Is it alright for a Catholic (or any Christian really) to read the Koran?

[James_Least]

Sorry. Wake up, ALLAH is in the camp. He is dressed like a sheep. Recheck the armour, the fiery darts are everywhere. The mystery of iniquity is already at work.

“If our only hope in Jesus is in this world, we are of all men most miserable”–is not in the Koran.

All hail—Hubal, moon god of the Kabah.

Peace,

James Least

 

[benjammin]

I think it is alright to read the Koran as long as you take it with a grain of salt. In college, i had to read it since i was studying to be a social studies teacher, and I will say that there certainly are some beautiful things written in it, much like Plato and Aristotle, Homer and Virgl wrote many beautiful things which are compatible with christianity. However, we must realize that they don’t have the full truth in the sense that they don’t know God or Christ.

Deus Est Bonum!

 

[Kouyate42]

Possibly the one advantage of the Arabic language is that there’s not such a big time gap between the Qur’anic and modern languages, and so a greater proportion of words and meanings have survived from the Muhammadan era to the modern era in an understandable form. But you are correct in saying what you have here.

Another analogy I’ve heard used in mosque is that learning Qur’an and learning modern Arabic is like someone learning English trying to read Shakespeare. Especially true as first-language Arabic speakers make up a fairly small proportion of the Islamic world population.

EDIT: It must also be added the register of the Qur’an is completely different to any other text. You might be aware of registers of language where certain forms of language occur in different contexts. The language of a newspaper is different to that of a formal letter, which in turn is different to colloquial ‘street’ language etc. And so the language of the Qur’an being in a poetic form, is very much different to that of the average street Arabic speaker. There are forms of speech, terms used and other features which make it VERY different to the average piece of written Arabic.

 

[robwar]

mixing lies with truth is the most evil kind of lie there is.

read it—if you like fiction.

i’d rather read Bradbury.

While I am in the camp of those that think in general Catholic Christians should not read the Koran, it does not help to call it fiction. It is similar to that lone Pastor that keeps on coming to Dearborn to burn Korans in protest. Being disrespectful to other faiths and their religious books and objects only adds fuel to the fire. We won’t win over others by being sarcastic about their stuff. We don’t have to believe another’s faith but disrespectful comments just come back on us. Bradbury’s book about burning books and that world is so out of date.

 

[je333]

I’m a fairly devoted Catholic. I have several friends of differing faiths and have always had an interest in learning about other religions. Recently I found a copy of the Koran and began reading it, but I’ve been a bit hesitant in continuing due to doubts.

While parts of the Koran have been confronting, for the most part it’s been inspiring to read - particularly passages which speak of God’s majesty and glory. Reading it has also encouraged me to read the Bible more, to understand how the texts relate to one another and to form a greater appreciation and respect for the importance that the Koran holds for many people.

Reading the Koran hasn’t posed any threat to my faith, but even so - is it advisable for me to continue reading?

Yes, it is VERY alright for a Catholic or a Christian to read the Koran as it would be very alright for a Muslim to read the Bible. It is very alright to read any HOLY BOOK of different religion such as

The Jewish Torah

The Kitab-i-Aqdas of Bahá’u’lláh

The Hindu Vedas

The Avestas of Zarathustra (ZOROROASTRIANISM)

The Adi-Granth of the Sikhs

The Mahabarata’s Bhagavad-Gita

These books from localized religion are GOD inspired. I am pretty sure God has not neglected people of other culture. God and TRUTH existed even before he manisfested himself to save us around 2000 years ago. He was, he is and he will be in every culture and countries around the world. He is IN every person.

 

[dzheremi]

Possibly the one advantage of the Arabic language is that there’s not such a big time gap between the Qur’anic and modern languages, and so a greater proportion of words and meanings have survived from the Muhammadan era to the modern era in an understandable form. But you are correct in saying what you have here.

Part of me hates to butt in on this thread (I try to stay away from things marked “Islam” these days, as they never lead anywhere edifying), but this statement needs to be qualified a little bit. The view expressed here (which is somewhat traditional to Western academics and Orientalists, formed as they mostly are from Islamic sources which contain this view), which essentially paints the Arabic language, such that we can think of it in the singular, as a unified entity divided into eras corresponding to descending nodes known as “Pre-Classical (pre-Qur’anic)”, “Classical/Qur’anic”, “Modern dialects”, etc. does not work out so well in reality, and many scholars have devoted quite a bit of ink and paper to dispelling it. As for why it doesn’t work, U Maryland linguist and Semitist Jonathan Owens has described it as not being based on logic, and offered the following analogy to something a little more familiar to westerners: “Classical Arabic is included in the consideration of any reconstruction, but cannot automatically be assumed to have a privileged position relative to other varieties, even contemporary ones. An analogy can be drawn with Indo-European. Whereas Sanskrit and Hittite are the oldest attested examples of Indo-European, neither is assumed to be identical with Proto-Indo-European, which is reconstructed in part on the basis of varieties attested at a more recent period than Hittite or Sanskrit.” (p. 299, “Pre-Diaspora Arabic: Dialects, Statistics, and Historical Reconstruction”, in Diachronica 22:2, (2005))

So we cannot really say that there is more time or less time passed from the assumed “Classical Era” to the modern dialects, as Classical Arabic is not to be privileged in the creation of any given dialect in first place (in other words, what you find in any given dialect may not represent a development from Classical Arabic at all). Elsewhere in the article, Owens does good work debunking the myths surrounding pre-Classical and Classical Arabic as unified entities in themselves, showing that they are more or less convenient labels for speech varieties relative to that which was elevated in the creation of the Qur’an (or at least the codification of it under Uthman), in some cases not really corresponding to any reliable linguistic information at all (e.g., the “pre-Classical” catch-all/wastebasket category), and elsewhere mired in methodologically problematic biases inherited from the Arab grammarians and others who, perhaps under the influence of religious dogmatism, did not sufficiently appreciate the diversity in speech found in Muhammad’s day or beforehand, instead regarding as “the same language” that which had already developed into numerous distinct dialects by the Qur’anic period: “A basic problem is that from the perspective of the on-site observers in the late eighth and early ninth centuries, linguists like Sibawaih (d. 793/177) and Farra’ (d. 822/207), the distinction between dialect and Classical Arabic did not exist as it came to be understood by (relatively) modern observers such as Brockelmann or Fischer. Thus, a feature which by modern standards such as the 2f.sg object suffix -wi, as in inna-wi “that-you.f” is clearly ‘dialectal’ was simply treated by Sibawaih as an explicable morphophonological variant of -ki” (ibid:273).

You might be aware of registers of language where certain forms of language occur in different contexts. The language of a newspaper is different to that of a formal letter, which in turn is different to colloquial ‘street’ language etc. And so the language of the Qur’an being in a poetic form, is very much different to that of the average street Arabic speaker. There are forms of speech, terms used and other features which make it VERY different to the average piece of written Arabic.

This is all true, but it bears pointing out that it is no more true of the Qur’an than of Arabic readings of the Torah by the Mizrahi Jews or the Holy Bible by Eastern and Oriental Christians. In my church, the readers (native Egyptian Arabic speakers, one and all) also use the elevated register, which while not exactly the same as the Classical of the Qur’an (due more to lexical and stylistic differences than morphological ones), is no less challenging to a native speaker of the colloquial.

 

[Kouyate42]

mixing lies with truth is the most evil kind of lie there is.

read it—if you like fiction.

i’d rather read Bradbury.

I find it quite sad and even rather maddening that anyone of any faith should take such an attitude to anyone else’s religious beliefs and religious texts.

For a Muslim, the Qur’an isn’t just an inspired work like the Bible, where the Holy Spirit guided men to write their works, but a dictation right from the throne of God Himself. Whilst Christians attach little significance to the actual physical object of the Bible, for a Muslim a physical copy of the Qur’an is itself holy and should therefore be treated with the highest respect.

Also, I’d also add that there is much a Christian (of any sort) could learn from reading the Qur’an, and there are many parts which a Christian would agree with. Some of the best Islamic scholars are those who have read and studied the Bible, and so it is easily a two-way process.

By reading the Qur’an, you are not being forced to convert. You are not being forced to accept any beliefs that are presented in the 114 surat (chapters). You are not forced to take shahadah (declaration of faith, which you recite when converting to Islam) or to do anything other than read and learn from it.

 

[Reuben_J]

Frankly, I would rather not read the Quran. The way how bad it treats the Jews and Christians, it is revolting really, and I don’t have to subject myself to such abuse. It affects my peace and tranquility, so why should I want to do thing that takes those away? I read the Quran though to get a general idea of what it contains and even try to learn what certain verses mean through the tafsir – all for the sake of knowledge, and that’s all. I would advise Christians to read it also just to get an idea of what it contains.

 

[Kouyate42]

Frankly, I would rather not read the Quran. The way how bad it treats the Jews and Christians, it is revolting really, and I don’t have to subject myself to such abuse. It affects my peace and tranquility, so why should I want to do thing that takes those away? I read the Quran though to get a general idea of what it contains and even try to learn what certain verses mean through the tafsir – all for the sake of knowledge, and that’s all. I would advise Christians to read it also just to get an idea of what it contains.

It’s only ‘abusive’ if you read things out of context and without some sort of commentary to help you understand what is being said and why.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

It’s only ‘abusive’ if you read things out of context and without some sort of commentary to help you understand what is being said and why.

Our Bible can be read and understood by anyone. Most Muslims don’t know the Koran and never read it. They only hear about it, hear it interpreted. I wonder what most Muslims would think if they actually read the Koran themselves.

 

[Kouyate42]

Our Bible can be read and understood by anyone. Most Muslims don’t know the Koran and never read it. They only hear about it, hear it interpreted. I wonder what most Muslims would think if they actually read the Koran themselves.

I doubt this highly. It is a duty of EVERY Muslim who is able to do so to read, study and recite Qur’an in Arabic and if they wish to do, to read it in their own language (although Arabic is preferred). Even an illiterate Muslim will know large portions of Qur’an.

And I find the claim that the Bible can be read and understood by anyone, when it is Western Christians who show some of the greatest ignorance about even the most basic tenets of their own faith, to be laughable. If you remember some time back, the PEW Forum did a survey of basic religious knowledge, and the various Christian groupings scored VERY low scores on even their OWN religious faith’s questions.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I doubt this highly. It is a duty of EVERY Muslim who is able to do so to read, study and recite Qur’an in Arabic and if they wish to do, to read it in their own language (although Arabic is preferred). Even an illiterate Muslim will know large portions of Qur’an.

And I find the claim that the Bible can be read and understood by anyone, when it is Western Christians who show some of the greatest ignorance about even the most basic tenets of their own faith, to be laughable. If you remember some time back, the PEW Forum did a survey of basic religious knowledge, and the various Christian groupings scored VERY low scores on even their OWN religious faith’s questions.

Being taught to recite passages from the Koran is not the same as being able to read it.

And the Bible is understandable whether or not Western Christians choose to read it or not. Whether people are literate enough to understand it, is another question, but it is certainly understandable by itself, there are no explanations required in order to grasp what is being said. Of course Bible studies help, but again, not necessary.

 

[Reuben_J]

It’s only ‘abusive’ if you read things out of context and without some sort of commentary to help you understand what is being said and why.

Christians will read verses like these in the Quran:

Allah will curse Christians and Jews.

And the Jews say: 'Ezra is the son of Allah, the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say.Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! - 9:30

Jesus did not die but Allah made it only appear to be so.

*That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”; but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise – 4:157-8
*

Allah sowed enmity and hatred on Christians

And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. So We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection (when they discarded Allah’s Book, disobeyed Allah’s Messengers and His Orders and transgressed beyond bounds in Allah’s disobedience), and Allah will inform them of what they used to do. - 5:14

Christians believe that God is one third of the Trinity!

Surely, disbelievers are those who said: “Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).” But there is no ilah(god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall the disbelievers among them. - 5:73

It is no better for the Jews who are compared to pigs and apes.

 

[Kouyate42]

Being taught to recite passages from the Koran is not the same as being able to read it.

And the Bible is understandable whether or not Western Christians choose to read it or not. Whether people are literate enough to understand it, is another question, but it is certainly understandable by itself, there are no explanations required in order to grasp what is being said. Of course Bible studies help, but again, not necessary.

That’s interesting, you seem to ignore the grand majority of what I say. And the fact of the average Christian’s complete religious ignorance is still standing. Statistics like the PEW Forum’s study don’t lie.

Firstly, you ignore the fact that a Muslim is free, as many do, to read the Qur’an in their own language, as long as that translation is only taken as a rendering of the Arabic into an approximate meaning in that language and not as the actual Qur’an.

Secondly, many Muslim countries often see an education in Arabic being given to children, and this includes studies of Qur’an.

Christians will read verses like these in the Quran:

Time to dig out my books of tafseer (commentary on the Qur’an)! It’s too easy to simply cherry-pick verses out of context.

Allah will curse Christians and Jews.

And the Jews say: 'Ezra is the son of Allah, the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say.Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! - 9:30

In Islam, no one prophet, angel or other being is to be called a ‘son of God’ in the literal sense that Allah had sexual relations with a human, like the pagan god Zeus did. Being above and in control of all nature, it seems a gross idea that He then partakes in lower animal behaviors such as eating, drinking or sex.
As to your highlighted bit, it is a principle of Islam that anyone who teaches falsehood as truth, going rejecting truth after it is presented to them, and who dies in their disbelief, is doomed to the fires of Hell. This isn’t specific to Jews or Christians, but is a warning to all disbelievers.

Jesus did not die but Allah made it only appear to be so.

That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”; but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise – 4:157-8

I can’t personally see a problem here. To my mind at least, and to any Muslim, the story of the Crucifixion makes little to no sense and seems a gross insult to Allah.

I suggest you read some Islamic material on why Muslims believe as they do about the Crucifixion. I can provide links if you wish.

Allah sowed enmity and hatred on Christians

And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. So We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection (when they discarded Allah’s Book, disobeyed Allah’s Messengers and His Orders and transgressed beyond bounds in Allah’s disobedience), and Allah will inform them of what they used to do. - 5:14

This likely refers to the covenent which all of Jesus' followers took to follow the commands he gave to worship the One True God, Allah, and to welcome and accept the Messenger of God when he came. When that Prophet DID come, they did not accept or indeed welcome him at all, apart from a few.

So when the Day of Judgement comes, Allah will ask of all Christians why they chose to discard the real Injil (Gospels) in favour of falsehood and ideas such as the Trinity and Jesus as a Son of God, and to reject the Rasullah (Muhammad, SAW) as their Messenger.

And it must be said that if you look at early Church history, there were MANY warring factions, all with their own beliefs as to who Jesus was, how to worship etc. In short, the Qur’an passage you quote is correct in that there was and IS division and fighting.

It is no better for the Jews who are compared to pigs and apes.

The Jews are only rebuked and shamed in the Qur’an for their theological failings to worship God in the correct manner and hold to His laws. There is no reason based on Qur’an for Muslims to actively hate Jews, and infact Jews are considered to have received a VALID revelation and so are to be given the appropriate respect and legal protection.

All you’ve done is the usual trick of picking out verses to suit, out of context and with little knowledge of Islamic teaching.

 

[Reuben_J]

Time to dig out my books of tafseer (commentary on the Qur’an)! It’s too easy to simply cherry-pick verses out of context.
……
All you’ve done is the usual trick of picking out verses to suit, out of context and with little knowledge of Islamic teaching.

I was saying in my earlier post that I would not rather reading the Quran as I don’t like what it says about the Christians (and the Jews) regardless of what Muslim apologetics may say.

In Islam, no one prophet, angel or other being is to be called a ‘son of God’ in the literal sense that Allah had sexual relations with a human, like the pagan god Zeus did. Being above and in control of all nature, it seems a gross idea that He then partakes in lower animal behaviors such as eating, drinking or sex.
As to your highlighted bit, it is a principle of Islam that anyone who teaches falsehood as truth, going rejecting truth after it is presented to them, and who dies in their disbelief, is doomed to the fires of Hell. This isn’t specific to Jews or Christians, but is a warning to all disbelievers.

Anyway, it is Christian’s belief that Christ is the Son of God and the Quran says Allah curses the Christians for such belief. Imagine if you are a Christians who read this pronouncement. I don’t want anyone to say that I am cursed by their god just because of my belief.

The Quran is in error to say that Ezra was known as the son of God. This is historical error as the Jews never called him as such.

One may wonder, if the Quran is from Allah, how could he do not know that the Jews never called Ezra the son of Allah? Being Allah, he should not make mistake on that obvious fact, don’t you think? He can have different belief but he should not make factual mistake on what that belief is.

You say that this isn’t specific to Jews or Christians, but is a warning to all disbelievers. Not true as the ayah is very specific as it mentions specifically the Jews and the Christians with their alleged specific belief of their prophets (correct for the Christian, incorrect for the Jews) so I cannot say it is not specific to them.

I can’t personally see a problem here. To my mind at least, and to any Muslim, the story of the Crucifixion makes little to no sense and seems a gross insult to Allah.

I suggest you read some Islamic material on why Muslims believe as they do about the Crucifixion. I can provide links if you wish.

Try to be in Christians’ shoes who would read such blatant error and assertion about their belief, then you would understand why reading the Quran will not be edifying at all to them.

There are many problems about this ayah and you merely seem to side-stepping in actually addressing them.

Again to me as a Christian, this ayah is just nonsensical rambling that contradict just about anything of what God is
.
First, unlike what the ayah says, the Jews did not kill Jesus but the Romans. The Quran should check on that fact first.

It also says they did not kill him nor crucify him. Goodness, don’t you want to laugh at this? What is the difference between killing and crucifying? Unless of course, if the author was not sure about what ‘crucify’ was, unless he thought it was different from ‘kill’ and it was a term the Christians used for their belief but did not know what that term was.

Second, Allah made it appeared as if Jesus was killed. How could Allah do that which by doing so, a religion (Christianity) was started based on this untruth? Why would God make a mistake and do such thing that is contradictory to his nature as truth?

This likely refers to the covenent which all of Jesus’ followers took to follow the commands he gave to worship the One True God, Allah, and to welcome and accept the Messenger of God when he came. When that Prophet DID come, they did not accept or indeed welcome him at all, apart from a few.
So when the Day of Judgement comes, Allah will ask of all Christians why they chose to discard the real Injil (Gospels) in favour of falsehood and ideas such as the Trinity and Jesus as a Son of God, and to reject the Rasullah (Muhammad, SAW) as their Messenger.

Your explanation does not address the fact that this ayah mentions** “Allah planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection”**. If you are a Christian reading this ayah, you must wonder why God would sow enmity and hatred among people of a certain religion. And if you are a Muslim and believing in this, what would your attitude would be to Christians? Certainly not much. If Allah hates them then why shouldn’t you?

And it must be said that if you look at early Church history, there were MANY warring factions, all with their own beliefs as to who Jesus was, how to worship etc. In short, the Qur’an passage you quote is correct in that there was and IS division and fighting.

Warring factions that were caused by Allah (We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection)? Goodness, what kind of a god is that? Can it be said that Allah also caused the warring factions among Muslims today (if this is his nature of doing thing)?

The Jews are only rebuked and shamed in the Qur’an for their theological failings to worship God in the correct manner and hold to His laws. There is no reason based on Qur’an for Muslims to actively hate Jews, and infact Jews are considered to have received a VALID revelation and so are to be given the appropriate respect and legal protection.

You are shaming people just because of their belief. Imagine if I write a book and shame Muslims as being pigs and apes just because of what they believe. And that book is supposed to be the truth and comes from divine source. How would you not follow it? Even if you do not want to hate, you being a nice person but your religious book obviously does, and what would you do eventually? How would that affect your psyche toward the Jews? Your Quran say so man, so what are you gonna do?

 

[austenbosten]

I think it’s not only alright, but probably in the best interest for a Catholic to read the Koran, if he plans to engage in debate. How can you argue your point if you are ignorant of the sources the opponent will use?

But it’s not necessary, unless you want to be a kick-[behind] Christian apologist like Dr. William Lane Craig. :knight2:

 

[MartinJordan]

I think it’s alright to read it but with one caveat.

If one is ignorant of the richness, facts, witnessing and traditions of Christianity and the doctrines then its rather better to read Jewish Talmud/Mishnah or Bible first before reading the Koran.

It is universally understood that the Koran came 650 year atleast after the converted Jews of Christianity so one will do well to understand Judaism and Christianity first and foremost.

MJ

 

[Dhugz]

If you are a catholic apologies, yes. But if you are just an ordinary lay member, they you are forbidden. Because you are tempting yourself to belief the Quran.

 

[Kouyate42]

I think it’s alright to read it but with one caveat.

If one is ignorant of the richness, facts, witnessing and traditions of Christianity and the doctrines then its rather better to read Jewish Talmud/Mishnah or Bible first before reading the Koran.

It is universally understood that the Koran came 650 year atleast after the converted Jews of Christianity so one will do well to understand Judaism and Christianity first and foremost.

MJ

I’d probably say here that Mishnah and Talmud are both VERY difficult reads, even for knowledgable theologians/scholars. I don’t see how this would help in understanding anything, and I would think it would have the opposite effect.

 

[Vouthon]

Well I am a Catholic layman who has read many different translations of the Qur’an (ie Pickthall, Dawood and most recently Abdel Haleem) since about the age of 14.

I had and still have a vivid interest i differet religions, and so naturally after reading the Bible and some Catholic mystics proceeded to read the Pirke Avot (part of the Talmud that teaches only morality in short sayings of the Rabbis and is VERY EASY to read), the Dhammapada, Bhagavad Gita, Zend Avesta, Baha’i Writings…

The Qur’an was part of this process. I now own my own personal copy of the Qur’an, the Oxford University Press edition by Abdel Haleem.

Its a classic of world literature and the Word of God for nearly 1 billion human beings.

I consider it to be essential reading for those with an avid interest in interfaith dialogue. I would not, however, willy-nilly advise it to the average reader. Better would be a readible book by a scholar on Islam, since on its own the Qur’an is sometimes difficult to understand in English translation. One also needs a knowledge of the Hadith so as to understand Qur’anic “revelations” in the context of Muhammad’s life.

You really desire to read it though, then my advice is pray first, know your Bible and Church teachings and go ahead searching for seeds of the Word and rays of light in Islam, while being prepared for errors from the Catholic perspective (Ie God cannot have a Son, Jesus being a creature).