What do you think?
Rate this book
Claiming Abraham: Reading the Bible and the Qur'an Side by Side
Many of the Bible's characters and stories are also found in the Qur'an, but there are often differing details or new twists in the Qur'an's retelling of biblical narrative. In this compelling book, seasoned theologian Michael Lodahl explores these fascinating divergences to discover the theological difference they make.
Writing from a Christian perspective that is respectful of the Islamic tradition, Lodahl offers an accessible introduction to Muslim theology and to the Qur'an's leading themes to help readers better understand Islam. Lodahl compares and contrasts how the Bible and the Qur'an depict and treat certain characters in common to both religions, including Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. He offers theological reflection on doctrines held in common by Christians and Muslims, such as creation, revelation, and the resurrection of the body. Lodahl also explores the Jewish tradition as an important source for understanding the Qur'an.
Writing from a Christian perspective that is respectful of the Islamic tradition, Lodahl offers an accessible introduction to Muslim theology and to the Qur'an's leading themes to help readers better understand Islam. Lodahl compares and contrasts how the Bible and the Qur'an depict and treat certain characters in common to both religions, including Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. He offers theological reflection on doctrines held in common by Christians and Muslims, such as creation, revelation, and the resurrection of the body. Lodahl also explores the Jewish tradition as an important source for understanding the Qur'an.
238 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2010
3 people are currently reading
55 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 9, 2013
Alright, I'll admit that I almost didn't make it through this book. It was a one-star or a zero-star for a good portion of the middle. Why? This book is based on comparing the Bible and the Qu'ran side by side. The idea is that we can understand both. I liked that there were many passages of the Bible placed side by side with passages of the Qu'ran. However, in the middle, the book veered into comparing the Qu'ran with certain rabbinic Jewish traditions, and taking some kind of wild turns as far as Christian interpretation goes. For example, Lodahl says that if God knows the future, then the commandments of God are just a charade. Well, there are a few luminaries in church history, who might disagree with that. And by a few, I mean almost every orthodox theologian for the last 2000 years.
Add that to the fact that "structural similarities" is a very annoying phrase that is, in my opinion, overused in this book. Not to mention it is not a very useful phrase. If two people tell stories about a man being eaten by a fish, it is not really a "structural similarity" if men in both stories happen to visit places that have fish, it both men fall into the water, both men get eaten by fish, and both men get spit out on land, so that there is someone to tell the story. That's just pretty much how the stories have to go. In the same way, Lodahl points out structural similarities that aren't meaningful at all, and finds other structural similarities that don't seem very similar to me.
However, the beginning and the end of this book were really useful. Particularly the chapters on Jesus and Mary. Lodahl really is able to highlight one particular difference. The difference between an "all-powerful" but transcendent Allah, and an "all-powerful" but incarnational Jesus. The effects of that particular difference ripple through Muslim and Christian doctrines of inspiration, of sanctification, of justification, of the end times, of everything really.
Here are a few of my favorite quotes.
"As we shall see, the Qur’an also insists that, over time, both the Jewish and Christian traditions have not only disobeyed but also intentionally misinterpreted and distorted their respective revelations. The pure Torah and pure Gospel, then, are no longer available. In their present state they do not represent (i.e., they do not re-present) the Mother of the Book. The Qur’an, on the other hand, is believed by Muslims to be a perfect representation of the pure heavenly Book"
"It should be obvious that Muslims do not embrace a doctrine of incarnation; however, something comparable to an incarnation is believed to have occurred when the “Mother of the Book” was recited to Muhammad and eventually was committed to the written page. The Heavenly Book became an earthly book, the Qur’an. Thus it has become a truism in comparative theology that the functional equivalent to the Qur’an, for Christians, is not so much the Bible as it is Jesus Christ. We might put it like this: both Muslims and Christians believe that “long ago God spoke to [the people of Israel] in many and various ways by the prophets” (Heb. 1:1), but while Christians proceed to confess that God “has spoken to us by a Son” (Heb. 1: 2), Muslims insist that God “has spoken” the full, final, and authoritative Word in the Qur’an."
"If Muhammad is understood to have been essentially a passive recipient of revelation, only a receptacle for divine speech, then any attempt to interpret the Qur’an as a historical document created within and as a response to particular social-historical settings will be strongly discouraged if not censored entirely"
"the angel replies, “Thus [it will be], your Lord has said: ‘This is an easy matter for Me; that We may make him a sign unto mankind and a Mercy from Us.’ And thus it was decreed” (19:21). Once again, such language should not be overlooked or downplayed. The Qur’an accords Jesus a remarkable role; he is a “sign” and even a “mercy” from God to all humanity. It is as though the Qur’an could borrow Jesus’s estimation of John the Baptist—“A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet” (Matt. 11:9)—and apply it to Jesus himself. Qur’anic texts such as 19:21, in Rizwi Faizer’s words, “proclaim . . . a very distinct position regarding the nature of Christ which is no longer emphasized by Muslims today,” leading her even to suggest that this particularly high regard for Jesus “was originally . . . as much a part of [early Islam’s] creed as was the belief in one God and His prophet, Muhammad."
"The gist of the question before us is not really whether God is omnipotent. It is the nature of that all-potency that we are interrogating. Even though the Qur’an’s question is rhetorical, it is posed in terms of God’s ability to destroy: Jesus, Mary, everything else, if God wished. For Christian faith—at least as it is instructed and informed by the gospel of John—divine power is humble servanthood, on its knees, washing the feet even of a traitor. It is also the empowering of human creatures likewise to serve one another in love (Gal. 5:13), “to wash one another’s feet.”"
Add that to the fact that "structural similarities" is a very annoying phrase that is, in my opinion, overused in this book. Not to mention it is not a very useful phrase. If two people tell stories about a man being eaten by a fish, it is not really a "structural similarity" if men in both stories happen to visit places that have fish, it both men fall into the water, both men get eaten by fish, and both men get spit out on land, so that there is someone to tell the story. That's just pretty much how the stories have to go. In the same way, Lodahl points out structural similarities that aren't meaningful at all, and finds other structural similarities that don't seem very similar to me.
However, the beginning and the end of this book were really useful. Particularly the chapters on Jesus and Mary. Lodahl really is able to highlight one particular difference. The difference between an "all-powerful" but transcendent Allah, and an "all-powerful" but incarnational Jesus. The effects of that particular difference ripple through Muslim and Christian doctrines of inspiration, of sanctification, of justification, of the end times, of everything really.
Here are a few of my favorite quotes.
"As we shall see, the Qur’an also insists that, over time, both the Jewish and Christian traditions have not only disobeyed but also intentionally misinterpreted and distorted their respective revelations. The pure Torah and pure Gospel, then, are no longer available. In their present state they do not represent (i.e., they do not re-present) the Mother of the Book. The Qur’an, on the other hand, is believed by Muslims to be a perfect representation of the pure heavenly Book"
"It should be obvious that Muslims do not embrace a doctrine of incarnation; however, something comparable to an incarnation is believed to have occurred when the “Mother of the Book” was recited to Muhammad and eventually was committed to the written page. The Heavenly Book became an earthly book, the Qur’an. Thus it has become a truism in comparative theology that the functional equivalent to the Qur’an, for Christians, is not so much the Bible as it is Jesus Christ. We might put it like this: both Muslims and Christians believe that “long ago God spoke to [the people of Israel] in many and various ways by the prophets” (Heb. 1:1), but while Christians proceed to confess that God “has spoken to us by a Son” (Heb. 1: 2), Muslims insist that God “has spoken” the full, final, and authoritative Word in the Qur’an."
"If Muhammad is understood to have been essentially a passive recipient of revelation, only a receptacle for divine speech, then any attempt to interpret the Qur’an as a historical document created within and as a response to particular social-historical settings will be strongly discouraged if not censored entirely"
"the angel replies, “Thus [it will be], your Lord has said: ‘This is an easy matter for Me; that We may make him a sign unto mankind and a Mercy from Us.’ And thus it was decreed” (19:21). Once again, such language should not be overlooked or downplayed. The Qur’an accords Jesus a remarkable role; he is a “sign” and even a “mercy” from God to all humanity. It is as though the Qur’an could borrow Jesus’s estimation of John the Baptist—“A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet” (Matt. 11:9)—and apply it to Jesus himself. Qur’anic texts such as 19:21, in Rizwi Faizer’s words, “proclaim . . . a very distinct position regarding the nature of Christ which is no longer emphasized by Muslims today,” leading her even to suggest that this particularly high regard for Jesus “was originally . . . as much a part of [early Islam’s] creed as was the belief in one God and His prophet, Muhammad."
"The gist of the question before us is not really whether God is omnipotent. It is the nature of that all-potency that we are interrogating. Even though the Qur’an’s question is rhetorical, it is posed in terms of God’s ability to destroy: Jesus, Mary, everything else, if God wished. For Christian faith—at least as it is instructed and informed by the gospel of John—divine power is humble servanthood, on its knees, washing the feet even of a traitor. It is also the empowering of human creatures likewise to serve one another in love (Gal. 5:13), “to wash one another’s feet.”"
October 22, 2014
As a follower of Yeshua, and one who is sympathetic to the commonalities that exist between Judaism, Christianity and Islam I have to say this book was very inspiring to understanding some of the details about our religions that a lot of people seem to desire to ignore. This book does not try to claim that we are actually all the same, but it does a beautiful job at showing where and maybe why so many things coincide with each other across them.
December 13, 2010
This was a very interesting book. I was interested in his method as I have been applying this principle of side by side of Biblical & Qur'anic passages for 8 years. He had many interesting insight that were very helpful. However, there were many ideas that were not consistent. There was an apparent leaning toward open theology and appear to at times attempt to be politically correct in trying to be overly appreciative of Muhammad which reflected in questionable readings and interpretations. It is a book worth reading with discernment.
February 20, 2016
Profitable and thoughtful dialogue from a Christian perspective between the Bible and the Qur'an. Lodahl includes some very helpful textual background from apocryphal Christian sources and Jewish background from the Talmud that helps to provide insight into much of the Qur'an's interpretations and reinterpretations of Biblical material. You could read this with value without a great deal of familiarity with the Qur'an. I would be very interested to see a thoughtful Muslim response to this book.
December 7, 2014
A remarkable volume, which builds up steam toward the end. The final three chapters, which get to the heart of Christology, Trinitarian views of God and the nature of revelation are worth the price of the book. A well-written, if at times dense text.
March 20, 2015
Excellent textual analysis giving grace filled space for all attempts to interpret key sacred texts. Intermediate level. Not for fundamentalists from any tradition.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews