He knew his Arabs
and knew that the great part of them had made an
external submission to his rule while their hearts were
unchanged. Still, as the submission may be the ex
pression of sincerity, Islam is not infrequently used
* Bochari, I, p. 2. t Ibid., p. 8. Cf. Matt. 22M (Peshito).
t Ibid., p. 9. Cf. Matt. 10". § Ibid., p. 17.
|| Aslamna, we are resigned. The passage is 49 ".

SIN AND SALVATION 225
for faith : " When [Abraham's] Lord said to him :
Be resigned ! he replied : I am resigned to the Lord
of the universe." When Abraham went to offer his
son, the son encouraged his father, promising to be
patient — "And when both had [thus] resigned them
selves, he threw him upon his face but We called
to him." * As submission to the will of God, Islam
is a principle common to the three great religions.
The Jews and Christians claim to have been resigned
(Moslems) before the coming of Mohammed f It
follows that Mohammed did not intend to make
Islam the distinguishing principle of his religion.
He identified his reUgion with Judaism and Chris
tianity. In all three, faith was the principle in the
heart, Islam the profession with the lips. In the
New Testament also, " with the heart man believeth
unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is
made unto salvation." X
But what is the salvation secured by those who
believe? Most prominently it is deliverance from
punishment. As we have seen, the future state bulks
largely in the preaching of Mohammed. He had no
timidity in painting either the joys of the blessed or
the torments of the doomed. The thought of the
Judgment was the overmastering thought of his ear
lier career, and the motive for his preaching. That he
was here under Christian influence needs no demon
stration. To modern taste his appeal to the fear of
punishment is made too prominent. But it is doubt
ful whether it would have seemed so to the Church
of the Middle Age.
* Koran 2'25, 3710S. f 2852 ' . J Rom. 10"».
15

226 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
We should wrong Mohammed, however, if we sup
posed his conception of salvation to be merely ex-*
ternal. The happiness of the believer consists in
obtaining the forgiveness of God, and this forgive
ness is valued for itseU — not because it secures en
trance to Paradise. The wrath of God rests on sin
ners, but He forgives those who believe. So he has
manifested His grace in the past. When David was
reproved by a parable — " then he discovered how
We had tested him and, falling prostrate, he begged
forgiveness of his Lord and repented ; and We for
gave him his sin, and he had access to Us, and an
excellent refuge." * Of true beUevers it is said :
" These, when they have done wrong or harmed their
souls, remember God and ask forgiveness for their
sins (and who forgives sins except God ?) and do not
persist in what they have done, when they know [its
harm] ; their portion is forgiveness from their Lord,
and Gardens in which flow perennial streams." 4-
Although the future reward is mentioned here, the
forgiveness is evidently regarded as a good in itself.
And we can scarcely doubt the spiritual emphasis of
such a passage as the foUowing : " If you love God
follow me, and God will love you and forgive your
sins — God is loving and gracious." X It is related
in a tradition that Mohammed was accustomed to pray
for forgiveness seventy times a day; and that he
said: "There are three things possessing which a
man finds the sweetness of faith : that Allah and His
Prophet are dearer to him than anything besides
them ; that he loves the man who is loved by none
* Koran 38M. f3,M. 1329

SIN AND SALVATION 227
but God ; and that he dreads returning to unbelief
as he dreads being thrown into the fire."* The mo
tive here urged is the sweetness of a complete faith
considered by itself, and not looking for another
reward. But while we find some indications of a real spirit
ual apprehension of reUgion, it must be confessed that
the emphasis of Mohammed is placed largely upon
externals. His imagination was unequal to the task
of describing pure spiritual joys except under sensu
ous images. Hence comes the wearisome repetitions
in his picture of the rewards of heaven. In laying
so much stress upon the rewards of piety, he feU
short of the New Testament ideal. And this is ac
counted for largely by his conception of revelation
as a law. It is indeed a grace of God, that men are
pointed to the right path. They do attain salvation
by following the direction thus imparted. But in
practice, this means that their salvation consists in
the performance of ceremonies, whose only reason is
that they are enjoined by God. A treatise of Mos
lem theology which represents the estabUshed or
thodoxy f says the foundations of Islam are five, to
wit : (1) the confession that there is no God but
Allah and that Mohammed is His Apostle, (2) the
observance of prayer, (3) the giving of alms, (4) the
observance of Ramadhan, and (5) the performance
of the pilgrimage. Four parts of religion out of five
therefore consist in external observances. This is no
* Bochari, I, p. 9.
t Compendium Theol. Moham. apudBeland. DeRelig. Moham.,
p. 5.

228 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
doubt an exaggerated statement, as compared with
what Mohammed himself would have said. But he
opened the way to such a conception by presenting
his revelation as a legal system. Here is one of the
points in which he failed to rise to the New Testa
ment view, and in which his system more nearly re
sembled the legalism into which the Jews fell by
their one-sided emphasis of their Tora.
But while admitting that Islam did not rise to the
height of the Gospel, we must remember that the
Christianity of that day did not rise to the height
of the Gospel either. The early Church saw in the
New Testament a new Law of essentially the same
nature with the old.* This being the conception
which Mohammed received from the Christianity of
his time we cannot wonder that he adopted it, espe-
ciaUy as circumstances emphasized the need of a
strict code. He had to do with men converted from
heathenism. They were men little used to seU-con-
trol. As a matter of state policy, he was obliged to
provide them with specific rules of conduct, and to
enforce obedience by supernatural sanctions. His
rules were not as restrictive as those of Judaism, but
the principle on which the system was based was
reaUy the same.
The result of placing the revelation in this position
has been to make Islam the most conservative sys
tem the world has ever seen. Mohammed was, as he
himseU claimed, the last of the prophets — the seal of
that long line of messengers. His revelation is there
fore the final revelation, and being a law for all rela-
* Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, II, p. 140.

SIN AND SALVATION 229
tions of lUe, civil, social, and individual, these cannot
change because it cannot change.* There is no
power which can amend it, because it is a transcript
from the heavenly tablet, and no one now has access
to the original. The Pentateuch and the Gospel are
indeed from the same exalted source. But in their
present form these are open to suspicion as having
possibly been corrupted by those who have them in
charge. The authentic law is the Koran ; and faith
in God means obedience to this law. Multitudes of
earnest and conscientious men are making it the
aim of their Uves to conform to this law. They actu-
aUy attain a high degree of virtue measured by the
standard of the Middle Age ; and their conscientious
fidelity to principle must command our respect, meas
ure it by what standard we will. But theU devotion
to the Ught which came to their ancestors nearly
thirteen hundred years ago, shuts their eyes to the
light of the present time. AU the wonderful progress
of which we boast, is to them only apostasy from the
truth of God. Hence arises the tragedy of the East
— a tragedy at which the civilized world stands
aghast to-day, and the last act in which, it is to be
feared, is not yet played.
This is not the place in which to discuss this sub
ject at length. Our topic is sin and salvation, and
we have discovered in this as in the other parts of
*The traditions rightly express the mind of Islam when they
make Mohammed say : " Verily the best word is the word of God ;
and the best rule of conduct is that delivered by Mohammed, and
the worst of all acts are those which are innovations . . . and
every innovation is abandoning the right road." — Mishcat, I, p.
44.

230 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Mohammed's doctrine a decisive Biblical influence.
His system is that of the Old and New Testament, so
far as he was able to adapt it to the people with
whom he came in contact. To a considerable extent
he apprehended the doctrine of salvation by faith.
But he hampered his system by tying faith down to a
code which, under the guise of an unchangeable reve
lation, made the customs of his time a matter of per
petual obligation.

LECTURE VHI.
THE SERVICE OF GOD
There is probably no religion which has not some
ethical quaUty. There are always moral obUgations
imposed by the gods, even in heathenism. In Arab
heathenism we have examples, in those engagements
to which the gods were themselves party. When a
treaty was made between two tribes, the solemn act
was performed at a sanctuary, and the deity was
made a contracting party. This was done in the
belief that he would punish the party which broke its
engagement. The gods were therefore protectors of
oaths. To a certain extent they were also helpers of
the helpless. Fugitives, upon whom the guUt of
blood rested, found an asylum at the sanctuary, and
the god became their patron. But in general, what
we know of the gods of the Arabs does not impress us
with their high moral character. They do not appear
as the judges of conduct except where their own
rights are invaded — as in the cases already specified.
The morality which existed was developed without
their influence. It was the result of social forces
working independently. For example, the heathen
Arab was strong in endurance. The scanty nourish
ment of the desert enforces this as a lesson of nature.
To the present day among the Bedawin the chiefest
231

232 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
virtue is patience — "a courageous forbearing and
abiding of hunger. " * So it was before Mohammed.
There were no religious motives brought to bear upon
the conscience in favor of this virtue. PubUc opinion
and the'individual affections were enough. So it was
with the martial virtues. Tribal society lives in a
state of warfare. In such a society, courage in battle,
fidelity to the blood, self-sacrifice for the clan (or
even for its lowliest members) easily become the ideal
of nobility, without the aid of religion. So it was in
Arab heathenism. The hospitality for which the
Bedawy has become famous, is another social virtue
whose roots can be traced as far back as our knowl
edge of Arab heathenism goes. And this hospitality
was not only exercised toward the passing guest— it
flowed constantly for the needy. The songs of Hudhail
speak of " Chalid to whom came for support widows
who found no abiding place among their kinsfolk." f
We are the more bound to recognize the virtues of
heathenism, that the Moslems have no eye for them.
The revolution produced by Islam allows them to
think of the virtues of thek ancestors only as brilliant
vices. In reality they were more than this, and the
best of them were adopted by the new religion. The
characteristic thing, however, is, that in heathenism
they were independent of religion; in Islam they
were brought into vital connection with it.| The
* Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien, I, p. 252, quoting from
Doughty, Travels in Arabia Deserta.
f Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, I, p. 109.
X The Meccans, when exhorted to obey Allah, reply that they
obey (not their gods but) the customs of their fathers. Goldziher,
J. c, I, p. 10.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 233
change was made possible by the new doctrine of the
unity of God ; it was actively fostered by the scheme
of future rewards and punishments. In Islam the
will of Allah becomes the supreme rule of life. The
believer, becomes, by his faith, a servant whose only
motive is to inquire his Lord's will and to perform it.
Why that witt is so, and not otherwise, does not
concern him. Mohammed describes himself and his
motive to virtue when he speaks of himself as a grate
ful servant. We remember that the Apostle Paul
also liked to caU himself the bond-servant of Jesus
Christ. All conduct comes under this point of view. There
is no distinction between ceremonial law and moral
law. The servant is to do what he is bid, whether it
be to abstain from killing game when on a pilgrimage,
or to avoid adultery and murder. Ritual and ethics
come under the same head — aU conduct is ritual, or
all is ethical, as you please to view it. That this is
also the view of the Old Testament is evident. The
commands of the Pentateuch are given without dis
tinction into classes, and aU are motived in the same
way. Israel is a people set apart to the service of
God. The service consists in obedience to His re
vealed wUl — whether the command be to abstam from
pork or to abstain, from murder. This is precisely
what is meant by calling Israel a holy (consecrated)
people. Mohammed had the idea, and possibly ex
pressed it in similar language. The New Testament
has the idea but spirituaUzes it. The ritual of the
Christian consists in visiting the widow and the
fatherless in their affliction, and in keeping himself

234 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
unspotted from the world. But the Church has not
yet risen to the height of this ideal. Certainly in
the time of Mohammed it stood with the Synagogue
in emphasizing ritual quite as much as moraUty.
It is for convenience only, therefore, that I discuss
the service of God under the two heads of ritual and
ethics. The distinction has no basis in Islam itself.
In both divisions of the subject we see the curious
interplay of two factors — one the influence of the old
heathenism, the other the influence of the earlier re
vealed reUgions. Mohammed seems to have desired
a more complete break with heathenism than he was
actuaUy able to effect. An example is the kibla — the
point toward which the worshipper turns in prayer.
When he went to Medina he fixed Jerusalem as this
central point. But he found it impossible to main
tain the regulation. Either because of his own af
fection for the ancestral sanctuary, which he had
already recognized as the House of God,* or in order
to strengthen his cause with the Arabs, he changed
his Kibla to Mecca after about a year. The incident
is typical of his career. At the beginning he was in
clined to make a radical departure from heathenism.
In the end he had adopted a considerable portion of
its ritual.
This is further exemplified in the rites of pUgrim-
age and sacrifice. These, as he adopted them, were
taken from heathenism rather than from Judaism —
though not without analogies in Judaism. In adopt
ing sacrifice, he was careful to disavow its heathen
significance. The most natural interpretation of such
* In Sura 106.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 235
a rite is that the God partakes of the offering. Against
this Mohammed pronounces : " As for the sacrificial
animals, We have made them to be a part of the rites
of God, in which is a benefit. Therefore pronounce
the name of God over them as they stand in rows ;
and, when they are slain, eat their flesh and feed the
contented [poor] and the one who is ashamed to ask.
Thus We have made the cattle submissive to you,
perhaps you may be grateful. Their flesh and their
blood do not ascend to God, but the piety shown by
you ascends to Him — thus He has made them sub
missive to you, that you may praise God for the way
in which He has led you." * These words contradict
not only the theory that the sacrifice is a gift to God,
but also the theory that it constitutes a sacramental
meal, in which He partakes with the worshipper, and
further, the theory that it is a propitiation for sin.
Nothing is left except an undefined benefit to the be
Uever, which was probably conceived of as the merit
of having obeyed a command of God. Evidently
Mohammed adopted as Uttle of the ancient institu
tion as he could adopt U he retained it at all, and we
may suppose that in reducing it to such narrow limits,
he was to some extent under Christian influence.
In immediate connection with sacrifice we must
notice the pUgrimage. The only official sacrifices (if
I may use this phrase) in Islam are offered in con
nection with the pUgrimage. f According to tradi-
* Koran, 22" '.
t Private sacrifice is offered when an infant is seven days old (the
akika). Mohammed offered it for his grandsons, Mishcat, II, 316.
For regulations prescribing the kind of animal to be sacrificed, cf.
Mishcat, I, pp. 319, 321. The regular sacrifice (of the annual

236 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
tion it is incumbent on every Moslem, once in his
lifetime, to visit the sanctuary at Mecca. Moham
med, who lived at Medina, seems to have intended
that this should be done every year by those who
were not specially hindered. In performing this duty
the pilgrim wears a special garb from the time of en
tering the sacred territory. He makes the circuit of
the Kaaba and takes part in other ceremonies, now
carefully regulated by tradition, and, finally, he offers
a sacrifice in the valley of Mina. He then shaves
his head and resumes his ordinary clothing. The
whole resembles what we find in Judaism, where it is
incumbent upon the Israelite to visit the central sanc
tuary at stated times. Those Jews who were con
verted to Christianity did not abandon the custom,
for we find the Apostle Paul resolved to keep the
feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem. With this precedent,
we are not surprised to find pilgrimage established
as a meritorious work in Christianity from very early
times. Its prominence in the Middle Age and the
influence which its interruption had in arousing Eu
rope to the Crusades are well known. It is possible,
therefore, that Mohammed, in establishing this rite,
justified himself by both Jewish and Christian prec
edent. But the resemblance which its external feat
ures show to Judaism must not make us think that
they are borrowed from Judaism. The resemblance
is really owing to the older Semitic heathenism, upon
which both Judaism and Islam rest. The shaving of
the head, for example, which we find in Islam, and
Feast of Sacrifice) is offered at other places than Mecca. But this
is because it is the day on which the pilgrims offer it.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 237
of which we find examples both in the Old Testament
and the New, is found also in Arabic heathenism. It
is really a survival from the earliest Semitic heathen
ism of which we have any knowledge, in which the
sacrifice of the hair played a prominent part.
Again, the donning of special garments at the sanct
uary, which at first sight we think peculiar to Islam,
has its analogies in many other religions. The com
mand given to the Israelites to wash their clothes
before the appearance of God at Sinai is based upon
the same idea, and so is the exhortation of the Psalm
ist to worship in the beauty of holiness, by which he
means the sacred vestments. The idea is, of course,
that nothing ceremonially unclean should appear be
fore God. In the later Old Testament law the laity
are kept altogether from approaching the holy part
of the Temple, so that this regulation is for them un
necessary. So much the more stringent is the com
mand that the priests should approach God only in
the consecrated garments.* On the other hand we
are told that at Mecca, before the time of Moham
med, the pilgrims used to hire garments kept specially
for them, and wear them in making the circuit of the
Kaaba. The natural conclusion is that Mohammed
did not borrow from the earUer revealed religions,
but that he adopted the heathen custom, purging it
of what seemed to him incompatible with the faith.
The question of religious observances gave him some
* On these resemblances cf . Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbei-
ten, III, pp. 51 f., 106, who cites Gen. 352, II Kings, 1022; also
W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 433, and what was said in
lecture II. above.

238 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
thought, even at Mecca, if we may judge by the Ko
ran passage which says : " We have ordained for
every nation rites which they observe. Let none dis
pute with thee in this matter, but pray to thy Lord —
verily thou art in the straight path." * The theory
that the early reUgion of Mecca went back to Abra
ham would involve the belief that the pilgrimage was
divinely ordained, and this would easily be confirmed
by what Mohammed knew of Jewish and Christian
customs. The emphasis which he laid upon the
matter of pilgrimage is indicated, and perhaps exag
gerated, by the tradition which makes him say, that
he who worthily performs the pUgrimage returns as
innocent as he was the day his mother bore him.t
The next ritual observance which is prominent in
Islam is fasting. It is a matter of common fame that
the Mohammedan world observes the month of Ra-
madhan by abstaining from food during the daylight
hours. It must be confessed that the month is now
characterized as much by feasting at night as it is by
fasting during the day, but this was hardly the inten
tion of the founder. His idea seems to have been
that as God is nearer to men at some places than He
is at others, so He is nearer at some times than He is
at others. Such a season should be marked by some
special observances. With this he may have had the
idea that a month of self-denial would be well pleas
ing to God. In regard to this rite we have less dis
tinct testimony from Arabic heathenism that we have
in regard to some of the others which have been
* Koran, 2266, a Meccan sura according to the superscription.
t Bochari, II, p. 192.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 239
mentioned. Certainly the direct precedent is found
in Judaism and in Christianity. Tradition distinctly
asserts that Mohammed first estabhshed a fast in im
itation of the Jews. When he came to Medina * he
found them observing the Day of Atonement, and in
imitation of them he commanded his foUowers to
observe the same day in the same way. In the fol
lowing year, however, he appointed Ramadhan as
a month of fasting. There is no Jewish fast of this
extent, and as in that year he began to show his in
dependence of the Jews, he was probably influenced
by the Christian Lent. There can be no question that
he beUeved a precedent set in other religions : " O,
believers, fasting is ordained for you as it was or
dained for those before you, that you may observe
piety." t That a month should be the time fixed, in
stead of forty days, need not cause surprise. The
forty days had no special significance in Islam, and
in fact was not constant in Christianity, whereas
Mohammed was already familiar with the idea of a
sacred month or months in heathenism. His sense of
the importance of the moon as a measure of time
was very marked. He not infrequently alludes to the
moon's being created for this purpose, and he went
so far as to rearrange the calendar, making his year
a strictly lunar year. This was undoubtedly a misfort-
* The day is called Ashura (Tenth) and is still observed by some
zealous Moslems. Bochari, who gives this tradition, gives another
to the effect that the Koreish also fasted on that day in heathen
times. But this requires confirmation. Cf. Bochari, II, p. 231 ;
Mishcat, I, p. 486.
t Koran, 2I7B.

240 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
une for the Moslem world, but we can trace the rea
soning which led to the action. God had made the
moon for seasons. Out of every twelve months
which make a year He has made certain ones sacred.
By the intercalation of a month — which was the
Meccan device for making the solar and lunar year
keep in harmony — these were thrown out of then
proper place : " The number of months in the sight
of God is twelve, written in the Book of God on the
day when He created heaven and earth. . . .
Postponement [of the sacred months by intercala
tion] is only excess of infidelity. The infidels lead
astray by it, making a month profane one year
and making [the same month] sacred another year,
that they may agree with the number of months *
which God has made sacred. Thus they profane
what God has consecrated. The evil of their deeds
is beautiful in their eyes, but God does not direct
the people of unbelievers." With this high idea of
the month as the unit of time, it is natural that the
Prophet should order his fast accordingly. This gives
us no light on the meaning of the observance, but the
passage quoted above seems to show that it was a
means of showing piety. It is also brought into
special connection with Gabriel's visit to Mohammed,
and this would agree with what has been said of its
being a time when God comes nearer to men than He
comes at other times.
We next come upon a religious regulation which is
* They agree in the number of months but do not observe the ex
act ones which God has designated, seems to be the meaning. The
passage is 936 '.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 241
so foreign to our modern thought that we have diffi
culty in entering into the state of mind which lies
behind it — I mean the distinction between clean and
unclean. From the Old Testament we have learned
that there are certain things which the Hebrew could
not touch, and certain acts which he could not do,
without thereby becoming unfit for approach to God.
This defilement extended over a longer or shorter
period of time, according to its intensity, and coidd
only be removed by a religious rite. Of the acts
which render men unclean, the eating of certain kinds
of food is one of the most prominent, and at first
sight we think we discover the reason for this pro
hibition. Some of the forbidden objects are repul
sive to our taste (mostly because we are unfamiliar
with them) and we attribute like repulsion to the an
cients. Or else we take refuge in sanitary hypothe
ses and suppose the animals prohibited to be dele
terious to health. But it is doubtful whether either
of these reasons wiU apply to any system of clean
and unclean. The natural repulsion certainly does
not exist among the peoples who are most affected by
these laws ; and considerations of health were for
eign to their mode of thinking. The whole matter is
a matter of religious regulation, and must be ac
counted for in the sphere of religion. When we give
this consideration full weight, we see that clean and
unclean are associated with the recognition of differ
ent gods. He who has consecrated himseU by wor
shipping one god cannot immediately come into the
presence of another god; his first consecration must
be washed off, or at least worn off by the lapse of

242 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
time. All the more, where the god is conceived of
as a jealous god like Yahweh. The marks of a rival
deity upon a worshipper would make His anger flame
out upon him. In Israel nearly all animals except
the animals of the flock and herd were supposed to
belong to some of the false gods or demons. They
could not be eaten without bringing the worshipper
into communion with these divinities. Even the en
lightened Paul would not have his converts drink of
the cup of the Lord and also of the cup of devils.
This Old Testament thought, which is also slightly
shadowed forth in some New Testament passages, was
familiar to Mohammed. Some regulations of this
kind he adopted instinctively. He and his followers
would not eat of flesh offered to idols, taking thus the
position of the more scrupulous Christians in the
Apostolic age. The point of view comes out clearly
in the Koran prohibition : " Do not eat of that over
which the name of Allah has not been pronounced,
for this is sinful. The Satans come down to their
companions to dispute with you, and U you eat of
them you become idolaters." * The exact meaning
of the phrase the Satans come down to their compan
ions to dispute with you is uncertain. But it probably
expresses Mohammed's belief that the demons are so
associated with these offerings that the beUevers, in
eating of the offerings, put themselves in the power
of the demons — precisely the position of Paul just
aUuded to. Mohammed carried out the argument
logically. His final decree forbids : " that which has
* Koran, 6I2>. According to Origen, the blood is the food of the
demons. Cf. Conybeare in the Jewish Quarterly Review, October,
1896, p. 61.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 243
died [of itself], and blood, the swine, and that over
which any name except the name of God has been
pronounced, that which is strangled, that which is
smitten down with a club, that which falls from a
precipice, that which is gored, that which the beast of
prey has torn (unless you are able to bleed it), and
that which is sacrificed to idols."* Although the
Ust gives a large number of items, we see that it is
substantiaUy covered by the New Testament prin
ciple. For the CouncU of Jerusalem laid upon
Gentile Christians abstinence from things offered to
idols, from things strangled, and from blood.
In view of what has been quoted from Paul there
can hardly be any doubt as to the reasoning upon
which this decree is based. The things offered to idols
are the property of the demons. The Christian by eat
ing of them comes into communion with the demons.
But he thereby loses communion with God. Things
strangled are forbidden for the same reason as that
for which blood is forbidden. The blood belongs to
God and is unlawful to man — if it cannot be sacrificed
it must at least be carefully separated from the flesh.
All Mohammed's Ust may be explained on this very
principle — that blood and idol sacrifices are unlawful.
In this he considerably modified the Old Testament
law, dealing freely with it, as he did in some other
cases we have noticed,]- but influenced also by New
Testament precedent.
* Koran, 54.
t Tradition increases the list of prohibited foods. The ass was
added toward the close of Mohammed's life. He himself refused
to eat some things which he allowed to his followers. Possibly he
was influenced by his habit acquired in youth. For the distinc-

244 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The means ordinarily used to remove ceremonial
defilement is water. For the Moslem, therefore, the
ablution is one of the most important parts of the
service of God. The Koran commands : " O, believ
ers, when you are ready for worship, wash your faces
and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe your
heads, and [wash] your feet as far as your ankles." *
In addition to this, which is the ordinary ablution, a
full bath is ordered for certain kinds of defilement —
as was the case in Judaism. The subject interests us
here only as it is connected to all appearance with
the Old Testament and Rabbinical washings, rather
than with Christian Baptism. Baptism is referred
to but once in the Koran, if indeed it is referred to
at all.t It is possible however that Mohammed's
practice was influenced not by the Jews alone, but by
the various Gnostic or Pseudo-Christian sects which
insisted on frequent baptisms or ablutions.^
We come now to the most important part of the
Mohammedan ritual — the act of worship which we call
prayer. This is hardly an exact rendering, as when
we speak of prayer, we think most prominently of
tion of clean and unclean in Arab heathenism cf. Wellhausen,
Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, III, p. 52.
* 58. The command to wipe the head means to draw the wet hands
over the head. Had the main verb continued its force over this
clause it would have enjoined scrubbing the head. On the whole
subject cf. lane, Modem Egyptians, c. Ill; Reland, DeReligione
Mohammedanica (1717), pp. 66-77; Hughes, Dictionary of Islam,
Articles Ablution and Ghusl.
t Koran, 2132 is usually supposed to name Christian Baptism.
X The Elkesaites and Manda;ans (probably the Sabeans of the
Koran) are among these sects. Cf. Herzog, P. R. E-, IV., p. 135.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 245
supplication. But the galat of the Moslem does not
contain any large element of supplication, it is an
act of divine service, an act performed for the glory
of God and in obedience to Him. Like other parts
of the ritual it is not left to the discretion of the be
Uever, but is carefully regulated by tradition, both as
to the times when it is to be performed, and as to the
ceremonies which must be observed. Five times in
the day, the believer must perform this act of devo
tion, wherever he may be ; and Christian travellers in
the East have frequent occasion to admire the fidelity
with which the Moslem turns aside from his busi
ness or his amusement to show his obedience to his
Maker. It is unnecessary to describe the postures which
are enjoined by tradition for this service. The be
liever stands, bows, kneels, and prostrates himself
with his forehead touching the ground. These acts
follow a certain sequence making up a rekah or pros
tration. A prayer (to use the conventional term) is
made up of at least two prostrations, and the number
may be increased to ten or more. In these various
postures the worshipper repeats portions of the
Koran * and ejaculations of praise. At certain points
he declares his beUef in the unity of God and the
apostleship of Mohammed. At the close he salutes
the angels to his right and left. The chief content
of what the believer recites is the praise of God.
When Mohammed was asked why he spent so much
* Including always the Fatiha or opening chapter. Other portions
are chosen according to taste. The ejaculations are : " Praise be
to God ! "— " I extol the perfection of God the Great."

246 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
time in devotion, he replied : " Shall I not be a thank
ful servant ? " Worship then is the recognition of
God's goodness and of His Kingship. It is not man i
alone who praises his Maker. The whole creation
joins in ascriptions to Him : " Dost thou not see that
whatever is in heaven and on earth praises God, even
the birds with expanded wings? Each knows its
worship [galat] and its doxology, and God regards
what they do." * Such expressions are frequent in
the Koran, and they show what Mohammed regarded
as the proper service of the creature.
The importance of worship was rated very highly
by Mohammed. He came out of the house one day
in winter when leaves were falling from the trees.
He took two branches from a tree, and the leaves be
gan to drop from them. Remarking this, he said to
his companion : " Believers say their prayers for the
satisfaction of God, and their faults drop from them
like the leaves from these branches." t In another
tradition he is represented as saying that the most
pleasing thing to God is prayer at its appointed
times. Again, he caUed prayer a Kaffara, that is an
atonement, which covers sins from the sight of God.
In another place he says : "If one washed five times
a day in a river which flowed at his door, how much
filth would remain upon him ? So God washes away
sin by the five daily prayers." If we may believe
tradition further, he carried his view of the importance
of prayer to such an extreme as to say a man is justi
fied in repulsing one who interrupts his prayers even
if he thereby kills him. As it is added for he is a
* Koran, 24". t Mishcat, I, p. 130.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 247
Satan, we may suppose that Mohammed was disturbed
in his devotions by the evU one in visible form — the
parallel with Luther will occur to every one. Other
traditions affirm that he had often to contend against
the distraction of his thoughts in his devotions, and
that he ascribed this to Satan. In the tradition before
us, therefore, he was only counselling strenuous resis
tance to such an interrupter of prayers; against a
diabolical enemy one may use any violence.*
Another evidence of Mohammed's estimate of the
value of the prescribed worship is seen in another
tradition. This is to the effect that Moslems who
are condemned to hell wUl be known by the callouses
made upon their knees by their habit of prayer, for
over these spots the fire wiU have no power ; and
men thus marked wiU finally be redeemed from the
place of torment.
Turning now to the question where Mohammed got
his idea of worship, we cannot doubt that he got it
from a Christian source. Any one who has seen
public service in the Eastern Church, in any of its
branches, wiU have noticed how the congregation
take part by kneeling, bowing, crossing themselves,
and joining in the responses. Very likely in some
of his journeyings Mohammed had seen such a ser
vice. If not, we can readily suppose that his Chris
tian friends at Mecca would exemplUy such a service.
The sacraments, of courser, they could not illustrate,
not being priests ; and these, being mysteries of the
faith, they would be shy even of describing to a
foreigner. With such elements as they gave him,
* The examples are taken from Bochari, I, pp. 123 f. , 119.

248 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Mohammed arranged a ritual for himself. Its ele
ments were the various attitudes of worship exempli
fied by the Christians, and such words of praise as
were recited by them from the Psalms. With no
mind for mysteries or a priesthood, the Prophet
found his simple liturgy sufficient for himself, and
for the community that gathered about him.
The number of five prayers daily has no direct
Biblical precedent. Daniel seems to have prayed
three times daily, and the Psalmist specifies morning,
evening, and noon as the times of prayer. It is a
curious coincidence that the only passage of the
Koran which gives the number of prayers also speci
fies three : " Perform worship at the setting of the
sun, up to the darkness of night, and the Recitation
of the dawn (the recitation of the dawn is witnessed
by the angels), and in the night. Awake to prayer,
therefore, perchance thy Lord wUl prepare for thee a
glorious place." * Exegesis has found a way to make
these verses prescribe the five customary seasons, but
on their face they speak of only three. In the Church
the canonical hours vary from three to seven daUy.
The Manichaeans are said to have had four and the
Mandseans five.f It is possible that Mohammed's
own custom varied at different times. Tradition says
that in the Night-journey, God commanded him at
first fifty prayers daily. At the advice of Moses, who
had had experience with human weakness, he asked
successive reductions of the number until it was
* Koran, 178° ', cf . Ps. 55la.
fHerzog, P. R. E2, IX., p. 241. Brandt, Mandaische Religion,
p. 92, ascribes seven to the Mandseans.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 249
brought down to five. We have already seen an ascetic
tendency in Mohammed's earlier impulse. It is pos
sible that he began with the observance of more fre
quent hours of worship than he was able to keep up
in his later practice. In fact he has supplemented
one of his early revelations with a command to mod
erate the excesses of his devotion (73ao).
Although the regular prayers are largely formal,
we must not forget that Islam encourages voluntary
prayers. I do not refer here to works of superero
gation, to which pious Moslems are much addicted.
When Mohammed says : " And remember thy Lord
in thy soul in humUity and fear, and without raising
the voice," * we can hardly suppose he means to com
mand the constant repetition of the name of God
which forms the worship of the dervishes. He is,
rather, encouraging the believer in communing with
God. He laid stress on the correct performance of
prayer, but he also laid stress on the intention. He
was accustomed himseU to offer voluntary petitions,
both after the regular prayers and at other times.
He gives in the Koran examples of prayer, and these
are real prayers ; that is, petitions for blessings both
spiritual and temporal, the spiritual being promi
nent. For example : " O Lord do not punish us for
our sins of negligence or for our errors ; and do not
lay upon us a law such as Thou didst lay upon those
who preceded us : f O Lord do not enjoin upon us
that for which we have not the ability ; blot out our
* Koran, 72M.
t He means the Children of Israel, whose law he thought bur
densome. The verse is 2"*>.

250 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
sins and forgive us; be gracious to us, Thou our
Lord, and aid us against a people of unbehevers." It
seems impossible to suppose such a prayer composed
without a vivid sense of sin, and without assurance
that God is the rewarder of those who seek Him.
In another verse of the same chapter we read : "When
My servants ask thee concerning Me — then verily I
am near, and I answer the petition of the worshipper
when he prays to Me; then let them seek Me and
believe in Me that they may walk in the right way."*
The example of the Prophet was in accordance with
this, for he embodied in his daily worship petitions
for himself and his friends. There is a tradition
which even affirms that a man shut out of Paradise
could get in by importunate prayer. But it is doubt
ful whether this correctly represents the mind of
Mohammed. As to the efficacy of prayer in the pres
ent life, however, he seems to have had no doubt.
So much for that part of the service of God which
consists in ritual. We cannot deny that in the religious
law too much emphasis is laid upon external observ
ances. But what has just been said is enough to show
that mere formality was not Mohammed's ideal. -He
desired to foster spiritual faith and unfeigned piety.
Turning now to the other side of the service of God,
what we include under the head of morals, we dis
cover that there was a great advance over heathenism,
in that the sense of responsibility to God was en
forced by all the preaching of Mohammed : " A man
is a shepherd, and what is committed to him (as his
family and his property) is his flock and he will be
* Koran, 2">2.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 251
inquired of concerning it in the Last Day — even a
slave wiU give account of the way in which he has
administered his master's property." * The tradition
reminds us of the New Testament parable of the
talents, and we cannot doubt that the thought is the
same : Man is responsible to his Maker, and for all
his actions he must give account.
The distinctly ethical character of the obligation
thus laid upon men is seen on almost every page of
the Koran. Several extended passages might be
quoted which were evidently intended to set forth the
whole duty of man. Let me quote just one :
"The servants of the Compassionate are they who walk
humbly on the earth, and, when the barbarians address
them, say : Peace be with you ! And [they are they] who
pass the night prostrate before their Lord or standing [in
prayer] ; and who say: Our Lord avert from us the punish
ment of Gehenna, for its punishment is lasting and it is an
evil place of abode ; who, when they expend, are neither
lavish nor niggardly but maintain a just mean between the
two ; who do not call upon any God in the presence of
Allah ; and who do not slay human beings — which God
forbids — except in the cause of justice ; and who do not com
mit adultery, for whoever does this shall incur punishment
(his pain shall be doubled in the Day of Resurrection, and
he shall be an object of contempt forever, unless he repent
and believe and do good — as for such, God will exchange
their evil deeds for good deeds; God is forgiving and
compassionate, and he who repents and does good is
sincere in his turning towards God). And [they are they]
who do not bear false witness ; and, when they pass by vain
discourse, pas3 by in honor ; and who, when they are told
of the revelations of their Lord, do not depart [as though]
* Bochari, I, p. 198.

252 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
deaf and blind ; and [they are] those who say : Our Lord,
give us comfort in our wives and children, and make us an
example to those who fear Thee. These shall be recom
pensed with Paradise * because they have endured ; and
there shall they obtain life and peace. Beautiful is such a
place of abode ! " f
Such passages show the distinctly ethical character
of Islam; and the fact that the virtues here com
manded may easUy be classified under ten heads,
makes us inquire what influence the Decalogue had
on the thought of Mohammed. We easily discover
that he had some knowledge of the fundamental Ten
Words, though he nowhere calls them by this name.
He endeavors to reproduce them in the following
passage addressed to the Jews :
"Come, I will repeat what your Lord forbade you to do;
[He commanded] that you should not associate anything
with Him; and [He commanded] good conduct towards
parents; and do not kill your children on account of
poverty — We will nourish you and them — and do not ap-
* Literally : a high place, meaning apparently the most exalted
of the heavens.
t Koran, 2564"'8. In the Traditions we find some resemblance to the
Christian classification of seven deadly sins : "Flee the seven that
cast into hell. They asked what these were and he replied : Poly
theism, magic, murder, usury, devouring the property of orphans,
fleeing in time of war, and accusing chaste women of unbecoming
conduct.1' Bochari, III, p. 179. Mohammed said also : "There are
seven whom God will shade with his shadow in the day when there
will be no other shade than His : a just ruler, a young man who
grows up in the service of God, a man whose heart cleaves to the
mosques, two men who love each other for the love of God, a man
who resists temptation by the fear of God, and a man who gives
alms and conceals it so that his left hand does not know what his
right hand does." — Bochari, II, p. 106.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 253
proach anything evil, whether it be concealed or manifest ;
and do not kill a human being (which God has forbidden
except in accordance with justice, and He enjoined you this
that you might have understanding) ; and do not approach
the property of the orphan, except to his profit, until he
reaches his majority ; and use a just measure and scale —
We, on Our part, do not exact from any soul more than its
ability; and when you speak be just, even to relatives : and
keep the covenant of God. These things He commanded
you that you should remember." *
If we count up the separate commands embodied
in this Ust we shaU find them to be nine in number.
In a tradition also we find that the Jews came to
discuss with Mohammed concerning the nine com
mands of God. This is in fact the Jewish computa
tion, for of the Ten Words in their division, the first
is the opening announcement : I am Yahweh thy
God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out
of the house of slaves. There are therefore nine com
mands. But when Ave examine the nine of Mohammed
we see that they do not correspond with those of the
Hebrew code. He left the Sabbath out of view alto
gether. He knows it, as we discover from other refer
ences, but he does not give it a place among God's
commands. We easUy discover the reason for this.
The Sabbath is practicable only among agricultural
or hand-working people. A pastoral people must herd
the flocks and milk them seven days in the week,
or their subsistence perishes. The Jew were an in
dustrial people. Those at Medina were mainly culti
vators or goldsmiths. They observed the Sabbath.
But Mohammed's people were mainly Bedawin. It
* Koran, 61S2 '.

254 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
seemed impossible to impose a day of rest upon them.
He did not hesitate therefore to abrogate it — the
Sabbath is intended only for the Jews, is in fact his
round assertion.*
We see from this instance, that Mohammed did not
feel that an unchangeable God would enact an un
changeable code. In regard to some other Mosaic
regulations, he admitted their divine character but
denied that they were binding upon later sects : " And
for the sin of the Jews, We forbade them good things
that had been lawful to them, and because they
turned away from the path of God." f We remember
that in the New Testament also, some of the Mosaic
ordinances are said to have been given the people for
the hardness of their hearts. A polemic utterance
against the Old Testament reason for the Sabbath,
seems contained in the words : " We created the
heavens and the earth and what is between them in
six days, and no fatigue affected TJs." X It is scarcely
possible to doubt that there is a reference here to the
declaration that God rested the seventh day. Since
neither the advantages of the Sabbath, nor the reason
given for its observance, commended themselves to Mo
hammed, he refused to re-enact it. The Friday which
he chose as his day of religious observance was not
intended as a Sabbath in the Old Testament sense.
The first command of Mohammed's Decalogue for-
* " The Sabbath is made only for those who dispute concerning
it" — by which he means the Jews who were arguing with him for its
adoption — Koran, 1612'.
t 4,5R.
t 50".

THE SERVICE OF GOD 255
bids associating any other object of worship with the
true God. With his doctrine of the unity of God
this is what we may expect. And in his common
wealth, as soon as he was strong enough, he made
this a crime to be punished by the judges. So in the
Old Testament we find stringent measures com
manded against every one who practised or encour
aged the worship of false gods.* It follows that
apostasy from Islam is punished with death : " If
they turn their backs, then take them and kill them,
and do not take any of them as friends or helpers. " f
This was probably intended for those who relapsed
into heathenism after having professed Islam. It
was early appUed, however, to those Moslems who
were converted to Judaism or Christianity. It is still
the theory of Mohammedan law everywhere that such
converts should be put to death.
The other commands of the Decalogue given by
Mohammed cover very fairly the second table of
Moses' Law. To appreciate his view of man's obli
gations toward his fellow we need to look at the dif
ference in principle between him and the heathenism
which he overthrew. In heathen Arabia, as in aU
early society, moral obUgations were connected with
the blood. The members of the clan were brothers.
In such a society, virtue consists in acting for the
common blood, either in defending it from attack
from the outside, or in fostering it by liberality with
in. This tribal system was in full force in Moham
med's time even in Mecca, where the different clans
Uved in different quarters of the city, each with its
*Deut 13. t Koran, 4'J1.

256 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
separate wall and gates. The common interest of the
city was protected only by treaties between the clans.
In Medina the different clans were frequently at war,
and before the coming of Mohammed, a continuous
feud had been carried on so long as to threaten the ex
termination of the population. Now Mohammed sub- ;
stituted the bond of faith for the bond of blood : " O,
you who believe ! Fear God in sincerity, and do not
die without being resigned [to Him] ; and hold fast, all
of you, on the bond of God, and be not divided ; and
remember the grace of God towards you when you
were enemies, how He united your hearts, and by His
grace you became brethren." * The men whom he ad
dressed had been members of different tribes and
therefore enemies. The word of Paul concerning
Christians before their conversion — that they had been
full of hate — was true also of those whom Mohammed
addressed. It is difficult for us to conceive the great
ness of the change wrought in them by the substitution
of the new tie of faith for the old tie of family. The
greatness of the change is shown by the difficulty with
which it was brought about. In the stormy times
through which the infant commonwealth passed, it
seemed again and again as if the old feuds would break
out. But faith triumphed over the old bonds, and the
brotherhood of believers was established. Tradition
has preserved some striking instances of the reality of
the change. One was the case of the son of Abdallah
Ibn Obay. Abdallah had been the most influential man
in Medina before the coming of Mohammed. Although
he yielded to the majority, and professed allegiance
* Koran, 3" '.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 257
to Mohammed, he was never heartily a believer, and
his lukewarmness or his secret machinations placed
many a thorn in the pillow of Mohammed. At one
time he so far forgot his ordinary prudence as to
speak openly of Mohammed in abusive language.
Thereupon the son went to Mohammed and offered
to kUl his father with his own hand, declaring that it
was better for him to be the executioner than another
— for if another should do it he would be moved to
take blood revenge, and so become a transgressor.
In another instance, a Moslem at Mohammed's in
stigation put to death a Jew who had shown him
many favors in times past. The brother of the ex
ecutioner reproached him with murdering his bene
factor. The only reply was : " If he who ordered me
to kUl him should order me to kiU thee I would
obey." When the brother assured himself that this
was said in earnest, he was so impressed with the
power of the new reUgion, that he became a convert
on the spot.* These examples show how the new
principle was reaUzed. They show its less attrac
tive side, to be sure. But we cannot doubt that its
strength against enemies is the measure of its strength
within the community. In his fareweU pUgrimage,
Mohammed declared that, Uke the sacred month and
the sacred territory, God had made the lUe and prop
erty of every Moslem inviolable to every other Mos
lem until the end of time.f
In adopting faith as the principle of his commu
nity instead of blood, Mohammed was probably under
* Wellhausen, Vakidi, p. 98.
f Muir, Life of Mahomet, IV., p. 23!) .
W

258 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Christian influence. The social organization in view
in the Old Testament was the chosen people. And
this people was a group of clans allied by blood and
tracing descent from a common ancestor — Abraham
or Israel as the case may be. In substance this was
the constitution of the Arabs before Mohammed.
The Prophets, indeed, in their visions of the coming
kingdom see that all men are to partake of the bless
ings of Israel. But they do not seem to proclaim
that simple faith in Yahweh is enough to make aU
men kin. They are content to leave the great con
summation to the future, where divine power will
effect what is incomprehensible to men. It was the
New Testament which brought believers into a
brotherhood " where there is neither Jew nor Greek,
neither bond nor free, neither male nor female." Mo
hammed must have heard of this from Christians.
The Jews who came under his observation were as
exclusive as the heathen. They were in fact organ
ized on the principle of the Arab clans, and they did
not let their faith keep them even from warring
against each other, clan against clan. Mohammed
grasped the Christian idea of the brotherhood of be^
lievers and organized his society on that basis. That
he did not rise to the height of the Christian concep
tion of the brotherhood of aU men can scarcely excite
surprise, when we see how far the Church is from ap
prehending this conception even to the present day.
Christian influence is suggested further by various
expressions used by Mohammed — though as we get
our knowledge of them from tradition, we may sus
pect that they are colored somewhat by the memory

THE SERVICE OF GOD 259
of the narrators. In regard to the brotherhood of
believers, he is reported to have said : " BeUevers
are like a building, one part of which strengthens
another " — and he interlaced his fingers to iUustrate
the union of materials in a buUding. So in the
New Testament, beUevers are builded together into
a temple. In some Koran passages he describes be
lievers as those who repel evil with good, where we are
tempted to see a reminiscence of the New Testament
exhortation to overcome evU with good.
Some other verbal resemblances might be pointed
out, but it is time for us to turn our attention to two
subjects in which the Moslem world now sharply dis
tinguishes itseU from Christendom. The first of
these is slavery. This institution already existed in
full vigor in Arabia in the time of Mohammed. A
slave market existed at Mecca into which came those
Arabs who were made captive in the wars between
the tribes, as well as the human merchandise im
ported from beyond the borders of the peninsula.
Even in time of peace, a defenceless man might be
kidnapped and sold. Mohammed did not dream of
aboUshing slavery. But he greatly mitigated its evils.
He exhorted masters to clothe their slaves with
the same kind of garments which they wore them
selves, and to feed them with the same kind of food
which they themselves ate. And he added as a
reason : " They are your brothers whom God has
made subject to you."* Further, he encouraged
* Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien, I, p. 73. I have not
now the reference to Bochari. On the slave market in Mecca cf .
W. R. Smith, Kinship and Marriage, p. 73 ; Wellhausen, Skizzen
und Vorarbeiten, I, p. 119.

260 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
manumission, making it a meritorious work and rec
ommending it as one of the means of atoning for
sins of omission. Finally, by the emphasis of the
brotherhood of beUevers he did much to secure
mild treatment of slaves on the part of their masters.
In aU this, Islam did as much as was done either by
Judaism or Christianity. Islam has, however, failed
to keep up with the progress of humanity in this as
in so many other respects. That, in the Middle Age,
Christianity had little to boast of as compared with
Islam, is shown by the fact that slaves were a staple
of the Venetian trade to the East, and were exported
from the domains of the Pope himself. Prelates even
were accused of taking the children of their serfs and
seUing them to the Jews, through whose hands they
passed into the possession of the Moslems.*
The other matter is one in which the custom of Is
lam is most repugnant to our ideas — 1 mean the law
of marriage and divorce.f In our dislike of the pres
ent practice of Moslems, however, we must not forget
that Mohammed did improve upon the customs of hea
thenism. Among the sins which he most strictly for
bade was adultery. When the deputation from Me-
* Kremer, Kulturgeschichte des Orients unter den Chalifen, II,
p.153. t In addition to what has been said about the duties of man to
man we should in justice to Islam notice the following points : (1)
Honor to parents is emphasized, cf. Koran 17i4f; (2) The punish
ment of the murder of a Moslem is death, and for injury of the
person the lex talionis is enforced as in the Old Testament ; (3) The
payment of just dues is enforced, and (by tradition) trade is regu
lated so as to prevent unfairness ; (4) Usury is prohibited as in the
Old Testament.

THE SERVICE OF GOD 261
dina swore aUegiance to him before the Flight, he
pledged them not to commit this sin.* '¦ When asked
to name the three greatest crimes, this was one of the
three.f In the passage cited above, he says : " Do
not approach anything evil." He probably means to
prohibit incitements to lust. He forbade the price
of a dog, the reward of fornication, and the pay of a
soothsayer — a conjunction that reminds us of an Old
Testament prohibition. In the early part of his reign
at Medina he ordered one of his foUowers to be stoned
on confession of adultery. When a deputation from
the important city of TaU came with the offer that
the city would become Moslem if the commands
against usury, adultery, and wine were modified, the
Prophet refused any concession.]: These are suffi
cient proof that Mohammed had no desire to encour
age Ucense, and that, in fact, his law was considerably
more strict than the custom of his ancestors. His
ideal of marriage was high, for he says : " A Moslem
has not obtained, after righteousness, anything bet
ter than a good dispositioned, beautUul wife ; such a
wife as, when ordered by her husband to do anything,
obeys ; and U her husband looks at her, is happy ;
and, U her husband swears by her to do anything,
she does it, to make him a swearer to the truth ;
and U he is absent from her she wishes him weU and
guards her person and takes care of his property." §
* Or fornication, the Arabic word includes both.
t Polytheism, infanticide, and adultery. Mishcat, I, pp. 8, 18, 20.
X Wellhausen, Vakidi, p. 383. In addition to these indications, I
might adduce the tradition that Mohammed prohibited the Muia
marriages — marriages for a specified time.
§ Mishcat, II p. 79.

262 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
With such an ideal, it seems as if he might have
done more for the elevation of marriage.
That he did not do more is probably due to his not
having had knowledge of what Christianity really
teaches. As we very weU know, the Church early
obscured the true doctrine of marriage by the prom
inence it gave to celibacy. Now the doctrine that
marriage is inferior to ceUbacy is one from which
the Arab revolts. The importance of preserving the
family name, and of keeping up the strength of the
clan, causes him to value children above all other
blessings. He stands just where the Hebrews of the
Old Testament stood. He has therefore no mind to
the doctrine of the Church. " We sent Jesus the Son
of Mary (he says in the Koran *) and gave him the
Gospel, and placed in the hearts of those who fol
lowed him pity and compassion — but the monastic life
they themselves invented." This shows that Moham
med, finding the ideal presented by Christianity a
perverted one, fell back upon the position common to
Hebrews and Arabs. He justifies himseU in his own
polygamy by the example of the prophets who had
preceded him, having David and Solomon especiaUy
in mind.
The real evil in Eastern society is not so much
polygamy as the freedom of divorce. Comparatively
few Mohammedans have more than one wife at a time.
But there are comparatively few who have not put
away more than one wife in order to take another. Now
divorce was repugnant to Mohammed. He never sent
away a wife, though some of them gave him anything
* Koran, 57".

THE SERVICE OF GOD 263
but a peaceful time. He tried to regulate divorce,
making it more difficult. That the attempted regula
tion would produce new evUs he did not foresee. It
did not occur to him that he could prohibit divorce
— the disciples of Jesus also found it impossible to
suppose such a prohibition practicable. In fact,
Mohammed stood substantially upon Jewish ground,
for the Jewish law allows the husband to put away
his wife if he find any serious fault in her.*
A curious but not edifying phase of this subject,
is the influence which Mohammed's own experiences
with women had upon his legislation. As it does not
bear directly upon our subject we need not discuss
it here. Probably there is in all history no more
striking example of the extent to which a regulation
based on the experience of a single individual has
affected a vast multitude of men for a long period of
time.f The failure to distinguish between personal
impulses and eternal laws has inflicted this lasting
calamity on Eastern society.
In the last lecture we discovered that the revela
tion of Mohammed is regarded as a Law. What was
there said is fully borne out by what we have seen
* Even if she burn the bread in baking, according to one school of
Scribes. t The jealousy of the uxorious old man led to the command that
all women should wear veils, which is still the rule of Eastern so
ciety. The desire to shield his favorite wife from a scandal, pro
duced the law that four witnesses should be brought to prove a
charge of adultery, and the accuser who cannot produce these must
receive eighty stripes. This law causes Eastern husbands to keep
their wives under constant guard because of the difficulty of proving
unfaithfulness. What the seclusion of women has done for Moslem
society I need not say.

264 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to-day. Koran and tradition occupy, to the Moham
medan, exactly the place which the Jew gives to
Tora and Mishna. Life is to be regulated in its
most minute details by the law given by God Him
self. The conservatism which is thereby given to
Islam has already been noticed. A further conse
quence is only too evident. The emphasis laid upon
obedience to a set of rules, stimulates a formal and
external righteousness. The process is precisely that
iUustrated in Judaism. On one side it becomes all
important to know the law. The Koran, like the
Tora, is a complicated code. It contains a great
variety of enactments, and these are not always clear
or self-consistent. Moreover, it does not provide
for all cases of conscience. The traditions must be
consulted by the man who wishes to please God ; and
the traditions form an extensive literature. But we
are not yet at the end. Cases in real life still force
upon the believer questions that cannot be answered
by direct declaration of either Koran or tradition.
But it wiU not do to remain in doubt. Of two
possible courses of action, one must be pleasing to
God and the other not. The development of casuistry
is the result. In fact the religious science of Islam is
largely casuistry. The learned have the issues of life
in their hands, and the result has been to foster the
pride which in old times led the Scribes to say :
" this people which knoweth not the Law is ac
cursed." In this respect, Islam has failed to rise to the New
Testament view. As we have seen, its ethical ideal
frequently shows Biblical influence. In the point

THE SERVICE OF GOD 265
now under consideration it has adopted the one-sided
legalism which characterized Pharisaism. The Scribes
who sat in Moses' seat have their counterpart in the
Scribes who still sit in the seat of Mohammed. The
conscience of the Moslem world is still in the hands
of these scholastics, whose ideal is the ideal of thir
teen centuries ago.
And if, in this respect, Mohammedanism must be
classed with Talmudic Judaism, the same must be said
of the character of its morality. The works pleasing
to God are largely works of the law— that is, they are
ceremonial and external. If even in Christianity,
which professes to free men from the law, men will
take refuge in formalism, how much more must this
be true in Islam ! In fact, the righteousness of the
followers of Mohammed consists in what the Apostle
caUs dead works. Here is where the system most
needs regeneration, and here is where the spiritual
Ught of Protestant Christianity should come to its
help.

LECTURE IX.
THE FUTURE LIFE
We have already had occasion to notice the prom
inence which the doctrine of the Judgment assumed
in the system of Mohammed, and in connection with
it the doctrine of the resurrection. In more than one
place he intimates that the great stumbling-block
which his message put in the way of his compatriots
was the doctrine of the resurrection. The unbelievers
are represented as saying to their friends : * " Shall
we bring you to a man who tells that after you are
scattered by the decay of your members, you will be
come new creatures?" Elsewhere the unbelievers
are characterized as those who do not believe in the
future lUe, while the believers are frequently de
scribed as those who beUeve in the future life — the
ivorld to come as we may well translate the word.f
The stress of the message is laid upon this : " Let
those who exchange the present life for the life to
come, fight in the cause of God." $ The idea that
those who lose the present lUe in order to gain the
other make a good bargain is also found in the New
Testament. The future is in fact the true good, the
present is only a delusion : " Say to them : The pres-
* Koran, 34'.
t Al-achira : that which comes after this life, 23, 695 and often.
J4'6. 26G

THE FUTURE LIFE 267
ent lUe is a little thing, and the Ufe to come is [the
true] good to the one who fears God: " "The present
lUe is only play and pastime, but the future home is
better to those who fear God — do you not under
stand?"* Belief in the future life is, then, one of the funda
mentals of Moslem faith. How much this article of
the creed includes to orthodox Mohammedans can be
seen from the foUowing synopsis of the chapters de
voted to this subject in a treatise on theology : t
1 ' Section 64. To show that the inquisition of Munkar
and Nakir, and the punishment of the tomb, and its felicity,
and all that is handed down concerning it, are true. . . .
Followers of tradition assert that this inquisition of Mun
kar and Nakir comes to every man equally, whether he be
buried, or devoured by beasts or by birds, or even if his dust
be scattered by the wind.
"Section 65. To show that all the signs of the Hour,
concerning which the Lawgiver has told us, are true, and
that it is necessary that all of them come to pass before the
coming of the Hour. These are : the appearance of the
Mahdi, then of the Antichrist, then of Jesus ; next the
connng of the Beast, the rising of the sun in the west, the
ascension of the Koran, the opening of the barrier of Gog
and Magog. Though there remained for the world but the
space of one day, all this would come to pass.
" Section 66. To show the necessity of a firm belief that
God will restore us to life in the form in which he first
brought us into it ; and the possible modes in which the
bodies shall receive the spirits ; to explain the form of the
Trumpet, and the reviving of .those who are in the tombs.
" Section 67. To show that the assembly after the resur-
* Koran, 4", 632, cf . 1326.
t From Fliigel, Scha'rani und sein Werk iiber die Muhammmedan-
ische Glaubenslehre in the Z. D. M. G., XX. (1866), pp. 22-24.

268 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
rection is true, and so of the change of the earth to another
earth and also of the heavens [to other heavens]. As to
the assembly, it is the collection of all created beings that
they may appear before God and give account before Him.
It extends to all creatures, both the distinguished and the
vulgar. All the pious, the prophets, the saints, and the
believers shall appear in the presence of the Compassionate,
and the evil-doers of different classes shall assemble before
the Almighty and the Avenger.
" Section 68. To show that the Pool and the Bridge and
the Scales are true.
" Section 69. To show that the books kept by the record
ing angels are true and that they shall be laid before God
in the day of resurrection according to the express tradi
tions. But as to the records men have different lots : one
shall hold his in his right hand, and another shall hold his
in his left, and another shall hold his behind his back.
Those who hold their books in their right hands are the
different classes of believers ; those whose books are given
into their left hands, these are the hypocrites, but not idol-
ators ; those who hold their books behind their backs are
those who received the Scripture but cast it behind them.
" Section 70. To show that our prophet Mohammed (God
bless and save him) will be the first intercessor in the Day
of Resurrection and the first whose intercession will be ac
cepted and the best of them, and no one shall have prece
dence of him.
' ' Section 71. To show that Paradise and the Fire are
true, and that they were created before Adam (peace be on
him) as has been already set forth at large. "
The citation, though only from a synopsis, is
enough to show the extent to which Mohammedan
eschatology has been developed. The theologians
have been obliged to find room in their system for
every saying on this subject which is attributed to
Mohammed by tradition, as well as every declara-

THE FUTURE LIFE 269
tion contained in the Koran. Their harmonistic
efforts are evident enough in some sections of this
treatise, as where those who receive the book of rec
ord are divided into three classes. This division is
based on different texts of the Koran, in each of
which only two classes of men are specified. Thus,
we find in several instances that the good are called
men of the right and the bad men of the left. These
phrases are apparently borrowed from the Gospel
account of the Judgment, in which the sheep are
placed on the right hand and the goats on the left.
Influenced by this phraseology we have in these pas
sages the two classes designated as those who receive
their book (or account) in their right hand or in their
left hand as the case may be.* In another passage
the one receives his book in his right hand and the
other receives it behind his back.^ It is clear that
the Prophet meant by this various imagery to de
scribe two classes and only two. But the literalism
of the theologians compels them to adopt a scheme
which will aUow aU the texts to be literally true —
hence the three classes in our author's presentation.
So extended and weU-ordered a system as is here
presented was not in the mind of Mohammed. It is
not unhkely, however, that he was hospitable to in
timations concerning the life beyond the grave which
came to him from various quarters. The curious as
sertion attributed to him by tradition to the effect
that the souls of the martyrs abide in the crops of
green birds which inhabit Paradise, is almost cer
tainly a survival from Arabic heathenism, in which
* Koran, 6919-25. t847'10.

270 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
the departed soul was supposed to take the form of a
bird.* On the same evidence (that of tradition) we
are warranted in asserting that he took the idea of
the punishments of the grave from the Jews at Me-
dina.f The hypothesis of a future lUe seems to be a ne- ¦,
cessity to a faith which wiU maintain its hold on the
justice of God. The inequahties of this Ufe are so !
marked, the lot of man is here so glaringly appor- ,
tioned without reference to his deserts, that we must I
look for another world in which the injustices may i
be remedied. The perplexity of the Old Testament;
writers in their attempt to discover God's justice in
the assignment of prosperity and calamity in this,
world, is sufficiently evident from the Book of Job.
That they were able to keep their faith in God in
spite of the darkness which (to the most of them)
hung over the future, is evidence of the intensity of
the faith itself. Mohammed never had to go through
their struggle. But he felt the force of the moral ar
gument for the future life, if we may judge from the
following :X "Or do those who do evU think that
We will treat them like those who believe and do
good, making their life and their death the same ?
Evil is the opinion they have formed. God has made
the heavens and the earth in accordance with justice,
and in order that every soul may be recompensed for
what it has done, and they shall not be wronged."
The thought is plain; God has a purpose in His
*Kremer, Herrschende Idccn, p. 166.
t Bochari, II, p. 93, also p. 24 f.
1 Koran, 45Mf.

TEE FUTURE LIFE 271
dealings with men. This purpose is the manifesta
tion of His justice. The purpose will be accomplished
only when all receive their recompense. It follows
from the notorious inequalities of this life that the
recompense of the other Ufe is the more certain. It
is perhaps with some such thought in mind that
Mohammed said:* "the poor Refugees wiU reach
heaven before the rich by forty years at the resur
rection." It is hardly to be supposed that Mohammed
worked out the logic of this view. His whole idea
came ready formulated from Christianity. The point
at which it met his religious needs was this — the
Judgment solves the difficulties which force them
selves upon us as we contemplate the divine govern
ment of the world. The Judgment, then, is the point
of departure for the whole eschatology of the Koran.
It appears prominently in the earliest Suras. In the
Fatiha, God is King of the Day of Judgment. The
phrase Day of Judgment occurs elsewhere in the early
period, and is doubtless borrowed from a Christian
source.t It reminds us of New Testament usage also,
that the Hour is made the name of the Judgment. X
The Koran conception of the Judgment is the dra
matic one known to us by the Gospel description^
The world shaU suddenly be visited by great por-
* Mishcat, II, p. 507.
t Koran, 5112, 5658. The word din here used for judgment seems
not to have had that sense in Arabic, but to have been borrowed
from Hebrew or Aramaic.
X 631' 4°, I2»", 22«, etc. Cf. that day and hour, Matt. 3436.
§ Matt. 24-2M8, 25='-i8.

272 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
tents ; the Judge wiU sit on His throne ; aU nations
shall be gathered before Him; the good shall be
placed on His right hand and be welcomed to happi
ness ; the evil shaU be placed on the left hand and be
consigned to punishment. The picture recurs in aU
its features in the Koran, except that the Judge is
God, and not the Son of Man. In the Gospel, the
portents are the darkening of the sun and moon, the
falling of the stars from heaven, and the sending out
of the angels with the trumpet. To this should be
added earthquakes, and the various convulsions of
nature which the Old Testament prophets associate
with the Day of Yahweh. Compare the Koran :
" When the sun shall be darkened,
And when the stars shall be scattered,
When the mountains shall be removed,
And when the camels shall be uncared for,
When the beasts shall be collected,
And when the seas shall be dried up,
When the souls shall be united,
And the girl buried alive shall be asked
For what crime she was slain ;
When the books shall be opened,
And the heavens shall be folded together,
When the fire shall burn fiercely,
And Paradise shall be brought into view —
Then -each soul shall know what it has wrought. ' ' *
The Biblical resemblances of the passage are ob
vious, and many other passages of similar import
might be cited. Quite in accord with the New Testa
ment, is the division of those who are judged into
* Koran, 811"14. The meaning is not always eertain.

THE FUTURE LIFE 273
men of the right hand and men of the left hand. We
can scarcely doubt that this goes back to the Gospel
picture. As aheady noted, these two divisions com
prise all mankind. Those who believe are the men
of the right and those who disbelieve are the men of
the left.* In one passage there are said to be three
divisions. But this is for the purpose of throwing
the prophets into relief, they being aUowed to go first
to their reward. The fundamental distinction is be
tween the good and the bad. Possibly under Persian
influence, room was found later for an intermediate
class. That the judgment takes place by the help of
books of record we have noticed in an earlier lect
ure, as also that this is based on Jewish or Christian
ideas. The use of the Balance to determine the merit
of each one is affirmed in some passages,f and this
very natural figure has given the theologians trouble,
because, in their Uteralism, they did not see how
actions could be weighed.
In order to the complete vindication of divine
justice, aU responsible beings must be judged. Hence
the importance of the doctrine of the resurrection of
the dead. The original form of the doctrine seems to
have been different. The Old Testament believer
was much exercised that the final triumph of Israel
should take place without the presence of those who
had suffered most for the good cause. In the Book of
Daniel, the faith that Israel shaU triumph over the
GentUes is accompanied by the faith that many of
those who have died without the sight shall be raised
to participate in the glory for which they have longed.
* Koran, 90" », cf. 74", 56' '. 1 231M ', 21".
18

274 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
In mediaeval Judaism, the emphasis of the resurrec
tion is laid upon this thought. Saadia, for example,
goes into a calculation of the space which would be oc
cupied by Israel when all its dead should be raised.*
The earthly kingdom of the Messiah thus precedes
the final apportionment of rewards and punishments.
For the doctrine in this form, Mohammed had no
taste, as is evident from his connecting the resurrec
tion and the Judgment closely together. In his earlier
preaching (and perhaps to the close of his Ufe) he
thought the Judgment to be near at hand. He re
garded it as a Day of Yahweh which should come
suddenly upon the nations. His denunciation of
calamity upon Mecca was doubtless based upon a bona
fide expectation of the early appearance of God in
Judgment. In this he reminds us of the expectation,
so common in New Testament times, that the Lord
would soon return for judgment. This expectation
is not confined to New Testament times. The most re
ligious (or the most emotional) minds have frequently
felt the course of the world to be so bad, that there
must be an immediate intervention of divine power.
Thus the Fifth Monarchy expectation becomes acute
at times when reverses overtake the Church. For
Mohammed we may notice :
"Verily the chastisement of thy Lord is at hand,
None can turn it away.
A day when the heavens shall be in commotion,
And the mountains shall remove !
Woe, on that day, to those who accuse [the revelation]
of falsehood !
* Emunot we-Deot, oder Glaubenslehre und Philosophic von Saad-
ja Fajjumi, ubersetzt von Fiirst (leipzig, 1845), p. 408.

THE FUTURE LIFE 275
These are they who amused themselves with vanity.
The day on which they are roughly thrust into the fire
of Gehenna [they shall be told],
This is the fire whose existence you denied." *
The passage seems to assert categorically both that
the day of punishment is near, and that there is no
interval between its appearance and the condemna
tion of the unbelievers. Other assertions that the
Day is near can easUy be found. f Some of them are
guarded in their language. Even these remind us of
the New Testament, which is careful to assure us that
the exact time is known to God alone. Koran and
New Testament agree also in affirming the suddenness
with which the Hour shaU announce itself: "To
God belong the secrets of heaven and earth. The
matter of the Hour is like a glance of the eye, or even
nearer;" "They shaU discern nothing but a single
cry ; it shaU come upon them whUe they are disput
ing, and they shaU not be able to make their testa
ments or return to their families. A blast shaU be
blown and men shaU hasten from the tombs to their
Lord. They shall say : Woe to us ! Who has brought
us from our resting place ? This is what the Com
passionate threatened, and the messengers were truth
ful. There shall come a single cry and all [created
things] shaU appear before Us. On that day no soul
shaU be wronged at all, nor shall they be recom
pensed except for what they have done." X Elsewhere
also the single blast of the trumpet is followed at once
by the resurrection.§ In one passage, however, this
?Koran, 52'-". fE.g., 7534, 77', 27", 3363.
X 16", 36". ". § 37", 27"», 37".

276 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
is made two blasts: "The trumpet shall be blown
and all that are in heaven and earth shall die, ex
cept whom God will. Then it shaU be blown again
and they shaU rise and see. And the earth shall
shine with the light of its Lord, and the book
shall be placed, and the prophets and the witnesses
shaU be brought and men shall be judged — none shaU
be wronged.*
It is somewhat difficult to combine in a single
picture all the features of Mohammed's description.
Besides the sound of the trumpet we have the call of
an angel : " On the day when one shaU call to some
thing difficult, with looks cast down they shall come
forth from the graves like the locusts in clouds." f
In their terror they shall flee their nearest friends ;
the nurse shall forget her charge ; the pregnant
woman shall miscarry ; men shaU be drunken with
terror.]: AU voices are put to silence, and the only
sound heard is the tramp of the millions moving to
their doom.§ Angels and men are ranged in ranks.
The false gods are judged along with their wor
shippers. Each tries to excuse himself and to
throw the blame upon others. Gehenna is brought
near — a flaming monster with fiery maw gaping for
prey. II
Even the animals will be raised and brought into
judgment ^[ — though this is affirmed in but one pas
sage. Although the books of record are brought, they
* Koran, 3968f. f546f.
J8033, 222. So in the Day of Yahweh men shall be "drunken
but not with wine."
§ 20'". || 8923 '. f 63B.

THE FUTURE LIFE 277
are, properly speaking, not necessary. Men shall
be recognized by their marks; they shall be com
pelled to testUy against themselves ; then- members
wUl bear witness against them : " Then* hearing and
their eyes and their skins shaU testify concerning
what they were accustomed to do ; they will say to
then- skins : " Why do you testify against us ? They
will reply: God who causes everything to speak,
causes us to speak ; it is He who created you at first,
and to Him you return ; you cannot so conceal your
selves that your ears and eyes and skins will not
witness — but you thought that God would not know
what you were doing." * This feature appears also
in Rabbinical sources. The thought that, as soul
and body are both concerned in the sins of this life,
both must be punished in the other world, goes back
to the Persian reUgion. t
The multitude of detaUs must not cause us to lose
sight of the main point. This is, that the justice of
God will be fuUy vindicated by a universal Judgment
for which the dead will be raised. In this form the
idea is undoubtedly Christian. This idea forms a mo
tive for faith and good works. Believers are to be
rewarded, unbeUevers wiU be punished- This motive
is urged by aU the religions which have a distinct
conception of a future Ufe. As to historical Chris-
* Koran, 41»«, cf. 24% 3665 and Geiger, /. c, p. 74.
fKohut in Z. D. M. G., XXI (1867), p. 565 f. The argument
that the resurrection of men is no more difficult to God than their
creation, is also given by Zoroaster, adopted by the Jews and found
in the Koran — Kohut, /. c, p. 578 f. ; Saadia, Emunot (Fiirst), p. 381.
The same line of argument is found in the Church Fathers, Har-
nack, Dogmengeschichte, II, p. 65.

278 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
tianity there can be no doubt on this point, and if we
compare Mohammed's descriptions of Paradise and
Gehenna with those found in Christian sources we
shaU not be in doubt as to his dependence upon
them. These descriptions are probably the best
known portions of the Koran, so that their treatment
here may be brief.
Paradise is the Garden, or the Garden of Eden, or
with translation of the word Eden, the Garden of
Pleasure. This abode of the blessed is watered by
perennial streams; the inhabitants repose at their
ease in shady bowers ; they eat of the most delicious
fruits ; cups of a delicious beverage but which does
not intoxicate, are served to them as often as they
desire; they are clothed magnificently and adorned
with jewels.
To these delights are added the damsels of Para
dise, virgins whose beauty passes description. The
delights are not all sensuous. The throne of God
is in the midst of the Garden, and the blessed be
hold the worship of the angels and hear the praises
which they sing.* No vain discourse wiU be uttered,
but the universal salutation will be : Peace ! They
shall receive visits of congratulation from the angels.
Better than all, is the consciousness of the favor of
God.f That the saved shall behold the face of God
seems to be nowhere asserted in the Koran, though
tradition affirms it very strongly. It is perhaps
* Koran, 3976. It is unnecessary to give references for the other
particulars. t Such seems to be the meaning of 97S.

THE FUTURE LIFE 279
implied in the Koran phrase : " Those who endure
through desire of the face of their Lord." *
On the whole this must be admitted to be a sensu
ous paradise. Mohammed showed his own weakness
in introducing the Huris into the picture. For this he
had no precedent in the Bible. But for the rest of
his description he could plead Jewish and Christian
precedent. A recent author calls attention to the de
scription of Eden in the hymns of Ephraem Syrus.
This Father speaks of its fragrant fountains, its flow
ers and crowns ; the blessed are served by angels who
bring them wine from the vine of Paradise, f John of
Damascus describes Paradise in simUar terms.]: That
the same features are found in Rabbinical writings is
weU known.§ It is aside from our present purpose
to notice the resemblances further than to show that
Mohammed adopted substantially the view of his
predecessors. This went so far as to assert seven
heavens, and to affirm that the good are rewarded in
different degrees, both which propositions may be
found in Jewish and Christian authorities. ||
It need scarcely be added that the woes of the
* Koran, 13M. On seeing the face of God cf. Pocock, Noice Mis-
cellanece, in his Works, I. (1740), p. 236 ; Mishcat, II, 620.
fGrimme, Mohammed, II, p. 161.
JHarnack, Dogmengeschichte, II, p. 154.
§ Weber, Altsynagogale Theologie, p. 331.
|| On the seven heavens 2". The idea is Persian, cf. Z. D. M. G.,
XXI, p. 562, and Talmudic, ibid., p. 567. That the blessed have
different degrees of reward is less distinctly asserted in the Koran
though abundantly developed in Tradition, as Bochari, III, p. 185.
The same idea is found in Christianity (Harnack, /. c, II, p. 66),
and in Judaism (Weber, p. 332).

280 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
damned are also developed along the lines of Jew
ish and Christian belief. The fundamental idea is
that Gehenna is a place of fire. The name is bor
rowed with the idea.* The description is frequently
given. Sometimes Gehenna is almost an animate
monster. Its voracity is such that after it has re
ceived all its portion of men and demons and is
asked whether it is satisfied, it will reply : Is there
anything more? We are reminded of the Biblical
proverb which puts Sheol as one of the things insati
able. The unhappy souls are dragged to that abode
loaded with chains: As they enter they are greeted
with curses and reproaches, which they return upon
the heads of those who have preceded them. The fire
burns with an intensity sufficient to consume stones,
and it completely envelops its victims. It consumes
their members, which grow again to be a fresh source
of torture. They are given to eat of an infernal tree
called Zakkum, " whose fruit is like the heads of
devils," t and when eaten " boils within them like
molten metal." They receive to drink boiling water,
or a yet more disgusting liquid. Their prayer for re
lief is in vain. Though continually enduring the
pangs of death, death never comes to their relief. Of
special punishments we hear only that the misers who
have heaped up gold and silver will be branded with
red hot coins on forehead and side and back.]: On the
* Gehannam, approaching the Hebrew more nearly than the Chris
tian Syriac.
t Koran, 3763 ', cf. 4443 '.
J 935. The Hadith adds that those who have refused the poor-tax
of cattle shall be trampled by the cattle, Bochari, II, p. 101.

THE FUTURE LIFE 2S1
whole, the description of these torments faUs short of
the ingenuity of Christian and Rabbinic writers.*
What we have now considered makes up the main
view of the Koran. So long as the expectation of an
early coming of the Judgment could be entertained, it
was sufficient. But the Judgment delayed. Many
of the beUevers were taken away from earth, and
many of the enemies of the Prophet were put to
death. The question must arise — where are these
souls for the present time? Do they simply sleep
untU the resurrection ? The natural answer is that
they sleep with the body, and this answer seems to
be impUed in the assertion that those who are raised
wUl think that they have rested only a brief time
in the tomb. In one instance we have the account
of a man who was sceptical about the resurrection,
whereupon God caused him to die, and after a hun
dred years revived him. On being asked how long
he had remained in that state, he replied : a day or
part of a day.-f So the scoffers, when they are raised
at the last day, shaU think that they have been in the
grave only an hour, or only a little time.]: The only
rational hypothesis to account for this state of mind,
is that the souls have passed the time in sleep ; and
this we suppose to have been Mohammed's original
intention. But the impatience of his followers for
- paradise, and his own impatience for the punishment
* Cf. the Acts of Thomas (Walker's Apocryphal Gospels), p. 419
f . ; Antenicene Fathers, VIII, p. 547 ; Eisenmenger, Entdeckies Ju-
denthum, II, p. 341.
t Koran, 2Ml.
X 4635, 1754, cf . also, 20>» ', 3054 '.

282 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
of his enemies, could not rest in the simple hypothe
sis of sleeping souls. Jewish and Christian tradition
came to his help. These, although they asserted a
Judgment, found room for a series of scenes to pre
cede the final consummation. For the individual soul,
moreover, they had provided an extended experience
between death and the resurrection. As these theories
became known to Mohammed, he seems to have
adopted them more or less completely, but without
digesting them into a self-consistent scheme. As
further developed by tradition they have all found
place in the Moslem eschatology, which thus becomes
the compUcated thing which we have already contem
plated in the extract from Sha'rani. These additional
details deserve some attention. They are concerned
either with the experiences of the individual soul or
with the course of the world's history, and we may
conveniently arrange them under these two heads.
Death is the separation of soul and body. It is
natural to suppose that it is effected by the angels.
Such was the theory of Judaism, going back to Par-
seeism,* and adopted in popular Christianity.! So
we find in the Koran : " If only thou couldst see when
the evil-doers are in the pangs of death, whUe the
angels stretch forth their hands [saying] : Give forth
your souls! To-day you shaU be recompensed by
* In Parseeism the man's good deeds appear to him in the form of
a beautiful maiden at his death. Kohut (Z. D. M. G., XXI, p. 564)
cites also a passage in which the angels accompany the soul. For
Judaism, Weber, p. 324, Saadia (Fiirst's Translation), p. 364.
fThe Revelation of Paul in Walker's translation (Apocryphal
Gospels), p. 480; Antenicene Fathers, VIII, p. 576; Budge, Book
of the Bee, p. 131.

THE FUTURE LIFE 28c>
severe punishment for what you have falsely spoken
concerning God," * and more vividly : " If only thou
couldst see when the unbelievers die, how the angels
strike their faces and backs [saying] : Taste the pun
ishment of the fire ! This is for what your hands have
laid up in store." According to tradition, an inquisi
tion is held in the grave as to whether the deceased
is a sincere beUever. H he turns out to be such, his
grave is expanded for him and he is given a view
of Paradise. H the reverse be the case, the body is
beaten and the grave is contracted so as to press upon
the body. These are the pains of the grave adopted
from Judaism.f ^ne soul remains joined to the body
therefore, and is affected by its experiences.
Properly speaking, then, there are three theories
discoverable on this point. According to one, the
soul sleeps between death and the resurrection. This
is implied in the passages already cited, in which the
raised think they have been but an hour or a day in
the tomb. The second is developed by tradition in
the form just noted — that the soul is present with the
body receiving a foretaste of its final state. And,
thirdly, there are traces of a theory that the souls
enter at once upon the enjoyment of heaven or the
suffering of hell. The only trace of this in the Koran
is in an aUusion to Pharaoh and his people, who are
said to be brought to the fire morning and evening,
* Koran, 693, 852 '. The reader who is interested in the theological
development of these passages may consult Gautier, La Perle Pre-
cieuse de Ghaza.1% (1877), pp. 9, 15, 16.
tCf. Mishcat, I, pp. 38-43; Bochari, II, pp. 84, 92 f.; Weber,
I. C, p. 325 ; Saadia, p. 368.

284 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
" and when the Hour shall dawn it shall be said :
Take the people of Pharaoh to the severest punish
ment ! " * In the traditions, however, we have fre
quent assertions that the souls of those who die in
the holy war go at once to Paradise. It is not for
us to endeavor to reconcile these three propositions.
But it is fair to point out that a similar confusion pre
vails in the Christian treatment of the Ufe which comes
immediately after death and before the resurrection.
As remarked above, the Christian theory of the
last things embraces more than the final Judgment.
When it became evident that the great consummation
was not so imminent as Mohammed had supposed,
these additional events began to assert themselves,
even to Mohammed himself. He was willing at least
to allow room for the signs of the Hour. Such signs
he described in the convulsions of nature which are
so frequently mentioned in connection with the Judg
ment. But later he extended the list. One of the
most prominent of the additional signs was the ap
pearance of Gog and Magog : " A curse shall rest on
the city we have destroyed. They shaU not revive
until Gog and Magog shall have free course and they
shall come down in crowds from every height." -f
The explanation is given in another Sura which re
lates at length the story of Alexander the Great
(Dhu-1-Karnain). Among other things, this King is
said to have made a wall of iron cemented with
molten brass. J The object of the wall was to keep
* Koran, 40".
f 21s5 '. I have substituted the familiar Gog and Magog for the
Arabic form Yajuj and Majuj.
X The story fills 18'a-"'J, and is derived from a Christian source.

THE FUTURE LIFE 285
out the ferocious Tartar tribes here called Gog and
Magog. It is evident at a glance that we have here
an apocalyptic sign which goes back to Ezekiel and
which reappears in the New Testament Revelation.*
' Beyond the assertion that these nations shall come
in crowds as a sign of the Day, Mohammed makes
no use of them ; and in his presentation there seems
to be no room for the extended campaign of Gog
which is implied in Ezekiel's account.
Another sign of which tradition makes much is
the Beast, mentioned once in the Koran : " And
when the decree is pronounced upon them, We will
bring from the earth a beast which shaU say to them
that mankind has not kept firm hold of our revela
tion."! Here is evidently a reminiscence of the
Beast of the New Testament Revelation. But Mo
hammed only aUudes to it in connection with the
Hour, as one of its signs. The connection is only
external. The same may be said of the Second
Coming of Jesus, which is once said to be a sign of
the approach of the Hour. The coming of Anti
christ is certified by tradition only, as it would seem.
The expected Mahdi who is also predicted in tradi
tion, is another product of the perennial Messianic
hope of the Eastern world.]: Tradition goes counter
to the tenor of the Koran when it makes Jesus the
* Ezek. 38 and 39 ; Rev. 20*-10. On the influence which the pre
diction has had in Christian literature, cf . Bousset, Der Antichrist
(1895) pp. 29, 33 f. For Judaism, Weber, I. c, p. 369 f.
t Koran, 27"; Rev. 13.
X An extended discussion of these matters is given by Pocock,
Notes Miscellanece, in his Works (1740) I., p. 213 ff . ; cf. also Ruling,
Eschatologie des Islam (1895).

286 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Judge at the Day of Resurrection. The Bridge on
which those who are judged wUl attempt to pass to
heaven, only the beUevers succeeding, has also a
large place in tradition, having been borrowed from
Persian sources. These embellishments show how
many incongruous elements may be swaUowed, and
in a sense assimilated, by tradition.
One point remains to be noticed. The eternity of
reward and punishment seems distinctly affirmed in
the Koran. In fact a distinct polemic is found
against the Jews who had the contrary theory:
" They say : The fire shall affect us only a limited
number of days. Say to them : Have you received
an engagement from God such that He wiU not
change, or do you say concerning God what you do
not know ? Nay ! Whoever has deserved evil, and
whose sin has encompassed him — these are inhabi
tants of the Fire, and they remain forever in it. But
those who believe and do good, they are inhabitants
of the Garden. They remain forever in it." * We
are able to trace the Jewish doctrine to which allu
sion is here made. The importance of the covenant
made with Abraham was so great, that the Jewish
thinkers could not conceive it to be annulled by any
act on the part of man. One who had received cir
cumcision, and who was thus marked as being in
covenant with God, could not be punished eternally,
no matter how bad he had been. It was recognized
by the Rabbis, therefore, that Gehenna was only a
purgatory for the Jews, and that when their purifica
tion was accomplished they would be set free. It was
* Koran, 274 ff, cf. 3'23.

THE FUTURE LIFE 287
even said that their sojourn would be only twelve
months.* SimUar reasoning has led to the theory of
the Church that no baptized person can be etemaUy
lost. It is against this theory that Mohammed ar
gues, and yet the theory has appeared among his
followers. Tradition makes him say that the people
of Paradise wiU enter Paradise, and the people of
Gehenna wiU enter the fire ; then God wiU bring out
whoever has in his heart the weight of a grain of
mustard seed of faith. Then they will come out with
faces already burnt to a coal and be plunged in the
river of Ufe, whereby they will revive as the grain
springs up by the side of a river.! In another pas
sage he who is thus delivered is said to be the one
who says there is no God but Allah and in whose
heart is a grain of good. The case seems to be one
in which the traditions have invented a doctrine con
trary to the express words of the Koran.
One somewhat confused passage should be noticed,
lest we seem to ignore some part of Mohammed's
doctrine. It is the foUowing : " Between the two is
a waU, and on the Araf are men who recognize all by
their marks ; and they call to the inhabitants of Para
dise : Peace be upon you ! They do not enter though
desiring to. And when their looks are directed
toward the men of the Fire, they say : Our Lord,
place us not with the unbelievers ! " ! It is evident
* Weber, I. u., p. 327 ff. It is intimated that an occasional sin
ner might be found who must be remanded eternally. In that case
the distinguishing mark would be effaced.
t Bochari, I, pp. 10, 15.
t Koran, 744 f .

288 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
that we have here no doctrine of purgatory. The
most that we can conclude from the passage is that
some few will be found whose deserts are so equally
balanced that it is impossible to consign them to
either place, so they are left perched on the dividing
wall. But it is not certain that Mohammed laid any
stress on this single passage — which indeed may have
been uttered for dramatic effect.
The results of this inquiry may be briefly formu
lated thus : In regard to the life beyond the grave
Mohammed was powerfully influenced by the doc
trine of the preceding revealed religions, especially
by the doctrine of Christianity. We have no reason
to doubt that it appealed to him on its moral and
spiritual side — on its moral side because it vindicated
the justice of God ; on its religious side because it
gave promise of satisfaction in the presence of God.
The good pleasure of God was one of the joys to
which he looked forward. " Do not count those who
have been slain in the cause of God as dead — nay !
they live with Him, and there they are nourished,
rejoicing in what God gives them of His bounty, and
receiving the good tidings that those who have not
yet attained, but are following after them, shall not
suffer fear or grief." * In view of such expressions
and the declarations already noted, that the present
life is of no value as compared with the life to come,
we cannot doubt the real religious conviction of Mo
hammed. That, in adopting it, he fitted it to his own
taste is only what we find in other religions. The
material and the sensuous appealed to him and to his
* Koran, 3163 f.

THE FUTURE LIFE 289
Arabs as it appealed to Jews and Christians of that
age. His heaven is not very different from the
heaven of Ephraem Syrus nor his hell different in
kind from that painted by Dante or Michelangelo.
The accretions to his doctrine which came from the
Messianic expectations of the Jews or the ChUiastic
expectation of the Christians, are due rather to the
traditionists than to Mohammed himself.

19

LECTURE X.
CHURCH AND STATE
When David the Bethlehemite incurred the suspi
cion of Saul his sovereign, he was in an evil case.
He could not depend upon the IsraeUtes to harbor
him because they were servants of Saul. The exter
mination of the priestly clan at Nob showed how per-
Uous it was to fall under the suspicion of the king.
David's own clan could not protect him except at the
risk of a similar fate. If the fugitive should seek
asylum with the neighboring tribes — it was they
against whom he had carried arms in times past, and
there was no Philistine or Amalekite or Ammonite
who would not be glad to take blood revenge upon
the unprotected Israelite. The man cut off from the
protection of his kin is an outlaw, and his blood is
free to the first comer. The only way he can be safe
is to gather about him others as desperately situated
as himself, to make of them a band of brothers, and to
establish their right at the point of the sword. David
did this and soon became formidable, was gladly re
ceived as a vassal by the Emir of Gath, obtained a
town for himseU and his men, and grew in strength
by carrying war against the Bedawin.
Nor was this aU. At the death of Saul the king
dom fell to pieces. The power of Ishbaal was never
290

CHURCH AND STATE 291
more than a shadow. The clans, under the Philistine
oppression, lost the feeling of unity and the hope of
independence. This was David's opportunity. The
Sheikhs of Hebron found the alliance of a captain
with six hundred men an advantage if accepted — the
danger of rejecting it was equaUy obvious. It is no
wonder that they received him and made him their
king. Once the rule of a vigorous man was estab-
Ushed, his kingdom could not help growing by the
accretion of the fragments into which the kingdom of
Saul had broken. The sequel is well known. The
power of David extended far beyond the boundaries
of Israel, and the impetus was not whoUy spent in
the reign of Solomon. But when Solomon's rash and
Ul-advised son came to the throne, the centrifugal
force again asserted itseU. The tributaries revolted,
the northern tribes elected a king of their own, and
the house of David was left with only a weak re
minder of its former greatness.
This very famiUar story Ulustrates a law which we
find exempUfied again and again in the history of the
East. Its operation may be observed in Middle Ara
bia even in our own day — for there the tribal society
survives in much the same form in which it existed
in Israel in the time of the Judges. The unit of so
ciety is the clan. Each clan has its own territory
which it defends against aU comers, while itself ready
at any minute to invade the pasture of its neighbors.
Within the clan all are brothers. Beyond the clan all
are enemies. There is no government in our sense of
the word. Every man does that which is right in his
own eyes. The Sheikhs have a moral influence only.

292 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The clans enter into association with each other by
treaty, but this constitutes simply a larger clan united
by the fiction of adoption or artificial brotherhood.
Such association does not make a state. But if an
enterprising man in one of the clans is able to attach
a band of soldiers to his person, government, in our
sense of the word, begins. The case of David is a
case in point. So is the case of Abimelech of Shec-
hem who established himself as Emir of Israel by
means of a band of mercenaries. Having secured the
allegiance of his immediate kinsmen, such a chief
rapidly extends his power. His power is in fact largely
dependent on the ability to content his subjects with
the spoil of their enemies. The normal course of
such a kingdom is to keep on expanding as long as it
is ruled by a capable and energetic prince. But it
falls to pieces as rapidly as it was built up, U once a
weakling comes to the throne.
This law wrought in favor of Mohammed. But
there was a difference between him and an ordinary
freebooter. He brought a principle into play which
had not earlier had a chance to show its power in
Arabia; that principle was religious faith. Had it
not been for this, his kingdom would have been no
more enduring than the hundreds of little monarchies
which all along the course of history have arisen in
Arabia and have disappeared leaving no trace behind.
In this also there is a resemblance' between Islam and
the Old Testament history. For the tenacity of the
Kingdom of David is no doubt due to the fact that it
based itself distinctly on the religion of Yahweh.
These considerations enable us to understand Mo-

CHURCH AND STATE 293
hammed's career when he became a ruler of men. In
the eighteenth century, great indignation was ex
pressed against him — a man who left his native land
to turn his hand against her. He was said thus to
have thrown off the mask which he had hitherto
worn, and to have discovered his treasonable designs.
These charges totally mistake the position. The
Arab has no country in the sense in which we use the
word. His attachment is solely to his clan. But
Mohammed's clan cast him off. They no longer de
fended him against their allies. He was already an
outlaw. The state of war existed between him and the
Meccans by their act, not by his. The Meccans un
derstood this. If we may believe tradition, they tried
to intercept him and kUl him on his journey to Me
dina. From their own point of view this was the
only reasonable thing to do. That they were not
more strenuous in the matter is probably to be ac
counted for by their contempt for him. They sup
posed the poor fanatic unable to do them harm.
It is probable, moreover, that the Meccans looked
upon Medina as a harmless or insignificant city. It
was in fact far from formidable. Medina was not a
city in our sense of the word. It was simply an
oasis over which the inhabitants were scattered in
viUages. A group of viUages occupied the place where
the city proper now stands. But it had no common
waU for some time after the arrival of Mohammed.
Burckhardt* describes the suburbs of the present
city as consisting of " large courtyards, with low apart-
* Travels in Arabia (1829), p. 326; Wellhausen, Skizzen und
Vorarbeiten, IV., p. 18.

294 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
ments built around them on the ground floor, and
separated from each other by gardens and planta
tions. . . . Each Hosh [court] contains thirty or
forty families, thus forming so many separate hamlets,
which in times of unsettled government are frequently
engaged in desperate feuds with each other." Such a
loose agglomeration of settlements was the so-caUed
city in the time of Mohammed. Except that they
were settled more closely together, its inhabitants
differed in nothing from the dwellers in the desert.
There was the same lack of government which exists
among the Bedawin. The history of the people be
fore the coming of Mohammed is a chronicle of little
wars between the clans. Two of these clans had lit
erally exterminated each other, one having been
destroyed to the last man, the other having two men
left who soon after died without issue. Not long be
fore the coming of Mohammed all the clans had
joined on one side or the other in a pitched battle,
which ended in the exhaustion of all parties. Even
then there was no peace, but war was carried on by
isolated murders and assassinations. The community
was, in fact, in a state of anarchy.*
Into this anarchy Mohammed came as a fixed point
upon which peace could take hold. He was the head
of a smaU band of Meccan converts who had under
gone the loss of all things for his sake. These were
soon joined by the fugitives of Abyssinia, who were
no less devoted to him. His religion had been
preached at Medina for more than a year before his
coming, and there was a considerable number of sin-
*For a more extended description cf. Wellhausen, IV., p. 27 ff.

CHURCH AND STATE 295
cere converts. With this following, it is not strange
that Mohammed was recognized as the leading man
in the community.
Had he not been a man of character, however, it is
doubtful whether he would have become the autocrat
that he actuaUy became. One great source of power
to a man in his position is the abiUty to arbitrate be
tween contending parties. A judge who wUl not take
bribes nor regard persons is hard to find. He is prized
all the more when he is found. Now Mohammed
was honest ; he was generaUy free from bias— so far
as an Arab can be free from bias ; he claimed divine
direction. He naturally became the judge of the com
munity, just as naturaUy as Moses became the judge
of Israel.
Now to the Semitic mind, the king is the judge of
the nation. The Old Testament is fuU of passages
to prove this. The description of the ideal king in
the Seventy-second Psalm emphasizes this function :
" He shaU judge thy people with righteousness, and
•thy poor with justice." When a man establishes him
self as supreme judge of a people, he is weU on the
way to kingly power. The other function of the king
is carrying on war. It is to go out before them against
their enemies, that Israel demands a king in the days
of Samuel: "We wUl have a king over us . . .
that our king may judge us and go out before us and
fight our battles." * This work also fell to Moham
med. The state of war was in Arabia the state of
nature. The only way in which the Moslems could
sustain themselves was by raids upon their enemies.
* 1 Sam. 8">f.

296 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
In these Mohammed, by his very position, was forced
to be the leader. Although he had had no experience
in fighting, and although he was not a man of physi
cal courage, yet he was on the whole a successful gen
eral. He knew how to maintain discipline, and he
knew how to encourage his foUowers in the face of
defeat. As judge and as general he fulfilled the
Semitic ideal of kingship. It cannot be wondered at
that the kingship came to him.
The course of history then runs a close parallel be
tween Israel and Islam. It is difficult to make out
how much BibUcal influence was at work in the proc
ess. At Mecca we cannot discover that Mohammed
had any kingly aspirations. He is careful to disclaim
any power over his people ; he declares that he seeks
no reward from them ; he calls himself only a warner
and a bringer of tidings; he does not (apparently)
adduce the preceding prophets as claiming sover
eignty over their people. To aU appearance, he ex
pected the government of Mecca to remain in the
hands of the Sheikhs, even if the people should ac
cept Islam. A seat in their council as adviser was
perhaps the most that he expected. He seems to have
known of no BibUcal precedent for claiming more.
At Medina, however, where the cares of government
were forced upon him, he may have had a different
light. In this period he tells an Old Testament story
that would serve him as precedent. It is as foUows :
" Dost thou not know concerning the aristocracy of Is
rael after the time of Moses, how they said to one of their
prophets : Raise us up a king and we will fight in the way
of God 1 He replied: Perchance when you are ordered to

CHURCH AND STATE 297
fight, you will refuse. But they said: Why should we not
fight in the way of God, when we have been thrust out of our
homes and away from our children ? Yet, when they were
ordered to fight, they turned their backs except a few of
them, and God knows the evil-doers. Their prophet said to
them: God has sent you Talut as king. They replied: How
can the kingdom be his, when we are more worthy of it
than he, and he has not received abundance of property!
The prophet said : God has chosen him above you, and has
increased him in excellence both of mind and body; God
gives the kingdom to whom He will, and God is benevolent
and wise. The prophet added : A sign of his kingship is
that he will bring you the Ark, on which is the Shekina
from your Lord, a relic left by the people of Moses and
Aaron; angels will bear it — in this is a sign for you if you
are believers. And when Talut set out with the troops, he
said: God will test you by a stream; whoever drinks of it
is none of mine, and he who does not taste it, except by
taking up a little in his hand, shall be mine. But all ex
cept a few drank. And when he and those who believed
had crossed the stream, they said : We have no power against
Goliath and his soldiers to-day ! But those who were mind
ful that they must meet God said: How many a small troop
has overcome a larger one by the permission of God, for
God is on the side of those who are steadfast. And when
they went out against Goliath and his soldiers, they said :
O Lord, supply us with steadfastness, and make our feet
firm, and help us against the unbelievers ! So they put
them to flight by permission of God, and David killed Go
liath, and God gave him the kingdom and wisdom, and
taught him what He would. ' ' *
We see that the narrative is a confused reminis
cence of the election of Saul, the march of Gideon,
and the battle of David with GoUath. The point of
mterest is the manner in which the incident is made
* Koran 4MMM. Saul is named Talut to rhyme with Jalut (Goliath).

298 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
to reflect the situation at Medina. The king is de
manded in order that the people may fight in the way
of God, where we should say fight in the cause of
God. The phrase is the standing phrase used for
the wars of Mohammed against the unbeUevers. The
prophet in the text expresses the doubt whether the
people would be willing to fight. This doubt was a
reflection of Mohammed's own experience, for a party
of Medinans under an influential leader was always
ready to dissuade their fellow-citizens from joining
Mohammed's campaigns. The Israelites, in the nar
rative, complain that they have been thrust out of
their homes and away from their children — which was
exactly the case with Mohammed and the Fugitives.
These features of his own situation, being found in
the narrative, make it probable that Mohammed
regards himseU as the antitype of Saul, or of Saul
and David both. We have, therefore, one instance
in which Biblical precedent influenced Mohammed's
view of his own position as civil ruler. There is
another possibly in the verse which speaks of the
prophets as warriors : " It never came to pass that a
prophet made captives until he had made great
slaughter." * But the assertion seems evolved from
the situation rather than from any Biblical precedent.
It is rather remarkable that Mohammed makes no
use of some BibUcal precedents which he would most
naturally have cited had he laid emphasis upon this
matter of kingship. Moses was prophet and civil
ruler ; David was prophet and king ; so was Solomon.
But Mohammed nowhere calls attention to them in
* Koran 8,s.

CHURCH AND STATE 299
order to justUy his own assumption of power. The
reason is, that when he published the narratives
which deal with these characters, he did not himself
expect to become a worldly ruler. We are led to the
same conclusion by his not making use of the Mes
sianic idea. The Jews at Medina held the Messianic
hope. They taunted their Arab neighbors with the
expectation that the Messiah would come and put the
power into their hands whUe reducing the Gentiles
to servitude. This expectation influenced the Arabs,
so that when they heard of Mohammed, they argued
that this was the expected Messiah, and that by
adopting him as theirs they could anticipate the Jews
and disappoint them of then1 hopes. But whUe the
Messianic hope had thus an undoubted influence
in establishing Mohammed at Medina, we find him
making no further use of it. The name or title of
Messiah, he connects always with Jesus, the son of
Mary. The growth of the state in Islam was much more
rapid than in Israel, but it foUowed the same course.
As we learn from the book of Judges Israel ob
tained a foothold in Canaan by slow degrees. First a
few famUies would settle upon unoccupied territory.
Then they would take possession of part of a town.
In this they would naturaUy have their own quarter,
and their relations with the Canaanites would be reg
ulated by a treaty or covenant. So Canaanites and
IsraeUtes dwelt together in Shechem in the time of
Abimelech. As the Israelites grew stronger they
would reduce the Canaanites to the position of clients
or "sojourners." Thus, in many towns, the C°.vt,r~ ¦

300 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
ites paid tribute. A process of amalgamation going
on all the time, at last those Canaanites who were
most tenacious of their separate custom would be
weak enough to be exterminated, as were the Gibeon-
ites by Saul. Precisely such was the history of Is
lam. Mohammed and his followers first occupied
ground given them by the Medinans. They then en
tered upon a covenant relation with all the tribes of
the oasis. GraduaUy the community of true believers
absorbed a considerable part of the older inhabi
tants. The Jews which refused to amalgamate with
, the Moslems were driven out or exterminated. But
the process which in Israel extended over some cen
turies occupied in Islam only ten years.
It seems a pity that the development was so rapid.
Had it stopped at the stage upon which it entered
when Mohammed promulgated his covenant with the
inhabitants of Medina, it would have been better for
the after world. Copies of that instrument have
come down to us.* It is remarkable for the modest
position which Mohammed claims for himself in
relation to the community at large. He evidently
desires to leave the social organization as nearly as
possible just as it is. The autonomy of the clans is
not disturbed except in certain matters in which com
mon action is necessary. There is no endeavor to
enforce uniformity of religion. Even the heathen
are allowed to remain peaceably in their old relations.
The Jews are continued under the clientage, and of
* It is translated by Wellhausen, Skizzen, IV., p. 67 ff. The gen
uineness seems proved by the fact that it embodies none of the theo*
cratic ideas of the later time.

CHURCH AND STATE 301
course under the protection, of the AraV)s. The only
innovations concern common enmity to the Koreish
(of Mecca), common action in defensive war, and the
bringing of disputes before God and Mohammed for
arbitration. Had aU parties been willing to live to
gether under this constitution, we should have seen
a state arise with some measure of religious tolera
tion. But unfortunately toleration was not understood at
that time. Mohammed valued his document only as
the best that could be done under the circumstances.
The Jews, on their side, had no higher ideal. They
were as far from desiring to live in intimacy with men
of another religion as was Mohammed. They had no
realizing sense of the danger of their position. They
could not keep from giving provocation to their
neighbor ; and so, when he grew stronger, he crushed
them as Saul crushed the Gibeonites, and as David
crushed the Jebusites. With their defeat and expul
sion, the principle of one religion in the state virtu
aUy triumphed.
The principle of Islam is fixed by the experience
of Mohammed. What history actually brought forth
has become binding precedent and is justified by
the theologians. The Moslem has noio no thought
of the state except that it is a theocracy. Its basis
is the true reUgion ; its ruler is the spiritual as well as
the secular head of the commonwealth. There is no
difference between church and state. The church is
the state. Instead of a state church, there is a church
state. We can make the theory clear to our minds
by looking at the Papacy. The actual rise of the

302 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
Pope to temporal power was not unlike the rise of
Mohammed. The Bishop of Rome was the spiritual
head of a spiritual society. So long as the civU power
was vigorous, he was nothing more. But when the
civil power was broken, then what there was of social
order rallied around the only authority that existed.
Had he so willed, the Pope himself could not have
prevented this process. But we may suppose, with
out any injurious reflections upon the Pontiff, that he
was not unwilling to see his power increase. To him
it was increased power to do good, and — so far — a
triumph of the kingdom of God. Even the Apostle
Paul assumes that if the saints are competent to
judge the world, they are competent to decide the
petty issues of a civil lawsuit. It was not by vio
lent usurpation therefore that the Pope became
civil administrator of Italy. Had the process gone
on until the ambition of the ablest Popes was grati
fied, we should have seen Europe united under a
ruler who combined in himself the offices of Emperor
and of High Priest. This would have divided the
world between a Christian Caliph and a Moslem Pope.
The Ultramontane doctrine of the temporal power of
the Pope is in fact exactly the Moslem doctrine of
the Caliphate.
The name theocracy, we are told, was first invented
by Josephus. But it expresses a theory which has
been almost universally accepted except among the
most barbarous of men. That God is in fact the
ruler of men, follows logically from His attributes.
It is equally obvious that the man actually appointed
by God to rale, rules by divine right. He is God's

CHURCH AND STATE 303
representative on the earth. The ancient Persians
are said to have seen in their kings incarnations of
the Godhead. Divine honors were paid to Roman
Emperors. In Israel it was no strange thing to have
God say to the reigning monarch : " Thou art my
Son, to-day have I begotten thee." The King of
Israel, even Said, was the Anointed of Yahweh. In
the theory of some of the Hebrew writers, at least,
the prophetic office brought with it kingly power.
Samuel, in the picture drawn of him in one Old Tes
tament document, is the theocratic ruler of the na
tion — so absolute that he makes and unmakes kings,
always, of course, by the divine direction. The con
clusion is indeed easUy drawn, that if God sends His
commands by a messenger, obedience to the messen
ger is obedience to God. We rather wonder that the
conclusion was not more stringently drawn in Israel,
and we can easily see that if Elijah, the Tishbite, had
caUed about him those seven thousand who had not
bowed the knee to Baal, he might easily have seated
a prophetic dynasty on the throne of Ahab. It was
just because the kingly authority aheady had a divine
sanction that the prophets of Israel did not draw the
conclusion which Mohammed, in the absence of a
king, was able to draw and to enforce. The Macca-
bean dynasty is another example of the way in which
the rehgious and the secular power naturally combine
in the same hands.
It is the happiness of Christianity that it escaped
making any declaration concerning divine right. Its
formative period fell in a time when the civil govern
ment was taken care of by the Romans. It therefore

304 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
necessarily separated Church and State and learned
to distinguish between them. The civil ruler is stiU
ordained of God to be a terror to evil-doers. But he
is dissociated from the care for religion which the
Jews, and after them the Moslems, thought to be a
part of the monarch's functions. Mediaeval Christi
anity (we should not forget) took substantially the
same position with Jews and Moslems. It faUed to
apprehend the teaching of the New Testament. The
testimony of the New Testament to the divine sanc
tion of the state as a separate entity is only now be
ginning to be understood in enlightened Europe and
America. It is a part of the present misery of the
Eastern world that all classes of society are unable to
conceive even the possibility of such testimony.
The system which sees in the state a theocracy
necessarily regulates religion by law. How Islam
came near toleration and how it failed, we have already
seen. Islam does not, however, even now, treat Ju
daism and Christianity as it treats heathenism. The
latter must be destroyed because it is false, and be
cause it is disobedience to God. The first conse
quence is the importance of the sacred war, that is :
the war for the spread of Islam. The reason for the
emphasis placed upon this, is seen in what has already
been said about the fortunes of Medina. It was a
matter of life and death there, to make a successful
campaign. The Koran of the latter part of Moham
med's life is full of exhortations to take part in the
war. Those who may fall in the cause of God are
promised the highest place in Paradise. Those who
are backward in entering this service are blamed and

CHURCH AND STATE 305
denounced for their hypocrisy. It is assumed, finally,
that war must go on until aU heathenism has been put
down. " Say to the unbeUevers, that if they make an
end [of doing evil] they shall be forgiven. But if
they repeat it — the sentence of ancient peoples was
carried out ! Tfien fight them until there is no more
division of opinion, and the religion is wholly Al
lah's." * Tradition correctly interprets this and simi
lar passages when it says that Mohammed was com
manded to make war on men until they should say :
there is no God but AUah ; or more fully : " I am
commanded to make war on men until they shall con
fess that there is no God but AUah and that Moham
med is His Apostle, shall be steadfast in prayer, and
give the legal alms : and when one shall perform
these things, his blood and his property shaU be se
cure from me except in conformity with the laws."!
The right and duty of propagating Islam by the sword
has therefore become fully established as a part of the
system. But we should remember that in Mohammed's
view, this was against idolaters only. He was content
with the submission of Jews and Christians, without
conversion. As we have seen, he at first supposed that
the three faiths were one in substance, and that their
adherents could be welded into one communion.
But he was undeceived by the conduct of the Jews
of Medina. These adhered to their own peculiar cus
toms with the tenacity which their race has always
shown in the matter of their faith. The more Mo
hammed saw of their exclusiveness, the more clear it
became to him that no real union with them was pos-
* Koran 83e '. f Mishcat, I, p. 5, cf. Bochari, IV., p. 5.
20

306 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
sible. Under the plea of treachery on their part he
expelled them from Medina. But elsewhere in Ara
bia he was willing that they should remain, on condi
tion of payment of tribute. At Chaibar, for example,
he spared their lives and left them in possession of
their lands, but on the condition of paying one-half
the fruits to the Moslems. This precedent became
law for the treatment of Jews and Christians, and
is formally sanctioned by this verse of the Koran :
" Make war on those who do not beUeve in God and
the Last Day, and who do not prohibit what God and
His Apostle have prohibited, and on those of the
peoples who have received a Scripture but do not
profess the true religion, until they pay a tax for
each one and humble themselves." * The terms
used leave no doubt that Jews and Christians are
meant. For the extermination of idolaters, Mohammed
might have pleaded the precedent of the Book of
Joshua. The Book of Joshua makes no formal pro
vision for conversion of the Canaanites. But it is
evident, from the example of Rahab, that it was open
to the Canaanites to join the Hebrew community if
they would. Nor do I find that other parts of the
Old Testament take a less rigid position. Idolatry
is sin and its devotees must be punished, such is the
general tenor of these writings. Their view, indeed,
does not generally extend beyond the boundaries of
their own land. When the Hebrews were able to
bring other nations under tribute, they did so without
too curious inquiry into their religion, though in some
* Koran 92».

CHURCH AND STATE 307
instances, at least, the gods of the conquered nations
were destroyed.
This need not be developed at length, because the
precedents seem to have been unknown to Mo
hammed. But the general principle on which his rule
was based was common to him and other reUgious
leaders. No reUgion can admit that other reUgions
are as good as itseU. The high claims of Chris
tianity to be the one true religion are writ large in
the New Testament. To a certain stage of human
thought it seems natural, indeed it seems inevitable,
that so important a thing as reUgion should be fos
tered by the state. H it be the truth, why not make
it triumph by the civil power? What Christianity
would have done had it been compeUed to organize a
civU government in the ApostoUc age we cannot tell.
The Apostles were but men. They had the ideals of
their age. It is not unUkely that they would have in
stituted a state much like that of the CaUphs. We
have reason to be thankful that they were not aUowed
to try the experiment. We know what happened
when Christianity actually came to control the throne
of the Empire. Justinian required aU his subjects to
acknowledge the orthodox creed,* and the persecu
tion of heretics is the standing subject of Byzantine
annals. Had Mohammed cared to inquire into Chris
tian practice, as iUustrated in the Byzantium of his
time, he would have found abundant precedent for
his course. And at a later day, the Crusaders and
the persecutors of the Jews showed the Moslem prin
ciple in fuU force in Christian lands.
* Kattenbusch, Confessionskunde, I., p. 377.

308 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
The identity of Church and State in Islam involves
also this proposition : The Koran is the civil as weU
as the religious law of all Moslems. As we have seen,
there is no distinction of obligation. A man is as
much bound to perform the ablution as he is to pay
his taxes. In theory the judge is as competent to
punish him for neglect of the one as he is to punish
him for neglect of the other. In practice it is of
course not easy to caU men to account for religious
dereliction. But in the more strict Mohammedan
states, officers are not infrequently appointed whose
duty it is to see that aU the citizens come to the
stated prayers. Now the introduction of a code for
Arabia was an almost unmixed blessing. There had
been no law in the desert. With the triumph of Islam,
the tribes came into the peace of Allah. Society was
brought into order, and there was a recognized stand
ard of judgment. But the establishment of any code
as a perpetual law is a misfortune. Yet Mohammed
was only following Biblical precedent. For it is evi
dent that the Pentateuch occupies, for the Jew, just
the place taken by the Koran among the Moslems.
Were the conservative Jews to be put into possession
of Palestine to-morrow, we cannot doubt that they
would attempt to restore the Tora to its place as the
supreme civil and ecclesiastical law of that land.
Every violation of its provisions concerning ritual —
sacrifice, lawful food, purifications — would become an
offence against the civil law, and would be within the
cognizance of the courts. The same theory has pre-
vaUed more or less among Christians. The West
minster Assembly of Divines defined it as the duty

CHURCH AND STATE 309
of the civil magistrate : " to take order that unity and
peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of
God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies
and heresies be suppressed, aU corruptions and
abuses in worship or discipUne [be] prevented or re
formed, and all the ordinances of God duly settled,
administered, and observed — for the better effecting
whereof he hath power to call synods, to be present
at them, and to provide that whatever is transacted
in them be according to the mind of God."* In
theory, Protestantism and Mohammedanism stood on
the same ground as late as the seventeenth century
of our era. Our present condemnation of the posi
tion of Islam, shows how far we have advanced in
the last two centuries in apprehending the true nature
of the New Testament Church.
It may be briefly mentioned here that the recogni
tion of a single supreme code has not prevented divis
ions among Mohammedans any more than it pre
vented them among Jews and Christians. The point
at which the most bitter conflict arose, was this very
one of the divine right of the ruler. Concerning Mo
hammed himseU, of course, there never was any doubt.
But he made no provision for a successor. It seems
strange to us that he faded to regulate so important
a matter. But he was as shortsighted as the rest of
us, and did not expect death to come so soon. Pos
sibly he expected to see the Judgment come before
his death ; or he may have reUed on God to give him
a long life. The fact remains. The neglect was the
more remarkable in that the Prophet left no male
* Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, III, p. 653.

310 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
children. In the emergency which actually arose,
Abu Bekr, one of the earliest and most trusted of the
Companions, was made Successor by a vote of ac
clamation, led by the firm and clear-minded Omar.
It is evident that here is a precedent for popular elec
tion. On the other hand, AU, the son-in-law (and
adopted son) of Mohammed, seems to have held from
the first that the principle of inheritance should ob
tain. When he himself came to the CaUphate, three
distinct parties arose. One held that the throne
should go, according to old Arab custom, to the rec
ognized Sheikh of the Koreish (the clan of the
Prophet). Another held strictly to the principle of
legitimacy, believing that the blood of Mohammed in
his descendants (the children of AU and Fatima) gave
the only claim. A third was democratic, demanding
an election by the whole body of true believers. It
increases our sense of the importance of ideas to see
how bitterly the adherents of these three views con
tended with each other for decades, making a record
of bloodshed and suffering which has not been sur
passed in the annals of the race.* In this conflict
there are traces of Christian ideas among the hetero
dox sects. They adopted the Messianic hope, and they
regarded AU and his legitimate followers as incarna
tions of the Godhead. The party which finally
triumphed in the CaUphate! adopted substantially
Old Testament ground. According to them the ruler
* On this subject cf . Brunnow, Die Charidschiten (1884) ; De
Sacy, Histoire des Druses, I, p. xxvii. ; Kremer, Geschichte der
Herrschenden Ideen des Islam, p. 409.
t The Shiites, or partisans of Ali, retained possession of Persia.

CHURCH AND STATE 311
should be the defender of the faith, and should sup
press heresy ; he should judge the people, protect the
public peace, punish evU-doers, make war on the infi
dels, collect and disburse the taxes, and appoint trust
worthy and competent officers. These qualifications
are much the same which would have been named by
an Old Testament prophet. Should the ruler fail in
these, the people have a right to depose him — which
again reminds us of the Old Testament principle, as
iUustrated by the freedom with which the elders of
Israel assert themselves in the presence of Jeroboam,
or the boldness with which EUsha commissions Jehu
to depose and succeed the reigning monarch of the
Northern Kingdom. But these parallels are the
result of siniUar conditions rather than of direct in
fluence. The question of government is closely connected
with the question of property. EspeciaUy where relig
ion is the basis of government, we expect some reg
ulation of property. In any monotheistic reUgion
God is, of course, the ultimate owner of everything,
and aU human holders get their title from Him.
Where the reUgion emphasizes the brotherhood of
beUevers, we have additional reason to look for some
enactment concerning property. In the case of Islam
we find, on the whole, a conservative position taken.
It has indeed been supposed of late that Mohammed
came forward as a social reformer, and that his first
preaching urged a state tax to be paid by the rich for
the support of the poor. This he tried to enforce (on
this theory) by his threat of the Judgment Day.
But if what has already been said in these lectures be

312 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
true, this theory just inverts the order of ideas. The
idea of the Judgment is an idea great enough to en
force itself. Mohammed's mind was impressed with
this idea first. With it he had a realizing sense of
the sin of men. It was only because sins of property
have a large place among the sins of men, that he
was impressed by them. Because of their prominence
he gives them proportionate attention. He had, of
course, great sympathy with the poor, and great in
dignation at oppression. One of his earliest suras
rebukes the wicked in this way : " You do not treat
the orphan generously, nor do you incite others
to feed the poor, and you devour inheritance with
greedy appetite, and you love wealth with an intense
love." * Liberality is a virtue, avarice is a sin ; these
are his axioms, and in adopting them he was no more
socialistic than was the Apostle Paul. He takes the
differences between men to be part of the divine or
dering : " It is He who made you succeed [former
generations] in the earth, and has raised some of you
above others in rank that He may try you by what
He has given you."! The matter of wealth or riches,
however, is comparatively unimportant ; the present
world and its possessions are only fleeting. The real
wealth is yonder. In all this he took the religious,
and not the socialistic, view.
What roused his indignation was injustice and op
pression, and the most of his laws concerning prop
erty were directed against these. We find, therefore,
stringent injunctions designed to protect the orphan.
From the same point of view we understand the pro-
* Koran 8918 ff. f 6165.

CHURCH AND STATE 313
hibition of usury. That a man who loaned another
money should get back twice as much, seemed to him
the use of a false weight and measure. He does not
denounce those who have wealth, but those who get
it wrongfuUy. He does not advocate lavish benefi
cence. He describes the good man as the one who
in his expenditure is neither niggardly nor lavish. In
all this we discover no social revolution.
That he who has should be ready to help him who
has not, is, of course, one of the elementary truths of
his religion. But it does not seem that the tax which
was assessed upon the well-to-do, was based upon this
duty. It was rather a recognition of God's right. It
is called a purification, and the name would indicate
the view taken in the Old Testament — that the prop
erty cannot be lawfully used until it is consecrated
by giving a portion to God. This portion, like the
tithe of Deuteronomy, belonged to God, and, like that,
it was given by God to the poor, the stranger, the
fatherless and the widow." * This afterward became
among the Moslems a regular state tax which came
into the pubUc treasury, just as in the later legis
lation in Israel the tithe became a regular provision
for the support of the priesthood. But Mohammed
had no idea of a state treasury, and his tax was in
tended for the support of the poor. In some cases
it was sent to him to distribute ; in others he allowed
each tribe to assess it upon its own wealthy men
and distribute it to its own poor. In the whole ar
rangement he stands very much upon the ground of
early Israel. * Deut. 14=8.

CONCLUSION
In reviewing what has been said in these lectures
we form a tolerably clear conception of the forces
which have made Islam. In the first place, we must
suppose that Mohammed was a religious nature-
capable of appreciating reUgious truth and of apply
ing it to himself. For religious truth is only ade
quately apprehended when it is made practical. This
does not mean that Mohammed was moraUy perfect.
He was not free from the defects of his age and
of his race. He was not incapable of self-decep
tion — possibly not incapable of deceiving others.
But he had the reUgious impulse, and when he
came in contact with the truths of Christianity, they
burned in his soul. This was the spark which set
Arabia on fire.
I have said that it was when he came in contact
with the truths of Christianity that his soul was fired.
It is commonly supposed that his impulse was Jew
ish rather than Christian ; and his system does, in
fact, more nearly resemble Judaism than it resembles
Protestant Christianity. But we shaU be guilty of
an anachronism U we make this comparison. The
Christianity with which Mohammed came in contact
was the Christianity of Arabia or Mesopotamia in the
seventh century. Its type was, no doubt, that of
314

CONCLUSION 315
primitive Ebionism rather than that even of Byzan
tine orthodoxy. The fact that Mohammed took so
large a part of his material from the Old Testament
does not disprove this. The Old Testament was a
part of the Church's Bible from the first — for a time
it was the Church's only Bible. The narratives
which we find in the Koran are from that part of the
Old Testament which is familiar to every child even
among us. They would be equaUy famiUar to the
early Christians for the same reason. Adam and
Noah and Abraham and Moses are Christian saints
quite as distinctly as they are Jewish patriarchs.
And U we find no reason why Mohammed should
not take these from a Christian source, we do find
things which he could not have got from a Jewish
source. His description of the Judgment shows feat
ures borrowed from the Gospel account. He recog
nized Jesus as a prophet and one of the chiefest of
them — this could not have come from the Jews, to
whom Jesus was the arch traitor, the detested one
who hung upon the accursed cross. Putting these
two considerations together with some minor indica
tions (ah the more weighty because they are indirect)
we need have no hesitation in concluding that the
impulse came from Christianity.
But, as we have had occasion to remark, the
Prophet of Arabia was not able to assimUate the
most spiritual part of the Christianity of the New
Testament. It was not fairly presented to him, for
one thing. What is transferred in religion is not the
pure source, but a tradition colored by individual ex
perience. Think of a Roman Catholic missionary —

316 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
as sincere, as devout, and as intelligent as you can
imagine — think of him as preaching to the Moslems
of Baghdad. Does he preach the simple truths of
the New Testament, or does he preach those truths
in the form in which they exist in his consciousness ?
You cannot doubt that he will preach a tradition— a
tradition in which is much of truth, but a tradition
nevertheless. Now think of the Baptist, or Method
ist, or Episcopal missionary, is not the same thing
true to some degree of each of these ? But if this
be so in this age of the world, we cannot find it
strange that Mohammed received from the humble
Christians with whom he came in contact something
less and something more than the pure Gospel. On
the whole it is rather remarkable that he received so
much of the truth. The unity of God ; the certainty
of judgment; the fact of revelation; God's wUl to
save men ; the appropriation of salvation by faith ;
good works the fruits of faith — these doctrines make
up no small part of our religion. And these he
adopted and proclaimed. That he presented them
in his own form is only what we should expect.
If it is true that not all Christian truths were pre
sented to Mohammed it is also true that he was in
capable of assimilating some doctrines even had they
been presented to him. The chief of these is the doc
trine of the Trinity. In the metaphysical affirmations
of the creed of Nicaea concerning substance and per
son, he would not have been able to find himself. As
for the Sonship of Christ, we have already seen that
this was coupled in his mind with the conceptions of
heathenism ; while the idea of a love of God which

CONCLUSION 317
could lead to an incarnation would probably have
seemed to him fanciful and extravagant. The same
is true of the doctrine of the atonement. Sacrifice
had to him lost its propitiatory sense — perhaps be
cause it was already a meaningless rite in Arabic
heathenism. Concerning these doctrines, which have so large a
part in the Christianity that we know, we are in doubt
whether they were ever fairly presented to Mo
hammed, and we are also in doubt whether he could
have used them in his system U they had been so pre
sented. In either case the result is the same. His
system is a Judaistic Christianity adapted to Arabic
conditions. But even in this imperfect form we cannot help
admiring in Islam the power of the truth. It cannot
for a moment be denied that the progress of Islam,
which is one of the wonders of history, was due to
many causes. It was not the truth alone which tri
umphed, but the truth in alliance with all worldly
and selfish motives. Islam is not the only religion
in which the world, the flesh, and the devil have fought
on the side of the truth, but for their own ends. Still,
when all allowance has been made, we see that the
truth in Islam has been a power. As compared with
heathenism, Islam is a society in which God and
righteousness are living and active forces. Everyone
who has been admitted to intimacy with Mohamme
dans will testify that men are not rare among them
who Uve in the fear of God, who strive to do His
will, and whose kindness and benevolence are the
outworking of sincere faith in Him. The hold of Is-

318 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM
lam on its adherents is because it has so much of the
truth. This is the excellence of Islam. It was a great ad
vance on the heathenism which it displaced. We
cannot doubt that even now it carries into the heart
of Africa a civiUzation and a moraUty that are an im
mense advance on the fetishism in which the degraded
negroes welter.
But with its excellence in bringing men one step in
advance, we must contrast the tenacity with which it
restrains them from taking another. It is like iron
in the conservatism with which it holds its system
against every attempt at change. Its formalism, its
scholasticism, its unchangeable law embodied in a
completed code — these shut up its conscientious ad
herents to medisevalism as their ideal. There can be
no real liberty and no real progress where a scholastic
system has thus intrenched itself. The position of
Christians in the Turkish Empire throws a lurid light
upon this truth. Again and again has European
pressure, aided by a few educated Turks, endeavored
to secure equality before the laws for aU subjects of
the Sublime Porte. But as often as the attempt is
made it proves a failure — each new failure more
ghastly than the last. The reason is that the con
science and the faith of the most sincere and upright
Moslems are bound up with the Koran and its sys
tem. You cannot introduce a reform against the
conscience and against the faith of those who must
be depended upon to make the reform operative.
Before Islam can be reformed, new truth must be
brought to bear upon its heart and conscience. Civ-

CONCLUSION 319
ilization cannot effect this. Rifles and ironclads, the
Cafe, the Theatre, the written Constitution, Repre
sentative Institutions — none of these can reach below
the surface. A larger truth, a deeper religious expe
rience, a higher Ufe than the one supplied by then-
own faith— this must be brought home to the hearts
of these beUevers before they can enter into the
larger Uberty which we enjoy.

3 9002 Q1463

ll'lUll iUiWiU:;:,; ¦ ill'-
mmm

WSiBi