The Bible, The Qur'an and Science

2. The Bible,
The Qut'arr
-rnd Science
ThEl3iblE
f
ThEQuran
andkiEnc:e

3. Maurice Buceille
fhe Bible,
The Qut'art
arrd Science
ul,aBlble
le Coran et le Science"
TIIE TNCT,Y SCBIPTUBES
EXAMINED IN THE LICET
OF UODEBN KNOWI,EDGE
Trenslat€d from the [tench
by
Ahdalr It Prnncll
rnd
Thc Anthe
MauriceBucaiDe
Thel3ible
f
TheQuran
andkienf:e
"LaBible,Ie CoranetlaScience"
THEHOLYSCRIPTURES
EXAMINED
INTHELIGHT
OFMODERNKNOWLEDGE
TranslatedfromtheFrench
by
,AlastairD.PalmeD
and
TheAuth..

4. FRENCE EDITIONS
Firrt Freneh Edition, May 19?6
"L,a Bibler le Coran et le Science"
F ourth French Edition, September 197?
Publisherr Seghers, I Rue FalguiEre ,76726 Paris, Cedex 18.
ARABIC TBANSLATION (in print)
Publirtrers Dsr Al Ma'arif, 1119 Corniche El Nil, Cairo, Egypt.
FRENCHEDITIONS
FirstFrenchEdition,May1976
"LaBible,IeCoranetIeScience"
FourthFrenchEdition,September1977
PublishersSeghers,3Rue Falguiere,75725Paris,Cedex15.
ARABIC
TRANSLATION (inprint)
PublishersDarAlMa'arif,1119Corniehe ElNil,Cairo,Egypt.

5. Toreword
In his objeetive study of the texts, Maurice Bucaille clears
&rvay many preconceived ideas about the Old Testament, the
Gospels and the Qur'an. He tries, in this collection of Writings, to
separate what belongs to Revelation from what is the product of
error or human interpretation. His study sheds new light on the
Holy Seriptures. At the end of a gripping account, he places the
Believer before a point of eardinal importance: the continuity of
a Revelation emanating from the same God, with modes of ex-
pression that differ in the course of time. It leads us to meditate
,rpott those factors which, in our day, should spiritually unite-
rather than divide-Jews, Christians and Muslims.
As a surgeon, Maurice Bucaille has often beeir in a situation
urhere he was able to examine not only people's bodies, but their
souls. This is how he was struck by the existence of Muslim piety
and by aspects of Islam which remain unknown to the vast ma-
jority of non-Muslims. In his search for explanations which are
otherwise difficult to obtain, he learnt Arabic and studied the
Qur'an. In it, he was surprised to find statements on natural phe-
nomena whose meaning can only be understood through modern
scientifc knowledge.
He theri turned to the question of the authenticity of the writ'
ings that constitute the Holy Scriptures of the monotheistic re-
ligions. Finally, in the case of the Bible, he proceeded to a eon-
frontation between these writings and scientific data.
The results of his research into the Judeo-Christian Revelation
and the Qur'an are set out in this book.
Fo..ewo..d
Inhisobjectivestudy ofthetexts,MauriceBucailleclears
awaymanypreconceivedideas
abouttheOlrlTestament,the
GospelsandtheQur'an.Hetries,in thiscollectionofWritings,to
separatewhatbelongstoRevelation fromwhatistheproductof
errororhumaninterpretation.His studyshedsnew lightonthe
HolyScriptures.Attheendofagrippingaccount,heplacesthe
Believerbeforeapointofcardinalimportance: thecontinuityof
aRevelation
emanatingfromthesameGod,withmodes ofex­
pression
thatdifferinthecourseoftime. Itleadsus tomeditate
uponthosefactorswhich,in
ourday,shouldspiritually unite­
ratherthandivide-Jews,ChristiansandMuslims.
Asasurgeon,MauriceBucaille
hasoftenbeen inasituation
where
hewasable toexaminenotonlypeople'sbodies, buttheir
souls.ThisishowhewasstruckbytheexistenceofMuslimpiety
andbyaspectsofIslamwhichremainunknown tothevastma­
jorityofnon-Muslims.Inhissearchforexplanationswhich are
otherwisedifficult toobtain,helearntArabicandstudiedthe
Qur'an.Init,hewas surprisedtofindstatementson naturalphe­
nomenawhosemeaningcanonlybeunderstood
throughmodern
scientifcknowledge.
Hethenturnedtothequestionoftheauthenticityofthewrit­
ingsthatconstitutetheHolyScripturesofthemonotheisticre­
ligions.Finally,
inthecaseoftheBible,heproceededtoacon­
frontationbetweenthese writingsandscientificdata.
Theresultsof
hisresearchinto theJudeo-ChristianRevelation
andtheQur'anaresetoutinthisbook.

6. CONTTENTS
ITiITRODUCTION
OLD TESTAMENT
I. General Outlines
Origins of the Bible
IL The Books of the OId Testament
Th.e Torah or Pentateuch
Ttre Historical Books
The ProPhetic Books
The Books of PoetrY and Wisdom
UI. fire Old Testament and Scienoe Findings
The Creation of the World
The Date of the World's Creation and
Date of Man's Appearance on Earth
The Flood
IV. Position of christian Authors with regard to
Scientific Error in the Biblical Texts'
A Critical Examination
V. Conclusions
THE GOSPELS
I. Introduction
II. Historical Reminder. Judeo-christianity and
Saint Paul
III. The Four Gospels. Sources and History
The GosPel According to Matthew
The GosPel Aecording to Mark
i
1
4
7
10
14
L7
18
21
22
29
32
3S
42
44
44
49
64
58
6B
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
i
OLDTESTAMENT
I.GeneralOutlines 1
Origins
oftheBible
4
II.TheBooks oftheOldTestament 7
Th.e
TorahorPentateuch
10
TheHistoricalBooks
14
ThePropheticBooks 17
TheBooks
ofPoetryandWisdom 18
III.TheOldTestament andScienceFindings 21
TheCreation
oftheWorld 22
TheDateoftheWorld'sCreation and
DateofMan'sAppearanceon Earth 29
TheFlood
32
IV.PositionofChristianAuthors
withregardto
Scientific
ErrorintheBiblicalTexts.
ACriticalExamination
36
V.Conclusions
42
THEGOSPELS
44
I.Introduction 44
II.HistoricalReminder. Judeo-Christianityand
SaintPaul
49
III.TheFourGospels.Sourcesand History 54
TheGospelAccordingtoMatthew
58
TheGospelAccordingto Mark 63

7. The Gospel According to Luke
The Gospel According to John
Sources of the Gospels
History of the Texts
The Gospels and Modern Science. The
Gehealogies of Jesus
The Genealogies of Jesus
Critical Examination of the Texts
Commentaries of Modern Experts in Exegesis
Contradictions and Improbabilities in the
Descriptions
Descriptions of the Passion
John's Gospel does not describe the
Institution of the Eucharist
Appearances of Jesus Raised from the Dead
Ascension of Jesus
Jesus's Last Dialogues. The paraclete
of
John's Gospel
Conclusions
THE QIIR'AN AND MODERN SCIEN;E
I. Introduction
II. Authenticity of the eur'an. How It Came
to be Written
III'. The creation of the Heavens and the Earth
Differences f'om and Resemblances to the
Biblical Description
The Qur'an does not lav dorvn a seflnenee for
the Creation of the Earth and Heavens
The Basic Process of the Formation of the
Univer.se and the Resulting Composition of
the Worlds
Some Modern Scientific Data concerning the
Formation of the Univer.se
rv.
V.
66
68
TI
77
82
88
88
92
VI.
94
94
95
98
100
10?
107
110
110
r26
138
138
137
139
L42
TheGospelAccording toLuke 66
TheGospelAccording toJohn 68
SourcesoftheGospels 71
HistoryoftheTexts 77
IV.TheGospelsandModernScience.The
Genealogies
ofJesus 82
TheGenealogiesofJesus 83
CriticalExaminationoftheTexts 88
CommentariesofModernExpertsinExegesis92
V.ContradictionsandImprobabilitiesin the
Descriptions 94
Descriptions
ofthePassion 94
John'sGospeldoesnotdescribe the
InstitutionoftheEucharist 95
Appearances
ofJesusRaisedfromtheDead 98
AscensionofJesus 100
Jesus'sLastDialogues.The Paracleteof
John'sGospel 102
VI.Conclusions 107
THEQUR'ANANDMODERN SCIENCE 110
I.Introduction 110
II.AuthenticityoftheQur'an.How ItCame
tobe
Written 126
III.TheCreationoftheHeavens andtheEarth 133
DifferencesfromandResemblancesto the
BiblicalDescription 133
TheQur'andoesnotlaydowna RPJlIlp.nr.p.for
theCreationoftheEarthandHeavens 137
TheBasicProcessof theFormationofthe
UniverseandtheResultingComposition of
theWorlds 139
SomeModernScientific Dataconcerningthe
FormationoftheUniverse 142

8. Confrontation with the Data in the Qur'an
concerning the Creation
t47
Answers to Certain Objections 149
IV. Astronomy in the Qur'an
A. General Reflections concerning the Sky
B. Nature of HeavenlY Bodies
C. CelestialOrganizations
D. Evolution of the Heavens
E. The Conquest of SPace
V. The Earth
A. Verses Containing General Statements
B. The Water CYcle and the Seas
C' The Earth's Relief
D. The Earth's AtmosPhere
VI. The Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms
A. The Origins of Life
B. The Vegetable Kingdom
C. The Animal Kingdom
VII. Human ReProduction
Reminder of Certaiu Basic Conccpts
Httman Reproduction in the Qur'an
The Qur'an and Sex Education
QUR'ANIC
AND BIBLICAL NARRATIONS
I. General Outlines
Parallel : Qur'an/Gospels
and- Iodertt
Knorvledge
Parallel : Qur'an/Old Testament and
Modern l{nowledge
II. The Flood
The Biblical Nan'ation of the Flood and the
Criticism Leveled at it-A Renrinclet'
The Narratiou of the Flood contained irr
the Qur'an
161
t6z
155
158
166
16?
170
1?0
1?8
180
18?
185
185
187
190
t98
198
199
207
211
211
211
213
zL4
2r4
zr6
ConfrontationwiththeDataintheQur'an
concerning
theCreation 147
AnswerstoCertainObjections
149
IV.AstronomyintheQur'an
151
A.GeneralReflectionsconcerning
theSky 152
B.NatureofHeavenlyBodies
155
C.CelestialOrganizations
158
D.EvolutionoftheHeavens 165
E.TheConquestofSpace
167
V.The Earth
170
A.VersesContainingGeneralStatements
170
B.TheWaterCycle andtheSeas 173
C.TheEarth'sRelief 180
D.TheEarth'sAtmosphere 182
VI.TheAnimalandVegetableKingdoms
185
A.TheOrigins ofLife 185
B.TheVegetableKingdom
187
c.TheAnimalKingdom
190
VII.HumanReproduction
198
ReminderofCertainBasicConcepts
198
HumanReproductionintheQur'an
199
TheQur'anandSexEducation
207
QUR'ANICANDBIBLICALNARRATIONS
211
I.GeneralOutlines
211
Parallel:Qur'an/Gospels and-:Model'll
Knowledge
211
Parallel:Qur'an/OldTestamentand
ModernKnowledge
213
n.TheFlood
214
TheBiblicalNarrationoftheFlood andthe
CriticismLeveled
atit-AReminder 214
TheNarrationoftheFloodcontainedin
theQur'an
216

9. III. The Exodus
The Exodus according to the Bible
The Exodus according to the eurran
Confrontation between Scriptural Data
and Modern Knowledge
1. Examination of certain details
contained in the Narrations
2. The point oceupied by the Exodus in
the history of the Pharaohs
219
220
?,2L
224
224
228
3. Ramesses II, Pharaoh of the Oppression;
Merneptah, Pharaoh of the Eiodus Zgl
4. The description contained in the Holy
Scripture of the pharaoh's
death
during the Exodus Zg7
5. Pharaoh Merneptah's Mummy Zgg
QUR'AN, HADITHS AND MODERN SCIENCE ':42
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
24g
TRANSLITERATION OF THE ARABIC INTO LATIN
CHARACTERS
258
III.TheExodus 219
TheExodusaccording totheBible 220
TheExodusaccording
totheQuran 221
ConfrontationbetweenScriptural
Data
andModernKnowledge 224
1.Examination
ofcertaindetails
contained
intheNarrations 224
2.Thepointoccupied
bytheExodusin
thehistoryofthe
Pharaohs 228
8.RamessesII, PharaohoftheOppression.;
Merneptah,
PharaohoftheExodus 231
4.Thedescriptioncontainedin theHoly
Scripture
ofthePharaoh'sdeath
duringtheExodus 237
5.PharaohMerneptah'sMummy 239
QUR'AN,HADITHSANDMODERNSCIENCE 242
GENERALCONCLUSIONS 249
TRANSLITERATION OF
THEARABICINTOLATIN
CHARACTERS 253

10. lntrodrrction
Eseh of the three monotheistic religions possesE its own collec'
tion of scriptures. For the fsithful-be they Jews, christisns or
Muslir.s,-these documents constitute the foundation of their
belief. For them they are the materisl transcription
-o!
s divine
Revelation; directly, 8{t in the case of Abraham and Moses, who
received the commendments from God Himself, or indireetly' as
in the cgse of Jesus and Muhammad, the first of whom stated
that he was speaking in the name of the Father, and the s€cond
of whom transmitted to men the Revelation imparted to him by
Archangpl Gabriel.
If wJtake into consideration the obiective facts of religious
history, we must place the Old Testament, the Gospels and the
Qut'an'on the same level as being collections of written Revela-
tion. Although this attitude is in principle held by Musliml' the
fsithful in the West under the predominantly Judeo-Christian
influence refuse to ascribe to the Qur'an the charactcr of a book
of Revelation.
Sueh an attitude may be explained by the position each reli-
gious eommunity adopt" to**"ds the other two with regprd to
the Scriptures.
Judaism has as its holy book the Hebraic Bible' This difiers
from the old Testament of the christians in that the lattcr have
included several books whieh did not exist in Hebrew. In practice'
this divergence hardly makes any difference to the doctrine' Ju-
daism does not howuue" admit any revelation subsequent to its
own.
Christianity has taken the Hebraic Bible for itself and added
a few supplements to it. It has not however accepted all the pub-
lished writings destined to make known to men the Mission of
Jesus. The church has made incisive cuts in the profusion of
books relating the life and teachings of Jesus' It has only pre-
served a limited number of writings in the New Testament' the
most importdnt of which are the four Canonic Gospels' Christian'
ity takes no account of any revelation subsequent to Jesus and
his Apostles. It therefore rules out the Qur'an'
Inkodudion
Eachofthethreemonotheisticreligionspossess itsowncollec­
tionofScriptures.Forthefaithful-betheyJews,Christians or
Musli1Tls-thesedocumentsconstitute
thefoundationoftheir
belief.Forthemtheyarethematerialtranscription ofadivine
Revelation;directly,
asintheeaseofAbrahamandMoses,who
received
thecommandmentsfrom GodHimself,orindirectly,as
intheeaseofJesusandMuhammad,thefirstofwhom stated
thathewasspeakingin thenameoftheFather,andthesecond
ofwhom
transmittedtomentheRevelationimparted tohimby
ArchangelGabriel.
Ifwetakeintoconsiderationtheobjectivefacts ofreligious
history,we
mustplacetheOldTestament,theGospelsandthe
Qur'anonthesamelevel asbeingcollectionsof writtenRevela­
tion.Although
thisattitudeisinprincipleheldbyMuslims, the
faithfulin theWestunder thepredominantlyJudeo-Christian
influencerefuse
toascribetotheQur'anthecharacterofa book
ofRevelation.
Such
anattitudemaybeexplained bythepositioneachreli­
giouscommunityadoptstowards
theothertwowith regardto
theScriptures.
Judaism
hasasitsholybook theHebraicBible.Thisdiffers
from
theOldTestament oftheChristiansinthatthelatterhave
includedseveralbookswhichdid
notexistinHebrew. Inpractice,
thisdivergencehardlymakesanydifference
tothedoctrine.Ju­
daismdoesnothowever
admitanyrevelationsubsequent toits
own.
ChristianityhastakentheHebraicBibleforitselfandadded
afewsupplementstoit.
Ithasnothoweveracceptedall thepub­
lishedwritingsdestinedtomakeknown
tomentheMissionof
Jesus.TheChurchhasmadeincisivecutsintheprofusionof
booksrelatingthelifeandteachingsofJesus.
Ithasonlypre­
servedalimitednumberofwritingsin
theNewTestament, the
mostimportantofwhicharethefourCanonicGospels.Christian ..
itytakesnoaccountofanyrevelationsubsequent
toJesusand
hisApostles.
Itthereforerulesout theQur'an.

11. fi THE BIBLE, TIrE QITR AN AND SCIENCE
The Qur'anic Revelation Bppeared six centuries afhr Jesus. It
nesumes numerous data found in the Hebraic Bible and the GoE-
pels since it guotes very frequenily from the
,Torah,r
and ilre
'Gorpels.'
The Qut'an direets au Mustims to believe in the scrip,
turee tttat precede it (sura 4, verte ls6). rt stresses the impor-
tant position occupied in the Bevelation by God's emissaries, s-uch
as Noah, Abratram, Moses, the prophets
aud Jesus, to whom they
"Ilrylt
a special position. His birth is described in the eur'an,
and likewise in the Gospels, as a supernatural event. Mary-is also
-given
a speeial placg as indicated bv the fact that sura ig U*"",
her.name.
fire above facts concerning Islem are not generally known in
the west. This is hardry surprising, when we eonsider the way
so msny generations in the West were instructed in the religious
problems faeing humanity and the ignorance in which they were
kept about anything related to Isram. The use of such terms as'Mohammedan
religion' and
'Mohammedans'
has been instru-
mental-even to the present day-in maintaining the false notion
that beliefs were involved that were spread ty ttre work of man
among: which God (in the christian sense) hla no place. Many
cultivated people today are interested in the philosophical, social
and political aspects of Isram, but they do not pause to inquire
about the Islamic Reveration itself, as indeed thlv should.
In what contempt the Muslims are held by certain christian
circles ! I experienced this when r tried to start an exchange
of ideas arislng from I comparative analysis of Biblicar and
Qut'anic stories on the same theme. I nnted a systematic refusal,
evln fqp the purposes of simpre reflection, to take any account of
what the Qur'an had to say on the subject in hand. rt i* as if a
quote from the Qur'an were a reference to the Devil !
A noticeable chang:e seems however to be under way these days
at the highest le'els of the christian world. The office for Non-
christian Affairs at the vatican has produced a document result-
ing from the second vatican council under the French tiile
Orientation^s pour un diul,ogue entre Chrdtiens et Musulmnruz
1. what is meant by Torah are the first five books of the Bible, in other
words the Pentateueh of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numberc
and Deuteronomy).
Z. Pub. Ancora, Rome.
u THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
TheQur'anicRevelationappearedsixcenturies
afterJesus.It
resumesnumerousdatafoundintheHebraicBible andtheG0s­
pelssinceitquotesveryfrequentlyfrom the'Torah'!and~
'Gospels.'The Qur'andirectsall Muslimsto believeintheScrip..
turesthatprecedeit(sura4,verse186).Itstressestheimpor­
tantpositi"onoccupied intheRevelationbyGod'semissaries,such
asNoah,Abraham,Moses, theProphetsandJesus, towhomthey
allocate
aspecialposition.His birthisdescribedintheQur'an,
andlikewiseintheGospels,asasupernaturalevent.Maryisalso
givenaspecialplace,
asindicatedby thefactthatsura19bears
hername.
TheabovefactsconcerningIslam arenotgenerallyknown in
theWest.Thisishardlysurprising,whenweconsider
theway
SOmanygenerations intheWestwereinstructed inthereligious
problemsfacing
humanityandtheignoranceinwhichtheywere
keptaboutanythingrelatedtoIslam.Theuse ofsuchtermsas
'Mohammedanreligion'and'Mohammedans'hasbeeninstru­
mentaI-eventothepresentday-inmaintainingthefalsenotion
thatbeliefswereinvolved thatwerespreadby theworkofman
amongwhich God(intheChristiansense)hadnoplace.Many
cultivatedpeopletoday
areinterestedinthephilosophical,social
andpoliticalaspects ofIslam,buttheydonotpausetoinquire
about
theIslamicRevelationitself, asindeedtheyshould.
InwhatcontempttheMuslims areheldbycertainChristian
circles!IexperiencedthiswhenItried
tostartanexchange
ofideas
arisingfromacomparativeanalysis ofBiblicaland
Qur'anicstorieson
thesametheme.Inotedasystematicrefusal,
even
fo;thepurposesofsimplereflection, totakeanyaccountof
whattheQur'anhadtosayonthesubjectinhand. Itisasifa
quotefromtheQur'anwereareferencetotheDevil
!
Anoticeablechangeseemshoweverto
beunderwaythesedays
atthehighestlevelsoftheChristianworld.The
OfficeforNon­
ChristianAffairs
attheVaticanhasproducedadocumentresult­
ingfromtheSecondVaticanCouncilundertheFrenchtitle
Orientatio'RSpour
undialogueentreChretiensetMusulrnans 2
1.WhatismeantbyToraharethefirstfivebooks oftheBible,inother
wordsthePentateuchofMoses(Genesis,Exodus,Leviticus,
Numbers
andDeuteronomy).
2.Pub.Ancora,Rome.

12. lnfiodnrcfun
lll
(orientations for a Dialogue between christians and Muslims) '
third French edition dated 19?0, which bears witness to the pro-
found change in official attitude. Once the document has invited
the reader to clear away the "out-dated image, inherited from
the past, or distort€d by prejudice and slander" that Christians
have of Islam, the Vatican document proceeds to "recognize the
past injustice towards the Muslims for which the West, rvith its
bnti*U*n education, is to blame'. It also criticizes the miscon-
ceptions Christians h*ve been under concerning Muslim fatalism'
Islemic legalism, fanaticism, etc. It stresses belief in unity of
God and ieminds us how surprised the audience was at the
Muslim University of Al Azhar, Cairo, when Cardinal Koenig
proclaimed this unity at the Great Mosque during an official con-
ference in March, 1969. It reminds us also that the vatican of-
fice in 196? invited christians to offer their best wishes to Mus-
lims at the end of the Fast of Bamadan with "genuine religious
wofthtt.
such preliminary steps towards a closer relationship between
the Boriran Catholic Curia and Islam have been follorved by vari-
ous rlanifestations and consolidated by encounters between the
two. There has been, however, little publicity accorded to events
of such great importance in the western World, where they took
plaee and where there are ample means of communication in the
form of press, radio and television.
The newspapers g'ave tittle coverag:e to the offieial visit of
Cardinal Pignedoli, the President of the Vatican Office of Non-
Christian Affairs, on 24th April, 1974, to King Faisal of Saudi
Arabia. The French newspaper Le Mond,e on 25th April, 19?4'
d€alt with it in a few lines. What momentous news they contain,
however, when we read how the Cardinal conveyed to the Sover-
eign a message from Pope Paul VI expressing "the regards of
His Holiness, moved by a profound belief in the *niflcation of
Islamic and Christian worlds in the worship of a single God, to
His Majesty King Faisal as supreme head of the Islamic world".
Six months later, in October 19?4, the Pope received the offi-
cial visit to the Vatican of the Grand Ulema of Saudi Arabia' It
occasioned a dialogue between Christians and Muslims on the
,'Cultural
Rights of Man in l^glam". The Vatican ne\Yspaper'
Obseruotore
-Rom&na,
on 26th Oetober, 19?4, reported this \is-
In&oduclion iii
(OrientationsforaDialoguebetweenChristiansandMuslims),
thirdFrencheditiondated1970,whichbearswitnesstothepro­
foundchangeinofficialattitude.Oncethedocumenthasinvited
thereadertoclearawaythe"out-datedimage,inheritedfrom
thepast,ordistortedbyprejudiceandslander"thatChristians
haveofIslam,theVaticandocumentproceedsto"recognizethe
pastinjusticetowardstheMuslimsforwhichtheWest,withits
Christianeducation,istoblame".Italsocriticizesthemiscon­
ceptions
ChristianshavebeenunderconcerningMuslimfatalism,
Islamiclegalism, fanaticism,etc.Itstressesbeliefinunityof
GodandremindsushowsUrflrisedtheaudiencewasatthe
MuslimUniversityofAlAzhar,Cairo,whenCardinalKoenig
proclaimed
thisunityattheGreatMosqueduringanofficialcon­
ference
inMarch,1969. ItremindsusalsothattheVaticanOf­
fice
in1967invitedChristianstooffertheirbestwishestoMus­
lims
attheendoftheFastofRamadanwith"genuinereligious
walth".
Suchpreliminarystepstowardsacloserrelationshipbetween
theRomanCatholicCuriaandIslamhavebeenfollowed byvari­
ousmanifestationsandconsolidatedbyencountersbetweenthe
two.Therehasbeen,however,littlepublicityaccordedto events
ofsuchgreatimportanceinthewesternworld,wheretheytook
place
andwherethereareamplemeansofcommunicationinthe
formofpress,radioandtelevision.
Thenewspapersgavelittlecoveragetotheofficialvisitof
CardinalPignedoli,thePresidentoftheVaticanOfficeofNon­
ChristianAffairs,on 24thApril,1974,to KingFaisalofSaudi
Arabia.TheFrenchnewspaperLeMonde on25thApril,1974,
dealtwithitinafewlines.Whatmomentousnews theycontain,
however,whenwe
readhowtheCardinalconveyedtotheSover­
eignamessagefromPopePaulVIexpressing"theregardsof
HisHoliness,moved byaprofoundbeliefintheunificationof
IslamicandChristianworldsintheworshipofasingleGod, to
HisMajestyKingFaisalassupremeheadoftheIslamicworld".
Sixmonthslater,inOctober1974, thePopereceivedtheoffi­
cialvisittotheVaticanoftheGrandUlemaofSaudiArabia.It
occasionedadialoguebetween ChristiansandMusHmson the
"CulturalRightsofManinIs1am".TheVaticannewspaper,
ObservatoreRomano, on26thOctober,1974, reportedthishis-

13. iv THE BIBrr, THE QITn AN AND SCTENCE
toric event in a front page story that took up more spece than the
rcport on the closing day of the meeting held uy lhe synod of
Bishops in Bome.
The Grand Ulema of Saudi Arabia were afterwards received
by the Eeumenical council of churctres of Geneva and by the
r,ord Bishop of strasbourg, His Grace Etchinger. The Bishop
invited them to join in midday prayer before him in his eathe-
drsl. The fact that the event was reported seems to be more on
account of its unusual nature than because of its considerable
religious signifieance. At all events, among those whom I ques-
tioned about this religious manifestation, there were very few
who replied that they were aware of it
The open-minded attitude pope paur
vr has towards Islam will
certainly become a milestone in the relations between the two
religions. He himself said that he was "moved by a profound be-
lief in the unification of the Islamic and Christian worlds in the
wottship of a single God". This reminder of the sentiments of the
head of the catholic chureh concerning Muslims is indeed neces-
siry. Far too msny christians, brought up in a spirit of open
hostitity, are ageinst any reflection about rslam on principle. The
vatican document notes this with regret. It is on accouni of this
ttrat they remain totally ignorent of what Islam is in reality, and
retain notions about the Islamic Bevelation which are entirely
mistaken.
Nevertheless, when studying an aspect of the Revelation of a
monotheistie religion, it seerna quite in order to compare what the
other two have to say on the same subject. A comprehensive
study of a problem is more interesting than a eompartmentalized
one. The confrontation between certain subjects dealt with in the
scriptures and the facts of zOth century science will therefore,
in this work, inelude all three religions. In addition it will be
useful to realize that the three rerigions should form a tighter
block by virtue of their eloser relationship at a time when they
are all threatened by the onslaught of materialism. The notion
that science and religion Bre incompatibre is as equally prevalent
in countries under the Judeo-christian influence as in the world
of Islarn--+specially in scientific circles. If this question were to
be dealt with comprehensively, a series of lengthy exposds would
be necessarr. rn this work, I intend to tsckle only Lr" *rpot of it:
iv THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
toriceventinafrontpagestorythattookupmorespacethanthe
reportontheclosingdayofthemeetingheldby theSynodof
BishopsinRome.
TheGrandmemaofSaudiArabiawereafterwardsreceived
bytheEcumenicalCouncil ofChurchesofGenevaandbythe
LordBishopofStrasbourg,HisGraceEIchinger. TheBishop
invited
themtojoininmiddayprayerbeforehiminhiscathe­
dral.
Thefactthattheeventwasreportedseemstobemoreon
account
ofitsunusualnaturethanbecauseofitsconsiderable
religioussignificance.
Atallevents,amongthosewhomIques­
tioned
aboutthisreligiousmanifestation, therewereveryfew
whoreplied
thattheywereawareofit.
Theopen-mindedattitudePopePaulVIhastowardsIslamwill
certainlybecomeamilestone intherelationsbetween thetwo
religions.
Hehimselfsaidthathewas"movedbyaprofoundbe­
liefintheunificationoftheIslamicandChristianworldsinthe
worshipofasingleGod". Thisreminderofthesentimentsofthe
headoftheCatholicChurchconcerningMuslims isindeedneces­
sary.FartoomanyChristians,broughtupinaspiritofopen
hostility,
areagainstanyreflectionaboutIslamonprinciple.The
Vaticandocumentnotes thiswithregret.Itisonaccountofthis
thattheyremaintotallyignorantofwhatIslamisinreality,and
retainnotionsabouttheIslamicRevelationwhich areentirely
mistaken.
Nevertheless,when
studyinganaspectoftheRevelationofa
monotheisticreligion,
itseemsquite inordertocomparewhatthe
othertwohavetosayonthesamesubject.Acomprehensive
studyofaproblemismoreinterestingthanacompartmentalized
one.
Theconfrontationbetweencertainsubjectsdealt withinthe
Scripturesandthefactsof20thcenturysciencewilltherefore,
inthiswork,includeall threereligions.Inadditionitwillbe
useful
torealizethatthethreereligionsshould formatighter
blockby virtueoftheircloserrelationship atatimewhenthey
areallthreatenedbytheonslaughtofmaterialism.Thenotion
thatscienceandreligionareincompatible isasequallyprevalent
incountriesundertheJudeo-Christianinfluence asintheworld
ofIsIatn--especiallyinscientificcircles. Ifthisquestionwere to
bedealtwithcomprehensively,aseries oflengthyexposeswould
benecessary.Inthiswork,I intendtotackleonlyoneaspect ofit:

14. lntmilrgr',ian
the examination of the scriptures themselves in the light of
modern scientific knowledge.
Before proceeding with our task, w€ must ask a fundamental
question t Ho* authentic are today's texts? It is a question which
entsils an examination of the circumstances surrounding their
composition and the way in which they have come down to us.
In the West the critical study of the Scriptures is something
quite reeent. For hundreds of years people were content to accept
the Bible-both Old and New Testaments-as it was. A reading
produced nothing more than remarks vindicating it. It would
it"u" been a sin to level the slightest criticism at it. The clergy
were priviledged in that they were easily able to have a compre-
hensive knowledge of the Bible, while the maiority of laymen
hesrd only selected readings as part of a sermon or the liturgy'
Raised to the level of a speeialized study, textual criticism has
been valuable in uncovering and disseminating problems which
sre often very serious. How disappointing it is therefore to read
works of a so-called critical nature which, when faced with very
real problems of interpretation, merely provide passages of an
apologetical nature by means of which the author contrives to
hide his dilemma. Whoever retains his objective iudgment and
power of thought at such a moment will not find the improbabil-
iti*s and contradictions any the less persistent. One can only re-
gret an attitude which, in the face of all logical reason' upholds
cer-tain passages in the Biblical Scriptures even though they are
riddled with *"*o"t. It can exercise an extremely damaging in-
fluence upon the cultivated mind with regard to belief in God'
Experience shows however that even if the few are able to dis-
tinguish fallacies of this kind, the vast majority of christians
have never taken any account of such incompatibilities with their
secular knowledg:e, even though they are often very elementary.
Islam has something relatively comparable to the Gospels in
some of the Hadiths. These are the collected sayings of Muham-
mad and stories of his deeds. The Gospels are nothing other than
this for Jesus. Some of the collections of Hadiths were written
decsdes after the death of Muhammad' just as the Gospels were
writtcn decades after Jesus. In both cases they bear human wit-
ness to events in the past. We shall see how, contrary to what
many people think, the authors of the four Canonic Gospels were
theexaminationoftheScripturesthemselves inthelightof
modernscientificknowledge.
Beforeproceeding
withourtask,we mustaskafundamental
question:Howauthentic
aretoday'stexts?Itisaquestionwhich
entails
anexaminationofthecircumstancessurrounding their
compositionandthewayinwhichtheyhavecomedown tous.
IntheWt!stthecriticalstudy oftheScripturesissomething
quiterecent.
Forhundredsof yearspeoplewerecontenttoaccept
theBible-bothOldandNewTestaments-asitwas.Areading
producednothingmore
thanremarksvindicatingit. Itwould
havebeena
sintoleveltheslightestcriticism atit.Theclergy
werepriviledged
inthattheywereeasilyabletohaveacompre­
hensiveknowledge
oftheBible,while themajorityoflaymen
heardonlyselectedreadings aspartofasermon ortheliturgy.
Raised
tothelevelofaspecializedstudy,textualcriticism has
beenvaluable inuncoveringanddisseminatingproblemswhich
areoftenveryserious.Howdisappointing itisthereforeto read
worksofaso-calledcritical naturewhich,whenfacedwithvery
realproblems
ofinterpretation,merelyprovidepassages ofan
apologeticalnaturebymeans ofwhichthe authorcontrivesto
hidehisdilemma.Whoever
retainshisobjectivejudgmentand
powerofthoughtatsuchamomentwill notfindtheimprobabil­
ities
andcontradictionsanythelesspersistent.Onecanonlyre­
gretanattitudewhich,inthefaceofalllogicalreason,upholds
certainpassagesintheBiblicalScriptureseventhoughthey are
riddledwith errors. Itcanexerciseanextremelydamagingin­
fluenceupon
thecultivatedmind withregardtobeliefin God.
Experienceshowshowever thatevenifthefewareabletodis­
tinguishfallacies
ofthiskind,thevastmajorityofChristians
havenevertaken
anyaccountofsuchincompatibilitieswith their
secularknowledge,eventhoughthey areoftenveryelementary.
Islam
hassomethingrelativelycomparabletotheGospels in
someoftheHadiths.These arethecollectedsayingsofMuham­
mad
andstoriesofhisdeeds.TheGospels arenothingotherthan
thisforJesus.Some ofthecollectionsofHadithswerewritten
decadesafterthedeathofMuhammad,justastheGospelswere
writtendecadesafterJesus.Inbothcasesthey bearhumanwit­
ness
toeventsinthepast.Weshallseehow, contrarytowhat
manypeople think,theauthorsofthefourCanonicGospelswere

15. vl TIIE BIBLF,, TIIE QIJn'AN AIYD SCIENCE
not the witnesses of the events they relate. The same is true of
the Hadiths referred to at the end of this book.
Ifere the comparison must end because even if the authenticity
of such-and-such a Hadith has been discussed and is still under
discussion, in the early centuries of the Church the problem of
the vast number of Gospels was definitively decided. only four
of them were proclaimed official, or eanonic, in spite of the many
points on whieh they do not agree, and order was given for the
rest to be concealed; hence the term
,Apoerypha'.
Another fundamental difference in the Scriptures of Chris-
tionity and Islam is the fact that Christianity does not have
a text which is both revealed and written down. Islam, however,
has the Qur'an which fits this description.
The Qur'an is the expression of the Revelation made to Muham-
mad by the Arehangel Gabriel, which was immediately taken
down, and was memorized and recited by the faithful in their
prayers, especially during the month of Ramadan. Muhammad
himself arranged it into suras, and these were collected soon
after the death of the Prophet, to form, under the rule of Caliph
uthman (Lz to 24 years after the prophet's
death), the text we
know today.
fn contrast to this, the Christian Revelation is based on nu-
merous indirect human accounts. We do not in faet have an eye-
witness account from the life of Jesus, contrary to what many
Christians imagine. The question of the authenticity of the Chris-
tian and Islamic texts has thus now been formulated.
The eonfrontation between the texts of the Scriptures and
seientific data has always provided man with food for thought.
It was st first held that corroboration between the scriptures
and science was a necessary element to the authenticity of the
sacred t€xt. Saint Augustine, in Ietter No. gp,
which we shall
quote later on, formally established this principle. As seience
progressed however it beeame clear that there were discrepancies
between Biblical Scripture and science. It was therefore decided
that eomparison would no longer be made. Thus a situation arose
which today, we are forced to admit, puts Biblical exegetes and
scientists in opposition to one another. We eannot, after all, ac-
cept a divine Revelation making statements which are totally
inaccurate. There was only one way of logieally reeouciling ilre
THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
notthewitnessesoftheeventstheyrelate.Thesameis trueof
theHadithsreferredtoattheendofthisbook.
Herethecomparison
mustendbecauseeven iftheauthenticity
ofsuch-and-sucha Hadithhasbeendiscussed andisstillunder
discussion,in
theearlycenturies oftheChurchtheproblemof
thevastnumber
ofGospelswasdefinitivelydecided.Onlyfour
ofthemwereproclaimedofficial, orcanonic,inspite ofthemany
pointsonwhichtheydonotagree,
andorderwasgiven forthe
resttobeconcealed;hencethe termIApocrypha'.
Anotherfundamentaldifferencein
theScripturesofChris­
tianityandIslamis thefactthatChristianitydoes nothave
a
textwhichisbothrevealed andwrittendown.Islam,however,
has
theQur'anwhichfitsthisdescription.
TheQur'anis
theexpressionof theRevelationmade toMuham­
madby
theArchangelGabriel,whichwasimmediatelytaken
down,andwasmemorized'andrecitedby
thefaithfulintheir
prayers,especially duringthemonthofRamadan.Muhammad
himself
arrangeditintosuras, andthesewerecollectedsoon
afterthedeathoftheProphet,toform,under theruleofCaliph
Uthman(12to
24yearsaftertheProphet'sdeath),thetextwe
knowtoday.
Incontrasttothis,theChristianRevelationisbasedonnu­
merousindirecthumanaccounts.We
donotinfacthaveaneye­
witnessaccountfrom
thelifeofJesus,contrarytowhatmany
Christiansimagine.Thequestionof
theauthenticityoftheChris­
tianandIslamictextshas thusnowbeenformulated.
Theconfrontationbetween
thetextsof theScripturesand
scientific
datahasalwaysprovided manwithfood forthought.
Itwasatfirstheld thatcorroborationbetween thescriptures
andsciencewasanecessaryelement totheauthenticityofthe
sacredtext.
SaintAugustine,in letterNo.82,whichweshall
quote
lateron,formallyestablished thisprinciple.Asscience
progressedhowever
itbecameclear thattherewerediscrepancies
betweenBiblicalScripture
andscience.Itwasthereforedecided
thatcomparisonwouldnolongerbemade.Thusasituationarose
whichtoday,we
areforcedtoadmit,putsBiblicalexegetes and
scientistsinoppositiontooneanother.Wecannot, afterall,ac­
ceptadivineRevelationmakingstatementswhich aretotally
inaccurate.Therewasonlyonewayoflogieallyreconciling the

16. Iffin vli
two; it lay in not considering I psssage containing uneceeptrbh
scientific data to be genuine. This solution was not adopted. In-
steed, the integrity of the text was stubbornly maintlincd rnd
e!ryerts wene obliged to adopt a position on the truth of the Bib
Hcal Seriptures which, for the scientist, is hardly tenrble.
Like Saint Augustine for the Bible, Islom has always essumcd
thst the data contained in the Holy Scriptures were in sgr€s'
ment u/ith scientific fact. A modern examination of the Islamic
Bevelstion has not ceused a change in this position. As we shell
gee later on, the Qut'an deals with meny subiects of interest to
gcience, far more in fact than the Bible. There is no comparison
between the limitcd number of Biblical staternents which leed to
a confrontstion with science, and the profusion of subiects men-
tioned in the Qur'an thet are of a scientific nature. None of the
latter can be contested from a scientific point of view; this is the
basic fact that emerges fmm our study. We shall see at the end
of this work that such is not the case for the Hadiths. Thes€ arc
collections of the Prophet's sayings, set aside from the Qur'enic
Bevelation, certsin of which are scientifically unacceptable. fire
Hadiths in question have been under study in accordance with
the strict principles of the Qurtan which dictate that science snd
reason should elways be referred to, if necessary to deprive them
of any authenticity.
These reflections on the scientifieally acceptable or unaccepL
able nsture of a certain Scripture need some explanetion. It must
be strcssed that when scientific data are discussed here, whrt ic
meant is dats definitely estsblished. This considerstion rules out
any explanatory theories, once useful in illuminating a phenome'
non and easily dispensed with to make way for further explrnr'
tions more in keeping with scientific progress. What I intend to
consider here are incontrovertible facts and even if science csn
only provide incomplete data, they will nevertheless be sufficiently
well established to be used without fesr of error.
Scientists do not, for example, have even 8n approximate date
for man's appearance on Earth. They have however discovered
remains of human worhs which we can situate beyond a shadow
of a doubt at before the tenth millenium B.C. Hence we cannot
consider the Biblieal reality on this subject to be competible with
science. In the Biblical text of Genesis, the dates and geneelogie
llllrGdacflon vii
two;itlayinnotconsideringapassagecontaininl'unacceptable
scientific
datatobegenuine.Thissolutionwasnotadopted.In­
stead,theintegrityofthe
textwasstubbornlymaintainedand
expertswereobliged
toadoptapositiononthe truthoftheBib­
licalScriptureswhich,
forthescientist,ishardlytenable.
LikeSaintAugustine
fortheBible,Islamhasalwaysassumed
thatthedatacontainedintheHolyScriptureswere inagree­
mentwithscientificfact.AmodernexaminationoftheIslamic
Revelationhasnotcausedachange
inthisposition.Asweshall
see
lateron,theQur'andealswithmanysubjectsofinterest to
science,farmoreinfactthantheBible.Thereis nocomparison
between
thelimitednumberofBiblicalstatementswhichlead to
aconfrontationwithscience,and theprofusionofsubjectsmen­
tioned
intheQur'anthatareofascientificnature.Noneofthe
lattercanbecontestedfromascientificpointofview;thisisthe
basicfact
thatemergesfrom ourstudy.Weshallsee attheend
ofthiswork thatsuchisnotthecasefortheHadiths.These are
collectionsoftheProphet'ssaYings,setasidefromtheQur'anic
Revelation,certain
ofwhicharescientificallyunacceptable.The
Hadithsinquestionhavebeenunderstudyinaccordancewith
thestrictprinciplesoftheQur'anwhichdictate thatscienceand
reasonshouldalways
bereferredto,ifnecessarytodeprivethem
ofanyauthenticity.
Thesereflectionson
thescientificallyacceptable orunaecept­
ablenatureofacertainScriptureneedsomeexplanation.
Itmust
bestressedthatwhenscientificdata arediscussedhere, whatis
meantis
datadefinitelyestablished.Thisconsiderationrulesout
anyexplanatorytheories,onceuseful
inilluminatingaphenome­
nonandeasilydispensedwithtomakewayfor
furtherexplana­
tionsmore
inkeepingwithscientificprogress.WhatIintend to
considerhere areincontrovertiblefactsandeven ifsciencecan
onlyprovideincompletedata,theywillneverthelessbesufficiently
wellestablishedto
beusedwithout fearoferror.
Scientists
donot,forexample,haveeven anapproximatedate
forman'sappearanceon
Earth.Theyhavehoweverdiscovered
remainsofhumanworkswhichwecansituatebeyondashadow
ofadoubt
atbeforethetenthmilleniumB.C.Hencewecannot
considertheBiblicalrealityonthissubjectto
becompatiblewith
science.
IntheBiblicaltextofGenesis,thedatesand I'enealo~es

17. THE BIBI.E, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENGE
given would plaee man's origins (i.e. the ereation of Adsm) at
roughly thirty-seven centuries B.C. In the future, science may be
able to provide us with data that are more precise than our
present ealculations, but we may rest assured that it wilt never
tell us that man first appeared on Earth E,?86 years ag:o, as does
the Hebraic calendar for 1975. The Biblical data eoncerning the
antiquity of man are therefore inaccurate.
This confrontation with science excludes all religious prob-
lems in the true sense of the word. Science does not, for example,
have any explanation of the process whereby God manifested
Himself to Moses. The same may be said for the mystery sur-
rounding the manner in which Jesus was born in the absence of
a biological father. The Scriptures moreover give no material
explanation of such data. This present study is concerned with
what the Scriptures tell us about extremely varied natural phe-
nomena, which they surround to a lesser or greater extent with
commentaries and explanations. With this in mind, we must nrte
the contrast between the rich abundance of information on a
given subject in the Qur'anic Revelation anrl the modesty of the
other two revelations on the same subject.
It was in a totally objective spirit, and without any precon-
ceived ideas that I first examined the Qur'anic Revelation. r was
Iooking for the degree of compatibility between the eur'anic
text and the data of modern science. r knew from translations
that the Qur'an often made allusion to all sorts of natural phe-
nomena, but I had only a summary knowledge of it. It was only
when I examined the text very closely in Arabic that I kept a list
of them at the end of which I had to acknowledge the evidence
in front of me; the Qur'an did not contain a single statement
that was assailable from a mocern scientific point of view.
r repeated the same test for the old Testament and the Gos-
pels, always preserving the $ame objective ouflook. In the former
I did not even have to go beyond the first book, Genesis, to find
statements totally out of keeping with the cast-iron facts of
modern science,
on opening the Gospels, one is immediately confronted with a
serious problem. on the first page we find the genealogy of Jesus,
but Matthew's text is in evident contradiction to Luke,s on the
same question. There is a further problem in that the latter,s
viii THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
givenwouldplace man'sorigins(i.e.thecreation ofAdam)at
roughlythirty-sevencenturiesB.C. Inthefuture,sciencemaybe
able
toprovideuswith datathataremoreprecise thanour
presentcalculations, butwemay restassuredthatitwillnever
tellus
thatmanfirstappearedon Earth5,736yearsago, asdoes
theHebraiccalendar
for1975.TheBiblical dataconcerningthe
antiquityofmanarethereforeinaccurate.
Thisconfrontationwithscienceexcludesallreligiousprob­
lems
inthetruesenseoftheword.Sciencedoesnot,forexample,
have
anyexplanationoftheprocesswherebyGodmanifested
Himself
toMoses.Thesame maybesaidforthemysterysur­
rounding
themannerinwhichJesuswasbornin theabsenceof
abiologicalfather.TheScripturesmoreovergivenomaterial
explanation
ofsuchdata.This presentstudyisconcernedwith
whattheScripturestellusaboutextremelyvaried naturalphe­
nomena,whichthey
surroundtoalesserorgreaterextentwith
commentaries
andexplanations.Withthisinmind,we mustn)te
thecontrastbetweentherichabundance ofinformationona
givensubject
intheQur'anicRevelation andthemodestyofthe
othertworevelationson thesamesubject.
Itwasinatotallyobjectivespirit,andwithoutanyprecon­
ceivedideas
thatIfirstexaminedtheQur'anicRevelation.Iwas
looking
forthedegree ofcompatibilitybetweentheQur'anic
textandthe dataofmodernscience.Iknewfromtranslations
thattheQur'anoftenmadeallusiontoall sortsofnaturalphe­
nomena,
butIhadonlya summaryknowledgeofit. Itwasonly
whenIexamined
thetextverycloselyinArabicthatIkeptalist
ofthemattheendofwhichI hadtoacknowledgetheevidence
infrontofme:theQur'andidnotcontainasinglestatement
thatwasassailablefromamodernscientificpoint ofview.
Irepeatedthesame
testfortheOldTestamentandthe Gos­
pels,alwayspreservingthesameobjectiveoutlook. Intheformer
Ididnotevenhave
togobeyondthefirstbook,Genesis,tofind
statementstotally
outofkeepingwiththecast-ironfactsof
modernscience.
Onopening
theGospels,oneisimmediatelyconfrontedwitha
seriousproblem.On
thefirstpagewefindthegenealogy ofJesus,
butMatthew'stextisinevidentcontradictiontoLuke'sonthe
samequestion.Thereisa
furtherprobleminthatthelatter's

18. Infiodwtkm
rx
data on the antiquity of man on Earth sre incompatible with
modern knowledge.
The existence of these contradictions, improbabilities and in-
compatibilities does not seem to me to detract from the belief in
God. They involve only man's responsibility. No one can say
what the original texts might have been, or identify imaginative
editing, deliberate manipulations of them by men, or uninten-
tional modification of the Scriptures. What strikes us today,
when we realize Biblical contradictions and incompatibilities
with well-established scientific data, is how specialists studying
the texts either pretend to be unaware of them, or else draw at-
tention to these defects then try to camouflage them with dia-
lectic acrobatics. When we come to the Gospels according to
Matthew and John, I shall provide examples of this brilliant use
of apologetical turns of phrase by eminent experts in exegesis.
Often the attempt to camouflage an improbability or a contra-
diction, prudishly called a
'difficulty',
is suecessful. This explains
why so many Christians are unaware of the serious defects con-
tained in the Old Testament and the Gospels. The reader will
find precise examples of these in the first and second parts of
this work.
In the third ped, there is the illustration of an unusual appli-
cation of science to a holy Scripture, the contribution of modern
secular knowledge to a better understanding of certain verses in
the Qur'an which until now have remained enigmatic, if not
incomprehensible. Why should we be surprised at this when
we know that, for Islam, religion and science have always been
considered twin sisters? From the very beginning, Islam directed
people to cultivate science; the applieation of this precept
brought with it the prodigious strides in seience taken during
the great era of Islamic civilization, from which, before the
Renaissance, the West itself benefited. In the confrontation be-
tween the Scriptures and science a high point of understanding
has been reached owing to the light thrown on Qur'anic passages
by modern scientific knowledge. Previously these passages were
obscure owning to the non-availability of knowledge which could
help interpret them.
Introduction
dataontheantiquityofmanonEarthareincompatiblewith
modernknowledge.
Theexistenceofthesecontradictions,improbabilities andin­
compatibilitiesdoes
notseemtometo detractfromthebeliefin
God.Theyinvolveonly
man'sresponsibility.Noonecansay
whattheoriginaltexts mighthavebeen, oridentifyimaginative
editing,deliberatemanipulations
ofthembymen, oruninten­
tionalmodification
oftheScriptures.Whatstrikesustoday,
whenwerealizeBiblicalcontradictions
andincompatibilities
withwell-establishedscientificdata, ishowspecialistsstudying
thetextseitherpretendtobeunawareofthem,orelsedrawat­
tentiontothesedefects thentrytocamouflagethemwithdia­
lecticacrobatics.Whenwecome
totheGospelsaccordingto
Matthew
andJohn,Ishallprovideexamples ofthisbrilliantuse
ofapologetical
turnsofphrasebyeminentexpertsinexegesis.
Often
theattempttocamouflageanimprobabilityoracontra­
diction,prudishlycalleda'difficulty',
issuccessful.Thisexplains
whyso
manyChristiansareunawareoftheseriousdefectscon­
tained
intheOldTestamentandtheGospels.Thereaderwill
findpreciseexamples
oftheseinthefirstandsecondpartsof
thiswork.
Inthethirdpart,thereistheillustrationofanunusualappli­
cation
ofsciencetoaholyScripture, thecontributionofmodern
secularknowledgetoa
betterunderstandingofcertainversesin
theQur'anwhichuntilnowhaveremainedenigmatic, ifnot
incomprehensible.Whyshouldwebe surprisedatthiswhen
weknow
that,forIslam,religion andsciencehavealwaysbeen
considered
twinsisters?Fromtheverybeginning,Islamdirected
people
tocultivatescience; theapplicationofthisprecept
broughtwithittheprodigiousstridesinsciencetakenduring
thegreateraofIslamiccivilization, fromwhich,before the
Renaissance,theWestitselfbenefited. Intheconfrontationbe­
tweentheScripturesandsciencea highpointofunderstanding
hasbeenreachedowing tothelightthrownonQur'anicpassages
bymodernscientificknowledge.Previouslythesepassageswere
obscureowningto
thenon-availabilityofknowledgewhichcould
help
interpretthem.

19. t
The Old
Testarrrcnt
General Outlines
\Mho is the author of the Old Testsment?
One wonders how many readers of the Otd Testarnent, if asked
the above question, would reply by repeating what they had
read in the introduction to their Bible. They might snswer that'
even though it was wri.tten by men inspired by the Holy GhosL
the author was God.
Sometimes, the author of the Bible's presentation confines
himself to informing his reader of this succinct obseryation
which puts an end to all further questions. Sometimes he corrects
it by warning him that detsils may subsequently have be+n added
to the primitive text by men, but that nonetheless, the litigious
character of a passsge does not alter the general
'truth'
that
proceeds from it. This
'truth'
is stressed very heavily. The
Church Authorities answer for it, being the only body, with the
essistance of the Holy Ghost, able to enlighten the faithful on
guch points. Since the Councils held in the Fogrth century, it was
the Church that issued the list of Holy Books, ratified by the
Councils of Florence (1441), Trent (1546), and the First Vati-
can Council (18?0), to form what today is known as the Canon-
Just recently, after 8o many encyclicals, the Second Vatican
Council published a text concerning the Revelation which is ex-
tremely important. It took three yesrs (1962-1965) of strenuous
I
ThEOld
TEstamEnt
Gene..alOutlines
Whois theauthoroftheOldTestament?
Onewondershowmanyreaders
oftheOldTestament, ifasked
theabovequestion,wouldreplybyrepeating whattheyhad
readintheintroductiontotheirBible.They mightanswerthat,
eventhough itwaswrittenbymeninspiredbytheHolyGhost,
theauthorwasGod.
Sometimes,theauthoroftheBible'spresentationconfines
himself
toinforminghis readerofthissuccinctobservation
whichputs
anendtoallfurtherquestions.Sometimeshecorrects
itbywarninghim thatdetailsmay'Subsequentlyhavebeenadded
totheprimitivetextbymen,butthatnonetheless,thelitigious
characterofapassagedoesnot
alterthegeneral'truth'that
proceedsfromit.This 'truth'isstressedveryheavily.The
ChurchAuthoritiesanswer
forit,beingtheonlybody,with the
assistanceoftheHolyGhost,able toenlightenthefaithfulon
suchpoints.Since
theCouncilsheldinthe Fourthcentury,itwas
theChurchthatissuedthelistofHolyBooks,ratifiedbythe
CouncilsofFlorence(1441),
Trent(1546),andthe FirstVati­
canCouncil(1870),toform
whattodayisknown astheCanon.
Justrecently,aftersomanyencyclicals,theSecondVatican
Councilpublisheda
textconcerningtheRevelationwhichisex­
tremelyimportant.
Ittookthreeyears(1962-1965)ofstrenuous
1

20. g
THE BIBLF", TIIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
effort to produce. The vast majority of the Bible's readers who
find this highly reassuring information at the head of a modern
edition have been quite satisfied with the guarantees of authen-
tieity made over past centuries and have hardly thought it possi-
ble to debate them.
When one refers however to works written by clergymen, not
meant for mass publication, one realizes that the question con-
cerning the authenticity of the books in the Bible is much more
complex than one might suppose o pri,ori. For example, when
one consults the modern publication in separate installments of
the Bible in French translated under the guidance of the Bibli-
cal School of Jerusalemr, the tone appears to be very different.
one realizes that the old Testament, like the New Testament,
raises problems with controversial elements that, for the most
part, the authors of commentaries have not conceared.
we also find highly precise data in more condensed studies of
a very objective nature, such as Professor Edmond Jacob's
study; The Old Testament (L'Ancien Testament)'. This book
gives an excellent general view.
Many people are unaware, and Edmond Jacob points this out,
that there were originally a number of texts and not just one.
Around the Thi'rd century 8.C., there were at least three forms
of the Hebrew text: the text which was to become the Masoretic
text, the text which was used, in part at least, for the Greek
translation, and the Samaritan Pentateuch. In the First century
8.C., there was a tendency towards the establishment of a single
text, but it was tiot until a century after Christ that the Biblical
text was definitely established.
If we had had the three forrns of the text, comparison would
have been possible, and we could have reached an opinion con-
cerning what the original might have been. unfortunately, we
do not have the slightest idea. Apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls
(Cave of Qumran) dating from a pre-Christian era near the
time of Jesus, a papyrus of the Ten Commandments of the Sec-
ond century A.D. presenting variations from the classical text,
and a few fragments from the Fifth century A.D. (Geniza of
1. Pub. Cerf, Paris
2. Pub. Presses universitaires de France, paris ,.eue
sais-je?" colleetion
THEBmLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
efforttoproduce.ThevastmajorityoftheBible'sreaderswho
find
thishighlyreassuringinformationattheheadofamodern
editionhavebeen quitesatisfiedwiththeguaranteesofauthen­
ticitymadeover pastcenturiesandhavehardlythoughtitpossi­
ble
todebatethem.
Whenone refershowevertoworkswrittenbyclergymen,not
meantformasspublication,onerealizes thatthequestioncon­
cerningtheauthenticityofthebooksintheBibleis muchmore
complexthanonemightsupposeapriori.Forexample,when
oneconsults
themodernpublication inseparateinstallmentsof
theBibleinFrenchtranslatedundertheguidanceoftheBibli­
calSchool
ofJerusaleml,thetoneappearstobeverydifferent.
Onerealizes
thattheOldTestament,liketheNewTestament,
raisesproblemswithcontroversialelements that,forthemost
part,theauthorsofcommentarieshavenotconcealed.
Wealsofindhighlyprecise
datainmorecondensedstudiesof
averyobjectivenature,suchasProfessorEdmondJacob's
study:TheOld Testament(L'AncienTestament)2.Thisbook
gives
anexcellentgeneralview.
Manypeopleareunaware,andEdmondJacobpointsthisout,
thattherewereoriginallya numberoftextsandnotjustone.
AroundtheThirdcenturyB.C.,therewereatleastthreeforms
oftheHebrewtext:thetextwhichwastobecometheMasoretic
text,
thetextwhichwasused,inpartatleast,fortheGreek
translation,andtheSamaritanPentateuch.IntheFirstcentury
B.C.,therewasatendency towardstheestablishmentofasingle
text,
butitwasnotuntila centuryafterChristthattheBiblical
textwasdefinitelyestablished.
Ifwehadhadthethreeformsofthetext,comparisonwould
havebeenpossible,
andwecouldhavereachedanopinioncon­
cerningwhattheoriginalmighthavebeen. Unfortunately,we
do
nothavetheslightestidea.ApartfromtheDeadSeaScrolls
(Cave
ofQumran)datingfromapre-Christianeranearthe
timeofJesus,a papyrusoftheTenCommandmentsoftheSec­
ond
centuryA.D.presentingvariationsfromtheclassicaltext,
andafewfragmentsfromtheFifthcenturyA.D.(Genizaof
1.Pub.Ced,Paris
2.Pub.PressesUniversitairesdeFrance,Paris"Quesais-je?"collection

21. Cairo), the oldest Hebrew text of the Bible dates from the Ninth
century A.D.
The Septuagint was probably the first translation in Greek.
It dates from the Third eentury B.C. and was written by Jews
in Alexandria. It was on this text that the l'Iew Testament was
based. It remained authoritative until the Seventh century A.D.
The basic Greek texts in general use in the Christian world are
from the manuscripts catalogued under the title Cod'en Vatica'mn
in the Vatiean City and Coden Sinniticus at the British Museum,
London. They date from the Fourth century A.D'
At the beginning of the Fifth century A.D., Saint Jerome was
able to produce a text in latin using Hebrew documents. It was
later to be called thle Vulgate on account of its universal distribu-
tion after the Seventh century A.D.
For the record, we shall mention the Aramaic version and
the Syriac (Peshitta) version, but these are incomplete.
All of these versions have enabled specialists to piece together
so-called
'middle-of-the-road'
texts, a, sort of compromise be-
tween the different versions. Multi-tingual collections have also
been produced whieh iuxtapose the Hebrew, Greek, Latin'
Syriac, Aramaic and even Arabic versions. This is the case of
the famous Walton Bible (London, 165?). For the sake of
completeness, let us mention that diverging Biblical conceptions
a""
"e*ponsible
for the fact that the various Christian churches
do not all accept exactly the same books and have not until now
had identical ideas on translation into the same language. The
Eatmeni,cal Translation of the OId Testament is a work of uni-
fication wriiten by numerous Catholic and Protestant experts
now nearing completionr and should result in a work of syn-
thesis.
Thus the humau element in the Old Testament is seen to be
quite considerable. It is not difficult to understand why from
version to version, and translation to translation, rvith all the
corrections inevitably resulting, it was possible for the original
text to have been transformed during the course of more than
two thousand years.
l. Translator's Note: Published December f9?5 by Les Editions du Cerf
and l.cs Bergers et les Mages, Paris
TheOldTestamen' 3
Cairo),theoldestHebrew textoftheBibledatesfromthe Ninth
centuryA.D.
TheSeptuagintwasprobably
thefirsttranslationinGreek.
Itdatesfromthe ThirdcenturyB.C.andwas writtenbyJews
inAlexandria.Itwasonthis textthattheNewTestamentwas
based.
ItremainedauthoritativeuntiltheSeventhcenturyA.D.
ThebasicGreektexts
ingeneraluseintheChristianworld are
fromthemanuscriptscataloguedunder thetitleCodexVaticanus
intheVaticanCity
andCodexSinaiticus attheBritishMuseum,
London.Theydatefrom
theFourthcenturyA.D.
Atthebeginningof theFifthcenturyA.D., SaintJeromewas
abletoproducea
textinlatinusingHebrewdocuments. Itwas
latertobecalledtheVulgateonaccountof itsuniversaldistribu­
tion
aftertheSeventhcenturyA.D.
Fortherecord,weshallmentiontheAramaicversionand
theSyriac(Peshitta)version,buttheseareincomplete.
All
oftheseversionshaveenabledspecialiststopiecetogether
so-called'middle-of-the-road'texts,a
sortofcompromise be­
tweenthedifferentversions.Multi-lingualcollectionshavealso
beenproducedwhichjuxtapose
theHebrew,Greek,Latin,
Syriac,Aramaic
andevenArabicversions.This isthecaseof
thefamousWaltonBible (London, 1657).Forthesakeof
completeness,letusmention thatdivergingBiblicalconceptions
areresponsibleforthefactthatthevariousChristianchurches
do
notallacceptexactly thesamebooks andhavenotuntilnow
hadidenticalideasontranslationintothesamelanguage.The
EcumenicalTranslation
oftheOldTestamentisaworkofuni­
fication
writtenbynumerousCatholicand Protestantexperts
now
nearingcompletion
1andshouldresult inaworkofsyn­
thesis.
Thus
thehumanelement intheOldTestamentisseen tobe
quiteconsiderable.Itisnotdifficulttounderstandwhyfrom
version
toversion,andtranslationtotranslation,withallthe
correctionsinevitablyresulting,
itwaspossiblefortheoriginal
texttohavebeentransformed during thecourseofmore than
twothousandyears.
1.Translator'sNote: PublishedDecemberf975byLesEditionsduCerf
andLesBergersetlesMages, Paris

22. 1 TIIE BBI.F,, TIIE QI,'R'AN AND SGAENCE
ORIGINS OF THE BIBLE
Before it became a collection of books, it uras a folk tradition
that relied entirely upon human memory, originally the only
means of passing on ideas. This tradition was sung,.
"At an elementary stage, writes E. Jacob, errery people sings;
in Israel, as elsewhere, poetry preceded prose. Israel r"ng long
and well; Ied by circumstances of his history to the treiehts of
ioy and the depths of despair, taking part with intense leeling
in all that happened to it, for everything in their eyes had a
sense, Israel gave its song a wide variety of expression". They
sgng for the most diverse reasons and E. Jacob mentions a
number of them to which we find the accompanying songs in the
Bible: eating songs, harvest songs, songs connected with work,
like the famous well song (Numbers zL, 1r7), wedding songs,
as in the Song of Songs, and mourning songs. In the Bible there
are numerous songs of war and among these we find the song
of Deborah (Judges 5, 1-32) exalting fsrael's victory desired
and led by Yahweh Himself, (Numbers 10, 85) ;
,,Ahd
whenever
ttre ark (of alliance) set out, Moses said,
,Arise,
oh yahweh,
snd let thy enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee
flee before thee"'.
There are also the Maxims and proverbs (Book of proverbs,
Proverbs and Maxims of the Historic Books), words of blessing
and curse, and the laws decreed to man by the prophets
on re-
ception of their Divine mandate.
E. Jacobs notes that these words were either passed down
from family to family or channelled through the sanctuaries in
the form of an account of the history of God's chosen people.
History quickly turned into fable, as in the Fable of Jotham
(Judges g, 7-z1-), where "the trees went forth to anoint a king
over them; and they asked in turn the olive tree, the fig tree,
the vine and the bramble", which allows E. Jacob to note
..ani-
mated by the need to t€tl a good story, the narration was not
perturbed by subjects or times whose history was not well
known", from which he concludes:
"rt is proba,ble thst what the old restament narrates about
Moses and the patriarchs only roughly corresponds to the suc-
cession of hisboric facts. The narrators however, even at the
stage of oral trsnsmigsion, wene able to bring into play suctl
4 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
ORIGINSOFTHEBIBLE
Beforeitbecameacollection ofbooks,itwasafolktradition
thatreliedentirelyuponhumanmemory,originally theonly
means
ofpassingonideas.Thistraditionwassung.
"Atanelementarystage,writesE.Jacob,everypeople sings;
inIsrael,aselsewhere,poetryprecededprose.Israel sanglong
andwell;ledbycircumstancesof
hishistorytotheheightsof
joyandthedepths ofdespair,takingpartwithintensefeeling
inall
thathappenedtoit, foreverythingin theireyeshada
sense,Israelgave
itssongawidevarietyofexpression".They
sangfor themostdiversereasons andE.Jacobmentionsa
number
ofthemtowhich wefindtheaccompanyingsongsin the
Bible:eatingsongs,harvestsongs,songsconnected withwork,
likethefamousWellSong(Numbers21,
17),weddingsongs,
asintheSong ofSongs,andmourningsongs. IntheBiblethere
arenumeroussongs ofwarandamongthesewefind theSong
ofDeborah(Judges 5,1-32)exaltingIsrael'svictorydesired
andledbyYahwehHimself,(Numbers
10,35);"Andwhenever
theark(ofalliance)setout,Mosessaid,'Arise,ohYahweh,
andletthyenemiesbescattered;andletthem thathatethee
fleebeforethee' ".
TherearealsotheMaximsandProverbs(Book ofProverbs,
Proverbs
andMaximsoftheHistoricBooks),words ofblessing
andcurse,andthelawsdecreedtomanbytheProphetsonre­
ceptionof
theirDivinemandate.
E.Jacobsnotes thatthesewordswereeitherpasseddown
fromfamily
tofamilyorchannelledthrough thesanctuariesin
theformofanaccountofthehistoryofGod'schosenpeople.
Historyquickly
turnedintofable, asintheFableof Jotham
(Judges9,7-21),where "thetreeswent forthtoanointaking
over
them;andtheyaskedin turntheolivetree,thefigtree,
thevineandthebramble",whichallowsE.Jacob tonote"ani­
matedbytheneed
totellagoodstory,the narrationwasnot
perturbedbysubjects ortimeswhosehistorywas notwell
known",fromwhichheconcludes:
"Itisprobs.blethatwhattheOldTestament narratesabout
Mosesandthe
patriarchsonlyroughlycorrespondsto thesuc­
cessionofhistoricfacts.The
narratorshowever,even atthe
stageoforaltransmission,wereableto bringintoplaysuch

23. Trpol|dTffircnt
f
gmce and imsgination to btend between them hishly varied epi-
sodes, that when all is said and done, they were able to present
ar a history thtt was fairly credible to criticsl thinkers what
heppened at the beginning of humanity aud the world".
Therc is good 1re88on to believe thst after the Jewish people
settled in Canean, et tlre end of the Thirteenth century B.C.,
writtns was us€d to preserve and hand down the tradition. There
wes not however complete accurscy' even in what to men seema
to demand the greatest durability, i.e. the lgws. Among these,
the trrws which sre supposed to have been written by God's own
hend, the Ten Commindments, were transmitt€d in the Old
Testrment in two versions; Exodus (20' 1-21) and Deuteronomy
(6, 130). Ttrey are the same in spirit, but the variations are
obvious. There is elso a concern to keep a large written record
of contracts, letters, lists of personalities (Judges, high ciff
ofrcials, genealogical tables), lists of ofrerings and plunder. [n
thle way, archives were creatcd which provided documentation
for the later editing of definitive works resulting in the books
we have todey. firus in each book there is a mixture of difterent
literary genres: it can be left to the specialists to find the rea-
tons for this odd assorlrnent of documents.
The otd Testsment is a disparate whole based upon an initially
onal tradition. It ie interesting therefore to compere the proeess
by which it was constituted with what could happen in another
period and another place at the time when a primitive literature
waB born.
Lct ug teke, for example, the birth of French literature at the
time of tfue Frankish Rofatty. The same oral tradition presided
over the presenration of important deeds: wars' often in the
defense of C'tr"istianity, various sensational events, where heroes
distinguished themselves, that were destined centuries later to
inspire court Fffits, chroniclers snd authors of vsrious
'cycles'.
In this wEY, ito* the Eleventh century A.D. onwards, these
narative poems, in which reality is mixed with legend, were
to sppear and constitute the first monument in epic poetry'
The most famous of all is the song of Roland (La Chanson de
Roland) a biographical chant about a feat of arms in which
Roland was the coilrmander of Emperor charlemagne's re&r-
gUerd on its wsy home from an expedition in Sp'rin. The sacri-
rINOldr........, 5
graceandimaginationtoblendbetweenthemhighlyvariedepi­
sodes,
thatwhenallis saidanddone,theywereable topresent
asahistorythatwasfairlycredibletocriticalthinkers what
happenedatthebeginningofhumanityand theworld".
Thereisgoodreason tobelievethataftertheJewishpeople
settled
inCanaan,attheendoftheThirteenthcenturyB.C.,
writingwasuaedtopreserveandhanddownthetradition.There
wasnothowevercompleteaccuracy,even inwhattomenseems
todemandthegreatestdurability,i.e. thelaws.Amongthese,
thelawswhich aresupposedtohavebeenwrittenbyGod'sown
band,
theTenCommandments,were transmittedintheOld
Testament
intwoversions;Exodus(20,1-21) andDeuteronomy
(6,
leBO).Theyarethesameinspirit, butthevariationsare
obvious.There isalsoaconcern tokeepa largewrittenrecord
ofcontracts,letters,lists ofpersonalities(Judges,highcity
officials,genealogicaltables),lists
ofofferingsandplunder.In
thisway,archiveswerecreatedwhichprovideddocumentation
forthelatereditingofdetinitiveworksresulting inthebooks
wehavetoday.Thusineachbookthereisamixture
ofdifferent
literarygenres:itcanbelefttothespecialiststofindtherea­
IODSforthisoddassortmentofdocuments.
TheOldTestamentisadisparatewholebasedupon aninitially
oraltradition.
Itisinterestingtherefore tocomparetheprocess
bywhich
itwasconstitutedwith whatcouldhappeninanother
periodandanotherplaceatthetimewhenaprimitive literature
wasborn.
Letustake,
forexample,the birthofFrenchliterature atthe
timeoftheFrankishRoyalty.Thesameoraltraditionpresided
over
thepreservationof importantdeeds:wars,often inthe
defenseofOhristianity,varioussensationalevents,whereheroes
distinguishedthemselves,
thatweredestinedcenturieslater to
inspirecourtpoets,chroniclersandauthors ofvarious'cycles'.
Inthisway,fromtheEleventhcentury A.D.onw·ards,these
narrativepoems,inwhichrealityismixedwithlegend,were
toappearandconstitutethefirstmonumentinepicpoetry.
Themostfamous ofallistheSong ofRoland(LaChansonde
Roland)abiographicalchantaboutafeatof
armsinwhich
Rolandwas
thecommanderofEmperorCharlemagne'srear­
guardonitswayhomefrom anexpeditioninSp:ain.Thesacri-

24. S THE BIBLE TIIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
fiee of Roland is not just an episode invented to meet the needs
of the story. It took place on r5th August, ??g. In actual fact it
was &n attack by Basques living in the mountains. This litersn'
work is not just legend; it has a historical basis, but no historisn
would take it literally.
This parallel between the birth of the Bible and a secular liter-
ature seems to correspond exactly with reality. It is in no way
meant to relegate the whole Biblical text as we know it today to
the store of mythological collections, as do so many of those who
systematieally negate the idea of God. It is perfecfly possible to
believe in the reality of the Creation, God's transmission to
Moses of the Ten commandments, Divine intercession in human
afrairs, e.g. at the time of solomon. This does not stop us, at tbe
same time, from considering that what has been conveyed to
us is the gist of these facts, and that the detail in the description
should be subjeeted to rigorous eritieism, the reason toi ttris
being that the element of human participation in the transcrip-
tion of originally oral traditions is so great.
8 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
liceofRolandisnotjustanepisodeinventedtomeet theneeds
ofthestory.Ittookplaceon15thAugust,778. Inactualfactit
wasanattackbyBasquesliving inthemountains.Thisliterary
workis notjustlegend;ithasahistoricalbasis, butnohistorian
wouldtakeitliterally.
Thisparallelbetween
thebirthoftheBibleandasecularliter­
atureseemstocorrespondexactlywithreality. Itisinnoway
meanttorelegatethewholeBiblical
textasweknowittodayto
thestoreofmythologicalcollections, asdosomany ofthosewho
systematicallynegate
theideaofGod.Itisperfectlypossible to
believeintherealityoftheCreation,God'stransmission to
MosesoftheTenCommandments,Divineintercession inhuman
affairs,e.g. atthetimeofSolomon.Thisdoes notstopus,atthe
sametime,fromconsidering thatwhathasbeenconveyed to
usisthe gistofthesefacts, andthatthedetailinthedescription
shouldbesubjectedtorigorouscriticism,
thereasonforthis
beingthattheelementofhumanparticipation inthetranscrip­
tionoforiginallyoral traditionsissogreat.

25. ll
The Books of the
Old Testarrrent
Ttre Old Testament is a collection of works of greatly differing
length and many different genres. They were written in severrl
languages over a period of more than nine hundred ye&rs' based
on oral traditions. Many of these works were corrected and com-
pleted in accordance with events or special requirements, often
at periods that were very distant from one another'
This copious literature probably flowered at the beginning of
the Israelite Monarchy, around the Eleventh century B.C. It
was at this period that a body of scribes appeared among the
members of the royal household. They were cultivated men whose
r6le uras not limited to writing. The first incompiete writings,
mentioned in the preceding chapter, may date from this period.
There was a special reason for writing these works down; there
were a certain number of songs (mentioned earlier), the prophe-
tic oracles of Jacob and Moses, the Ten Commandments and, on
a more general level, the legislative texts which established a
religious tradition before the formation of the law. All these
texts constitute fragments scattered here and there throughout
the various collections of the Old Testament.
It was not until a little later, possibly during the Tenth cen-
tury 8.C., that the so-called
'Yahvist"
text of the Pentateuch
was written. This text was to form the backbone of the first
five books ascribed to Moses. Later, the so-called
'Elohist'2
text
was to be added, and also the so-called
'sacerdotal'3
version. The
So called because God is named Yahweh in this text'
So cslled because God is named Elohim in this text'
Frorn the preachers in the Temple at Jerusalem'
1.
2.
B.
II
ThEI300ksofthE
OldTeslalDenl
TheOldTestamentisacollection ofworksofgreatlydiffering
length
andmanydifferentgenres.Theywere writtenin-several
languagesoveraperiod
ofmorethanninehundredyears,based
onoraltraditions.Many
oftheseworkswerecorrectedandcom­
pleted
inaccordancewithevents orspecialrequirements,often
atperiodsthatwereverydistantfromoneanother.
Thiscopious
literatureprobablyflowered atthebeginningof
theIsraeliteMonarchy,around theEleventhcenturyB.C. It
wasatthisperiod thatabodyofscribesappearedamong the
membersof theroyalhousehold.Theywere cultiVL edmenwhose
rolewas
notlimitedtowriting.Thefirstincompletewritings,
mentioned
intheprecedingchapter,maydatefromthisperiod.
Therewasaspecialreasonfor writingtheseworksdown; there
wereacertainnumber ofsongs(mentioned earlier),theprophe­
ticoracles
ofJacobandMoses,theTenCommandmentsand,on
amoregenerallevel,thelegislative
textswhichestablisheda
religious
traditionbeforetheformationofthelaw.Allthese
textsconstitutefragmentsscatteredhereandtherethroughout
thevariouscollectionsoftheOldTestament.
Itwasnotuntilalittlelater,possiblyduringtheTenthcen­
turyB.C.,thattheso-called'Yahvist'l textofthePentateuch
waswritten.This
textwastoform thebackboneofthefirst
fivebooksascribedtoMoses.Later, theso-called'Elohist'2 text
wastobeadded,andalsotheso-called'Sacerdota1'3version.The
1.SocalledbecauseGodis namedYahwehinthistext.
2.SocalledbecauseGod isnamedElohimin thistext.
3.FromthepreachersintheTempleatJerusalem.
1

26. g
THE BrBr q rHE QUnAN AND SCTENCE
initial Yahvist text deals with the origins of the world up to the
death of Jacob. This taxt comes from the southern kinsdom,
Judah,
At the end of the Ninth century and in the middle of the
Eighth century 8.C., the prophetic influence of Elias and Elisha
took shape and spread. We have their books today. This is also
the time of the Elohist text of the
pentateuch
which covers &
much small'er period than the Yahvist text because it limits itself
to facts relating to Abraham, Jacob and Joseph. The books of
Joshua and Judges date from this time.
The Eighth century B.c. saw the appearance of the writer-
prophets: Amos and Hosea in Israel, and Michah in Judah.
rn 721 8.c., the fall of samaria put an end to the Kingdom of
Israel. The Kingdom of Judah took over its religious heritage.
The collection of Proverbs dates from this period, distinguished
in particular by the fusion into a single book of the
yahvist
and
Elohist texts of the Pentateuch; in this way the Torah was eon-
stituted. Deuteronomy was written at this time.
In the second half of the seventh century 8.c., the reign of
Josiah coincided with the appearance of the prophet Jeremiah,
but his work did not take definitive shape until a century later.
Before the first deportation to Babylon in Egg 8.c., there
appeared the Books of zephaniah, Nahum and Habakkuk.
Ezekiel was already prophesying during this first deportation.
The fall of Jerusalem in E8? B.c. marked the beginning of the
second deportation which lasted until 5Bg B.C.
The Book of Ezekiel, the last great prophet and the prophet of
exile, was not arranged into its present form until after tris aeath
by the scribes that were to become his spiritual inlreritors. These
same scribes were to resume Genesis in a third version, the so-
ealled
'Sacerdotal'
version, for the section going from the Cre-
ation to the death of Jacob. In this way a third text was to be
inserted into the eentral fabric of the Yahvist and Elohist texts
of the Torah. We shall see later on, in the books written roughly
two and four centuries earlier, an aspect of the intricacies of
this third text. It was at this time that the Lamentations
appeared.
on the order of cyrus, the deportation to Babylon came to an
end in 538 B.c. The Jews returned to palestine
and the Temple
8 THEBIBLE,THEQUR·ANANDSCIENCE
initialYahvist textdealswith theoriginsoftheworldup tothe
deathofJacob.Thistextcomesfrom thesouthernkingdom,
Judah.
AttheendoftheNinthcenturyandinthemiddleof the
EighthcenturyB.C.,thepropheticinfluenceofElias andElisha
tookshape
andspread.Wehave theirbookstoday.Thisisalso
thetimeoftheElohisttextofthePentateuchwhichcoversa
muchsmallerperiod
thantheYahvisttextbecauseitlimitsitself
tofactsrelatingtoAbraham,Jacob andJoseph.Thebooks of
JoshuaandJudgesdatefromthistime.
TheEighthcenturyB.C. sawtheappearance ofthewriter­
prophets:AmosandHosea inIsrael,andMichah inJudah.
In721B.C.,thefallofSamariaputanendtotheKingdom of
Israel.TheKingdom ofJudahtookoveritsreligiousheritage.
Thecollection
ofProverbsdatesfromthisperiod,distinguished
inparticularbythefusionintoasinglebookoftheYahvist and
Elohisttexts ofthePentateuch;inthiswaytheTorahwascon­
stituted.Deuteronomywas
writtenatthistime.
InthesecondhalfoftheSeventhcenturyB.C.,thereign of
Josiahcoincidedwiththeappearance oftheprophetJeremiah,
buthisworkdidnot takedefinitiveshapeuntilacenturylater.
Before
thefirstdeportationtoBabylonin598B.C.,there
appeared
theBooksofZephaniah,NahumandHabakkuk.
Ezekielwasalreadyprophesying
duringthisfirstdeportation.
Thefall
ofJerusalemin587B.C.markedthebeginning ofthe
seconddeportationwhichlasteduntil538B.C.
TheBook
ofEzekiel.thelast greatprophetandtheprophet of
exile,wasnot arrangedintoitspresentformuntil afterhisdeath
bythescribes
thatweretobecomehisspiritualin!1eritors.These
samescribesweretoresumeGenesisina
thirdversion,theso­
called'Sacerdotal'version,
forthesectiongoingfrom theCre­
ationtothedeath
ofJacob.Inthiswaya thirdtextwas.tobe
insertedintothecentralfabric
oftheYahvistandElohisttexts
oftheTorah.Weshallsee lateron,inthebookswrittenroughly
twoand
fourcenturiesearlier,anaspectoftheintricacies of
thisthirdtext.Itwasatthistime thattheLamentations
appeared.
OntheorderofCyrus,thedeportationtoBabyloncameto an
endin 538B.C.TheJews returnedtoPalestineandtheTemple

27. Tho Boob of tlp Old Ttutrlritt, 0
at Jentsalem was rebuilt. Ttre prophets' activities began again,
resulting in the books of llaggai, Zechariah, the third book of
Isaiah, Malaehi, Daniel and Baruch (the last being in Greek).
The period following the deportation is also the period of the
Books of Wisdom: Proverbs was written definitively around 480
8.C., Job in the middle of the Fifth century 8.C., Ecclesisstes or
Koheleth dates from the Third century 8.C., as do the Song of
Songp, Chronicles I & II, Ezra and Nehemiah; Ecclesiasticus or
Sirah appeared in the Seeond century B.C.; the Book of Wisdom
and the Book of Maceabees I & II $tere written one century be-
fore Christ. The Books of Buth, Esther and Jonah are not easily
datable. The same is true for Tobit and Judith. All these dates
are given on the understanding that there may have been subse-
quent adaptations, since it was only cirea one century before
Christ that form was first given to the writings of the Old Testa-
ment. For many this did not become definitive until one century
after Christ.
Thus the Old Testament appears as a literary monument to
the Jewish people, from its origins to the eoming of Christianity.
The books it consists of were written, completed and revised
between the Tenth and the First centuries B.C. This is in no
way a personal point of view on the history of its composition.
The essential data for this historical survey were taken from the
entry The Bi.bte in the Encyclopedia Universalis' by J. P. San-
droz, a professor at the Dominican Faeulties, Saulchoir. To under-
stand what the Old Testament represents, it is important to
retain this information, eorrectly established today by highly
qualified speeialists.
A Revelation is mingled in all these writings, but all we possess
today is what men have seen fit to leave us. These men manipu-
lated the texts to please themselves, according to the circum-
stances they were in and the necessities they had to meet.
When these objective data are compared with those found in
various prefaces to Bibles destined today for mass publication'
one realizes that facts are presented in them in quite a dif-
ferent way. Fundamental facts concerning the writing of the
books are passed over in silenee, ambiguities which mislead the
reader are maintained, facts are minimalised to such an extent
1. Paris, 19?4 edition, Vol. S, pp. 246'263.
T1uJBoobofOaeOldTalGment 9
atJerusalemwasrebuilt.Theprophets'activitiesbeganagain,
resulting
inthebooksofHaggai,Zechariah, thethirdbookof
Isaiah,Malachi,Daniel andBaruch(thelastbeinginGreek).
Theperiodfollowing thedeportationisalso theperiodofthe
BooksofWisdom:Proverbs waswrittendefinitivelyaround480
B.C.,
JobinthemiddleoftheFifthcenturyB.C.,Ecclesiastes or
Kohelethdates fromtheThirdcenturyB.C., asdotheSongof
Songs,ChroniclesI &II,EzraandNehemiah;Ecclesiasticus or
Sirahappearedin theSecondcenturyB.C.;theBook ofWisdom
andtheBookofMaccabeesI &IIwerewrittenonecentury be­
foreChrist.TheBooks ofRuth,EstherandJonaharenoteasily
datable.Thesameis
trueforTobitandJudith.Allthesedates
aregivenon theunderstandingthattheremayhavebeensubse­
quentadaptations,since
itwasonlycircaonecenturybefore
Christthatformwasfirstgiven tothewritingsoftheOldTesta­
ment.
Formanythisdidnotbecomedefinitiveuntilonecentury
afterChrist.
ThustheOldTestamentappearsasa
literarymonumentto
theJewishpeople,from itsoriginstothecoming ofChristianity.
Thebooks
itconsistsofwerewritten,completed andrevised
betweentheTenthandthe
FirstcenturiesB.C.Thisis inno
wayapersonalpointofviewon
thehistoryof itscomposition.
Theessential
dataforthishistoricalsurveyweretakenfrom the
entryTheBible intheEncyclopediaUniversalistby J.P.San­
droz,aprofessor
attheDominicanFaculties,Saulchoir.Tounder­
standwhattheOldTestamentrepresents, itisimportantto
retainthisinformation,correctlyestablishedtoday byhighly
qualifiedspecialists.
ARevelationismingledinallthesewritings,
butallwepossess
todayis
whatmenhaveseenfittoleaveus.Thesemenmanipu­
lated
thetextstopleasethemselves,accordingtothecircum­
stancestheywereinand
thenecessitiesthey hadtomeet.
Whentheseobjective
dataarecomparedwiththosefoundin
variousprefacestoBiblesdestinedtoday
formasspublication,
onerealizes
thatfactsarepresentedintheminquiteadif­
ferentway.Fundamentalfactsconcerningthe writingofthe
booksarepassedoverinsilence,ambiguitieswhichmislead the
readeraremaintained,facts areminimalisedtosuch anextent
1.Paris,1974edition,Vol.3, pp.246-253.

28. t0 IIIE BIBLE, THE QtrR'AN AND SCIENCE
that a false idea of reality is conveyed. A large number of pre-
faces or introductions to the Bible misrepresent reality in this
way. In the case of books that were adapted several times (like
the Pentateueh), it is said that eertsin details may have been
added later on. A discussion of an unimportant passage of a
book is introduced, but crucial facts warranting lengthy expo-
sitions are passed over in silence. It is distressing to see such
inaccurate information on the Bible maintained for mass publi-
cation.
THE TONAII OR PENTATEUCH
Torah is the Semitic n&me.
The Greek expression, which in English gives us
'Pentateuch',
designates & work in five parts; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers and Deuteronomy. These were to form the five primary
elements of the collection of thirty-nine volumes that makes up
the Old Testament.
This group of texts deals with the origins of the world up to
the entry of the Jewish people into Canaan, the land promised
to them after their exile in Esypt, more precisely until the death
of Moses. The narration of these facts serves however as a gen-
eral framework for a description of the provisions made for the
religious and social life of the Jewish people, hence the name
Law or Torah.
Judaism and Christianity for many centuries considered that
the author was Moses himself. Perhaps this affirmation was
based on the fact that God said to Moses (Exoclus 17, L4): "write
this (thg defeat of Amalek) as a memorial in a book", or again,
talking of the Exodus from Egypt, "Moses wrote down their
starting places" (Numbers 33, 2), and finally "And Moses wrote
this law" (Deuteronomy 31, g).
From the First century B.c.
onwards, the theory that Moses wrote the
pentateuch
was up-
held; Flavius Josephus and Philo of Alexandria maintain it.
Today, this theory has been completely abandoned; everybody
is in agreement on this point. The New Testament nevertheless
ascribes the authorship to Moses.
paul,
in his Letter to the
Romans (10, 5) quoting from Leviticus, affirms that
.,Moses
writes that the man who practices righteousness which is based
on the law . . ." etc. John, in his Gospel (5, 46-47), makes Jesus
10 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
thatafalseidea ofrealityisconveyed.Alargenumber ofpre­
faces
orintroductionstotheBiblemisrepresentreality inthis
way.Inthecaseofbooksthatwereadaptedseveraltimes(like
thePentateuch),itissaidthatcertaindetailsmayhavebeen
added
lateron.Adiscussionof anunimportantpassage ofa
bookisintroduced,
butcrucialfacts warrantinglengthyexpo­
sitions
arepassedover insilence.Itisdistressingtoseesuch
inaccurateinformationontheBiblemaintained
formasspubli­
cation.
THETORAHORPENTATEUCH
Torahis theSemiticname.
TheGreekexpression,which
inEnglishgivesus'Pentateuch',
designatesaworkinfive
parts;Genesis,Exodus,Leviticus,
NumbersandDeuteronomy.Theseweretoformthe
fiveprimary
elementsofthecollectionofthirty-ninevolumes thatmakesup
theOldTestament.
Thisgroup
oftextsdealswiththeorigins oftheworldup to
theentryoftheJewishpeopleintoCanaan,thelandpromised
tothem
aftertheirexileinEgypt,morepreciselyuntilthedeath
ofMoses.The narrationofthesefactsserveshoweverasagen­
eralframework
foradescriptionoftheprovisionsmade forthe
religiousandsociallifeoftheJewishpeople,hencethename
LaworTorah.
Judaism
andChristianityformanycenturiesconsidered that
theauthorwasMoseshimself.Perhapsthisaffirmationwas
basedonthefact
thatGodsaidtoMoses(Exodus17,14): "Write
this(thedefeat ofAmalek)asamemorialinabook", oragain,
talkingoftheExodusfromEgypt,"Moseswrotedown
their
startingplaces"(Numbers33, 2),andfinally"AndMoseswrote
thislaw"(Deuteronomy31, 9).FromtheFirstcenturyB.C.
onwards,thetheory
thatMoseswrotethePentateuchwasup­
held;FlaviusJosephusandPhiloofAlexandriamaintainit.
Today,
thistheoryhasbeencompletelyabandoned;everybody
is
inagreementonthispoint.TheNewTestamentnevertheless
ascribestheauthorshiptoMoses.Paul,inhis
Lettertothe
Romans(10,5)quotingfromLeviticus,affirms
that"Moses
writes
thatthemanwhopracticesrighteousnesswhichisbased
onthelaw
..."etc.John,inhisGospel (5,46-47),makesJesus

29. Thc tub of tlu OldTarlunnla ll
ssy the following: "ff you believed Moses, you would believe
me, for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings,
how wi[ you believe my words?" We have here an example of
editing, because the Greek word that corresponds to the original
(written in Greekl is epi,steu,ete, so that the Evangelist is putting
an afrruetion into Jegug's mouth 'that is totally wrong:: the fol-
lowing demonstrates this.
I am borrowing the elements of this demonstration from
Father de Vaux, Head of the Biblical School of Jerusalem. He
prefaeed his Fr€nch translation of Genesis in 1962 with a General
Introduction to the Pentateuch which eontained valuable argu-
ments. These ran contrary to the affirmations of the Evangelists
on the authorship of the work in question. Father de Vaux re-
minds us that the "Jewish tradition which was followed by
Christ and his Apostles" was accepted up to the end of the
Middle Ages. The only person to contest this theory was Abe-
neara in the Twelfth eentury. It was in the Si:rteenth century
thst Calstadt noted that Moses could not have written the ac-
count of his ou/n desth in Deuteronomy (84, 5-12). The author
then quotes other critics who refuse to ascribe to Moses a part,
at least, of the Pentateueh. It was above all the work of Riehard
Simon, father of the Oratory, Cri,tical Historg af the Old, Testa-
rnont (Histoire critique du Vieux Testament) 1678, that under-
lined the chronological difficulties, the repetitions, the confusion
of the stories and stylistie diferences in the Pentateuch. The
book caused a scandal. R. Simon's line of argument was barely
followed in history books at the beginning of the Eishteenth
century. At this time, the references to antiquity very often pro-
ceeded from what "Moses had written".
One can easily imagine how difficult it was to combat a legend
strengthened by Jesus himself who, as we have seen, supported
it in the New Testament. It is to Jean Astruc, Louis XV's doctor,
that we owe the decisive argument.
By publishing in 1?63, his Conieetures on the originnl wri,t'
ings whieh it appea,rs llfoses used to eompose the Boolt of Gene$,s
(Conjectures sur les M}moires originaux dont il parait que
Moysd s'est servi pour composer le livre de la Genese), he placed
the accent on the plurality of sources. He was probably not the
first to have noticed it, but he did however have the courage to
TIleBoob011MOldr........, 11
saythefollowing:"IfyoubelievedMoses,youwouldbelieve
me,
forhewroteofme.Butifyoudonotbelievehiswritings,
howwillyoubelievemywords?"Wehavehere
anexampleof
editing,because theGreekword thatcorrespondsto theoriginal
(writteninGreek)is episteuete,sothattheEvangelistisputting
anaffirmationintoJesus'smouth,thatistotally wrong:thefol­
lowingdemonstratesthis.
I
amborrowingtheelementsofthisdemonstrationfrom
FatherdeVaux,Head oftheBiblicalSchool ofJerosalem.He
prefacedhis
FrenchtranslationofGenesisin1962withaGeneral
Introduction
tothePentateuchwhichcontainedvaluable argu­
ments.These rancontrarytotheaffirmationsof theEvangelists
on
theauthorshipoftheworkinquestion. FatherdeVauxre­
mindsus
thatthe"Jewishtraditionwhichwasfollowedby
ChristandhisApostles"wasaccepteduptotheend
ofthe
MiddleAges.Theonlyperson
tocontestthistheorywasAbe­
nezra
intheTwelfthcentury. ItwasintheSixteenthcentury
thatCalstadtnoted thatMosescouldnothave writtentheac­
countofhisowndeath
inDeuteronomy(34,5-12).The author
thenquotesothercriticswhorefusetoascribetoMosesapart,
atleast,ofthePentateuch.Itwasaboveallthework ofRichard
Simon,
fatheroftheOratory,CriticalHistory oftheOldTesta­
ment(HistoirecritiqueduVieuxTestament)1678, thatunder­
lined
thechronologicaldifficulties,therepetitions,theconfusion
ofthestoriesandstylisticdifferencesinthePentateuch.The
bookcausedascandal.
R.Simon'sline ofargumentwasbarely
followedinhistorybooks
atthebeginningoftheEighteenth
century.
Atthistime,thereferences toantiquityveryoftenpro­
ceededfrom
what"Moseshadwritten".
Onecaneasilyimaginehowdifficult
itwastocombatalegend
strengthenedbyJesushimselfwho,
aswehaveseen,supported
itintheNewTestament.ItistoJeanAstruc,LouisXV'sdoctor,
thatweowethedecisiveargument.
Bypublishing,
in1753,his Conjecturesontheoriginalwrit­
ingswhich
itappearsMosesusedtocomposetheBook ofGenesis
(ConjecturessurlesMemoiresoriginauxdont ilparaitque
Moyses'estservipourcomposer
IelivredelaGenese),heplaced
theaccentonthepluralityofsources.Hewasprobablynotthe
first
tohavenoticedit, buthedidhoweverhave thecourageto

30. L2 THE BrBLF,' TIIE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
make public an observation of prime importance: two texts, each
denoted by the way in which God was named either Yahweh or
Elohim, were present side by side in Genesis. The latter therefore
contained two ju:<taposed texts. Eichorn (1?80-l?8S) msde the
same discovery for the other four books; then Ilgen (l?g8)
noticed that one of the texts isolated by Astruc, the one where
God is named Elohim, was itself divided into two. The Penta-
teuch literal\y fell apart.
The Nineteenth century saw an even more minute sesrch into
the sources. In 1854, four sources were recognised. They were
called the Yahvist version, the Elohist version, Deuteronorly,
and the Sacerdotal version. It was even possible to date them:
1) The Yahvist version was plaeed in the Ninth century
B.C. (written in Judah)
2) The Elohist version was probably a little more recent
(written in Israel)
3) Deuteronomy was from the Eighth century B.c. for some
(E. Jacob), and from the time of Josiah for others (Father
de Vaux)
4l The Saeerdotal version came from the
after the exile: Sixth century B.C.
It can be seen that the arrangement of the
teuch spans at least three centuries.
The problem is, however, even more complex. In 1941, A. Lods
singled out three sources in the Yahvist version, four in the
Elohist version, six in Deuteronomy, nine in the Sacerdotal ver-
sion, "not including the additions spread out among eight differ-
ent authors" writes Father de Vaux. More reeently, it has been
thought that "many of the constitutions or laws contained in the
Pentateuch had parallels outside the Bible going back much
further than the dates ascribed to the documents themselves"
and that "many of the stories of the Pentateuch presupposed a
background that was different frsrn-4nd older than-the one
from which these documents were supposed to have come". This
leads on to "an interest in the formation of traditions". The
problem then appears so complicated that nobody knows where
he is anymore.
The multiplicity of sources brings'with it numerous disagree-
ments and repetitions. Father de Vaux gives examples of this
period of exile or
text of the Penta-
12 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
makepublic anobservationofprimeimportance:twotexts,each
denotedby
thewayinwhichGod wasnamedeitherYahwehor
Elohim,werepresentsidebyside inGenesis.The lattertherefore
containedtwojuxtaposedtexts.Eichorn(1780-1783)made the
samediscovery fortheotherfourbooks;thenIlgen(1798)
noticed
thatoneofthetextsisolatedbyAstruc, theonewhere
GodisnamedElohim,wasitselfdividedintotwo. ThePenta­
teuchliterallyfell
apart.
TheNineteenthcenturysaw anevenmoreminutesearchinto
thesources.In1854,foursourceswererecognised.Theywere
called
theYahvistversion,theElohistversion,Deuteronomy,
and
theSacerdotalversion. Itwasevenpossibletodate them~
1)TheYahvistversionwasplacedinthe Ninthcentury
B.C.
(writteninJud.ah)
2)TheElohistversionwasprobablyalittlemorerecent
(writteninIsrael)
3)Deuteronomywasfrom
theEighthcenturyB.C. forsome
(E.Jacob),andfromthetime ofJosiahforothers(Father
deVaux)
4)TheSacerdotalversioncamefrom
theperiodofexileor
aftertheexile:SixthcenturyB.C.
Itcanbeseen thatthearrangementofthetextofthePenta­
teuchspans
atleastthreecenturies.
Theproblemis,however,evenmorecomplex.
In1941,A.Lads
singledout
threesourcesintheYahvistversion,four inthe
Elohistversion,sixinDeuteronomy,nineintheSacerdotalver­
sion,
"notincludingtheadditionsspreadoutamongeightdiffer­
entauthors"writesFatherdeVaux.Morerecently, ithasbeen
thought
that"manyoftheconstitutionsorlawscontained inthe
Pentateuchhadparallelsoutside theBiblegoingbackmuch
furtherthanthedatesascribedtothedocumentsthemselves"
and
that"manyofthestoriesofthePentateuchpresupposeda
background
thatwasdifferentfrom-andolderthan-theone
fromwhichthesedocumentsweresupposedtohavecome".This
leadsonto
"aninterestintheformation oftraditions".The
problemthenappearssocomplicated
thatnobodyknowswhere
heisanymore.
Themultiplicity
ofsourcesbrings'withitnumerousdisagree­
ments
andrepetitions.FatherdeVauxgivesexamples ofthis

31. Tlu Boob oI tllc Old Teetamcnl
overlapping of trsditions in the case of the Flood, the kidnap-
ping of Joseph, his adventures in Egypt, disagreement of names
relating to the same character, differing descriptions of impor-
tant events.
Thus the Pentateuch is shown to be formed from various tra-
ditions brought together more or less skillfully by its authors.
The latter sometimes juxtaposed their compilations and some-
times adapted the stories for the sake of synthesis. They allowed
improbabilities and disagreements to appear in the texts, how-
ever, whieh heve led modern man to the objective study of the
soureeg.
As far as textual criticism is concerned, the Pentateueh pro-
vides what is probably the most obvious example of adaptations
made by the hand of man. These were made at different times in
the history of the Jewish people, taken from oral traditions and
texts handed down from preceding generations. It was begun
in the Tenth or Ninth century B.C. rrith the Yahvist tradition
which took the story from its very beginnings. The latter
sketches fsrael's own particular destiny to "fit it back into God's
Grand Design for humanity" (Father de Vaux). It was con-
cluded in the Sixth century B,C. rsith the Sacerdotal tradition that
is meticulous in its preeise rnention of dates and genealogies.'
Father de Vaux writes that "The few stories this tradition
has of its own bear witness to legal preoccupations: Sabbatical
rest at the completion of the Creation, the alliance with Noah,
the alliance with Abraham and the circumeision, the purchase
of the Cave of Makpela that gave the Patriarchs land in Canaan".
We must bear in mind that the Saeerdotal tradition dates from
the time of the deportation to Babylon and the return to Pales-
tine starting in 638 B.C. There is therefore a mixture of religious
and purely political problems,
For Genesis alone, the division of the Book into three sourees
has been firmly established: Father de Vaux in the commentary
to his translation lists for each source the passages in the present
1. We shell gee in the next chapter, when confronted with modern scien-
tific data, the extent of the narrative errors committed by authors of
the Sacerdotal version on the subject of the antiquity of man on Earth,
hie situation in time and the course of the Creation. They are obviously
errlort arising from manipulation of the texts.
r3
TheBooboftheOldTestament 13
overlappingoftraditionsinthecase oftheFlood,thekidnap­
ping
ofJoseph,hisadventures inEgypt,disagreementofnames
relating
tothesamecharacter,differingdescriptionsofimpor­
tantevents.
Thus
thePentateuchisshowntobeformedfromvarious tra-.
ditionsbroughttogethermore
orlessskillfullybyitsauthors.
The
lattersometimesjuxtaposed theircompilationsandsome­
timesadapted
thestoriesfor thesakeofsynthesis.Theyallowed
improbabilities
anddisagreementsto appearinthetexts,how­
ever,whichhaveledmodernmantotheobjectivestudyofthe
sources.
As
farastextualcriticismisconcerned,thePentateuchpro­
vides
whatisprobablythemostobviousexample ofadaptations
madebythehand
ofman.Theseweremade atdifferenttimesin
thehistoryoftheJewishpeople,takenfromoraltraditionsand
textshandeddownfromprecedinggenerations.
Itwasbegun
intheTenthorNinthcenturyB.C.withtheYahvisttradition
whichtook
thestoryfrom itsverybeginnings.The latter
sketchesIsrael'sownparticulardestinyto"fit itbackintoGod's
GrandDesign
forhumanity"(FatherdeVaux).Itwascon­
cludedin
theSixthcenturyB.C.withtheSacerdotaltradition that
ismeticulousin itsprecisementionofdatesandgenealogies.
1
FatherdeVauxwrites that"Thefewstoriesthistradition
has
ofitsownbearwitnesstolegalpreoccupations:Sabbatical
restatthecompletionof theCreation,thealliancewithNoah,
thealliancewithAbrahamandthecircumcision,thepurchase
oftheCaveofMakpela
thatgavethe PatriarchslandinCanaan".
Wemust
bearinmindthattheSacerdotaltraditiondatesfrom
thetime
ofthedeportationtoBabylonandthe returntoPales­
tine
startingin538B.C.Thereisthereforeamixtureofreligious
andpurelypoliticalproblems.
ForGenesisalone,thedivisionoftheBookinto threesources
hasbeenfirmlyestablished:
FatherdeVauxinthecommentary
tohistranslationlistsforeachsourcethepassagesinthepresent
1.Weshallseein thenextchapter,whenconfrontedwithmodernscien­
tific
data,theextentofthenarrativeerrorscommittedbyauthorsof
theSacerdotalversionon thesubjectofthe antiquityofmanon Earth,
hissituationintimeandthecourse oftheCreation.They areobviously
errorsarisingfrommanipulationofthetexts.

32. l{ TIIE BIBI,E, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
text of Genesis that rely on them. On the evidence of these data
it is possible to pinpoint the contribution made by the various
Bources to any one of the ehapters. For example, in the case of
the Creation, the Flood and the period that goes from the Flood
to Abraham, occupying as it does the first eleven chapters of
Genesis, we can see alternating in the Biblical text a section of
the Yahvist and a section of the Sacerdotal texts. The Elohist
text is not present in the first eleven chapters. The overlapping
of Yahvist and Sacerdotal contributions is here quite clear. For
the Creation and up to Noah (first five chapters), the arrange-
ment is simple: a Yahvist passage alternates with a Sacerdotal
passage from beginning to end of the nanation. For the Flood
and especially chapters 7 and 8 moreover, the cutting of the text
aecording to its source is narrowed down to very short passages
and even to a single sentence. In the space of little more than
a hundred lines of English text, the text changes seventeen times.
It is from this that the improbabilities and contradictions arise
when we read the present-day text. (see Table on page 15 for
schematic distribution of sources)
THE ITISTOruCAL BOOKS
In these books we enter into the history of the Jewish people,
from the time they came to the Promised Land (which is most
likely to have been at the end of the Thirteenth century B.C.)
to the deportation to Babylon in the Sixth century B.C.
Here stress is laid upon what one might call the
'national
event' which is presented as the fulfilment of Divine word. In
the narration however, historical aceuraey has rather been
brushed aside: a work such as the Book of Joshua complies first
and foremost with theologieal intentions. With this in mind, E.
Jacob underlines the obvious contradiction between archaeology
and the texts in the case of the supposed destruction of Jericho
and Ay.
The Book of Judges is centered on the defense of the chosen
people against surrounding enemies and on the support given to
them by God. The Book was adapted several times, as Father A.
LefEvre notes with great objectivity in his Preamble to the
Crampon Bible: the various prefaces in the text and the appen-
14 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
textofGenesisthatrelyonthem.Ontheevidenceofthese data
itispossibletopinpointthecontributionmadebythevarious
sources
toanyoneofthechapters. Forexample,inthecaseof
theCreation,theFloodandtheperiod thatgoesfrom theFlood
toAbraham,occupying
asitdoesthefirstelevenchaptersof
Genesis,wecansee
alternatingintheBiblical textasectionof
theYahvistandasectionoftheSacerdotaltexts.TheElohist
textisnotpresent inthefirstelevenchapters.Theoverlapping
ofYahvistandSacerdotalcontributionsisherequiteclear. For
theCreationanduptoNoah(first fivechapters),the arrange­
mentissimple:aYahvistpassagealternateswithaSacerdotal
passagefrombeginningtoend
ofthenarration.FortheFlood
andespeciallychapters7and8moreover,thecutting ofthetext
accordingto itssourceisnarroweddowntovery shortpassages
andeventoasinglesentence. Inthespaceoflittlemore than
ahundredlines ofEnglishtext, thetextchangesseventeentimes.
Itisfromthisthattheimprobabilitiesandcontradictionsarise
whenwereadthepresent-daytext.(seeTable
onpage15for
schematicdistribution ofsources)
THEHISTORICALBOOKS
Inthesebooks weenterintothehistoryoftheJewishpeople,
fromthetimetheycametothePromisedLand(whichismost
likelytohavebeen
attheend oftheThirteenthcenturyB.C.)
tothedeportationtoBabylon
intheSixthcenturyB.C.
Herestressislaidupon
whatonemightcallthe'national
event'whichispresentedasthefulfilment
ofDivineword. In
thenarrationhowever,historicalaccuracy hasratherbeen
brushedaside: aworksuch
astheBookofJoshuacompliesfirst
andforemostwiththeologicalintentions.Withthisinmind,E.
Jacobunderlinestheobviouscontradictionbetweenarchaeology
andthetexts
inthecaseofthesupposeddestructionofJericho
andAy.
TheBook ofJudgesiscenteredonthedefenseofthechosen
peopleagainstsurroundingenemiesand
onthesupportgivento
them
byGod.TheBookwasadaptedseveraltimes,as FatherA.
Lefevrenoteswith greatobjectivityinhisPreambletothe
CramponBible:thevariousprefacesinthe
textandtheappen-

33. Tlc B@b of ,rE Olilfierrtrrrlwnt tE
TABLE OF THE DISTBIBUTION OF THE YAHVIST AND
SACERDOTAL TEXTS IN CHAPTERS 1 TO 11 in GENESIS)
The first figure indieates the chapter.
The second figure in brackets indicat€s the number of phrases,
sometimes divided into two parts indicated by the letters a and b.
Letters: Y indicates Yahvist text
S indicates Sacerdotal text
Example: The fust line of the table indicates: from Chapter
1, phrase 1 to Chapter 2, phrase 4a, the text published in preeenL
day Bibles is the Sacerdotal tet(t
Clwptcr
I
2
6
6
6
7
1
7
7
7
7
7
7
T
7
8
I
I
I
8
I
I
I
s
I
10
l0
10
10
1l
l1
phror,c
(r)
({b}
(1)
(11
(e)
(1)
(6)
(?)
(rr1
(12)
(18)
(16b)
(18)
(221
(21)
(2b)
(8)
(6)
(184)
(18b)
(111
(20)
(1)
(18)
(s8)
(8)
(20)
(211
(8r1
(1)
(r0)
tn Clwptar
2
{
E
6
6
7
phrou,c
(da)
(2e1
(s2)
(8)
(22)
(6)
(r6a)
(1?)
(2r)
(2s)
(2a)
(10)
(nl
(1?)
(2?)
(11
(ls1
(241
(s0)
(821
(e)
(82)
be of the way
tcxt
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y adapted
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
S
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
Y
s
men have
7 (10)
7
I
7
7
8
I (6)
g (Lz's
I
8
I
I
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
What simpler illustration can there
manipulst€d the Biblical Scriptures?
ThsBooboftheOldTaftJment 15
TABLEOF THEDISTRIBUTIONOF THEYAHVISTAND
SACERDOTALTEXTS
INCHAPTERS1 TO11inGENESIS)
Thefirstfigureindicatesthechapter.
Thesecondfigureinbracketsindicatesthenumberofphrases,
sometimesdividedintotwo
partsindicatedbythelettersaand b.
Letters:YindicatesYahvisttext
SindicatesSacerdotal
text
Example:Thefirstlineofthetableindicates:fromChapter
1,phrase1 toChapter2,phrase4a,thetextpublishedinpresent­
dayBiblesistheSacerdotal
text.
CluJpter pkrfUle toCluJpter pkrfUle uzt
1 (1) 2 (4a) S
2 (4b) 4 (26) Y
5 (1) 5 (82) S
6 (1) 6 (8) Y
6 (9) 6 (22) S
7
(1) 7 (5) Y
7 (6) S
7 (7) 7 (10) Yadapted
7 (11) S
7 (12) Y
7 (18) 7 (16a) S
7 (1Gb) 7 (17) Y
7 (18) 7 (21) S
7 (22) 7 (23) Y
7 (24) 8 (2a) S
8 (2b) Y
8 (8) 8 (5) S
8 (6) 8 (12) Y
8 (18a) S
8 (18b) Y
8 (14) 8 (19) S
8 (20) 8 (22) Y
9 (1) 9 (17) S
9 (18) 9 (27) Y
9 (28) 10 (7) S
10 (8) 10 (19) Y
10 (20) 10 (23) S
ro ~~ w (~) Y
10 (81) 10 (32) S
11 (1) 11 (9) Y
11 (10) 11 (32) S
Whatsimplerillustrationcantherebeofthewaymenhave
manipulated
theBiblicalScriptures?

34. t0 THE BIBLE, THE QUHAN AND SCIENCE
dices bear witness to this. The story of Ruth is attached to the
narrations conteined in Judges.
The Book of Samuel and the two Books of Kings are above all
biographical collections concerning Samuel, Saul, David, and
Solornon. Their historic worth is the subject of debate. From
this point of view E. Jacob finds numerous errors in it, beeause
there are sometimes two and even three versions of the same
event. The prophets Elias, Elisha and Isaiah also figure here,
mixing elements of history and legend. For other commentators,
sueh as Father A. Lefdvre, "the historical value of these books is
fundamental."
Chronicles I & II, the Book of Ebra and the Book of Nehemiah
have a, single author, called
,the
Chronicler', writing in the
Fourth century B.c. He resumes the whole history of the Cre-
ation up to this period, although his genealogical tables only go
up to David. In actual fact, he is using above all the Book of
samuel and the Book of Kings, "mechanically copying them out
without regard to the inconsistencies" (E. Jacob), but he never-
theless adds precise facts that have been conflrmed by archae-
ology. In these works care is taken to adapt history to the needs
of theology. E. Jacob notes that the author
,,sometimes
writes
history according to theology". "To explain the fact that King
Manasseh, who was a sacrilegious persecutor, had a rong and
prosperous reign, he postulates a conversion of the King during
a stay in Assyria (Chronicles II, gg/tl)
although there is no
mention of this in any Biblical or non-Biblical souree". The Book
of Ezra and the Book of Nehemiah have been severely criticised
beeause they are full of obscure points, and because the period
they deal with (the Fourth century B.c.) is itself not very well
known, there being few non-Biblical documents from it.
The Books of robit, Judith and Esther are classed among the
Historical Books. rn them very big liberties are taken w.ith
history: proper names are changed, eharacters and events are
invented, all for the best of religious reasons. They are in fact
stories designed to serve a moral end, peppered with historical
improbabilities and inaccuracies.
The Books of Maecabees are of quite a different order. They
provide a version of events that took place in the Second century
B.c. which is as exact a record of the history of this period as
18 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
dicesbearwitnesstothis.The storyofRuthisattachedto the
narrationscontainedinJudges.
TheBookofSamuelandthetwoBooksofKings areaboveall
biographicalcollectionsconcerningSamuel,Saul,David,and
Solomon.
Theirhistoricworthis thesubjectofdebate.From
thispointofviewE.Jacobfindsnumerous errorsinit,because
therearesometimestwo andeventhreeversionsof thesame
event.TheprophetsElias,Elisha
andIsaiahalsofigurehere,
mixingelementsofhistoryandlegend.
Forothercommentators,
such
asFatherA.Lefevre,"thehistoricalvalue ofthesebooksis
fundamental."
ChroniclesI
&II,theBookofEzraandtheBookofNehemiah
haveasingleauthor,called
'theChronicler',writinginthe
FourthcenturyB.C.Heresumes thewholehistory oftheCre­
ationupto
thisperiod,althoughhisgenealogicaltablesonlygo
uptoDavid.Inactualfact,heisusingabovealltheBook of
SamuelandtheBook ofKings,"mechanicallycopyingthemout
without
regardtotheinconsistencies"(E.Jacob), buthenever­
thelessaddsprecisefacts
thathavebeenconfirmedbyarchae­
ology.
Intheseworks careistakento adapthistorytotheneeds
oftheology.E.Jacobnotes thattheauthor"sometimeswrites
historyaccordingtotheology"."Toexplain
thefactthatKing
Manasseh,whowasasacrilegiouspersecutor,
hadalongand
prosperousreign,hepostulatesaconversion
oftheKing during
astayinAssyria(ChroniclesII, 33/11)althoughthereisno
mention
ofthisinanyBiblicalornon-Biblicalsource".TheBook
ofEzraandtheBookofNehemiahhavebeenseverelycriticised
becausethey
arefullofobscurepoints,andbecausetheperiod
theydeal
with(theFourthcenturyB.C.)isitselfnotverywell
known,
therebeingfewnon-Biblicaldocuments fromit.
TheBooksofTobit, JudithandEstherareclassedamongthe
HistoricalBooks.
Inthemvery biglibertiesaretakenwith
history:propernames arechanged,characters andeventsare
invented,all forthebestofreligiousreasons.They areinfact
storiesdesignedtoserveamoralend,pepperedwithhistorical
improbabilitiesandinaccuracies.
TheBooks
ofMaccabeesareofquiteadifferentorder.They
provideaversionofevents
thattookplaceintheSecondcentury
B.C.whichis
asexactarecord ofthehistoryofthisperiodas

35. Tho Books of t E Old Tectament 17
may be found. It is for this reason that they constitute accounts
of great value.
The collection of books under the heading
'historical'
is there-
fore highly disparate. History is treated in both a scientific and a
whimsical fashion.
THE PNOPHETIC BOOKS
Under this heading we find the preachings of various prophets
who in the Old Testament have been classed separately from
the first great prophets such as Moses, Samuel, Elias and Elisha,
whose teachings are referued to in other books.
The prophetic books cover the period from the Eiehth to the
Second century B.C.
In the Eighth century 8.C., there were the books of Amos,
Hosea, Isaiah and Michah. The first of these is famous for his
condemnation of social injustice, the second for his religious
corruption which leads him to bodily suffering (for being foreed
to marry a saered harlot of a pagan cult), like God suffering for
the degradation of His people but still granting them His love.
Isaiah is a figure of political history: he is consulted by kings
and dominates events; he is the prophet of grandeur. In addition
to his personal works, his oracles are published by his disciples
right up until the Third century B.C.: protests against iniquities'
fear of God's judgement, proclamations of liberation at the time
of exile and later on the return of the Jews to Palestine. It is
certain that in the case of the second and third Isaiah, the pro-
phetic intention is paralleled by political considerations that are
as clear as daylight. The preaching of Michah, a contemporary of
fsaiah, follows the same general ideas.
In the Seventh century 8.C., Zephanish, Jeremiah, Nahum
and Habakhuk distinguished themselves by their preachings.
Jeremiah became a martyr. His oracles vere collected by Baruch
who is also perhaps the author sf Lamentations'
The period of exile in Babylon at the begfnning of the Sixth
century B.C. gsve birth to intense prophetic activity. Ezekiel
figures importantly as the consoler of his brothers" inspiring
hope among them. IIis visions &re famous. The Book of Obsdish
deals with the misery of a conquered Jerusalem.
TheBooboftheOldTeaftJment 17
maybefound.Itisforthisreasonthattheyconstituteaccounts
ofgreatvalue.
Thecollection
ofbooksundertheheading'historical'isthere­
forehighlydisparate.History
istreatedinbothascientificanda
whimsicalfashion.
THEPROPHETICBOOKS
Underthisheading wefindthepreachingsofvariousprophets
who
intheOldTestamenthavebeenclassedseparatelyfrom
thefirst
greatprophetssuch asMoses,Samuel,EliasandElisha,
whoseteachings
arereferredtoinotherbooks.
ThepropheticbookscovertheperiodfromtheEighthtothe
SecondcenturyB.C.
IntheEighthcenturyB.C.,therewerethebooksofAmos,
Hosea,IsaiahandMichah.Thefirstoftheseisfamousforhis
condemnation
ofsocialinjustice,thesecondforhisreligious
corruptionwhichleadshimtobodilysuffering
(forbeingforced
to
marryasacredharlotofapagancult),like Godsufferingfor
thedegradationofHispeople butstillgrantingthemHislove.
Isaiahisafigure
ofpoliticalhistory:heisconsultedbykings
anddominatesevents;heistheprophetofgrandeur. Inaddition
tohispersonalworks,hisoracles arepublishedbyhisdisciples
rightupuntilthe ThirdcenturyB.C.:protestsagainstiniquities,
fearofGod'sjudgement,proclamationsofliberation atthetime
ofexile
andlateronthereturnoftheJewstoPalestine. Itis
certain
thatinthecaseofthesecondand thirdIsaiah,thepro­
pheticintentionisparalleledbypoliticalconsiderations
thatare
asclearasdaylight.Thepreaching ofMichah,acontemporary of
Isaiah,follows thesamegeneralideas.
IntheSeventhcenturyB.C.,Zephaniah,Jeremiah,Nahum
andHabakkukdistinguishedthemselvesby theirpreachings.
Jeremiahbecamea
martyr.HisoracleswerecollectedbyBaruch
whoisalsoperhaps
theauthorofLamentations.
TheperiodofexileinBabylon atthebeginningof theSixth
centuryB.C.gave
birthtointensepropheticactivity.Ezekiel
figuresimportantly
astheconsolerofhisbrothers,inspiring
hopeamongthem.Hisvisions
arefamous.TheBook ofObadiah
dealswith
themiseryofaconqueredJerusalem.

36. 18 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
After the exile, whieh came to an end in bgg 8.c., prophetic
activity resumed with Haggai and Zechariah who urged the re-
eonstruction of the Temple. When it was completed, writings
going under the name of Malachi appeared. They contain various
oracles of a spiritual nature.
one wonders why the Book of Jonah is included in the pro-
phetic books when the old Testament does not give it any real
text to speak of. Jonah is a story from which one p'incipll fact
emerges: the necessary submission to Divine will.
Daniel was written in three languages (Hebrew, Aramaic and
Greek). According to Christian eommentators, it is a
,discon-
certing'Apocalypse from an historical point of view. It is prob-
ably a work from the Maceabaean period, seconrl century B.c.
Its author wished to maintain th0 faith of his countrymen, at the
time of the
'abomina,tion
of desolation', by convincing them that
the moment of deliverance was at hand. (E. Jacobi
THE BOOKS OF POETRY AND WISDOM
These form collections of unquestionable literary unity.
Foremost among them are the
psalms,
the greatest monument
to Hebrew poetry. A large number were composed by David and
the others by priests and levites. Their themes are praises, sup-
plications and meditations, and they served a liturgical function.
The book of Job, the book of wisdom and piety po,r efrcellenne,
probably dates from 400-b00 B.C.
The author of
'Lamentations'
on the fall of Jerusalem at the
beginning of the sixth century B.c. may well be Jeremiah.
we must once again mention the song of songs, allegorical
chants mostly about Divine love, the Book of proverbs,
a collec-
tion of the words of Solomon and other wise men of the court,
and Ecclesiastes or Koheleth, where earthly happiness and wis-
dom are debated.
we have, therefore, a collection of works with highly disparate
contents written over at least seven centuries, using extremely
varied sourees before being amalgamated inside a single work.
How was this collection able, over the centuries, to constitute an
18 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Aftertheexile,whichcameto anendin538B.C.,prophetic
activityresumed
withHaggaiandZechariahwhourged there·
constructionoftheTemple.When itwascompleted, writings
goingunderthenameofMalachiappeared. Theycontainvarious
oracles
ofaspiritualnature.
Onewonderswhy theBookofJonahisincludedin thepro­
pheticbookswhen
theOldTestamentdoesnotgive itanyreal
texttospeakof. Jonahisastoryfromwhichoneprinciple fact
emerges:thenecessarysubmission toDivineWill.
Danielwas
writteninthreelanguages(Hebrew, Aramaicand
Greek).Accordingto Christiancommentators,itisa'discon­
certing'Apocalypsefrom anhistoricalpoint ofview.Itisprob­
ablyaworkfrom
theMaccabaeanperiod,Second centuryB.C.
Itsauthorwishedto maintainthefaithofhiscountrymen,atthe
timeofthe'abominationofdesolation',byconvincingthem that
themomentofdeliverancewas athand.(E.Jacob)
THEBOOKSOFPOETRYANDWISDOM
Theseformcollections ofunquestionableliteraryunity.
Foremostamong
themarethePsalms,thegreatestmonument
toHebrewpoetry.A
largenumberwerecomposedbyDavid and
theothersbypriestsandlevites.Theirthemesarepraises,sup­
plications
andmeditations,andtheyservedaliturgicalfunction.
Thebook
ofJob,thebookofwisdomandpietypal'excellence,
probablydatesfrom400-500B.C.
Theauthorof'Lamentations'onthefallofJerusalematthe
beginningoftheSixthcenturyB.C.maywellbeJeremiah.
We
mustonceagainmentiontheSongofSongs,allegorical
chantsmostlyaboutDivinelove, theBookofProverbs,acollec­
tionofthewords
ofSolomonandotherwisemen ofthecourt,
andEcclesiastesorKoheleth,where earthlyhappinessandwis­
dom
aredebated.
Wehave,therefore,acollectionofworks withhighlydisparate
contentswrittenoveratleastsevencenturies, usingextremely
variedsourcesbeforebeing amalgamatedinsideasinglework.
Howwasthiscollectionable,over thecenturies,toconstitute an

37. Tlw Boola of thc Old Tectamrlzfi
le
inseparable whole and-with a few variations according to com-
lnooity-uecome the book containing the Judeo-christian Reve-
lation ? This book was called in Greek the
'canon'
because of the
idea of intangibilitY it eonveYs.
The smalgam does not date from the Christisn period, but
from Judaism itself, probably with a primary stage in the Sev-
enth century B.C. before later books were added to those already
accepted. It is to be noted however that the first five books, form-
ing ihe Torah or Pentateuch, have always been given pride of
plice. Once the proclamations of the prophets (the prediction of
a chastisement commensurate with misdemeanour) had been ful-
filled, there was no difficulty in adding their texts to the books
that had already been admitted. The same was true for the
assurances of hope given by these prophets. By the Second
century 8.C., the
'Canon'
of the prophets had been formed.
other books, e.g. Psalms, on account of their liturgieal func-
tion, were integrated along with further writings, such as Lam-
entations, the Book of Wisdom and the Book of Job'
Christianity, which was initially Judeo-Christianity, has been
carefully studied-as we shall see later on-by modern authors,
such as Cardinal Dani6lou. Before it was transformed under
Paul's influence, Christianity accepted the heritage of the Old
Testament without difficulty. The authors of the Gospels ad-
hered very strictly to the latter, but whereas a
'purge'
has been
made of the Gospels by ruling out the
'Apoct'ypha',
the same
selection has not been deemed necessary for the old Testament.
Everything, or nearly everything, has been accepted'
who would have dared dispute any aspects of this disparate
amalgam before the end of the Middle Ages-in the West at
least? The answer is nobody, or almost nobody. From the end
of the Middle Ages up to the beginning of modern times, one or
two critics began to appear; but, as we have already seen, the
Church Authorities have always succeeded in having their own
way. Nowadays, there is without doubt a genuine body of textual
crilicism, but even if ecclesiastic specialists have devoted many
of their efforts to examining a multitude of detailed points, they
have preferred not to go too deepty into what they euphemisti-
cally call
'difficulties'.
They hardly seem disposed to study them
in ttre light of modern knowledge. They may well establish paral-
TheBoob01theOldTestament 19
inseparablewhole and-withafewvariationsaccording tocom­
munity-becomethebookcontainingtheJudeo-ChristianReve­
lation?
ThisbookwascalledinGreekthe'canon'because ofthe
ideaofintangibilityitconveys.
Theamalgamdoes
notdatefrom theChristianperiod, but
fromJudaismitself,probablywitha primarystageintheSev­
enthcenturyB.C.before laterbookswereaddedtothosealready
accepted.
Itistobenotedhowever thatthefirstfivebooks,form­
ingtheTorahorPentateuch,havealwaysbeengivenprideof
place.Oncetheproclamationsoftheprophets(theprediction
of
achastisementcommensuratewithmisdemeanour)hadbeenful­
filled,
therewasnodifficultyinadding theirtextstothebooks
thathadalreadybeenadmitted.Thesamewas trueforthe
assurancesofhopegivenbytheseprophets.BytheSecond
centuryB.C.,the'Canon'oftheprophetshadbeenformed.
Otherbooks,e.g.Psalms,onaccountof
theirliturgicalfunc­
tion,wereintegratedalongwith
furtherwritings,suchasLam­
entations,theBookofWisdomandtheBookofJob.
Christianity,whichwasinitiallyJudeo-Christianity,hasbeen
carefully
studied-asweshallsee lateron-bymodernauthors,
such
asCardinalDanielou.Before itwastransformedunder
Paul'sinfluence,ChristianityacceptedtheheritageoftheOld
Testamentwithoutdifficulty.TheauthorsoftheGospelsad­
heredverystrictlytothelatter,
butwhereasa'purge'hasbeen
madeoftheGospelsbyrulingoutthe'Apocrypha',thesame
selectionhasnotbeendeemednecessaryfortheOldTestament.
Everything,
ornearlyeverything,hasbeenaccepted.
Whowouldhavedareddispute
anyaspectsofthisdisparate
amalgambeforetheendoftheMiddle
Ages-intheWest at
least?Theanswerisnobody, oralmostnobody. Fromtheend
oftheMiddleAgesuptothebeginningofmoderntimes,one or
twocriticsbeganto appear;but,aswehavealreadyseen,the
ChurchAuthoritieshavealwayssucceededinhaving
theirown
way.Nowadays,thereiswithoutdoubtagenuinebodyoftextual
criticism,
butevenifecclesiasticspecialistshavedevotedmany
oftheireffortstoexaminingamultitudeofdetailedpoints,they
havepreferred
nottogotoodeeplyintowhattheyeuphemisti­
callycall'difficulties'.Theyhardlyseemdisposedtostudythem
inthelightofmodernknowledge.Theymaywellestablishparal-

38. to THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
lels with history-principally when history and Biblical narra-
tion appear to be in agreement-but so far they have not com-
mitted themselves to be a frank and thorough comparison with
scientific ideas. They reslize that this would lead people to con-
'test notions about the truth of Judeo-christian scripto"*r, which
have so far remained undisputed.
THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
leiswithhistory-principallywhenhistoryandBiblical narra­
tionappear tobeinagreemeJ1lt--butso fartheyhavenotcom­
mittedthemselvesto
beafrankandthoroughcomparisonwith
scientificideas.Theyrealize
thatthiswouldleadpeopletocon-
.testnotionsaboutthe truthofJudeo-ChristianScriptures,which
have
sofarremainedundisputed.

39. lll
fhe Otd festarnent and
Scierrce.
Findings
Few of the subiects dealt within the Old Testament, and
likewise the Gospels, give rise to a confrontation with the data
of modern knowledge. When an incompatibility does occur be-
tween the Biblical text and science, however, it is on extremely
important points.
As we have already seen in the preceding chapter, historical
errors were found in the Bible and we have quoted several of
these pinpointed by Jewish and christian experts in exegesis. The
latter have naturally had a tendency to minimize the importance
of such errors. They find it quite natural for a sacred author to
present historical fact in accordanee with theologly and to write
iri*to.y to suit certain needs. We shall see further on' in the case
of the Gospel according to Matthew, the same liberties taken
with reality and the same commentaries aimed at making ad-
missible as reality what is in contradiction to it. A logical and
objective mind cannot be content with this procedure.
i-to* a logical angle, it is possihte to single out a large number
of contradictions and improbabilities. The existence of different
sourees that might have been used in the writing of a description
may be at the origin of two different presentations of the same
fact. This is not
"it;
ditr*rent adaptations, later additions to the
text itself, like the commentaries added a posteriori, then included
in the text later on whe$ a new copy was made-these are per-
fectly recognized by specialists in textual criticism and very
ir"ni.tv underlined by some of them. In the case of the Pentateuch
gl
III
TheOldTeslaDlenland
Sc:iEnf:e.
Find,uls
Fewofthesubjectsdealt withintheOldTestament, and
likewisetheGospels,give risetoaconfrontation withthedata
ofmodernknowledge.When anincompatibilitydoesoccurbe­
tween
theBiblicaltextandscience,however, itisonextremely
importantpoints.
Aswehave
alreadyseenintheprecedingchapter,historical
errorswerefoundin theBibleandwehavequotedseveral of
thesepinpointedby JewishandChristianexpertsinexegesis.The
latterhavenaturallyhadatendencytominimizetheimportance
ofsucherrors.Theyfind itquitenaturalforasacredauthorto
presenthistoricalfactinaccordancewiththeologyandtowrite
historyto suitcertainneeds.Weshallsee furtheron,inthecase
oftheGospelaccording toMatthew,thesameliberties taken
withrealityandthesamecommentariesaimed atmakingad­
missibleas
realitywhatisincontradiction toit.Alogical and
objectivemindcannotbecontentwiththisprocedure.
Fromalogicalangle, itispossibletosingleouta largenumber
ofcontradictionsandimprobabilities.Theexistence ofdifferent
sources
thatmighthavebeenused inthewritingofadescription
maybeattheoriginoftwodifferentpresentations ofthesame
fact.
Thisisnotall;differentadaptations, lateradditionsto the
textitself,likethecommentariesadded aposteriori,thenincluded
in
thetextlateronwheJ}anewcopywas made-theseareper­
fectlyrecognizedbyspecialistsintextualcriticism
andvery
franklyunderlinedbysomeofthem. Inthecaseof thePentateuch
21

40. 22 THE BIBLq THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
alone, for example, Father de vaux in the General Introduction
preceding his translation of Genesis (pages lB and 14), has drawn
attention to numerous disagreements. We shall not quote them
here since we shall be quoting several of them later on in this
study. The general impression one gains is that one must not
follow the text to the letter.
Here is a very typical example:
In Genesis (6, B), God decides just before the Flood henee-
forth to limit man's lifespan to one hundred and twenty years,
". . . his days shall be a hundred and twenty years". Further on
however, we note in Genesis (ll, r0$z) that the ten descendants
of Noah had lifespans that range from l4g to 600 years (see
table in this chapter showing Noah's descendants down to Abra-
ham). The contradiction between these two passages is quite
obviouq. The explanation is elementary. The first passage (Gene-
sis 6, 3) is a Yahvist text, probably dating as we have already
seen from the Tenth century B.c. The second passage in Genesis
(11, 10-3U) is a much more recent text (Sixth century B.C.)
from the Saeerdotal version. This version is at the origitt if th"**
genealogies, which are as precise in their information on life-
spans as they are improbable when taken en ?nusse.
It is in Genesis that we find the most evident incompatibilities
with modern science. These coneern three essential points:
1) the Creation of the world and its stages;
2l the date of the creation of the world ancl the date of man's
appearance on earth;
3) the description of the Flood.
THE CNEATION OF THE WORLD
As Father de Vaux points out, Genesis
,.starts
with two juxta_
posed descriptions of the creation'.1. when examining them from
the point of view of their eompatibility with modern scientifie
data, we must look at each one separately.
First Description of the Crcatimr
The first description occupies the first chapter and the ver.y
first verses of the second chapter. It is a masterpieee of inaecu-
racy from a scientific point of view. It must be examined one
22 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
alone,forexample,FatherdeVauxin theGeneralIntroduction
precedinghis
translationofGenesis(pages13 and14),hasdrawn
attentiontonumerousdisagreements. Weshallnotquote them
heresinceweshallbequotingseveral ofthemlateroninthis
study.Thegeneralimpressiononegainsis thatonemustnot
followthe texttotheletter.
Hereisaverytypicalexample:
InGenesis(6, 3),Goddecides justbeforetheFloodhence­
forthtolimitman'slifespantoonehundred andtwentyyears,
"
...hisdaysshallbeahundred andtwentyyears".Furtheron
however,wenoteinGenesis(11,10-32)
thatthetendescendants
ofNoahhadlifespans thatrangefrom148 to600years(see
tablein
thischaptershowingNoah'sdescendantsdown toAbra­
ham).Thecontradictionbetweenthesetwopassagesisquite
obvious..Theexplanationiselementary.Thefirstpassage(Gene­
sis6,3)isaYahvisttext,probably datingaswehave already
seenfromthe TenthcenturyB.C.Thesecondpassage inGenesis
(11,10-32)
isamuchmorerecent text(SixthcenturyB.C.)
from
theSacerdotalversion.Thisversionis attheoriginofthese
genealogies,which
areasprecisein theirinformationonlife­
spansastheyareimprobablewhen takenenmasse.
ItisinGenesis thatwefindthemostevidentincompatibilities
withmodernscience.Theseconcern threeessentialpoints:
1)theCreation oftheworld anditsstages;
2)thedateoftheCreationoftheworldandthedateofman's
appearanceon earth;
3)thedescriptionoftheFlood.
THECREATIONOFTHEWORLD
AsFatherdeVauxpointsout,Genesis "startswithtwojuxta­
poseddescriptionsoftheCreation'!.Whenexaminingthem from
thepointofviewoftheircompatibilitywithmodernscientific
data,we
mustlookateachoneseparately.
FirstDescriptionoftheCreation
Thefirstdescriptionoccupiesthefirst chapterandthevery
firstverses
ofthesecondchapter. Itisamasterpiece ofinaccu­
racyfromascientificpoint
ofview.Itmustbeexaminedone

41. Thc OldTetwrcnt ud Sctercc
23
parsgmph at a time. The text repnoduced here is from the Be-
vised $tandard Version of the Bible.'
Chapter 1, verges | &21
.,In
ihe beginning God ereated the heavens and the earth. The
earth *"" without form and void, and darkness was upon the
fece of the deep; and the spirit of God was moving over the faee
of the waters."
It is quite possible to admit that before the Creation of the
Earth, what was to become the Universe as we know it was cov-
ered in darkness. To mention the existence of water at this period
is however quite simply pure imagination. We shall see in the
ifti"a part of tttir book how there is every indication that at the
initial stage of the formation of the universe a gaseous m&ss
existed. It is an error to place water in it.
Verses 3 to 5:
"And God said,
'L€t
there be light', and there was light' And
God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light
from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he
ealled Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one
day."
The lish,t circulating in the universe is the result of complex
reaction* itt ttt* stars. We shall come back to them in the third
part of this work. At this stage in the Creation, however, accord-
ing to the Bible, the stars were not yet formed. The
'lights'
of the
firmament are not mentioned in Genesis until verse 14, when they
were created on the Fourth day, "to separate the day from the
night", "to give light upon earth"; all of which is accurate'
Itls illogieal, however, to mention the result (lieht) on the first
day, when the cause of this light was created three days later'
The fact that the existence of evening and morning is placed on
the first day is moreover, purely imaginary; the existence of
evening and morning as elements of a single day is only con-
ceivabl,e after the creation of the earth and its rotation under the
light of its own star, the Sun !
-verses 6 to 8
,,And
God said,
'Let
there be a firmament in the midst of the
waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters'' And God
l--prU. W. nl. Collins & Sons for the British and Foreign Bible Society'
1952.
TheOldTatornenttJfIdScience
paragraphatatime.The textreproducedhereisfromtheRe­
vised
StandardVersionoftheBible.
l
Chapter1,verses1 &2 :
"InthebeginningGodcreated theheavensand theearth.The
earthwaswithoutformandvoid,anddarknesswasupon the
faceofthedeep;andtheSpiritofGodwasmovingover theface
ofthewaters."
Itisquitepossible toadmitthatbeforetheCreation ofthe
Earth,whatwastobecome theUniverseasweknowitwascov­
eredindarkness.Tomention theexistenceof wateratthisperiod
ishoweverquitesimply pureimagination.Weshallsee inthe
thirdpartofthisbookhow thereiseveryindication thatatthe
initial stageoftheformationoftheuniverseagaseousmass
existed.
Itisanerrortoplacewaterinit.
Verses3to5:
"AndGodsaid,'Lettherebelight',andtherewaslight.And
God
sawthatthelightwasgood; andGodseparatedthelight
from
thedarkness.GodcalledthelightDay,and thedarknesshe
calledNight.Andtherewas evening
andtherewasmorning,one
day."
ThelightcirculatingintheUniverseistheresultofcomplex
reactions
inthestars.Weshallcomebacktothem inthethird
partofthiswork.AtthisstageintheCreation,however,accord­
ingtotheBible, thestarswerenotyetformed.The'lights' ofthe
firmamentarenotmentionedinGenesisuntilverse14,whenthey
werecreatedon
theFourthday,"toseparatethedayfrom the
night","togivelightupon earth";allofwhichisaccurate.
Itisillogical,however,tomention theresult(light)on thefirst
day,whenthecauseofthislightwascreated
threedayslater.
Thefactthattheexistenceofeveningandmorningisplacedon
thefirstdayismoreover,purelyimaginary;theexistenceof
eveningandmorningaselementsofasingledayisonlycon­
ceivable
afterthecreationoftheearthanditsrotationunderthe
lightof
itsownstar,theSun!
-verses6to8
"AndGods2.id,'Lettherebeafirmamentinthemidstof the
waters,andlet itseparatethewatersfromthewaters.'And God
1.Pub.W.M.Collins&SonsfortheBritishandForeignBibleSociety,
1952.

42. ,U THE BIBT.R, TIIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
made the firmament and separated the waters whieh were under
the ftrmament from the waters which were above the firmament.
And it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And there
was evening and there was morning, a second day."
The myth of the waters is continued here with their separation
into two layers by a firmament that in the description of the
Flood allows the waters above to pass through and iiow onto the
earth. This image of the division of the waters into two masses
is scientifically unacceptable.
-verses I to 13
"And God said,
'L€t
the waters under the heavens be gathered
together into one place, and let the dry land appear., And it was
so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gath-
ered together he called seas. And God saw that it was good. Antl
God ssid,
'r-Et
the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding
seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their ***d, each
according to its kind upon the earth.' And it was so. The earth
brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their
own kinds' and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each
aecording: to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And there
was evening and there was morning, a third day."
?he fact that continents emerged at the period in the earth's
history, when it was still covered with water, is quite acceptable
scientifically. IVhat is totauy untenabre is that a highly organized
vegetable kingdom with reproduction by seed could have ap-
peared before the existence of the sun (in Genesis it does not
appear until the fourth day), and likewise the establishment of
alternating nights and days.
-verses 14 to 19
"And God said,
'Let
there be rights in the firmaments of the
heavens to separate the day from tight; and let them be for
signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be
lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the
earth.' And it was so. And God made the two great lights, the
greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night;
tre made the stars also. And God set them in the fir'mament of
the heavens to give light upon earth, to rule ovei. the day and
over the night, and to separate the light from the dar.kness. And
THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
madethefirmamentandseparatedthewaterswhichwereunder
thefirmamentfromthewaterswhichwereabovethefirmament.
And
itwasso.And GodcalledthefirmamentHeaven.Andthere
waseveningandtherewasmorning,asecondday."
Themythofthewatersiscontinuedherewith theirseparation
intotwolayersbyafirmament
thatinthedescriptionofthe
Floodallows
thewatersabovetopassthroughand flowontothe
earth.Thisimageof thedivisionofthewatersintotwomasses
isscientificallyunacceptable.
-verses9to13
"AndGodsaid,'Letthewatersundertheheavensbegathered
togetherintooneplace,andlet
thedrylandappear.'And itWas
so.Godcalledthe drylandEarth,andthewaters thatweregath­
eredtogetherhecalledSeas.And
Godsawthatitwasgood.And
Godsaid,
'Lettheearthputforthvegetation,plantsyielding
seed,
andfruittreesbearing fruitinwhichis theirseed,each
according
toitskinduponthe earth.'Anditwasso.The earth
broughtforthvegetation,plantsyieldingseedaccordingto their
ownkinds,andtreesbearing fruitinwhichis theirseed,each
accordingtoitskind.And
Godsawthatitwasgood.Andthere
waseveningand
therewasmorning,a thirdday."
Thefactthatcontinentsemerged attheperiodinthe earth's
history,when itwasstillcoveredwithwater,isquiteacceptable
scientifically.
Whatistotallyuntenableis thatahighlyorganized
vegetablekingdomwithreproductionbyseedcouldhaveap­
pearedbeforetheexistenceofthesun(inGenesis
itdoesnot
appearuntilthefourth day),andlikewisetheestablishmentof
alternatingnightsanddays.
-verses14to19
"AndGodsaid,'Let therebelightsinthefirmamentsofthe
heavenstoseparatethedayfrom:night;andletthembefor
signsandforseasonsandfordaysandyears,andletthembe
lightsinthefirmamentoftheheavenstogivelightuponthe
earth.'And
itwasso.AndGodmadethetwo greatlights,the
greaterlighttoruletheday,andthelesserlighttorulethe night;
itemadethe starsalso.And Godsettheminthefirmamentof
theheavenstogivelightuponearth,toruleoverthedayand
overthenight,andtoseparatethelightfromthedarkness.And

43. tlu OlitTrrrtcrlrlnt onit Sdct e It
God ssw thst it was good. And there was evening and there was
morning, a fourth daY."
Here the Bibtical author's description is acceptable. The only
criticism one could level at this pagssge is the lnsition it occu'
pies in the description as a whole. Earth and Moon emanated, as
ie know, from their original Btar, the Sun' To place the creation
of the Sun and Moon after the creation of the Earth is contrary
to the most ftrmly estsblished ideas on the formation of tlre
elements of the Solrr SYstem.
-verses 20 to 80
"Aud God said,
'Iret
the waters bring forth swarms of living
creatures, and let birds fly above the esrth seross the firmament
of the heavens.' So God created the great sea monsters and every
Iiving creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, 8c'
eording to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its
kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them say-
ing,
'Be
fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and
let Uirds multiply on the earth.' And there was evening and there
was morning, a fifth day."
T|1is passage contains assertions which are unacceptable.
According to Genegis, the animal kingdom begpn with the ap'
peerance of creatures of the ses and winged birds. The Biblicsl
deseription informs us that it was not until the next day-as we
shall see in the following verses-that the earth itself was popu-
lated by animals.
It is eertein that the origins of life came from the sea, but this
question will not be dealt with until the third part of this book.
F"o* ttre sea, the earth was colonized, as it were' by the animal
kingdom. It is from animals living on the surface of the earth,
*t d in particular from one species of reptile which lived in the
second era, that it is thought the birds originated. Numerous
biological charaeteristics common to both species make this de-
duction possible. The beasts of the earth are not however men-
tioned ut tit the sixth day in Genesis; after the appearance of
the birds. This order of appearance, beasts of the earth after
birds, is not therefore acceptable.
-verses 24 to 31
,.And
God said,
'I-€t
the earth bring forth living creatures &c-
cording to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of
Godsaw thatitwasgood.Andthere waseveningandtherewas
morning,a
fourthday!'
HeretheBiblicalauthor'sdescriptionisacceptable.Theonly
criticismonecouldlevel
atthispassageis thepositionitoccu­
piesin
thedescriptionasawhole.EarthandMoonemanated,as
weknow,from
theiroriginalstar,theSun.Toplace thecreation
oftheSunandMoon afterthecreationoftheEarthiscontrary
tothemostfirmlyestablishedideason theformationofthe
elementsoftheSolarSystem.
-verses20to30
"And
Godsaid,'Letthewatersbringforthswarmsofliving
creatures,
andletbirdsflyabovethe earthacrossthefirmament
oftheheavens.'So Godcreatedthegreatseamonstersandevery
livingcreature
thatmoves,withwhichthewatersswarm,ac­
cordingto
theirkinds,andeverywingedbirdaccording toits
kind.And Godsawthatitwasgood.And Godblessedthemsay­
ing,'Be
fruitfulandmultiplyand fillthewatersintheseas,and
letbirdsmultiplyon
theearth.'Andtherewaseveningandthere
wasmorning,afifth
day." .
Thispassagecontainsassertionswhich
areunacceptable.
According
toGenesis,theanimalkingdombeganwith theap­
pearanceofcreatures
oftheseaandwingedbirds.TheBiblical
descriptioninformsus
thatitwasnotuntilthenext day-aswe
shallseein
thefollowingverses-thattheearthitselfwaspopu­
latedbyanimals.
Itiscertainthattheoriginsoflifecamefrom thesea,butthis
questionwillnotbedealtwithuntilthe
thirdpartofthisbook.
Fromthesea,theearthwascolonized,as itwere,by theanimal
kingdom.
Itisfromanimalslivingon thesurfaceoftheearth,
andinparticularfromonespeciesofreptilewhichlivedinthe
Secondera,
thatitisthoughtthebirdsoriginated.Numerous
biologicalcharacteristicscommontobothspeciesmakethis
de­
ductionpossible.Thebeastsofthe eartharenothowevermen­
tioneduntil
thesixthdayinGenesis; aftertheappearanceof
thebirds.Thisorderofappearance,beastsofthe
earthafter
birds,isnotthereforeacceptable.
-verses24to31
"AndGodsaid,'Letthe earthbringforthlivingcreaturesac­
cordingtotheirkinds:cattleandcreepingthingsandbeastsof

44. rO TIIE BIBI.F,|, THE QI'N'AN AND SCIENGE
the earttr accordlng to their kindg.' And it was so. And God made
the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the catfle
according to their kinds, and everything that ereeps upon the
ground eecordins to its kind. And God saw that it was good."
"Then God said,
'L€t
us make man in our image, afterour like-
ness; and let them have dominion (sic) over the fish of the sea,
and over the birds of the air, and over the catile, and over all the
earth and over every creeping thins that creeps upon the earth".
"so God created man in his own image, in the image of God he
created him; male and female he created them."
"And God blessed them, and God said to them,
.Be
fruitful and
multiplS and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion
over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over
every living thing that moves upon the earth.' And God said,
'Behold,
I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon
the fsce of the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you
shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth, and to
every bird of the air, and to everythins that creeps on the earth,
everything that has the breath of life, I have siven every green
plant for food." And it was so. And God saw everything that he
had made, and behold, i! was very good. And there *"J evening
and there was morning, a sixth day."
This is the description of the culmination of the creation. The
author lists all the living creatures not rnentioned before and
describes the various kinds of food for man and beast.
As we have seen, the enor was to place the appearance of
beasts of the earth after that of the birds. Man's *pp""rrnce is
however correctly situated after the other species of living things.
The Cescription of the creation finishes in the first three
verses of Chapter p:
"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the
host (sic) of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work
which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his
work which he had done. so God blessed the seventh day and
hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he
had done in creation;
These are the generations of the heavens and the ear.ilr rvhen
they were created."
This description of the seventh day calls for some comment.
THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
theearthaccordingtotheirkinds.'And itwasso.AndGodmade
thebeastsoftheearthaccordingtotheirkindsandthecattle
according
totheirkinds,andeverything thatcreepsuponthe
groundaccording
toitskind.And Godsawthatitwasgood."
"ThenGodsaid,'Letusmakemaninourimage,afterourlike­
ness;
andletthemhavedominion(sic)overthefish ofthesea,
andoverthebirdsoftheair,andoverthecattle,andoverallthe
earthandovereverycreeping thingthatcreepsuponthe earth".
"SoGodcreated maninhisownimage,intheimage ofGodhe
created
him;maleandfemalehecreatedthem."
"AndGodblessedthem, andGodsaidtothem,'Be fruitfuland
multiply,
andfilltheearthandsubdue it;andhavedominion
over
thefishoftheseaandoverthebirdsofthe airandover
everyliving
thingthatmovesupontheearth.'And Godsaid,
'Behold,Ihavegivenyoueveryplantyieldingseedwhichisupon
thefaceoftheearth,andeverytreewithseedinits fruit;you
shallhavethem
forfood.Andtoeverybeast oftheearth,andto
everybird
oftheair,and toeverythingthatcreepsontheearth,
everything
thathasthebreathoflife,Ihavegiveneverygreen
plantforfood."And itwasso.And Godsaweverythingthathe
hadmade,andbehold,itwasverygood.Andtherewasevening
andtherewasmorning,asixthday."
ThisisthedescriptionoftheculminationoftheCreation.The
authorlistsallthelivingcreaturesnotmentionedbeforeand
describes
thevariouskindsoffoodfor manandbeast.
Aswehaveseen,the
errorwastoplacetheappearanceof
beasts
oftheearthafterthatofthebirds.Man'sappearanceis
howevercorrectlysituated
aftertheotherspeciesoflivingthings.
Thedescription
oftheCreationfinishesinthefirstthree
versesofChapter2 :
"Thus
theheavensandthe earthwerefinished,andallthe
host(sic)ofthem.Andontheseventhday
Godfinishedhiswork
whichhehaddone,andherestedontheseventhdayfromallhis
workwhichhehaddone.
SoGodblessedtheseventhdayand
hallowedit,becauseon
itGodrestedfromallhisworkwhichhe
haddoneincreation;
These
arethegenerationsoftheheavensandthe earthwhen
theywerecreated."
Thisdescriptionoftheseventhdaycallsforsomecomment.

45. ?I'h.OldTlrrtomlrln crdiGiancc
n
Firstty the mesning of certain words. fire text is tsken from
the Bevised Stendard Version of the Bible mentioned above. The
word trosf, sig1nifiee here, in all probability, the multitude of be-
ings created. Ag for the expression
'he
rested', it is a manner of
translsUng the Hebrew word
'shabbath',
from which the Jewish
day for reet is derived, hence the expression in English
'sabbath'.
It is quite clear that the
'rest'
that C'od is said to have taken
after his six days' work is a legend. There is nevertheless &n ex-
planation for this. We must bear in mind that the description of
the creation examined here is tsken from the so-called Sacerdotal
veruio& written by priests and scribes who were the spiritual
suecessors of Ezekiel, the prophet of the exile to Babylon writing
in the Sixth century B.C. We have already seen how the priests
took the Yahvist and Elohist versions of Genesis and remodelled
them after their own fashion in accordanee with their o\iln pre-
occupations. Father de Vaux has written that the
'legalist'
char-
acter of these writings was very essentisl. An outline of this has
already been given above.
Whereas the Yahvist text of the Creation, written several cen-
turies before the Sacerdotal text, makes no mention of God's
sabbath, taken after the fatigue of a week's labor, the authors of
the sacerdotal text bring it into their description. They divide
the latter into separate days, with the very precise indication of
the days of the week. They build it around the sabbatic day of
rest which they have to iustify to the faithful by pointing out
thst God wss the first to respect it. Subseguent to this practical
necessity, the description that follows has an apparently log,ical
religious order, but in fact scientific data permit us to qualify the
latter as being of a whimsical nature.
The idea that successive phases of the Creation' as seen by the
Sacerdotal authors in their desire to incite people to religious
observation, could have been compressed into the space of one
week is one that cannot be defended from a scientific point of
view. Today we are perfectly aware that the formation of the
universe and the Earth took place in stages that lasted for very
long periods. (In the third part of the present work, we shall
o*itt" this question when we come to look at the Qur'anic data
concernins the Cneation). Even if the description came to a close
on the *veniog of the sixth day, without mentioning the seventh
27
Firstlythemeaningofcertainwords.Thetextistakenfrom
theRevisedStandardVersionoftheBiblementionedabove.The
word'host'signifieshere,
inallprobability,themultitudeofbe­
ingscreated.Asfortheexpression'herested', itisamannerof
translatingtheHebrewword'shabbath',fromwhich theJewish
dayforrestisderived,hence theexpressioninEnglish'sabbath'.
Itisquiteclearthatthe'rest'thatGodissaidtohavetaken
afterhissixdays'workisalegend.Thereisneverthelessanex­
planation
forthis.We mustbearinmindthatthedescriptionof
thecreationexamined hereistakenfromtheso-calledSacerdotal
version,
writtenbypriestsandscribeswhowere thespiritual
successors
ofEzekiel,theprophetoftheexile toBabylon writing
intheSixthcenturyB.C.Wehavealreadyseenhow thepriests
tooktheYahvistandElohistversions ofGenesisandremodelled
themaftertheirownfashion inaccordancewith theirownpre­
occupations.
FatherdeVauxhaswrittenthatthe'legalist'char­
acterofthesewritingswasveryessential.Anoutline ofthishas
alreadybeengivenabove.
Whereas
theYahvisttextoftheCreation,writtenseveralcen­
turiesbeforetheSacerdotaltext,makesnomentionofGod's
sabbath,
takenafterthefatigueofaweek'slabor,theauthorsof
theSacerdotaltextbringitintotheirdescription.Theydivide
thelatterintoseparatedays,withtheverypreciseindication of
thedaysoftheweek.Theybuild itaroundthesabbaticday of
restwhichtheyhaveto justifytothefaithfulbypointingout
thatGodwas thefirsttorespectit.Subsequenttothispractical
necessity,
thedescriptionthatfollowshas anapparentlylogical
religiousorder,
butinfactscientificdatapermitustoqualifythe
latterasbeingofawhimsicalnature.
Theidea
thatsuccessivephases oftheCreation,asseenbythe
Sacerdotal
authorsintheirdesiretoincitepeopletoreligious
observation,couldhavebeencompressedinto
thespaceofone
week
isonethatcannotbedefendedfromascientificpointof
view.Todaywe
areperfectlyawarethattheformationofthe
Universe
andtheE'arthtookplace instagesthatlastedforvery
longperiods.
(Inthethirdpartofthepresentwork, weshall
examine
thisquestionwhenwecometolook attheQur'anicdata
concerningtheCreation).Evenifthedescriptioncametoaclose
ontileeveningofthesixthday,withoutmentioning theseventh

46. ?a TIrE BIBLF., rEE QIIRAITI AND SGXB{CE
dan the
'sabbath'
when God is ssid to h^Bve rested, snd even if,
as in the Qurhnic description, e'wgne perrnittod to ttlink thrt
they w'ere in fact undefined periods rather than actu*l day+ the
Sacerdotal description would stiu not be any mor€ rcceptable.
The sueeession of episodes it contains is an absolute contradiction
with elementary scientific knowledge.
It may be seen therefore that the Saeerdotal description of the
creation stands out as an imaginative and ingenious fabricafion.
Its purpose was guite different from that of making the truth
known.
SecordDewvipfu
The second description of the creation in Genesis follows im-
mediately upon the first without cornment or transitional pas-
sage. It does not provoke the same objections.
we must remember that this description is roughly three cen-
turies older and is very short. It allows.more space to the ereation
of man and earthly paradise than to'the creation of the Earth
and Heavens. It mentions this very briefly (chapter E, 4biTl z
"rn the day tha,t Yahweh God made the earth and the heavens,
when no plant of the field was yet in the esrth and no herb of the
field had yet sprung up-for yahweh
God had not caused it to
rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the ground;
bu't a flood went up from earth and wstered the whole face of the
ground-then Yahweh God formed'man of dust from the ground,
and breathed into his nostrils the bresth of life; and man became
a living being."
This is the Yahvist text that appears in the text of presenL
day Bibles. The Sacerdotal text was added to it later on, but one
may ask if it was originally so brief. Nobody is in a position to
say whether the Yahvist text has not, in the course of tirne, been
pared down. We do not know if the few lines we possess represent
all that the oldest Biblieal text of the creation had to say.
The Yahvist description does not mention the actual formation
of the Earth or the Heavens. It makes it clear that when God
ereated man, therre was no vegetation on Earth (it had not yet
rained), even though the waters of the Earth had covered its
surface. The sequel to the text confirms this; God planted a gpr-
den at the same time as man was created. The vegetable kingdom
THEBIBLE,THEQUIrANANDSCIENCE
day,the 'sabbath'whenGodis saidtohaverested, andevenif,
asintheQur"aniedescription,we werepermittedtothinkthat
theywereinfactundefinedperiods ratherthanactualdays, the
Sacerdotaldescriptionwouldstill notbeanymoreacceptable.
Thesuccession
ofepisodesitcontainsisanabsolutecontradiction
withelementaryscientificknowledge.
ItmaybeseenthereforethattheSacerdotaldescription ofthe
Creationstandsoutasanimaginativeandingeniousfabrication.
Itspurposewasquitedifferent fromthatofmakingthetruth
known.
SecondDescription
Theseconddescription oftheCreationinGenesisfollowsim­
mediatelyupon
thefirstwithoutcomment ortransitionalpas­
sage.Itdoesnotprovokethesameobjections.
We
mustrememberthatthisdescriptionisroughly threecen­
turiesolderandisveryshort. Itallows_morespace tothecreation
ofm'anandearthlyparadisethanto·thecreationoftheEarth
andHeavens.Itmentionsthisverybriefly (Chapter2,4b-7):
"Inthedaytha'tYahweh Godmadetheearthandtheheavens,
when
noplantofthefieldwas yetintheearthandnoherbofthe
fieldhad yetsprungup-forYahwehGodhadnotcauseditto
rainupontheearth,and therewasnoman totilltheground;
butafloodwentupfrom earthandwateredthewholeface ofthe
ground-thenYahwehGodformed-manofdustfromtheground,
andbreathedintohisnostrilsthe
breathoflife;andmanbecame
alivingbeing."
ThisistheYahvist
textthatappearsinthetextofpresent­
dayBibles.TheSacerdotal
textwasadded toitlateron,butone
mayask
ifitwasoriginallysobrief.Nobodyis inapositionto
saywhethertheYahvist texthasnot,inthecourse oftime,been
pareddown.We
donotknowifthefewlineswepossessrepresent
all
thattheoldestBiblical textoftheCreationhad tosay.
TheYahvistdescriptiondoes
notmentiontheactualformation
ofthegarthortheHe'avens.ItmakesitclearthatwhenGod
createdman, therewasnovegetationon Earth(ithadnotyet
rained),eventhough thewatersoftheEarthhadcovered its
surface.Thesequel tothetextconfirmsthis:Godplanteda gar­
den'atthesametime asmanwascreated.Thevegetablekingdom

47. Trrc OldTectarrrcnt amil SctcrroD
therefore appears on Earth at the seme time as man. This is
scientifically inaccurate; man did not appear on Earth until a
long time after vegetation had been growing on it. We do not
know how meny hundreds of millions of years separate the two
events.
This is the only critieigm that one can level at the Yahvist text.
The fact that it does not place the creation of man in time in re-
lation to the formation of the world and the earth, unlike the
Sacerdotal text, which places them in the same week, frees it
from the serious obiections raised against the latter.
THE DATE OF THE WORLD"S CNEATION AND THE
DATE OF MAATS APPEANANCE ON EANTH.
Ttre Jewish calendar, which follows the data contained in the
Old Testament, places the dates of the above very precisely. The
second half of the Christian year 1975 eorresponds to the be-
ginning of the 5,736th year of the creation of the world. The
creation of man followed several days later, so that he has the
same numerieal age, counted in years, as in the Jewish ealendar.
There is probably a correetion to be made on account of the fact
that time was originally calculated in lunar years, while the cal-
endar used in the West is based on solar years. This correction
would have to be made if one wanted to be absolutely exact, but
as it represents only 3To, it is of very little consequenee. To sim-
plify our calculations, it is easier to disregard it. lVhat matters
here is the order of magnitude. It is therefore of little importance
if. over a thousand years, our ealculations are thirty years out.
We are nearer the truth in following this Hebraic estimate of
the creation of the world if we say that it happened roughly
thirty-seven centuries before Christ.
What does modern scienee tell us? It would be difficult to reply
to the question concerning the forrnation of the Universe. All we
can provide figures for is the era in time when the solar system
was formed. It is possible to arrive at a reasonable approxima-
tion of this. The time between it and the present is estimated at
four and a half billion years. We can therefore measure the mar-
gin separating the firmly established reality we know today and
the data taken from the Old Testament. We shall expand on this
20
riseOldrelttJmenland SciBrace
thereforeappearsonEarthatthesametime asman.Thisis
scientificallyinaccurate;
mandidnotappearonEarthuntila
longtime
aftervegetationhadbeengrowingonit.Wedo not
knowhow manyhundredsofmillionsofyearsseparatethetwo
events.
Thisis
theonlycriticismthatonecanlevel a:ttheYahvisttext.
The
factthatitdoesnotplacethecreationof manintimeinre­
lation
totheformationoftheworldandtheearth,unlike the
Sacerdotaltext,whichplacesthem inthesameweek,frees it
fromtheseriousobjectionsraised againstthelatter.
THEDATEOFTHEWORLD~S CREATIONANDTHE
DATEOFMAN'SAPPEARANCE ONEARTH.
TheJewishcalendar,whichfollowsthe datacontainedin the
OldTestament,placesthedatesof theaboveveryprecisely.The
second
halfoftheChristianyear1975correspondstothebe­
ginning
ofthe5,736thyear ofthecreationoftheworld.The
creation
ofmanfollowedseveraldayslater,so thathehasthe
samenumericalage,countedinyears,
asintheJewishcalendar.
Thereisprobablyacorrectiontobemadeonaccountofthefact
thattimewasoriginallycalculated inlunaryears,whilethecal­
endarusedintheWestisbasedonsolaryears.Thiscorrection
wouldhavetobemade
ifonewantedtobeabsolutelyexact, but
asitrepresentsonly 3%,itisofverylittleconsequence.Tosim­
plify
ourcalculations,itiseasiertodisregardit.\Vhat matters
hereistheorder ofmagnitude.Itisthereforeoflittleimportance
if~overathousandyears,ourcalculations arethirtyyearsout.
We
arenearerthetruthinfollowingthisHebraicestimateof
thecreationof theworldifwesaythatithappenedroughly
thirty-sevencenturiesbeforeChrist.
Whatdoesmodernsciencetellus? Itwouldbedifficulttoreply
tothequestionconcerningtheformationoftheUniverse.Allwe
canprovidefiguresforisthe
eraintimewhenthesolarsystem
wasformed.
Itispossibleto arriveatareasonableapproxima­
tionofthis.Thetimebetween
itandthepresentisestimated at
fourandahalfbillionyears. Wecanthereforemeasurethemar­
gin
separatingthefirmlyestablishedreality weknowtodayand
the
datatakenfromtheOldTestament.Weshallexpandonthis

48. 30 THE BIBT.T, THE QUR'AN AI{D SCIENCE
in the third pert of the present work. These facts emerg€ from
a elose scrutiny of the Biblical text. Genesis provides verr pre-
cise information on the time that elapsed between Adam and
Abraham. For the period from the time of Abraham to the be-
ginnings of Christianity, the information provided is insufficient.
It must be supported by other sources.
L From Adnmto Abtaham
Genesis provides extremely precise genealogical data in Chap-
ters 4, 5, 11, 21 and 25. They concern all of Abraham's aneestors
in direct line back to Adam. They give the length of time each
person lived, the father's age at the birth of the son and thus
make it easily possible to ascertain the dates of birth and death
of eaeh ancestor in relation to the creation of Adam., as the table
indicates.
All the data used in this table come from the Sacerdotal text
of Genesis, the only Biblical text that provides information of
this kind. It may be deduced, according to the Bible, that Abra-
ham was born 1,948 years after Adam.
ABRAHAM's GENEALOGY
1. Adam
Seth
Enosch
Kenan
Mahalaleel
Jared
Enoeh
Methuselah
Lamech
10. Noah
Shem
Arpaehshad
Shelah
Eber
Peleg
date ol birth langth date of dea,th
alter orea,tion of af ter creation
of Adam life of Ad,am
930 930
130 9L2 1042
236 905 1140
325 910 1235
395 895 1290
460 962 t422
622 865 98?
687 969 1656
874 TT7 1651
1056 950 2006
1556 600 2156
1658 438 2096
1693 433 2122
t72g 464 2L87
t757 239 1996
30 THEBOLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
inthethirdpartofthepresentwork.Thesefactsemergefrom
aclose
scrutinyoftheBiblicaltext.Genesisprovidesverypre­
ciseinformationonthetime
thatelapsedbetweenAdamand
Abraham.
Fortheperiodfrom thetimeofAbrahamtothe be­
ginningsofChristianity,theinformationprovidedisinsufficient.
Itmustbesupportedby othersources.
1.FromAdamtoAbraham
Genesisprovidesextremelyprecisegenealogical datainChap­
ters4,5,11,21and25.TheyconcernallofAbraham'sancestors
indirectlinebacktoAdam.Theygive thelengthoftimeeach
personlived,the
father'sageatthebirthofthesonandthus
make
iteasilypossibletoascertain thedatesofbirthanddeath
ofeachancestorinrelationtothecreation ofAdam.,asthetable
indicates.
Allthe
datausedinthistablecomefromtheSacerdotaltext
ofGenesis,theonlyBiblicaltext thatprovidesinformation of
thiskind.Itmaybededuced,accordingtotheBible, thatAbra­
hamwasborn1,948years
afterAdam.
ABRAHAM'sGENEALOGY
date0/birth length date0/death
aftercreation 0/ aftercreation
0/Adam life 0/Adam
1.Adam 930 930
Seth 130 912 1042
Enosch 235 905 1140
Kenan 325 910 1235
Mahalaleel 395 895 1290
Jared 460 962 1422
Enoch 622 365 987
Methuselah 687 969 1656
Lamech 874 777 1651
10.Noah 1056
950 2006
Shem 1556 600 2156
Arpachshad 1658 438 2096
Shelah 1693
433 2122
Eber 1723 464 2187
Peleg 1757 239 1996

49. Trlc Oldfietfurlrpttt &d Scfgllrcc
Reu 178?
Sentg 1819
Nahor f849
Teratr 18?8
90. Abrsham 1948
239
280
148
206
t76
2. Front Abralwm to Tlw Beginning Ot Cfubtinnitrry
fire Bible does not provide any numerical information on this
period that might lead to such precise estimates as those found
in Genesis on Abraham's ancestors. We must look to other
sources to estimate the time separating Abraham from Jesus. At
present, allowing for a slight margin of error, the time of Abrs-
ham is situated at roughly eighteen cgnturies before Jesus. Com'
bined with information in Genesis on the interval separating
Abraham and Adam, this would place Adam at roughly thirty-
eight centuries before Jesus. This estirnat€ is undeniably wTong:
the orisins of this inaccuracy arise from the mistakes in the
Bible on the Adam-Abraham period. The Jewish tradition still
founds its calendar on this. Nowadays, we can challenge the
traditional defenders of Biblical truth with the incompatibility
between the whimsical estimates of Jewish priests Jiving in the
Sixttt century B.C. and modern data. For centuries, the events
of antiquity relating to Jesus were situated in time according to
information based on these estimates.
Before modern times, editions of the Bible frequentfy provided
the reader with a preamble explaining the historical sequ€nce
of events that had eome to pass between the creation of the world
and the time when the books were edited. The figures vary
slightly according to the time. For example, the Clementine Vul-
ga,te,1621, gave this information, although it did place Abraham
a little esrlier and the Creation at roughly the 40th ceritury B.C.
Walton's polyglot Bible, produced in the l?th century, in addi-
tion to Biblical texts in several languagps' gave the reader tables
similar to the one shown here for Abraham's ancestors. Almost
all the estimates coincide with the figures given here. With the
arrival of modern times, editors were no longer able to maintain
such whimsical chronologies without going against scientific dis-
covery that placed the Creation at a much earlier date. They were
content to abolish these tables and preambles, but they avoided
3l
20?;6
2049
r997
2083
2l?.9
TIteOld TeatDmetaItmtlScisnce 31
Beu 1787 239 2026
Serug 1819 230 2049
Nahor 1849 148 1997
Terah 1878 205 2083
20.Abraham 1948 175 2123
J.FromAbrahamto TheBeginningsOfChristianity
TheBibledoes notprovideanynumericalinformationon this
periodthatmightleadtosuchpreciseestimates asthosefound
inGenesisonAbraham'sancestors.Wemustlook
toother
sources
toestimatethetimeseparatingAbrahamfromJesus. At
present,allowing foraslightmarginoferror,thetimeofAbra­
hamissituatedatroughlyeighteencenturiesbeforeJesus.Com­
binedwithinformationinGenesisontheintervalseparating
Abraham andAdam,thiswouldplaceAdam
atroughlythirty­
eightcenturiesbeforeJesus.Thisestimateisundeniablywrong:
theoriginsofthisinaccuracyarisefromthemistakesin the
BibleontheAdam-Abrahamperiod.TheJewishtraditionstill
founds
itscalendaronthis.Nowadays,wecanchallenge the
traditionaldefenders ofBiblicaltruthwiththeincompatibility
between
thewhimsicalestimatesofJewishpriestsJivingin the
SixthcenturyB.C.andmoderndata. Forcenturies,theevents
ofantiquityrelatingtoJesusweresituatedintimeaccordingto
informationbasedontheseestimates.
Beforemoderntimes,editionsoftheBiblefrequentlyprovided
thereaderwithapreambleexplainingthehistoricalsequence
ofeventsthathadcometopassbetweenthecreationoftheworld
andthetimewhenthebookswereedited.Thefigures
vary
slightlyaccordingtothetime. Forexample,theClementine Vul­
gate,1621,gavethisinformation,although itdidplaceAbraham
alittleearlierand
theCreationatroughlythe 40thcerituryB.C.
Walton'spolyglotBible,producedinthe17thcentury,inaddi­
tion
toBiblicaltextsinseverallanguages,gavethereadertables
similartotheoneshownhereforAbraham'sancestors.Almost
alltheestimatescoincidewiththefiguresgivenhere.Withthe
arrivalofmoderntimes,editorswere nolongerabletomaintain
suchwhimsicalchronologieswithoutgoingagainstscientificdis­
covery
thatplacedtheCreation atamuchearlierdate.Theywere
content
toabolishthesetablesandpreambles,buttheyavoided

50. 38 TIIE BIBI.q TIG QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
warning the reeder that the Biblical texts on which these ehro-
nologies were based had become obsorete and could no longer be
considered to express the truth. They preferred to draw a modest
veil over them, and invent set-phra'ses of eunning dialeetics thet
would make acceptable the text as it hsd forrnerly been, without
eny subtractions from it.
This is why the genealogies contained in the Sacerdotal text of
the Bible &re still honoured, even thoush in the Twentieth cen-
tury one eannot reasonably continue to count time on the basis
of such fiction.
Modern seientific data do not allow us to establish the date of
man's appearance on earth beyond a certain limit. we may be
certain that man, with the capacity for action and intelligent
thought that distinguishes him from beings that appesr t,o be
ana'tomically similar to him, existed on Earth after a certain esti-
mable date. Nobody however can sey at what exact date he ap-
peared. What we can say today is that remains have been found
of a humanity capable of human thought and action whose agp
may be calculated in tens of thousands of years.
This approximate dating refers to the prehistoric human
species, the most recently discovered beins the Cro-Magnon Man.
There have of course been many other discoveries ali over the
world of remains that appear to be human. These relate to less
highly evolved species, and their age could be somewhere in the
hundreds of thousands of years. But were they genuine men ?
whatever the answer may be, scientific data are sufficienfly
precise coneerning the prehistoric species like the Cro-Magnon
Man, to be able to place them much further back than the epoch
in which Genesis places the first men. There is therefore an
obvious incompatibility between what we can derive from the
numerical data in Genesis about the date of man's appearance
on Earth and the firmly established facts of modern scientific
knowledge.
THE FLOOD
Chapters s, 7 and 8 are devoted to the clescription of the Flood.
In actual faet, there are tvyo descriptions; they have not been
placed side by side, but are distribrited all the way through. pas-
31 'IHEBIBLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
warningthereaderthattheBiblicaltextsonwhichthesechro­
nologieswerebased
hadbecomeobsolete andcouldnolonger be
consideredtoexpressthetruth.Theypreferredtodrawamodest
veiloverthem,andinventset-phra"ses
ofcunningdialectics that
wouldmakeacceptable thetextasithadformerlybeen,without
anysubtractionsfrom it.
Thisiswhythegenealogiescontained intheSacerdotaltextof
theBiblearestillhonoured,eventhoughin theTwentiethcen­
turyonecannotreasonablycontinue tocounttimeon thebasis
ofsuchfiction.
Modernscientific
datadonotallowustoestablish thedateof
man'sappearanceon earthbeyonda certainlimit.Wemaybe
certainthatman,with thecapacityforactionandintelligent
thoughtthatdistinguisheshimfrombeings thatappeartobe
anatomicallysimilar tohim,existedon Earthafteracertainesti­
mabledate.Nobodyhowevercan
sayatwhatexactdateheap­
peared.
Whatwecansaytodayis thatremainshavebeenfound
ofahumanitycapable ofhumanthoughtandactionwhoseage
maybecalculatedintens ofthousandsofyears.
Thisapproximatedatingreferstotheprehistorichuman
species,themostrecentlydiscoveredbeingtheCro-MagnonMan.
Therehave
ofcoursebeenmany otherdiscoveriesallover the
worldofremainsthatappeartobehuman.Theserelatetoless
highlyevolvedspecies,
andtheiragecouldbesomewhereinthe
hundl1!ds
ofthousandsofyears.Butweretheygenuinemen?
Whatever
theanswermaybe,scientific dataaresufficiently
preciseconcerning
theprehistoricspeciesliketheCro-Magnon
Man,tobeabletoplacethemmuch
furtherbackthantheepoch
inwhichGenesisplacesthefirstmen.Thereistherefore an
obviousincompatibilitybetween whatwecanderivefrom the
numericaldatainGenesisaboutthedate ofman'sappearance
on
Earthandthefirmlyestablishedfactsofmodernscientific
knowledge.
THEFLOOD
Chapters6,7and8 aredevotedtothedescriptionoftheFlood.
Inactualfact,there aretwodescriptions;theyhavenotbeen
placedsidebyside,but
aredistributedallthewaythrough.Pas-

51. Trrc O|dTgrltoment ffid Scta'nce
sages sre intertroven to give the appearance of a coherent sue-
cession of varying episodes. In these three chapters there are, in
reali'ty, blatant contradictions; here again the explanation lies in
the existence of two quite distinct sources: the Yahvist and Sac-
erdotal versions.
It has been shown earlier that they formed a disparate amal-
gam; each original text has been broken down into paragraphs
or phrases, elements of one source alternating with the other,
so thst in the eourse of the complete description, lve go from
one to another seventeen times in roughly one hundred lines of
Engilish t€xt
Taken as a whole, the story goes as follows:
Man'e corruption had beeome widespread, so God decided to
annihilate him along with all the other living creatures. He
warned Noah and told him to construct the Ark into which he
was to take his wife, his three sons and their wives, along with
other living ereaturgs. The two sources differ for the latter: one
passsge (Sacerdotal) says that Noah was to take one pair of each
rpeeies; then in the passage that follows (Yahvist) it is stated
that God ordered him to take seven males and seven females
from esch of the so-called
'pure'
animal speeies, and a single pair
from the'impure' species. Further on, however, it is stated that
Noah eetually took one pair of each animal. Speeialists, such as
Father de Vaux, state that the passage in question is from an
adaptetion of the Yahvist description.
Bainwater is given as the agent of the Flood in one (Yahvist)
passage, but in snother (Sacerdotal), the Flood is given a double
cause: rainwater and the wsters of the Earth.
The Earth was submerged right up to and above the mountain
peaks. All life perished. After one year, when the waters had
receded, Noetr emerged from the Ark that had come to rest on
Mount Ararat.
One might add thst the Flood lasted differing lengths of time
according to the souree used: forty days for the Yahvist version
and one hundred and fifty in the Sacerdotal text.
The Yshvist version does not tell us when the event took place
in Noah's life, but the Sacerdotsl text tells us that he was six
hundred years old. The latter also provides information in its
geuealogies that situates him in relation to Adam and Abraham.
TlasOldTeaftJmenIandScience 33
sagesareinterwoventogivetheappearanceofacoherentsuc­
cession
ofvaryingepisodes.Inthesethreechaptersthereare,in
reaJi.ty,blatantcontradictions;hereagaintheexplanationliesin
theexistence
oftwoquitedistinctsources:theYahvistandSac­
erdotalversions.
Ithasbeenshownearlier thattheyformedadisparateamal­
gam;eachoriginaltexthasbeenbrokendownintoparagraphs
orphrases,elements ofonesource alternatingwiththeother,
so
thatinthecourseof thecompletedescription,we gofrom
one
toanotherseventeentimes inroughlyonehundredlinesof
English
text.
Takenasawhole,the storygoesasfollows:
Man'scorruption
hadbecomewidespread, soGoddecidedto
annihilatehimalongwithall
theotherlivingcreatures.He
warnedNoah
andtoldhim toconstructthe Arkintowhichhe
wastotakehiswife,his threesonsandtheirwives,alongwith
otherlivingcreatures.Thetwosourcesdiffer forthelatter:one
passage(Sacerdotal)says
thatNoahwastotakeone pairofeach
SPeCies;theninthepassagethatfollows(Yahvist) itisstated
thatGodorderedhim totakesevenmalesandsevenfemales
from
eachoftheso-called'pure'animalspecies,andasingle pair
fromthe'impure'species. Furtheron,however,itisstatedthat
Noahactuallytookone pairofeachanimal.Specialists,such as
FatherdeVawe,statethatthepassageinquestionisfroman
adaptation
oftheYahvistdescription.
Rainwater
isgivenas theagentoftheFloodinone(Yahvist)
passage,
butinanother(Sacerdotal), theFloodisgivenadouble
cause:
rainwaterandthewatersof theEarth.
TheEarthwassubmergedrightuptoandabovethemountain
peaks.Alllifeperished. Afteroneyear,whenthewatershad
receded,Noahemergedfrom
theArkthathadcometo reston
Mount
Ararat.
OnemightaddthattheFloodlasteddifferinglengthsoftime
according
tothesourceused:fortydays fortheYahvistversion
andonehundredandfiftyintheSacerdotaltext.
TheYahvistversiondoes
nottelluswhentheeventtookplace
inNoah'slife, buttheSacerdotaltexttellsus thathewassix
hundredyearsold.The
latteralsoprovidesinformation inits
genealogies
thatsituateshim inrelationtoAdamandAbraham.

52. u THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
If we ealculate according to the information contained in Genesis,
Noah was born 1,056 years after Adam (see table of Abraham's
Genealogy) and the Flood therefore took place 1,656 years after
the creation of Adam. In relation to Abraham, Genesis places
the Flood 292 years before the birth of this Patriarch.
According to Genesis, the Flood affeeted the whole of the
human race and all living creatures created by God on the face
of the Earth were destroyed. Humanity was then reconstituted
by Noah's three sons and their wives so that when Abraham was
born roughly three centuries later, he found a humanity that was
already re-formed into separate communities. Horv eould this re-
construction have taken place in such a short time? This simple
observation deprives the narration of all verisimilitude.
Furthermore, historical data show its incompatibility with
modern knowledge. Abraham is placed in the period 1800-1880
8.C., and if the Flood took place, as Genesis suggests in its gene-
alogies, roughly three centuries before Abraham, we would have
to place him somewhere in the Twenty-first to Twenty-second
century B.C. Modern historical knowledge eonfirms that at this
period, civilizations had sprung up in several parts of the world;
for their remains have been left to posterity.
In the ease of Esypt for example, the remains correspond to
the period preceding the Middle Kingdom (2,100 B.C.) at roughly
the date of the First Intermediate Period before the Eleventh
Dynasty. In Babylonia it is the Third Dynasty at Ur, We know
for certain that there was no break in these civilizations, so that
there eould have been no destruction affecting the whole of hu-
manity, as it appears in the Bible.
We cannot therefore consider that these three Biblical narra-
tions provide man with an account of facts that correspond to
the truth. we are obliged to admit that, objectively speaking, the
texts which have come down to u's do not represent the expresion
of reality. We may ask ourselves whether it is possible for God
to have revealed anything other than the truth. It is difficult to
entertain the idea that God taught to man ideas that were not
only fictitious, but contradictory. We naturally arrive therefore
at the hypothesis that distortions occurred that were made by
man or that arose from traditions passed down from one genera-
tion to another by word of mouth, or from the texts of these tra-
34 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Ifwecalculateaccording totheinformationcontained inGenesis,
Noahwasborn1,056years
afterAdam(seetable ofAbraham's
Genealogy)andtheFloodthereforetookplace1,656years after
thecreationofAdam.InrelationtoAbraham,Genesisplaces
theFlood292yearsbefore thebirthofthisPatriarch.
AccordingtoGenesis, theFloodaffected thewholeofthe
humanraceandalllivingcreaturescreatedbyGodon theface
of
theEarthweredestroyed. Humanitywasthenreconstituted
byNoah'sthreesonsand theirwivesso thatwhenAbrahamwas
bornroughlythreecenturieslater, hefounda humanitythatwas
alreadyre-formedinto
separatecommunities.Howcould thisre­
constructionhavetakenplace
insucha shorttime?Thissimple
observationdeprives
thenarrationofallverisimilitude.
Furthermore,historicaldatashowitsincompatibilitywith
modernknowledge.
Abrahamisplacedintheperiod1800-1850
B.C.,
andiftheFloodtookplace, asGenesissuggestsin itsgene­
alogies,roughly
threecenturiesbeforeAbraham,wewouldhave
to·placehimsomewhere
intheTwenty-firsttoTwenty-second
centuryB.C.Modernhistoricalknowledgeconfirms thatatthis
period,civilizations
hadsprungupinseveralpartsoftheworld;
fortheirremainshavebeenlefttoposterity.
InthecaseofEgyptforexample,theremainscorrespondto
theperiodpreceding theMiddleKingdom(2,100B.C.) atroughly
thedateoftheFirstIntermediatePeriodbefore theEleventh
Dynasty.
InBabyloniaitistheThirdDynastyatUr.Weknow
forcertainthattherewasno breakinthesecivilizations,sothat
therecouldhavebeennodestructionaffectingthewhole ofhu­
manity,as
itappearsintheBiblf'.
Wecannotthereforeconsider
thatthesethreeBiblicalnarra­
tionsprovide manwithanaccountoffactsthatcorrespondto
the
truth.Weareobligedto admitthat,objectivelyspeaking, the
textswhichhavecomedown tousdonotrepresenttheexpresion
ofreality.Wemayaskourselveswhether itispossibleforGod
tohaverevealed
anythingotherthanthetruth.Itisdifficultto
entertaintheideathatGodtaughttomanideas thatwerenot
onlyfictitious,butcontradictory.Wenaturally arrivetherefore
atthehypothesisthatdistortionsoccurred thatweremadeby
man
orthatarosefromtraditionspasseddownfromonegenera­
tionto
anotherbywordofmouth,orfromthetextsofthesetra-

53. TtE OtdTedamen anitscJcrct 3f
ditions once they were written down. When one knows that r
work such as Genesis was adapted at leest twice over a period of
not less thsn three centuries, it is hardly surprising to find im-
probabilities or descriptions that are incompatible with reality.
This is because the progress msde in hum.an knowledge has en-
abled us to know, if not everything, enough at least about certain
events to be sble to judge the degree of compatibility between
our knowledge and the ancient descriptions of them. There is
nothing more logical than to maintain this interpretation of Bib-
lical errors which only implicates man himself. It is a great pity
that the majority of commentators, both Jewish and Christisn'
do not hold with it. The arguments they use nevertheless desenre
careful attention.
TheOldTetftnrumlIJtItIScience 35
ditionsoncetheywere writtendown.Whenoneknows thata
worksuch
asGenesiswasadapted atleasttwiceoveraperiod of
notlessthanthreecenturies,itishardlysurprisingtofind im­
probabilitiesordescriptionsthatareincompatiblewithreality.
Thisisbecausetheprogressmade inhum,anknowledge hasen­
abledustoknow,
ifnoteverything,enough atleastaboutcertain
eventsto
beabletojudgethedegreeofcompatibilitybetween
ourknowledgeandtheancientdescriptions ofthem.There is
nothingmorelogical thantomaintainthisinterpretation ofBib­
lical
errorswhichonlyimplicates manhimself.Itisagreatpity
thatthemajorityofcommentators,bothJewishandChristian,
do
notholdwithit.Theargumentstheyuseneverthelessdeserve
carefulattention.

54. IY
Position Of Christian
Authors lfith R*grrd To
Scientific frror ln fhe
Biblical Texls.
A Critical fxarrrinatiorr.
One is struck by the diverse nature of Christian commentators'
reactions to the existence of these accumulated errors, improb-
abilities and contradictions. Certain commentators acknowledge
some of them and do not hesitate in their work to tackle thorny
problems. others pass lightly over unacceptable statements and
insist on defending the text word for word. The latter try to con-
vince people by apologetic declarations, heavily reinforced by
arguments which are often unexpected, in the hope that what is
logically unacceptable will be forgotten.
In the Introduction to his translation of Genesis, Father de
Vaux acknowledges the existence of critical arguments and even
expands upon their cogency. Nevertheless, for him the objective
reconstitution of past events has little interest. As he writes in
his notes, the fact that the Bible resumes "the memory of one or
two disastrous floods of the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates,
enlarged by tradition until they took on the dimensions of a uni-
versal cataclysm" is neither here nor there;
,'the
essential thing
is, however, that the sacred author has infused into this memory
eternal teachings on the justice and mercy of God toward the
malice of man and the salvation of the righteous."
36
I~
PositionOfCh..i~lian
4ulho..sWilhR.eaardTo
Sl:ienlific:E ....o..InThe
l3iblil:alT exb.
4C..ilil:alExaDlination.
OneisstruckbythediversenatureofChristiancommentators'
reactions
totheexistenceoftheseaccumulatederrors,improb­
abilities
andcontradictions.Certaincommentatorsacknowledge
some
ofthemanddonothesitateintheirworktotackle thorny
problems.Otherspasslightlyoverunacceptable statementsand
insistondefendingthetextwordforword.The lattertrytocon­
vincepeoplebyapologeticdeclarations,heavilyreinforcedby
argumentswhichareoftenunexpected, inthehopethatwhatis
logicallyunacceptablewillbeforgotten.
IntheIntroductiontohistranslationofGenesis, Fatherde
Vauxacknowledges
theexistenceofcritical argumentsandeven
expandsupon
theircogency.Nevertheless, forhimtheobjective
reconstitution
ofp~steventshaslittleinterest.Ashewrites in
hisnotes,thefactthattheBibleresumes "thememoryofoneor
twodisastrousfloods ofthevalleysoftheTigrisandEuphrates,
enlargedby traditionuntiltheytookon thedimensionsofauni­
versalcataclysm"isneither
herenorthere;"theessentialthing
is,however,thatthesacredauthorhasinfusedintothismemory
eternalteachings
onthejusticeandmercyof Godtowardthe
maliceofmanandthesalvation oftherighteous."
36

55. AGr{delErrllnffir 37
In this way justification is found for the transformation of d
popular legend into an event of divine proportions-and it is as
such that it is thought fit to present the legend to men's fsith-
following the principle that an author has made use of it to illus-
trate religious teachings. An apologetic position of this kind ius-
tifies all the liberties taken in the eomposition of writings which
are supposed to be sacred and to contain the word of God. If one
acknowledges such human interference in what is divine, all the
human manipulations of the Biblical texts will be accounted for.
If there are theological intentions, all manipulations become le-
gitimat€; so that those of the
'sacerdotal'
authors of the Sixth
century are justified, including their legalist preoceupations that
turned into the whimsical descriptions we have.already seen.
A large number of Christian commentators have found it more
ingenious to explain errors, improbabilities and contradictions
in Biblical descriptions by t:sing the excuse that the Biblical
authors were expressing ideas in accordance with the social fac-
tors of a different eulture or mentality. From this arose the defi-
nition of respective
'literary
genres' which was introduced into
the subtle dialecties of commentators, so that it accounts for all
difficulties. Any contradictions there are between two texts are
then explained by the difference in the way eaeh author expressed
ideas in his own particular
'literary
genre'. This argument is
not, of course, acknowledged by everybody because it lacks grav-
ity. It has not entirely fallen into disuse today however, and we
shall see in the New Testament its extravagant use as an attempt
to explain blatant contradictions in the Gospels.
Another way of making acceptable what would be rejected by
logie when applied to a litigious text, is to surround the text in
question urith apologetical eonsiderations. The reader's attention
is distracted from the crucial problem of the truth of the text
itself and deflected towards other problems.
Cardinal Dani6lou's reflections on the Flood follow this mode
of expression. They appear in the review Liai,ng God (Dieu
Vivant)' under the title:
'Flood,
Baptism, Judgment', (Ddluge,
BWtdme, Jugement') where he writes "The oldest tradition of
the Church has seen in the theology of the Flood an image of
Christ and the Church". It is "an episode of great significance"
1. No. 38, 1974, pp. 95-112)
37
Inthiswayjustificationisfound forthetransformationofa
popularlegendinto aneventofdivineproportions-anditisas
suchthatitisthoughtfittopresent thelegendtomen's faith­
followingtheprinciplethatanauthorhasmadeuse ofittoillus...
tratereligiousteachings.Anapologeticposition ofthiskindjus­
tifiesallthelibertiestakenin
thecompositionofwritingswhich
aresupposedtobesacred andtocontainthewordofGod.Ifone
acknowledgessuchhumaninterference
inwhatisdivine,all the
humanmanipulations oftheBiblicaltextswillbeaccountedfor.
Iftherearetheologicalintentions,allmanipulationsbecome le­
gitimate;sothatthoseof the'Sacerdotal'authorsof theSixth
centuryarejustified,including theirlegalistpreoccupations that
turnedintothewhimsicaldescriptionswehavealreadyseen.
A
largenumberofChristiancommentatorshavefound itmore
ingenious
toexplainerrors,improbabilities andcontradictions
inBiblicaldescriptionsbypsing theexcusethattheBiblical
authorswereexpressingideas inaccordancewith thesocialfac­
torsofadifferentculture ormentality.Fromthisarosethedefi­
nition
ofrespective'literarygenres'whichwasintroducedinto
thesubtledialectics ofcommentators,so thatitaccountsforall
difficulties.Anycontradictions
therearebetweentwo.texts are
thenexplainedby thedifferenceinthewayeach authorexpressed
ideas
inhisown particular'literarygenre'.This argumentis
not,
ofcourse,acknowledgedbyeverybodybecause itlacksgrav­
ity.Ithasnotentirelyfallenintodisusetodayhowever, andwe
shallseein theNewTestament itsextravagantuseasanattempt
toexplainblatantcontradictionsin theGospels.
Anotherway
ofmakingacceptable whatwouldberejectedby
logicwhenappliedtoalitigioustext,istosurround
thetextin
questionwithapologeticalconsiderations.Thereader'sattention
isdistractedfromthecrucialproblemofthe truthofthetext
itselfanddeflectedtowardsotherproblems.
CardinalDanielou'sreflectionsontheFloodfollowthismode
ofexpression.They appearinthereview LivingGod(Dieu
Vivant)
1underthetitle: 'Flood,Baptism,Judgment',(Deluge,
Bapteme,Jugement')wherehewrites "Theoldesttraditionof
theChurchhasseeninthetheologyoftheFlood animageof
ChristandtheChurch".Itis"anepisodeof greatsignificance
11
1.No.38,1974, pp.95-112)

56. $E TIrE BrBLF,, THE QItn'AN AND SCTENGE
. . . "B
judgment striking the whole human race." Having quoted
from Origen in his Homilies on Ezehinl, he talks of "the shif
wreck of the entire universe saved in the Ark", Cardinel Dan-
i6lou dwells upon the vslue of the number eight "expressing the
number of people that were saved in the Ark (Noah and his wife,
his three son$ and their wives) ". He turns to his own use Justin's
urritings in his Dial,ogue: "They represent the symbol of the
eighth day when christ rose from the dead" and "Noah, the first
born of a new creation, is &n image of christ who was to do in
reality what Noah had prefigured." He continues the comparison
between Noah on the one hand, who was saved by the ark made
of wood and the water that made it float ( "water of the Flood
from which a new humanity was born"), and on the other, the
cross made of wood. He stresses the value of this symbolism and
concludes by underlining the "spiritual and doctrinal wealth of
the saerament of the Flood" (sic).
There is much that one could say about such apologetical com-
parisons. We should always remember that they are eommen-
taries on an event that it is not possible to defend as reality,
either on a universal scale or in terms of the time in which the
Bible places it. with a eommentary such as Cardinsl Dani6lou's
we are back in the Middle Ages, where the text had to be accepted
as it was and any discussion, other than conformist, was off the
point.
rt is nevertheless reassuring to find that prior to that age of
imposed obscurantism, hishly logical attitudes were adopted. one
might mention those of Saint Augustine which proceed from his
thought, that was singularly advaneed for the age he lived in.
At the time of the Fathers of the Church, there must have been
problems of textual criticism because Saint Augustine raises
them in his letter No. 82. The most typical of them is the follow-
ing passage:
"rt is solely to those books of Scripture rvhich are called
'canonic'that
I have learned to grant such attention and respect
that I firmly believe that their authors have made no errors in
writing them. When r encounter in these books a statement which
seems to contradict reality, I am in no doubt that either the text
(of my copy) is faulty, or that the translator has not been faith-
ful to the original, or that my understanding is deficient."
38 THEBIBLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
...uajudgmentstrikingthewholehumanrace."Havingquoted
fromOrigeninhisHomiliesonEzekiel,hetalksof"theship­
wreck
oftheentireuniversesaved intheArk",CardinalDan­
ieloudwellsupon
thevalueofthenumbereightuexpressingthe
numberofpeoplethatweresaved intheArk(Noahandhiswife,
his
threesonsandtheirwives)".He turnstohisownuse Justin's
writingsinhisDialogue:UTheyrepresentthesymbolof the
eighthdaywhen Christrosefrom thedead"and"Noah,thefirst
bornofanewcreation,is
animageofChristwhowas todoin
realitywhatNoahhadprefigured."Hecontinuesthecomparison
betweenNoahontheonehand,whowassaved
bythearkmade
ofwoodandthewaterthatmadeitfloat("wateroftheFlood
fromwhichanewhumanitywas born"),andontheother, the
crossmade ofwood.Hestressesthevalue ofthissymbolismand
concludesbyunderliningtheHspiritualanddoctrinalwealth
of
thesacramentoftheFlood"(sic).
Thereismuch
thatonecouldsayaboutsuchapologeticalcom­
parisons.Weshouldalwaysremember
thattheyarecommen­
tariesonaneventthatitisnotpossibletodefend asreality,
eitheronauniversalscale orintermsofthetimeinwhich the
Bibleplacesit.WithacommentarysuchasCardinalDanielou's
we
arebackintheMiddleAges,where thetexthad tobeaccepted
asitwasand anydiscussion,other thanconformist,wasoff the
point.
Itisneverthelessreassuring tofindthatpriortothatageof
imposedobscurantism,highlylogicalattitudeswereadopted.One
mightmentionthoseof SaintAugustinewhichproceedfrom his
thought,thatwassingularlyadvanced fortheagehelivedin.
Atthetimeof theFathersoftheChurch,theremusthavebeen
problems
oftextualcriticismbecause SaintAugustineraises
theminhisletterNo.82.Themosttypicalofthemisthefollow­
ingpassage:
"Itissolelytothosebooks ofScripturewhich arecalled
'canonic'
thatIhavelearnedto grantsuchattentionandrespect
thatIfirmlybelieve thattheirauthorshavemade noerrorsin
writingthem.WhenIencounterinthesebooksastatementwhich
seemstocontradictreality,Iam
innodoubtthateitherthe text
(ofmycopy)isfaulty, orthatthetranslatorhasnotbeenfaith­
fultotheorig:lnal,
orthatmyunderstandingisdeficient."

57. AfifificotBlolmitwfut
30
It was ineonceivable to Saint Augustine that a sacred text
might contain an error. Saint Augustine defined very clearly the
dogma of infallibility when, confronted with a passage that
seemed to contradict the truth, he thought of looking for its
cause, without excluding the hypothesis of a human fault. This
is the attitude of a betiever with a critical outlook. In Saint Au-
gustine's day, there was no possibility of a confrontation be-
I***tt the Biblical text and scienee. An open-mindedness akin to
his would today eliminate a lot of the difficulties raised by the
confrontation of certain Biblieal texts with scientific knowledge.
Present-day specialists, on the contrary, go to great trouble to
defend the Biblical text from any accusation of error. In his in-
troduction to Genesis, Father de Vaux explains the reasons com-
pelling him to defend the text at all costs, even if, quite obviously,
it i* hirtorically or scientifieally unacceptable. He asks us not to
view Biblical history "according to the rules of historical study
observed by people today", as if the existence of several different
ways of writing history was possible. History, when it is told in
an inaccurate fashion, (as anyone will admit), becomes a his-
torical novel. Here however, it does not have to comply with the
standards established by our conceptions. The Biblieal commen-
tator rejects any verification of Biblical descriptions through
geology, paleontology or prehistorical data. "The Bible is not
answerable to any of these disciplines, and were one to confront
it with the data obtained from these sciences, it would only lead
to an unreal opposition or an artificial concordance."' One might
point out that these reflections are made on what, in Genesis, is
in ,ro way in harmony with modern scientific data-in this case
the first eleven chapters. when however, in the present day, a
few descriptions have been perfectly verifled, in this case certain
episodes from the time of the patriarchs, the author does not fail
to support the truth of the Bible with modern knowledge' "The
doubt cast upon these descriptions should yield to the favorable
witness that history and eastet'n archaeology bear them'"' In
other words: if science is useful in confirming the Biblical de-
scription, it is invoked, but if it invalidates the latter' reference
to it is not, Permitted.
Introduction to Genesis, Page 35'
Ibid., page 34
1.
2.
ACriticDlEmmitItJeion 39
ItwasinconceivabletoSaintAugustinethatasacredtext
mightcontainanerror.SaintAugustinedefinedveryclearlythe
dogmaofinfallibilitywhen, confrontedwithapassagethat
seemedto contradictthetruth,hethoughtoflookingforits
cause,withoutexcludingthehypothesisofahumanfault.This
istheattitudeofabelieverwithacriticaloutlook.InSaintAu­
gustine'sday,therewasnopossibilityofaconfrontationbe­
tweentheBiblicaltextandscience.Anopen-mindednessakinto
hiswouldtodayeliminatealotofthedifficultiesraisedbythe
confrontationofcertainBiblicaltextswithscientificknowledge.
Present-dayspecialists,on thecontrary,gotogreattroubleto
defendtheBiblicaltextfromanyaccusationoferror.Inhisin­
troductiontoGenesis,FatherdeVauxexplainsthereasonscom­
pellinghim
todefendthetextatallcosts,evenif, quiteobviously,
itishistoricallyorscientificallyunacceptable. Heasksusnotto
viewBiblical history"accordingtotherulesofhistoricalstudy
observedbypeopletoday", asiftheexistenceofseveraldifferent
ways
ofwritinghistorywaspossible.History,when itistoldin
aninaccuratefashion,(asanyonewill admit),becomesahis­
toricalnovel.Herehowever,itdoesnothavetocomplywiththe
standardsestablishedby ourconceptions.TheBiblicalcommen­
tatorrejectsanyverificationofBiblicaldescriptions through
geology,paleontology orprehistoricaldata."TheBibleis not
answerableto anyofthesedisciplines,andwereone toconfront
itwiththedataobtainedfromthesesciences, itwouldonlylead
toanunrealoppositionoranartificialconcordance."1One might
pointoutthatthesereflectionsaremadeonwhat,inGenesis,is
innoway inharmonywithmodernscientific data-inthiscase
thefirsteleven chapters.Whenhowever,inthepresentday,a
fewdescriptions
havebeenperfectlyverified, inthiscasecertain
episodesfromthetimeofthepatriarchs,theauthordoesnotfail
tosupportthetruthoftheBiblewithmodernknowledge. "The
doubtcastuponthesedescriptionsshouldyieldto thefavorable
witness
thathistoryandeasternarchaeologybearthem."2In
otherwords:ifscienceisuseful inconfirmingtheBiblicalde­
scription,
itisinvoked,butifitinvalidatesthelatter,reference
toitisnotpermitted.
1.IntroductiontoGenesis,page35.
2.Ibid.,page34

58. iIIT THE BIBI,4 THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
To reconcile the irreconcilable, i.e. the theory of the truth of
the Bible with the inaecurate nature of certain faets reported in
the descriptions in the Old Testament, modern theologians have
applied their efforts to a revision of the classical concepts of
truth. It lies outside the scope of this book to give a detailed
exposd of the subtle ideas that are developed at length in works
dealing with the truth of the Bible; such as o. Loretz's work
(1972) whet is the Truth of the Bible? (euelle est la v6rit6
de la Bible?)r. This judgment
concerning science will have to
suffice:
The author remarks that the Second vatican council
,,has
avoided providing rules to distinguish between error and truth
in the Bible. Basic considerations show that this is impossible,
because the church cannot determine the truth or otherwise of
seientific methods in such a way as to decide in principle and on a
general level the question of the truth of the Scriptures".
rt is obvious that the church is not in a position to rnake a
pronouncement on the value of scientific
,method'
as a rneans of
access to knowledge. The point here is quite different. It is not a
question of theories, but of firmly established facts. In our day
and age, it is not necessary to be highly learned to know that the
world was not ereated thirty-seven or thirty-eight centuries ago.
we know that man did not appear then and that the Bibricar
genealogies on which this estimate is based have been proven
wrong beyond any shadow of a doubt. The author quoted here
must be aware of this. His statements on science are only aimecl
at side-stepping the issue so that he does not have to deai with it
the way he ought to.
The reminder of all these different attitudes adopted by chris-
tian authors when confronted with the scientific errors of Bib-
Iical texts is a good illustration of the uneasiness they engender.
It recalls the impossibility of defining a logical position other
than by reeognizing their human origins and the impossibility
of acknowledging that they form part of a Revelation.
The uneasiness prevalent in christian cireles concerning the
Revelation became elear at the second vatiean council tigog-
1965) where it took no less than five drafts before there was any
agreement on the final text, after three years of discussions. It
1. P"b. L. C-nturion, Paris
40 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Toreconciletheirreconcilable,i.e. thetheoryofthetruthof
theBiblewiththeinaccuratenatureofcertainfactsreportedin
thedescriptionsintheOldTestament,moderntheologianshave
applied
theireffortstoarevisionoftheclassicalconceptsof
truth.Itliesoutsidethescopeofthisbooktogiveadetailed
expose
ofthesubtleideas thataredevelopedatlengthinworks
dealing
withthetruthoftheBible;such asO.Loretz'swork
(1972)
WhatistheTruthoftheBible?(QueUe estlaVerite
delaBible?)
1.Thisjudgmentconcerningsciencewillhaveto
suffice:
TheauthorremarksthattheSecondVaticanCouncilHhas
avoidedprovidingrulestodistinguishbetween
errorandtruth
intheBible.Basicconsiderationsshow
thatthisisimpossible,
because
theChurchcannotdeterminethe truthorotherwiseof
scientificmethods insuchawayastodecideinprincipleandona
generallevel
thequestionofthetruthoftheScriptures".
ItisobviousthattheChurchisnotinapositiontomakea
pronouncementon
thevalueofscientific'method'asameans of
accesstoknowledge.Thepointhereisquitedifferent.
Itisnota
question
oftheories,butoffirmlyestablishedfacts. Inourday
andage,itisnotnecessarytobehighlylearned
toknowthatthe
worldwasnotcreatedthirty-seven
orthirty-eightcenturiesago.
Weknow
thatmandidnot appearthenand thattheBiblical
genealogiesonwhich
thisestimateisbasedhavebeenproven
wrongbeyondanyshadowofadoubt.The authorquotedhere
rnustbeawareofthis.His statementsonscienceareonlyaimed
atside-steppingtheissueso thathedoesnothavetodealwith it
thewayheoughtto.
Thereminderofallthesedifferent atti~udes adoptedbyChris­
tianauthorswhenconfrontedwith thescientificerrorsofBib­
licaltexts
isagoodillustration oftheuneasinesstheyengender.
Itrecallstheimpossibilityofdefiningalogicalposition other
thanbyrecognizingtheirhumanoriginsandtheimpossibility
ofacknowledgingthattheyformpartofaRevelation.
Theuneasinessprevalentin
Christiancirclesconcerning the
Revelationbecameclear attheSecondVaticanCouncil
(1962­
1965)where ittooknoless thanfivedraftsbeforetherewas any
agreementonthefinaltext, afterthreeyearsofdiscussions. It
1.Pub.LeCenturion, Paris

59. AGrifirnl Erorm/lngdion 1l
was only then that "this painful situation threatening to engulf
the Council" came to an end, to use His Grace Weber's expres-
sion in his introduction to the Conciliar Document No. 4 on the
Revelation'.
Two sentences in this document concerning the OId Testament
(chap IV, page 53) describe the imperfections and obsolescence
of certain texts in a way that eannot be contested:
"fn view of the human situation prevailing before Christ's
foundation of salvation, the Boohs of the Old Testament enable
everybody to know who is God and who is man, and also the way
in whieh God, in his justiee and mercy, hehaves towards men.
These books, eaen though theA contuin material which is imper-
fect and, obsolete, nevertheless bear witness to truly divine
teachings."
There is no better statement than the use of the adiectives
'imperfect'
and
'obsolete'
applied to certain texts, to indieate
that the latter sre open to critieism and might even be ahan'
doned; the principle is very clearly acknowledged.
This text forms part of a general declaration which was defin-
itively ratified by 2,344 votes to 6; nevertheless, one might
question this almost total unanimity. In actual fact, in the
commentaries of the official document signed by His Grace Weber,
there is one phrase in particular which obviously corrects the
solemn affirmation of the eouneil on the obsolescence of certain
texts: "Certain books of the Jewish Bible have a temporary
application and have something irnperfect in them."
'Obsolete',
the expression used in the official declaration, is
hardly a synonym for
'temporary
application', to use the com-
mentator's phrase. As for the epithet
'jewish'
which the latter
curiously adds, it suggests that the conciliar text only criticized
the version in Hebrew. This is not at all the case. It is indeed
the Christian Old Testament alone that, at the Council, was the
object of a judgment eoncerning the imperfection and obsoles-
cence of certain parts.
1. Pub. L€ Centurion, 1966, Paris.
ACritictJlEmmincdion 41
wasonly thenthat"thispainfulsituationthreateningtoengulf
theCouncil"cameto anend,touseHisGraceWeber'sexpres­
sion
inhisintroductiontotheConciliarDocumentNo.4on the
Revelation1.
TwosentencesinthisdocumentconcerningtheOldTestament
(chapIV,page53)describe
theimperfectionsandobsolescence
ofcertaintextsinaway thatcannotbecontested:
"InviewofthehumansituationprevailingbeforeChrist's
foundation
ofsalvation,the Booksoft"heOldTestament enable
everybodytoknowwhois
Godandwhoisman,andalso theway
inwhichGod,inhisjustice andmercy,behavestowardsmen.
Thesebooks,
eventhoughtheycontainmaterialwhichisimper­
fectandobsolete,
neverthelessbearwitnessto trulydivine
teachings."
Thereisno
betterstatementthantheuseoftheadjectives
'imperfect'and'obsolete'appliedtocertaintexts,toindicate
thatthelatterareopentocriticism andmightevenbeaban­
doned;
theprincipleisveryclearlyacknowledged.
This
textformspartofageneraldeclarationwhichwasdefin­
itivelyratifiedby2,344votesto
6;nevertheless,one might
questionthisalmosttotalunanimity. Inactualfact,inthe
commentaries
oftheofficialdocumentsignedbyHisGraceWeber,
thereisonephrase
inparticularwhichobviouslycorrectsthe
solemnaffirmationofthecouncilon
theobsolescenceofcertain
texts:"CertainbooksoftheJewishBiblehaveatemporary
application
andhavesomethingimperfectinthem."
'Obsolete',
theexpressionusedintheofficialdeclaration,is
hardlyasynonym
for'temporaryapplication',tousethecom­
mentator'sphrase.Asfor
theepithet'jewish'whichthe latter
curiouslyadds, itsuggeststhattheconciliartextonlycriticized
theversioninHebrew.Thisisnot atallthecase. Itisindeed
theChristianOldTestamentalonethat, attheCouncil,wasthe
objectofajudgmentconcerningtheimperfectionandobsoles­
cence
ofcertainparts.
1.Pub.LeCenturion,1966,Paris.

60. Conclusiorrs
The Biblical seriptures must be examined without being em-
bellished artificially with qualities one would like them to have.
firey must be seen objectively as they &re. This implies not
only a knowledge of the texts, but also of their history. The
latter makes it possible to form an idea of the circumstances
whieh brought about textual adaptations over the centuries, the
slow forrnation of the eollection that we have today, with its
numerous substrsctions and additions.
The above makes it quite possible to believe that different
versions of the same description can be found in the old Testa-
menf as well as contrsdietions, historical errors, improbabilities
end incompatibilities with firmly established scientific data. They
are quite natural in human works of a very great
-age.
How
could one fail to find them in the books written in the same con-
ditions in which the Biblical text was composed ?
At s time when it was not yet possible to ask scientific ques-
tions, and one could only decide on improbabilities or contradic-
tions,ra man of good sense, such as Saint'Augustine, considerecl
that God could not teach man things that did not correspond to
reality. He therefore put forward the principle that it was not
possible for an affHrmation contrary to the truth to be of divine
origin, and was prepared to exclude from all the sacrecl texts
anything that appeared to him to merit exclusion on these
grounds.
Later, at a time when the ineompatibility of eertain passages
of the Bible with modern knowledge has been realized, ih* *.*e
attitude has not been followed. This refusal has been so insistent
that a whole literature has sprung up, aimed at justifying the
42
Conf:lu~ion~
TheBiblicalScripturesmustbeexaminedwithoutbeingem­
bellishedartificiallywithqualitiesonewouldlikethemtohave.
They
mustbeseenobjectively astheyare.Thisimpliesnot
onlyaknowledge
ofthetexts,butalsooftheirhistory.The
lattermakesitpossibletoformanideaofthecircumstances
which
broughtabouttextualadaptationsoverthecenturies,the
slowformationof
thecollectionthatwehavetoday,withits
numeroussubstractionsandadditions.
Theabovemakes
itquitepossibletobelieve thatdifferent
versionsof
thesamedescriptioncanbefound intheOldTesta­
ment,
aswellascontradictions,historicalerrors,improbabilities
andincompatibilitieswithfirmlyestablishedscientificdata.They
arequitenaturalinhumanworksofavery great'age.How
couldonefail
tofindthem inthebookswritteninthesamecon­
ditions
inwhichtheBiblical textwascomposed?
Atatimewhen itwasnot yetpossibletoaskscientificques­
tions,
andonecouldonlydecideonimprobabilities orcontradic­
tions"amanofgoodsense,such asSaint'Augustine,considered
thatGodcouldnotteachmanthings thatdidnotcorrespondto
reality.Hetherefore
putforwardtheprinciple thatitwasnot
possiblefor
anaffirmationcontrarytothetruthtobeofdivine
origin,andwaspreparedtoexcludefromallthesacredtexts
anythingthatappearedtohimto meritexclusiononthese
grounds.
Later,
atatimewhentheincompatibilityofcertainpassages
of
theBiblewithmodernknowledgehasbeenrealized,thesame
attitudehasnotbeenfollowed.Thisrefusalhasbeensoinsistent
thatawholeliteraturehassprungup,aimed atjustifyingthe
42

61. Gqu** a:t
fest thtq in the face of all opposition, texts have been retained in
the Bible that hgve no reason to be there.
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1966) hss greatly reduced
tlis uncompromising ettitude by introducing reservstions about
tlts "BmkB of the Otd Testament" which "contain material thst
is imperfect and obsolete". One wonders if this will remain a
pious wish or if it will be followed by a change in attitue towerds
ruaterial whiclr, in the Twentieth century, is no longer accept-
able in the books of the Bible. In ectual fact, ssve for any human
manipulation, the lattcr were destined to be the "witness of
tnre tcachings coming from God".
43
factthat,inthefaceofallopposition, textshavebeenretainedin
theBible
thathavenoreason tobethere.
ThesecondVaticanCouncil
(1962-1965)hasgreatlyreduced
thisuncompromisingattitudebyintroducingreservationsabout
the"BooksoftheOldTestament"which"containmaterial
that
isimperfectandobsolete".Onewonders ifthiswillremaina
piouswish
orifitwillbefollowedbyachangeinattitnetowards
materialwhich,intheTwentiethcentury,is
nolongeraccept­
able
inthebooksoftheBible. Inactualfact,saveforanyhuman
manipulation,thelatterweredestinedto
bethe"witnessof
trueteachingscomingfrom God".

62. I
The Gospels
Many readers of the Gospels are embarrassed and even abashed
when they stop to think about the meaning of certsin descrip-
tions. The same is true when they make comparisonE between
difrerent versions of the same event found in several Goepels.
This obseryation is made by Father Roguet in his book Initiatian
to the Goapels (Initiation ir I'Evangile)'. With the rvide experi-
ense he has gained in his many years of answering perturbed
readers' letters in e Catholic ieeklg, he has been able to asgesg
just how greatly they have been worried by what they have
read. His questioners come from widely varying socisl and cul-
tural backgrounds. He notes that their requests for explanations
concern texts that are'considered abstruse, ineomprehensible, if
not eontradictory, absurd or scandslous'. There ean be no doubt
that a complete reading of the Gospels is likely to disturb Chris-
tians profoundly.
This obseruation is very reeent: Father Roguet's book was
published in 19?8. Not so very long ago, the majority of Chris-
tians knew only selected sections of the Gospels that were read
during services or commented upon during serrnons. with the ex-
ception of the Protestants, it was not customary for Christians to
read the Gospels in their entirety. Books of religious instruetion
only contained extrscts; the in eutenso text hardly circulated at
I
1. Pub. Editionr du Seuil, Parir, lg?B
u
I
Inl~odu(;lion
ManyreadersoftheGospels areembarrassedandevenabashed
whentheystoptothinkabout
themeaningofcertaindescrip­
tions.Thesameis
truewhentheymakecomparisonsbetween
differentversions
ofthesameeventfound inseveralGospels.
Thisobservationismadeby
FatherRoguetinhisbook Initiation
totheGospels
(Initiational'Evangile)t.Withthewideexperi­
encehehasgained
inhismanyyears ofansweringperturbed
readers'lettersinaCatholicweekly,hehasbeenabletoassess
justhowgreatlytheyhavebeenworriedby whattheyhave
read.Hisquestionerscomefromwidelyvaryingsocialandcul­
turalbackgrounds.Henotes thattheirrequestsforexplanations
concerntexts
thatare'consideredabstruse,incomprehensible, if
notcontradictory,absurd orscandalous'.Therecan benodoubt
thatacompletereading oftheGospelsislikelytodisturbChris­
tiansprofoundly.
Thisobservationisveryrecent:
FatherRoguet'sbookwas
publishedin1973.Notsoverylongago,themajority
ofChris­
tiansknewonlyselectedsections
oftheGospelsthatwereread
duringservices
orcommenteduponduringsermons.With theex­
ception
oftheProtestants,itwasnotcustomary forChristiansto
read
theGospelsin theirentirety.Booksofreligiousinstruction
onlycontained
extracts;theinextensotexthardlycirculated at
1.Pub.EditionsduSeuil, Paris,1973

63. Th. Gorpch 15
all. At a Boman Catholie school I had eopies of the works of Virgil
and Plato, but I did not hsve the New Testament. The Greek text
of this would nevertheless hsve been very instructive: it wrs
only much later on that I reslized why they had not set ug
translations of the holy writings of Christianity. The latter
could have led us to ask our teschers questions they would have
found it difficult to answer.
firese discoveries, made if one has a critical ouUook during a
reading in erteriu,o of the Gospels, hsve led the Church to come
to the eid of readers by helping them overcome their perplexity.
"Many Christians need to learn how to read the Gospels", notes
Fether Boguet. Whether or not one a,grees with the explanations
he gives, it is greatly to the author's credit that he actually
teckles these delicate problems. Unfortunately, it is not alweys
like this in many writings on the Christian Revelation.
In editions of the Bible produced for widespread publication,
introductory notes more often than not set out a collection of
ideas that would tend to persuade the reader that the Gospels
hardly raise any problems eoncerning the personalities of the
authors of the various books, the authenticity of the texts and
the truth of the descriptions. In spite of the fact that there are
so many unknowns concerning authors of whose identity we ere
not at all sure, we find a wealth of precise information in this
kind of introductory note. Often they present as a certainty what
is pure hypothesis, or they state that such-and-sueh an evangelist
w&s an eye-witness of the events, while specialist works claim the
opposite. The time that elapsed between the end of Jesus' min-
istry and the appearance of the texts is drastically reduced. They
would have one believe that these were written by one man taken
from an oral tradition, when in fact speeialists have pointed out
adaptations to the texts. Of course, certain difficulties of inter-
pretation are mentioned here and there, but they ride rough
shod over glaring contradictions that must strike anyone who
thinks about them. In the little glossaries one finds among the ap-
pendices complementing a reassuring prefacen one observes how
improbabilities, contradictions or blatant errors have been hid-
den or stifled under clever arguments of an apologetic nature'
This disturbing state of aftairs shows up the misleading nature
of such commentaries.
all.AtaRomanCatholicschoolI hadcopiesoftheworksofVirgil
andPlato,butIdidnothavetheNewTestament.TheGreek text
ofthiswouldneverthelesshavebeenveryinstructive: itwas
onlymuch
lateronthatIrealizedwhythey hadnotsetus
translationsoftheholywritingsofChristianity.The latter
couldhaveledus toaskourteachersquestionstheywouldhave
found
itdifficulttoanswer.
Thesediscoveries,made
ifonehasacriticaloutlook duringa
reading
inextensooftheGospels,haveled theChurchtocome
to
theaidofreadersbyhelpingthemovercome theirperplexity.
"ManyChristiansneed
tolearnhowtoreadtheGospels",notes
FatherRoguet.Whether ornotoneagreeswith theexplanations
hegives,
itisgreatlyto theauthor'scredit thatheactually
tacklesthesedelicateproblems.Unfortunately,
itisnotalways
like
thisinmanywritingsontheChristianRevelation.
IneditionsoftheBibleproducedforwidespreadpublication,
introductorynotesmoreoften
thannotsetoutacollectionof
ideas
thatwouldtendtopersuadethereader thattheGospels
hardlyraise
anyproblemsconcerningthepersonalities ofthe
authors
ofthevariousbooks,theauthenticity ofthetextsand
the
truthofthedescriptions. Inspiteof thefactthatthereare
somanyunknownsconcerningauthorsofwhoseidentity weare
notatallsure,wefindawealthofpreciseinformationinthis
kindofintroductorynote.Oftentheypresentasacertainty
what
ispurehypothesis, ortheystatethatsuch-and-suchanevangelist
was
aneye-witnessoftheevents,whilespecialist worksclaimthe
opposite.Thetime
thatelapsedbetween theendofJesus'min­
istryandtheappearance ofthetextsisdrasticallyreduced.They
wouldhaveonebelieve
thatthesewerewrittenbyonemantaken
from
anoraltradition,wheninfactspecialistshavepointedout
adaptationstothetexts.Ofcourse,certaindifficulties
ofinter­
pretation
arementionedhereandthere, buttheyriderough
shodoverglaringcontradictions
thatmuststrikeanyonewho
thinksaboutthem.
Inthelittleglossariesonefindsamongtheap­
pendicescomplementingareassuringpreface,oneobserveshow
improbabilities,contradictions
orblatanterrorshavebeenhid­
den
orstifledundercleverargumentsof anapologeticnature.
Thisdisturbing
stateofaffairsshowsupthemisleading nature
ofsuchcommentaries.

64. 18 TIIE BIBI.E TIIE QUN'AN AIVD SCIENCE
The ideas to be developed in the coming pages wilt without
doubt leave any readers still un&ware of these problems quite
amazed. Before going into detail however, r will provide an im-
mediate illustration of my ideas with sn example that seems to
me quite eonelusive.
Neither lllatthew nor John speaks of Jesus's Aseension. Luke
in his Gospel plaees it on the dsy of the Resurreetion and forty
days later in the Acts of the Aposiles of which he is said to be
the author. Mark mentions it (without giving a date) in a con-
clusion considered unauthentic today. The Ascension therefore
has no solid seriptural basis. commentators nevertheless ap-
proach this important question with ineredible lightness.
A. Tricot, in his Little Dictionary of the New Teitq,meat (petit
Dietionnaire du Nouveau Testament) in the crampon bibl",
(1960 edition)
r,
a work produced for mass publicatioi, does not
devote an entry to the Ascension. The synopsis of the irou, Gos-
pels (Synopse des Quatre Evangiles) by Fathers Benoit and Bois-
mard, teachers at the Biblical sehool of Jerusalem, (lg?z edi-
tion)z, informs us in volume II, pages 4El and 4sz, thattheeon-
tradietion between Luke's Gospel and the Acts of the Aposiles
may be explained by a
'literary
artifice': this is, to say the least,
difficult to follow !
In all probability, Father Roguet in his Ini.ti,ation to the Gos-
pel, t973, (pg rs?) has not been convinced by the above argu-
ment. The explanation he gives us is curious, to say the least:
"Here, as in many similar cases, the problem only appears in-
superable if one takes Biblieal statements literally, and forgets
their religious significance. It is not a matter of breaking down
the factual reality into a symborism which is inconsiste]nt, but
rather of looking for the theological intentions of those revealing
these mysteries to us by providing us with facts we can appre-
hend with our senses and signs appr.opriate to our incarnate
spirit."
How is it possible to be satisfied by an exegesi.s of this kind.
only a persou who accepted everything uneonditionally would
find such apologetic set-phrases acceptable.
Pub. Descl6e and Co., Paris.
Pub. Editions du Cerf, Paris
1.
a,
THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Theideas tobedevelopedinthecomingpageswillwithout
doubtleave
anyreadersstill unawareoftheseproblemsquite
amazed.Beforegoingintodetailhowever,
Iwillprovideanim­
mediateillustration
ofmyideaswithanexamplethatseemsto
mequiteconclusive.
NeitherMatthew
norJohnspeaksofJesus'sAscension.Luke
inhisGospelplaces itontheday oftheResurrectionand forty
dayslaterintheActsoftheApostlesofwhichheissaid tobe
theauthor.Markmentions it(withoutgiving adate)inacon­
clusionconsideredunauthentictoday.TheAscensiontherefore
hasnosolidscripturalbasis.Commentatorsneverthelessap­
proach
thisimportantquestionwithincrediblelightness.
A.Tricot,inhis LittleDictionary oftheNewTestament (Petit
DictionnaireduNouveauTestament)in theCramponBible,
(1960edition)!,aworkproduced formasspublication,does not
devoteanentrytotheAscension. TheSynopsisoftheFour GOB­
pels(Synopsedes QuatreEvangiles)by FathersBenoitandBois­
mard,teachers
attheBiblicalSchOOlofJerusalem,(1972edi­
tion)2,informsus
involumeII,pages451and452,thatthecon­
tradictionbetweenLuke'sGospel
andtheActs oftheApostles
maybeexplainedbya 'literaryartifice':thisis,tosaytheleast,
difficulttofollow!
Inallprobability,FatherRoguetinhisInitiationtotheGos­
pel,1973,(pg187)hasnotbeenconvinced bytheabove argu­
ment.Theexplanationhegivesusiscurious,to saytheleast:
"Here,asinmanysimilarcases, theproblemonly appearsin­
superable
ifonetakesBiblicalstatementsliterally, andforgets
theirreligioussignificance. Itisnotamatterofbreakingdown
thefactualrealityintoasymbolismwhichisinconsistent,
but
ratheroflookingforthetheologicalintentionsofthoserevealing
thesemysteriestousbyprovidinguswithfactswecanappre­
hendwith
oursensesandsigns appropriatetoonr incarnate
spirit."
Howis itpossibleto besatisfiedby anexegesisofthiskind.
Onlya
perSOllwhoacceptedeverythingunconditionallywould
findsuchapologeticset-phrasesacceptable.
1.Pub.DescleeandCo.,Paris.
2.Pub.EditionsduCerf,Paris

65. Trra@lc
{I
Another intenesHng ItDect of Father Roguef,r commentary ir
his admission that there are
'mlny
similar e88es'; similsr' thst
is, to the Ascension in the Gospels. The problem therefore has to
be approached as a whole, obiectively and in depth. It would
Beem reasoneble to look for an explanation by studying the gon-
ditions attendant upon the writing of the Gospels, or the rellgious
atmosphere prevsiling at the time. When adaptations of the
original writings taken from oral traditions are pointed out' and
we seie the way texts handed down to us have been eorrupted, the
presenee of obscure, incomprehensible, contradictorlr, improb-
able, and even absurd passages comes as much less of a surprise'
The same may be said of texts which are incompatible with to-
day's proven reality, thanks to scientific progress. Observations
such as these denote the element of human participation in the
writing and modification of the texts.
Admittedly, in the last few decades, objective resesrch on the
Scriptures has gained attention. In a recent book, Fnith in the
ResurTeetion, Resurrection of Fuithr (Foi en la R6surrection,
Rdsurreetion de la foi), Father Kannengiesser, a professor at
the Catholic Institute of Paris, outlines this profound change in
the following terms: "The faithful are hardly aware that a revo-
lution has taken place in methods of Biblical exegesis since the
time of Pious XII"2. The'Revolution' that the author mentions is
therefore very recent. It is beginning to be extended to the teaeh-
ing of the faithful, in the case of certain specialists at least, who
are animated by this spirit of revival. "The overthrow of the
most assured prospects of the pastoral tradition," the author
writes, "has more or less begun with this revolution in methods
of exegesis."
Father Kannengiesser warns that
'one
should not take liter-
ally' facts reported about Jesus by the Gospels, because they are
'writings
suited to an occasion' or
'to
combat', whose authors
'are
writing down the traditions of their own community about
Jesus'. Concerning the Resurrection of Jesus, which is the sub-
ject of his book, he stresses that none of the authors of the Gos-
pels can claim to have been an eye-witness. He intimates that, as
far as the rest of Jesus's public life is concerned, the same must
Pub. Beauchesne, Coll.
'Le
Point theologique', Paris, 1974
Pious XII was Pope from 1989 to 1969
1.
2.
47
Anotherinterestingaspect ofFatherRoguet'scommentary is
hisadmissionthatthereare'manysimilarcases';similar, that
is,totheAscensionintheGospels.Theproblemthereforehas to
beapproachedasawhole,objectivelyandindepth. Itwould
seemreasonable
tolookforanexplanationbystu<Jying theeon­
ditions
attendantuponthewritingoftheGospels,orthereligious
atmosphereprevailing
atthetime.Whenadaptationsof the
originalwritingstakenfromoraltraditions arepointedout, and
weseethewaytextshandeddown toushavebeencorrupted, the
presenceofobscure,incomprehensible,contradictory,improb­
able,
andevenabsurdpassagescomes asmuchlessofasurprise.
Thesame
maybesaidoftextswhich areincompatiblewithto­
day'sprovenreality,thanks
toscientificprogress.Observations
such
asthesedenotetheelementofhumanparticipationinthe
writingandmodificationofthetexts.
Admittedly,in
thelastfewdecades,objectiveresearchon the
Scriptureshasgainedattention. Inarecentbook, Faithinthe
Resurrection,Resurrection
ofFaith
l(FoienlaResurrection,
Resurrectiondelafoi),
'FatherKannengiesser,aprofessor at
theCatholicInstituteofParis,outlinesthisprofoundchangein
thefollowing
terms:"Thefaithfularehardlyaware thatarevo­
lutionhastakenplaceinmethodsofBiblicalexegesis since
the
timeofPious XII"2.The'Revolution'thattheauthormentionsis
thereforeveryrecent.
Itisbeginningtobeextended totheteach­
ingofthefaithful,inthecase ofcertainspecialists atleast,who
areanimatedbythis spiritofrevival."Theoverthrowofthe
mostassuredprospectsofthepastoraltradition,"theauthor
writes,
"hasmoreorlessbegunwiththisrevolutioninmethods
ofexegesis."
FatherKannengiesserwarnsthat'oneshouldnottake liter­
ally'facts reportedaboutJesusbytheGospels,becausethey
are
'writingssuitedtoanoccasion'or'tocombat',whoseauthors
'arewritingdownthetraditionsof theirowncommunityabout
Jesus'.ConcerningtheResurrectionofJesus,whichisthesub­
jectofhisbook,hestresses
thatnoneoftheauthorsofthe Gos­
pelscanclaimtohavebeen aneye-witness.Heintimatesthat, as
farastherestofJesus'spubliclifeisconcerned,thesamemust
1.Pub.Beauchesne,ColI.'Le Pointtheologique',Paris,1974
2.PiousXIIwasPopefrom1939to1969

66. {I TTIE BIBLE TIIE QUITAN AND SCIENCE
be tme because, accordins to the Gospets, none of the Aposiles-
apart from Judas Iscariot --left Jesus from the moment he first
followed Him until His last earthly manifestations.
we have come a long wsy from the traditional position, which
was once again solemnly eonfirued by the Seeond Vatican Coun-
cil only ten years ago. This once again is resumed by modern
works of popularization destined to be read by the faithful.
Little by little the truth is coming to light however.
It is not easy to grasp, because the weight of such a bitterly de-
fended tradition is very hearry indeed. To free oneself from it, one
has to strike at the roots of the problem, i.e. examine first the
circumstances that marked the birth of Christianity.
48 THE BmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
betruebecause,according totheGospels,noneofthe Apostles­
apartfromJudasIscariot--IeftJesusfromthemomenthefirst
followedHimuntilHislastearthlymanifestations.
Wehavecomealongwayfromthetraditionalposition,which
wasonceagainsolemnlyconfirmedbytheSecondVaticanCoun­
cilonlytenyearsago.Thisonceagainisresumedbymodern
works
ofpopularizationdestinedto bereadbythefaithful.
Littlebylittlethe
truthiscomingtolighthowever.
Itisnoteasytograsp,becausetheweightofsuchabitterly de­
fendedtraditionisveryheavyindeed.Tofreeoneselffromit,one
hastostrike
attherootsoftheproblem, Le.examinefirstthe
circumstances
thatmarkedthebirthofChristianity.

67. ll
Historical Renrinder
Judeo-Chrislianity
and Saint Paul
Tfue majority of Christians believe that the Gospels were writ-
ten by direct witnesses of the life of Jesus and therefore consti-
tute unquestionable evidence concerning the events high-lishting
His lifJ and preachings. One wonders, in thii presence of such
gUarantees of authenticity, how it is possible to discuss the teach-
ings derived from them and how one can cast doubt upon the
validity of the Church as an institution applying the general
instructions Jesus Himself gave. Today's popular editions of the
Gospels contain commentaries aimed at propagating these ideas
among the general public.
The value the authors of the Gospels have as eye-witnesses is
always presented to the faithful as axiomatic. In the middle of
the Second century, Saint Justin did, after all, call the Gospels
the
'Memoirs
of the Apostles'. There are moreover so many de-
tails proclaimed eoneerning the authors that it is a wonder that
one could ever doubt their accurscy; Matthew was a well-known
character'a customs officer employed at the tollgate or customs
house at Capharn&um'; it is even said that he spoke Aramaie and
Greek. Mark is also easily identifiable as Peter's colleague; there
is no doubt that he too was an eye-witness. Luke is the
'dear
physician' of whom Paul talks: information on him is very pre-
eise. John is the Apostle who was always near to Jesus, son of
Zebedee, fisherman on the Sea of Galilee.
4g
II
Hislo..i~allteRlinde..
JudEO-£h..islianit"
andSainiI>aul
ThemajorityofChristiansbelieve thattheGospelswerewrit­
tenbydirectwitnesses ofthelifeofJesusandthereforeconsti­
tuteunquestionableevidenceconcerningtheeventshigh-lighting
Hislife
andpreachings.Onewonders, inthepresenceofsuch
guaranteesofauthenticity,how itispossibletodiscusstheteach­
ingsderivedfromthem
andhowone caDcastdoubtuponthe
validity
oftheChurchasaninstitutionapplyingthegeneral
instructionsJesusHimselfgave.Today'spopulareditionsof
the
Gospelscontaincommentariesaimed atpropagatingtheseideas
among
thegeneralpublic.
Thevalue
theauthorsoftheGospelshaveaseye-witnessesis
alwayspresentedtothefaithful
asaxiomatic.Inthemiddle of
theSecondcentury, SaintJustindid,afterall,calltheGospels
the'MemoirsoftheApostles'.There aremoreoversomanyde­
tailsproclaimedconcerning
theauthorsthatitisawonder that
onecouldeverdoubt theiraccuracy;Matthewwasawell-known
character'acustomsofficeremployed atthetollgateorcustoms
house
atCapharnaum';itisevensaid thathespokeAramaicand
Greek.
Markisalsoeasilyidentifiable asPeter'scolleague;there
isDOdoubtthathetoowas aneye-witness.Lukeisthe 'dear
physician'ofwhomPaul talks:informationonhimisverypre­
cise.Johnis
theApostlewhowasalways neartoJesus,son of
Zebedee,fishermanon theSeaofGalilee.
49

68. 'II TIIE BIBI.F" TIIE QT'N'AN AND SCIENCE
Modern studies on the beginnings of Ghristianity show that
this way of presenting things hardly corresponds to reality. we
shall see who the authors of the Gospels reaily were. As far as the
decades following Jesus's mission are concerned, it must be un-
derstood that events did not at all happen in the way they hsve
been said to have taken place and that
peter's
arrival irt- Rome
in no rpay laid the foundations for the Church. on the contrary,
from the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the second
century, there was a struggle between two factions. one was
whet one might call Pauline christianity and the other Judeo-
Christianity. It was only very slowly that the first supplanted
th^- Becond, and Pauline Christianity triumphed ou"" Judeo-
CfiristianiW.
A large number of very recent works are based on eontempo-
rary discoveries about Christianity. Among them we find Cardi-
nal Dani6lou's name. In December 1g6? he published an article in
the review studies (Etudes) entiiled:
'A
New Representa,tion ol
the origi,ns of chri,stianity: Judeo-christi,anity'. (une vision
nouvelle des origines chr€tiennes, le juddo+hristianisme).
Here
he reviews past works, retraces its history and enables us to
place the appearance of the Gospels in quite a different eontext
from the one that emerges on reading accounts intended for
m&ss publication. what follows is a condensed version of the
essential points made in his artiele, incruding many quotations
from it.
After Jesus's departure, the "litfle group of Apostles" formeci
a "Jewish sect that remained faithful to the form of worship
practised in the Temple". However, when the observances of
converts from paganism were added to them, a
,special
system'
was offered to them, as it were: the Council of Jerusalem in 4g
A.D. exempted them from circumcision and Jewish observances;
"many Judeo-christians rejected this concession". This group
was quite separate from Paul's. What is more, paul
and the
Judeo-Christians were in conflict over the question of pagans
who had turned to christianity, (the incident of Antioch, 49
A.D.). "For Paul, the circumcision, sabbath, and form of wor-
ship practised in the Temple were henceforth old fashioned,
even for the Jews. christianity was to free itself from its politi-
50 THEBIBLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
Modernstudieson thebeginningsofChristianityshow that
thiswayofpresentingthingshardlycorresponds toreality.We
shallseewhotheauthors
oftheGospelsreallywere.As farasthe
decadesfollowingJesus'smission areconcerned,itmustbeun­
derstood
thateventsdidnot atallhappeninthewaytheyhave
beensaidtohavetakenplaceand
thatPeter'sarrivalinRome
innowaylaid thefoundationsfortheChurch. Onthecontrary,
fromthetime Jesus
leftearthtothesecondhalfoftheSecond
century,
therewasastrugglebetweentwofactions.Onewas
whatonemightcallPaulineChristianityand theotherJudeo­
Christianity.
Itwasonlyveryslowly thatthefirstsupplanted
thesecond,andPaulineChristianitytriumphedoverJudeo­
Cfiristianity.
Alargenumberofveryrecentworks
arebasedoncontempo­
rarydiscoveriesa})outChristianity.Amongthem wefindCardi­
nalDanielou'sname.
InDecember1967hepublished anarticlein
thereview
Studies(Etudes)entitled: fANewRepresentation 01
theOrigins 01Christianity:Judea-Christianity'. (Unevision
nouvelledesorigineschretiennes,
Iejudeo-christianisme).Here
hereviews
pastworks,retracesitshistoryandenablesus to
placetheappearance
oftheGospelsinquiteadifferentcontext
fromtheone
thatemergesonreadingaccountsintendedfor
masspublication.
Whatfollowsisacondensedversion ofthe
essentialpointsmadeinhisarticle,includingmanyquotations
fromit.
AfterJesus'sdeparture,the"littlegroupofApostles"formeci
a"Jewishsect
thatremainedfaithfultotheformofworshi y
practisedin theTemple".However,whentheobservances of
convertsfrompaganismwereaddedtothem,a'specialsystem'
wasofferedtothem,as
itwere:theCouncil ofJerusalemin 49
A.D.exemptedthemfromcircumcisionandJewishobservances;
"manyJudeo-Christiansrejectedthisconcession".Thisgroup
wasquiteseparatefromPaul's.
Whatismore,Pauland the
Judeo-Christianswereinconflictoverthequestionofpagans
whohadturnedtoChristianity,
(theincidentofAntioch,49
A.D.)."ForPaul,thecircumcision,Sabbath,andform ofwor­
shippractisedintheTemplewerehencefortholdfashioned,
evenfortheJews.Christianitywastofreeitselffromitspoliti-

69. Hhtodcalftemhdet.Iudeo'Chfictianitg atd SaintPaul 5l
cal-cum-religious adherence to Judaism and open itself to the
Gentiles."
For those Judeo-christians who remained
'loyal
Jews,' Paul
was a traitor: Judeo-Christian documents call him an
'enemy',
accuse him of
'tactical
double-dealing', "Until ?0 A'D.'
Judeo-Christianity represents the majority of the Church" end
"Paul remains an isolated case". The head of the community at
that time was James, a relation of Jesus. With him were Peter
(at the beginning) and John. "James may be considered to repre-
sent the Judeo-Cfuristian camp, which deliberately clung to Juda-
ism as opposed to Pauline Christianity." Jesus's family has s
very important place in the Judeo-Christian Church of Jerusa-
lem. "James's tsUgcessor was Simeon, SOn Of CleOpaS, a COuSin
of the L,ord".
cardinal Danielou here quotes Judeo-christian writings which
express the views on Jesus of this community which initially
formed around the apostles : the Gospel of the Hebrews ( coming
from a Judeo-Christian community in Egypt), the writings of
Clement: Homilies and Recognitions,
'Hypotyposeis',
the Second
Apocalypse of James, the Gospel of Thomas.' "It is to the Judeo-
Christians that one rnust ascribe the oldest writings of Christian
Iiterature." Cardinal Danidlou mentions them in detail.
,,It
was not just in Jerusalem and Palestine that Judeo-chris'
tianity predominated during the first hundred years of the
Church. The Judeo-Christian mission seems everywhere to have
developed before the Pauline mission. This is certainly the ex-
ptanation of the fact that the letters of Paul allude to a conflict'"
bnty were the same adversaries he was to meet everywhere: in
Galatia, Corinth, Colossae, Rome and Antioeh'
The Syro-Palestinian coast from Gaza to Antioch was Judeo-
christian
,nas
witnessed by the Acts of the Apostles and clem-
entine writings". Iri Asia Minor, the existence of Judeo-Chris-
tians is indica[ed in Paul's letters to the Galatians and Colossians.
Papias's writings give us information about Judeo-Christianity
in ithrygia. In Gte*ce, Paul's first letter to the Corinthisns men-
l. One could note hel.e that all these writings were later to be cle$ed ee
Apocryphs, i.e. they had to be concealed by the victorious church which
war norn of Paul'a sueeess. This Church rfiade obvious excigionr in the
Goepel literoture and retained only the four canonic Goepels.
B;'toncalReminder.Judeo-ChmtianityandSaintPaul 51
cal-cum-religiousadherencetoJudaismandopenitselfto the
Gentiles."
ForthoseJudeo-Christianswhoremained'loyalJews,'Paul
wasa
traitor:Judeo-Christiandocumentscallhim an'enemy',
accusehim
of'tacticaldouble-dealing',..."Until70A.D.,
Judeo-ChristianityrepresentsthemajorityoftheChurch"and
"Paulremainsanisolatedcase".Theheadofthecommunity at
thattimewasJames,arelationofJesus.Withhimwere Peter
(atthebeginning)andJohn. "Jamesmaybeconsideredtorepre­
sent
theJudeo-Christiancamp,whichdeliberatelyclung toJuda­
ismasopposedtoPaulineChristianity."Jesus'sfamily hasa
veryimportantplaceintheJudeo-ChristianChurchofJerusa­
lem.
"James's'SuccessorwasSimeon,sonofCleopas,acousin
of
theLord".
CardinalDanielouherequotesJudeo-Christianwritingswhich
expresstheviewsonJesusofthiscommunitywhichinitially
formedaroundtheapostles:theGospeloftheHebrews(coming
fromaJudeo-Christiancommunityin
Egypt),thewritingsof
Clement:HomiliesandRecognitions,'Hypotyposeis',theSecond
ApocalypseofJames,theGospelofThomas.]
"ItistotheJudeo­
Christians
thatonemustascribetheoldestwritingsofChristian
literature."CardinalDanieloumentionsthemindetail.
"ItwasnotjustinJerusalemandPalestip.e thatJudeo-Chris­
tianitypredominatedduringthefirsthundredyearsofthe
Church.TheJudeo-Christianmissionseemseverywheretohave
developedbeforethePaulinemission.Thisiscertainlytheex­
planationofthe
factthatthelettersofPaulalludetoaconflict."
Theywerethesameadversarieshewastomeeteverywhere:in
Galatia,Corinth,Colossae,RomeandAntioch.
TheSyro-PalestiniancoastfromGazatoAntiochwasJudeo­
Christian
"aswitnessedbytheActsoftheApostlesandClem­
entinewritings".IIiAsiaMinor,theexistenceofJudeo-Chris­
tiansisindicatedinPaul'sletterstotheGalatiansandColossians.
Papias'swritingsgiveusinformationaboutJudeo-Christianity
inPhrygia.
InGreece,Paul'sfirstlettertotheCorinthiansmen-
1.Onecouldnote herethatallthesewritingswerelatertobeclassedas
Apocrypha,i.e.theyhadtobeconcealedbythevictoriousChurchwhich
wasbornofPaul'ssuccess.ThisChurchrt(adeobviousexcisions inthe
GospelliteratureandretainedonlythefourCanonicGospels.

70. 52 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
tions Judeo-christians, espeeially at Apoilos. Aceording to clem-
ent's letter and the Shepherd of Hermas, Rome was an
,impor-
tant centre'. For suetonius and Tacitus, the christians r.epre-
sented a Jewish seet. cardinal Danidlou thinks that the first
evangelization in Africa was Judeo-christian. The Gospel of the
Hebrews and the writings of clement of Alexandr.ia link up with
this.
It is essential to know these facts to understand the struggle
between communities that formed the baekgrounrl against whieh
the Gospels were written. The texts that rve have 1oday, after.
many adaptations from the sources, began to appear around ?0
4.D., the time when the two rival communities were engaged in
a fierce struggle, with the Judeo-christians still retaining the
upper hand. With the Jewish war and the fall of Jerusalem in
70 A.D. the situation was to be reversed. This is hory cardinal
Dani6lou explains the decline:
"After the Jews had been discredited in the Empire, the chris-
tians tended to detach themserves from them. The Hellenistic
peoples of christian persuasion then gained the upper hand:
Paul won a posthumous victory; Christianity separated itself po-
litically and sociologically from Judaism; it became the third
people. All the same, until the Jewish revolt in 140 A.D., Judeo-
christianity continued to predominate culturally.',
From ?0 A.D. to a period sometime before 110 A.D. the Gos-
pels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were produced. They do
not constitute the first written Christian documents: the letters
of Paul date from well before them. According to o. culm&nn,
Paul probably wrote his letter to the Thessalonians in E0 A.D.
He had probably disappeared several years prior to the comple-
tion of Mark's Gospel.
Paul is the most controversial figure in Christianity. He was
considered to be a traitor to Jesus's thought by the latter's fam-
ily and by the apostles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle
around James. Paul created christianity at the expense of those
whom Jesus had gathered around him to spread his teachings.
He had not known Jesus during his lifetime and he proved the
legitimacy of his mission by deelaring that Jesus, raised from the
dead, had appeared to him on the road to Damascus. It is quite
reasonable to ask what christianity might have been without
52 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
tionsJudeo-Christians,especially atApollos.AccordingtoClem­
ent'sletterandtheShepherdofHermas,Romewas an'impor­
tantcentre'.ForSuetoniusandTacitus,theChristiansrepre·
senteda Jewishsect.CardinalDanielou thinksthatthefirst
evangelizationin
AfricawasJudeo-Christian.TheGospelofthe
HebrewsandthewritingsofClementofAlexandrialinkupwith
this.
Itisessentialtoknowthese factstounderstandthestruggle
betweencommunities thatformedthebackgroundagainstwhich
theGospelswere written.Thetextsthatwehavetoday, after
manyadaptationsfromthesources,beganto appeararound70
A.D.,
thetimewhen thetworivalcommunitieswereengagedin
afiercestruggle,with
theJudeo-Christiansstill retainingthe
upperhand.With theJewishwarandthefallofJerusalemin
70A.D.
thesituationwastobereversed.ThisishowCardinal
Danielouexplains
thedecline:
"AftertheJewshadbeendiscreditedin theEmpire,theChris­
tianstendedtodetachthemselvesfromthem. TheHellenistic
peoples
ofChristianpersuasionthengainedtheupperhand:
Paulwonaposthumousvictory; Christianityseparateditselfpo­
litically
andsociologicallyfrom Judaism;itbecamethethird
people.All thesame,until theJewishrevoltin140A.D.,Judeo­
Christianitycontinuedtopredominateculturally."
From70A.D.toaperiodsometimebefore110A.D. theGos­
pels
ofMark,Matthew,Luke andJohnwereproduced.Theydo
notconstitute
thefirstwrittenChristiandocuments:theletters
ofPauldatefromwellbeforethem.Accordingto O.Culmann,
PaulprobablywrotehislettertotheThessaloniansin50A.D.
Hehadprobablydisappearedseveral yearspriortothecomple­
tionofMark'sGospel.
Paulisthemostcontroversialfigurein Christianity.Hewas
consideredtobea
traitortoJesus'sthoughtbythelatter'sfam­
ily
andbytheapostleswhohadstayed inJerusaleminthecircle
aroundJames.Paulcreated Christianityattheexpenseofthose
whom
Jesushadgatheredaroundhimto spreadhisteachings.
Hehadnotknown Jesusduringhislifetimeandheprovedthe
legitimacyofhismissionbydeclaring thatJesus,raised fromthe
dead,hadappearedto himontheroadtoDamascus.Itisquite
reasonable
toaskwhatChristianitymighthavebeenwithout

71. HhroficalFremh1d,et.Itd,eo-chthtianitg
atd saint Paul 53
paul snd one could no doubt construet sll sorts of hypotheses on
ihis suUject. As far as the Gospels are concerned however, it is
almost certsin that if this atmosphere of struggle between com-
munities had not existed, we would not have had the writings
we possess today. They appeared at a time of fierce struggle be-
between the two communities. These
'combat
writings" as Father
Kannengiesser calls them, emerged from the multitude of writ-
ings on Jesus. These occurred at the time when Paul's style of
Ctrlistianity won through definitively, and created its own col-
Iection of official texts. These texts constituted the
'Canon'
which
condemned and excluded as unorthodox any other doeuments
thet were not suited to the line sdopted by the Church.
The Judeo-Christians have now disappeared as a communiff
with any influence, but one still hears people talking about them
under ihe general term of
'Judaistic'.
This is how Cardinal
Danidlou describes their disappearance :
.,when
they were cut off from the Great church, thst gradu-
ally freed itself from its Jewish attachments, they petered out
very quickly in the West. In the East however it is possible to
find tiaces of them in the Third and Fourth Centuries A.D., es-
p"*i*tty in Palestine, Arabia, Transjordania, Syria-and Mesopo-
tamie. Others joined in the orthodoxy of the Great Church, at the
same time preserving traces of Semitic culture; some of these
still persist in the churches of Ethiopia and chaldea".
HiatoricalReminder./udeo-ChriatianityandSaintPaul 53
Paulandonecould nodoubtconstructallsortsofhypotheses on
thissubject.As farastheGospels areconcernedhowever, itis
almostcertain
thatifthisatmosphereofstrugglebetweencom­
munitieshadnotexisted,wewouldnothavehadthewritings
wepossesstoday.Theyappeared
atatimeoffiercestrugglebe­
betweenthetwocommunities.These'combatwritings',as
Father
Kannengiessercallsthem,emergedfromthemultitudeofwrit­
ingsonJesus.Theseoccurred
atthetimewhenPaul'sstyleof
Christianitywonthroughdefinitively,andcreateditsowncol­
lectionofofficialtexts.Thesetextsconstitutedthe'Canon'which
condemnedandexcludedasunorthodoxanyotherdocuments
thatwerenotsuitedtotheline'adoptedbytheChurch.
TheJudeo-Christianshavenowdisappearedasacommunity
withanyinfluence,
butonestillhearspeopletalkingaboutthem
underthegeneral
termof'Judalstic'.ThisishowCardinal
Danieloudescribestheirdisappearance:
"Whentheywerecut
offfromtheGreatChurch, thatgradu­
allyfreeditselffromitsJewishattachments,theypeteredout
veryquicklyintheWest.
IntheEasthoweveritispossibleto
findtracesofthemintheThirdand
FourthCenturiesA.D.,es­
peciallyinPalestine,Arabia,Transjordania,SyriaandMesopo­
tamia.OthersjoinedintheorthodoxyoftheGreatChurch,
atthe
sametimepreservingtraces
ofSemiticculture;someofthese
stillpersistintheChurchesofEthiopia andChaldea".

72. lll
The Forrr Gospels.
Sourcc$ and History,
In the writings that come from the early stages of christian-
1tr'
tne Gospels are not mentioned until long after the works of
Peul. It wes not until the middle of the second century A.D.,
sfter 140 A.D. to be precise, that aecounts began to appear con-
eerning a collection of Evangelic writings. In spite of this,
.,from
lle
be$nning of the second century A.D., many chrigtian au-
thorg clearly intimatc that they knew a great many of paul's
let-
ter8." These observations are set out in ttre Introduction to the
Etumenieal Trowlati,on of the Biblc, Neur Testamemt (Introduc-
tion l la Traduction oecumdnique de la Bible, Nouveau Teste-
ment) edited rgzg'. They are worth rnentioning from the outset,
and it is uEeful to point out here that the work referred to is the
result of a collective effort which brought together more than
bne hundred catholic and protestant
specialists.
The Gospels, later to become official, i.e. canonic, did not be-
come known until fairly late, even though they were completed
at the beginning of the second centu"y e.o. hccording L flr"
Ecumenical rranslation, stories belonging to them bee;'n to be
quoted around the middle of the second century A.D. Neverthe-
less, "it is nearly always difficult to decide whether the quotations
come from written textg that the authors had next to them or if
the latter were oontent to evoke the memory of fragments of the
oral tradition."
"Before r40 A.D." we read in the commentaries this transla-
tion of the Bible contains,
,,there
was, in any case, no sccount,
t. Prb. Ed*onr du cerf et Ler Bergers et les Mages, parig.
54
III
TheFou..Gospels.
Sou...:esandHislory.
Inthewritingsthatcomefromtheearlystages ofChristian­
ity,theGospels
arenotmentioneduntillong aftertheworksof
Paul.
Itwasnotuntilthemiddle oftheSecondcenturyA.D.,
after140A.D.to beprecise,thataccountsbegan toappearcon­
cerningacollection
ofEvangelicwritings. Inspiteofthis,"from
thebeginningof theSecondcenturyA.D.,manyChristianau­
thorsclearlyintimate thattheyknewa greatmanyofPaul'slet­
ters."Theseobservations
aresetoutintheIntroductiontothe
EcumenicalTro,nalation 01tkeBible,NewTestament (Introduc­
tion
alaTraductionoecumeniquedelaBible,NouveauTesta­
ment)edited
1972).Theyareworthmentioningfrom theoutset,
and
itisusefultopointouthere thattheworkreferred toisthe
resultofacollectiveeffortwhichbroughttogethermore
than
hnehundredCatholic andProtestantspecialists.
TheGospels,latertobecomeofficial, Le.canonic,didnot be­
comeknownuntilfairlylate,eventhoughtheywerecompleted
atthebeginningof theSecondcenturyA.D.According tothe
EcumenicalTranslation,storiesbelongingtothembeganto
be
quotedaroundthemiddle oftheSecondcenturyA.D.Neverthe­
less,
"itisnearlyalwaysdifficulttodecidewhetherthequotations
comefromwrittentexts
thattheauthorshadnexttothem orif
thelatterwerecontenttoevokethememoryoffragments
ofthe
oraltradition."
"Before140A.D."wereadinthecommentariesthistransla­
tion
oftheBiblecontains, "therewas,inanycase,noaccount·
1.Pub.EditionsduCerfetLeaBergersetlesMages, Paris.
S4

73. lllrcRow@h'Sorrca ordfilffit tU
bywhichonemighthaverecognlgedaeollecfronofgvsngpllc
#tings". firie stat€m€nt is the opposite of what A. Tricot
writ€E (1960) in the comlnentaty to his translation of the New
Tegtoment: "Very eerly on, from the begiinning of th9 Second
century A.D., it became a habit to say
'Goapel'
meaning the books
thet Saint Justin around 160 A.D. h8d aleo called
'Ttre
Memoirs
of the Apoetles'." Unfortunately, assertions of this kind anc
sgfrciently common for the public to have ideas on tfie date of
the Goepels which ere mistaken.
The Gospels did not form a c'omplete whole
'very
eerly on';
it did not happen until more than a centurt' after the end of
Jesus's mission. The Ecrtmertcal Ttawlntimt of the Bibln esti'
mates the date the four Gospels acguired the status of canonic
literature at arsund 1?0 A.D.
Justin'g statement which calls the authors
'Apostles'
is not
acceptable either, as w€ shall see.
As far as the dste the Gospgls were written is concerned, A'
Trieot ststes that Mstthew'g, Mark's and Luke's Gospels were
written before ?0 A.D.: but this is not acceptable, except perhaps
for Mark. Following many others, thie commentator goes out of
his way to pres€nt the authors of the Gospels as the apostles or
the companiotts of Jesus. For this reason he suggests detes of
writing tttst place them very near to the time Jesus lived. As for
John, *tto* A. Tricot has us believe lived until roughly 100 A.D.'
christians have slways been used to seeing him depicted as being
very near to Jesus on ceremonisl occasions. It is very difficult
however to sssert that he is the author of the Gospel that bears
his name. For A. Tricot, as for other commentators, the Apostle
John (like Matthew) was the offieislly qualified witness of the
fects he recounts, although the majority of critics do not sup-
port the hypothesis which says he wrote the fourth Gospel.
If however the four Gospels in question cannot reasonably be
regarded as the
'Memoirs'
of the apostles or companions of
Jesus, where do theY come from ?
o. culmann, in his book The New Testament (Le Nouveau
Testament)', seys of this that the evangelists were only the
,,spokesmen
of the early christian eommunity which wrote
down the oral tradition. For thirty or forty years' the Gos-
1. P"b. FreEE€s Univereitsires de Fr'nce, Paris, 1967
55
bywhich ODemighthaverecognisedacollection ofevangelic
writings".Thisstatementis theoppositeofwhatA.TricOt
writes(1960)
inthecommentarytohistranslationoftheNew
Testament:"Veryearlyon,from
thebeginningoftheSecond
century
A.D.,itbecamea habittosay'Gospel'meaning thebooks
thatSaintJustinaround150 A.D.hadalsocalled'TheMemoirs
oftheApostles'."Unfortunately,assertions ofthiskindare
sufticientlycommon forthepublietohaveideason thedateof
theGospelswhieh aremistaken.
TheGospelsdid notformacompletewhole'veryearly on';
itdidnothappenuntilmore thanacenturYaftertheendof
Jesus'smission.The EcumenicalTranslation oftheBibleesti­
mates
thedatethefourGospelsaequired thestatusofcanonie
literatureataround170 A.D.
Justin'sstatementwhichcalls theauthors·Apostles' isnot
aceeptableeither,as weshallsee.
AsfarasthedatetheGospelswerewritteniseoncerned,A.
Tricotstates
thatMatthew's,Mark'sandLuke'sGospelswere
writtenbefore70 A.D.:butthisisnotacceptable,exeeptperhaps
forMark.Followingmanyothers,thiscommentatorgoesoutof
hiswaytopresenttheauthors
oftheGospelsas theapostlesor
thecompanionsofJesus.Forthisreasonhesuggestsdates of
writingthatplaeethemvery neartothetimeJesuslived.Asfor
John,whomA.Tricothasusbelieveliveduntilroughly100
A.D.,
Christianshavealwaysbeenused toseeinghimdepictedasbeing
very
neartoJesusonceremonialoccasions. Itisverydifficult
howeverto
assertthatheistheauthoroftheGospel thatbears
hisname.ForA.Tricot,as forothercommentators,theApostle
John(likeMatthew)wastheofficiallyqualifiedwitnessofthe
factsherecounts,althoughthemajorityofcritics
donotsup­
portthehypothesiswhichsayshewrotethefourthGospel.
IfhoweverthefourGospelsinquestioncannotreasonably be
regardedas the'Memoirs'oftheapostles orcompanionsof
Jesus,where
dotheycomefrom?
O.Culmann,inhisbook TheNewTestament (LeNouveau
Testament)\saysofthis
thattheevangelistswereonly the
"spokesmenoftheearlyChristiancommunitywhichwrote
downtheoraltradition.
Forthirtyorfortyyears,the Gos-
1.Pub.Preases UniversitairesdeFrance,Paris,1967

74. t0 TrIE BIELF,' TIIE QUn?N AND SCTENCE
pel had existed as an almost exclusively oral tradition: the
latter only transmitted sayings and isolated narratives. The
evangelists strung them together, eaeh in his own way ac-
cording to his own character and theologieal preoccupations.
They linked up the narrations and sayings handed down by
the prevailing tradition. The grouping of Jesus's sayingr
and likewise the sequence of narratives is made by the use
of fairly vague linking phrases such as
,after
this',
,when
he had'etc. rn other words, the
.framework'
of the synoptic
Gospelsl is of a purely literary order and is not based on
history."
The same author eontinues as follows :
"rt must be noted that the needs of preaching, worship and
teaehing, more than biographicar considerationsn were what
guided the early community when it wrote down the tra-
dition of the life of Jesus. The apostles illustrated the truth
of the faith t!"y were preaehing by deseribing the events
in the life of Jesus. Their Be"rnons are what caused the de-
seriptions to be written down. The sayings of Jesus were
transmitted, in partieular, in the teaching of the catechism
of the early Church."
This is exactly how the commentators of the Ecumen{,eal
Translation of the Bibte (Traduction oecum€nique de Ia Bible)
describe the writing of the Gospers: the formation of an orar
tradition influenced by the preaehingr of Jesus,s disciples and
other preachers; the preservation by preaching of this materiar,
which is in actual faet found in
-
the Gospels, by preaching,
Iiturgy, and teaching of the faithful; the slender por*ilititv of
"concrete form given by writings to c€ttain confessions of faith,
sayings of Jesus, deseriptions of the passion
for example; the
fact that the evangelists resort to various written forms as well
as data contained in the oral tradition. They resort to these to
produce texts which "are suitable for various circles, which meet
the needs of the church, explain observations on the scriptures,
correct errors and even, on oceasion, answer adversaries' objec-
tions. Thus the evangelists, each according to his own ouilook,
have collected and recorded in writing the material given to them
by the oral tradition".
1. The three Goepels of Mark, Matthew and Luke.
58 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
pelhadexistedasanalmostexclusivelyoral tradition:the
latteronlytransmittedsayingsandisolatednarratives.The
evangelists
strungthemtogether,each inhisownwayac­
cordingtohisown
characterandtheologicalpreoccupations.
Theylinkedup
thenarrationsandsayingshandeddownby
theprevailingtradition.Thegrouping
ofJesus'ssayings
andlikewise
thesequenceofnarrativesismadebytheuse
offairlyvaguelinkingphrasessuchas
'afterthis','when
he
had'etc.Inotherwords,the'framework' oftheSynoptic
Gospels
t
isofapurelyliteraryorderandisnotbasedon
history."
Thesame
authorcontinuesasfollows:
''Itmustbenotedthattheneedsofpreaching,worship and
teaching,more thanbiographicalconsiderations,were
what
guidedtheearlycommunitywhen
itwrotedown thetra­
ditionofthelifeofJesus. Theapostlesillustratedthe truth
ofthefaiththeywerepreachingbydescribingtheevents
inthelifeofJesus.Theirsermons arewhatcausedthede­
scriptionstobe
writtendown.Thesayings ofJesuswere
transmitted,inparticular,
intheteachingofthecatechism
oftheearlyChurch."
Thisisexactlyhow
thecommentatorsoftheEcumenical
Translation
oftheBible(Traductionoecum{miquedelaBible)
describe
thewritingoftheGospels:theformationof anoral
traditioninfluencedbythepreachings
ofJesus'sdisciplesand
otherpreachers;thepreservationbypreaching
ofthismaterial,
whichisinactualfactfound
intheGospels,bypreaching,
liturgy,
andteachingofthefaithful;theslenderpossibility ofa
concreteformgivenbywritingstocertainc0nfessionsoffaith,
sayings
ofJesus,descriptions ofthePassionforexample;the
factthattheevangelistsresorttovariouswrittenformsaswen
asdatacontainedintheoraltradition.They
resorttotheseto
producetextswhich
"aresuitableforvariouscircles,whichmeet
theneedsoftheChurch,explainobservations
ontheScriptures,
correct
errorsandeven,onoccasion,answeradversaries'objec­
tions.Thustheevangelists,eachaccordingtohisownoutlook,
havecollectedandrecordedin
writingthematerialgiventothem
bytheoraltradition".
1.ThethreeGospelsofMark,MatthewandLuke.

75. TlcRow @qrllr,, Sowrpt sniilnb/rltg
67
This position has been collectively adopted by more than one
hundred experts in the exegesis of the New Testament, botr
Catholic snd Protestant. It diverges widely from the line estab
Iished by the Second Vatican Council in its dogmatic constitution
on the Revelation drawn up between 1962 and 1966. This con'
ciliar document has already been referred to once above, when
talking of the Old Testament. The Council was able to declare
of the latter that the books which compose it "contain material
which is imperfect and obsolete", but it has not expressed the
same reservations about the Gospels, On the contrary' 8s we
read in the following:
"Nobody ean overlook the fact that, among all the Scriptures'
even those of the New Testament, the Gospels have a well-de-
senred position of superiority. This is by virtue of the fect thst
they represent the most pre-eminent witness to the life and
teachings of the Incafnate Word, Our Saviour. At all times and
in all places the Church has maintained and still meintains the
apostolic origin of the four Gospels. What the apostles aetually
preached on Christ's orders, both they and the men in their fol-
lowing subsequently transmitted, with the divine inspiration of
the Spirit, in writings which are the foundation of the faith, i.e.
the fourfold Gospel according to Matthew, Mark, Luke snd
John."
"Our Holy Mother, the Church, has firmly maintained and still
maintains with the greatest constancy, that these four Gospels,
which it unhesitatingly confirms are historieally authentic,
faithfully transmit what Jesus, Son Of God, actually did and
taught during his life among men for their eternal salvation
until the day when He was taken up into the heavens. . . The
sacred authors therefore composed the four Gospels in sueh a
way as to always give us true and frank information on the life
of Jesug".
This is an unambiguous affirmation of the fidelity with which
the Gospels transmit the acts and sayings of Jesus'
There is hardly any compatibility between the Council's af-
firmation and what the authors quoted above claim. In particular
the following:
The Gospels "are not to be taken literallg" they ste "usri'tings
sutted, tO an occASiOn" Ot "cornbat Writingy". Their aUthOrs "d're
Thispositionhasbeencollectivelyadopted bymorethanone
hundredexperts
intheexegesisoftheNewTestament,both
Catholic
andProtestant.Itdivergeswidelyfrom thelineestab­
lishedby
theSecondVaticanCouncil initsdogmaticconstitution
on
theRevelationdrawnupbetween1962 and1965.Thiscon­
ciliardocument
hasalreadybeen referredtoonceabove,when
talking
oftheOldTestament.TheCouncilwasable todeclare
ofthelatterthatthebookswhichcompose it"containmaterial
whichisimperfect andobsolete",butithasnotexpressed the
samereservationsabout theGospels.Onthecontrary, aswe
read
inthefollowing:
"Nobodycanoverlook
thefactthat,amongall theScriptures,
eventhoseof
theNewTestament, theGospelshaveawell-de­
servedposition
ofsuperiority.Thisisbyvirtueofthefact that
theyrepresent themostpre-eminentwitnesstothelife and
teachingsoftheIncarnateWord,OurSaviour.Atalltimesand
inallplacestheChurchhasmaintainedandstillmaintainsthe
apostolicoriginofthefourGospels.
Whattheapostlesactually
preachedonChrist'sorders,boththeyandthemen
intheirfol­
lowingsubsequentlytransmitted,
withthedivineinspirationof
theSpirit,inwritingswhich arethefoundationofthefaith,i.e.
thefourfoldGospelaccordingtoMatthew,Mark,Luke and
John."
"OurHolyMother,theChurch,hasfirmlymaintainedandstill
maintainswith
thegreatestconstancy,thatthesefourGospels,
which
itunhesitatinglyconfirms arehistoricallyauthentic,
faithfully
transmitwhatJesus,SonOf God,actuallydid and
taughtduringhislifeamongmenfor theireternalsalvation
untilthedaywhenHewastakenupintotheheavens
....The
sacredauthorsthereforecomposed
thefourGospelsinsucha
wayastoalwaysgiveus
trueandfrankinformationon thelife
ofJesus".
Thisis
anunambiguousaffirmation ofthefidelitywithwhich
theGospelstransmittheactsandsayingsofJesus.
Thereishardly
anycompatibilitybetweentheCouncil'saf­
firmationand
whattheauthorsquotedaboveclaim. Inparticular
thefollowing:
TheGospels
Harenottobetakenliterally"theyareuwritings
suitedto
anoccasion"orucombatwritings".Theirauthors Hare

76. TE THE BI8I.F' TTilE QIJN'AN AND SCIENCE
ufit@. d'own ttw traditiotrt of tlwir own eoftrrnuni,ty ctnccrning
Junt". (Father l(annengiesser).
The Gospels ere texts which "are suitable for various circles,
meet the neede of the church, explain observations on the scrip-
tutrt, eorrect ertorB and even, on occasion, answer adversaries'
objections. Thus, the evangelistE, eaeh aecording to his own ouL
look, hsve collected and raecorded in writing th; material given
to them by the oral tradition". (Ecumeni,eal, Translation if n"
Biblal.
rt is quite clear that we are here faced with contradictory
statements: the deelaration of the Council on the one hand, and
gore rucently adopted attitudes on the other. According to the
declaration of the second vatican couneil, a faithful account of
the actions and words of Jesus is to be found in the cospets; but
it ia impossible to reconeile this with the existence in ttre text of
eontredictions, improbabilities, thinep which are materially im_
posgible or statements which run contrgrr to firmly estabiished
rnality.
rf' on the other hand, one chooses to regard the Gospels as
erpressing the personal point of view of those who colloLo tn*
orel treditione- that belonged to various communities, or ag
writingr guited to an occasion or combat-writings, it does not
oom€ 8a a gurprise to find faults in the Gospels. All these faulh
rre the sign that they were written by men in circumstances
gueh es these. The writers may have b*tt quite sincere, even
though they relate faets without doubting their inaccura*y. rn*y
provide u$ with descriptions which contradiet other authors'
nrrrationE, or are influeneed by reasons of religious rivelry be-
tween cornmunities. They therefore present stories about the life
of Jesus from a completery different angre than their adversaries.
rt hss already been shown how the historical context is in
herrnony with the second approach to the Gospels. The data we
hsve on the t€xts themselves definitively confirms it.
THE @SPEf, ACCOrc,ING TO MATTHEW
Mstthew's is the first of the four Gospels as they appear in
the New Testament. This position is perfecily justined-by the
faet that it is e prolongation, as it were, of the oltl restament.
sa THEB18LE,TIlEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
mUngdowntMtroditi0ft8oftMirowncommunityconcerning
JUUB".(FatherKannengiesser).
The
Gospelsaretextswhich"aresuitableforvariouscircles,
meet
theneedsoftheChurch,explainobservationsontheScrip­
tures,correct
enorsandeven,onoccasion,answeradversaries'
objections.Thus,theevangelists,eachaccordingtohisownout­
look,havecollected
andrecordedinwritingthematerialgiven
tothembytheoraltradition".(EcumenicalTranBlationofthe
Bible).
Itisquiteclear thatweareherefacedwithcontradictory
statements:
thedeclarationoftheCouncilontheonehand,and
morerecentlyadoptedattitudeson
theother.Accordingto the
declarationoftheSecondVaticanCouncil,afaitltfulaccount of
theactionsandwordsofJesusistobefoundintheGospels; but
itisimpossibletoreconcilethiswiththeexistencein thetextof
contradictions,improbabilities,thingswhich aremateriallyim­
pouibleorstatementswhich runcontrarytofirmlyestablished
reality.
If,ontheotherhand,OBechoosestoregardtheGospelsas
expressingthepersonalpoint ofviewofthosewhocollected the
oraltraditionsthatbelongedtovariouscommunities, oras
writingssuited toanoccasionorcombat-writings,itdoesnot
come
asasurprisetofindfaultsintheGospels.Allthesefaults
arethesignthattheywere writtenbymenincircumstances
such
asthese.The writersmayhavebeenquitesincere,even
thoughtheyrelatefactswithoutdoubting
theirinaccuracy.They
provide
US'withdescriptionswhichcontradictotherauthors'
narrations,
orareinfluencedbyreasonsofreligiousrivalrybe­
tweencommunities.Theythereforepresentstoriesaboutthelife
ofJesusfromacompletelydifferentangle thantheiradversaries.
Ithasalreadybeenshownhowthehistoricalcontextisin
harmonywith
thesecondapproachtotheGospels.The datawe
haveon thetextsthemselvesdefinitivelyconfirmsit.
THEGOSPELACCORDING TOMATTHEW
Matthew'sisthefirst ofthefourGospels astheyappearin
theNewTestament.Thispositionisperfectlyjustifiedbythe
faet
thatitisaprolongation,as itwere,ofthe OldTestament.

77. TlpRowGrlryrlh.Sowootatdffiirltorg
50
It wss writtcn to show that "Jesus fulfilled the history of fsr&e!",
es the commentatorg of the Eeu,rnenied, Trs,nglf,,tion af the Bibl'e
note and on whieh we shall be drawing heavily. To do sor
Matthew constsntly refers to quotations from the Old Testament
which show how Jesus acted 8s if he were the Messiah the Jews
were awaiting.
This Gospel begns with a genealogy of Jesus'. Matthew traces
it back to Abraham via David. we shall presently see the fault in
the text that most commentators silently ignore. Matthew's ob-
vious intention was nevertheless to indicate the general tenor of
his work straight away by establishing this line of descendants'
The authot .otttinues the same line of thought by constantly
bringing to the forefront Jesus's attitude toward Jewish law, the
main principles of which (praying, fasting, and dispensing char-
ity) are summarized here.
-Jesus
addresses His teachings first and foremost to His own
people. This is how He speaks to the twelve Apostles: "Go no-
whire smong the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritensz
but go rsther to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew
10, 6-6). "I wgs sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"'
(Matthew L6, 24',). At the end of his Gospel, in second place,
Matthew extends the apostolic mission of Jesus's first disciples
to all nations. He makes Jesus give the following order: "Go
therefore and make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28' 19) '
but the primary destination must be the
'house
of Israel'' A'
Tricot says of lhis Gospel, "Beneath its Greek garb, the flesh
end bones of this book are Jewish, and so is its spirit; it has a
Jewish feel and bears its distinctive signs".
On the basis of these observations alone, the origins of
MattheCs Gospel may be placed in the tradition of s Judeo-
Christian co1Rmuniff. Aceording to O. Culmann, this community
"was trying to bresk away from Judaism while at the same time
p"***itg ttt" continuity of the Old Testament' The main pre-
occupations and the genlral tenor of this Gospel point towards
a streined situation."
1. The fact that it is in contrediction with Luke's Gospel will be dealt with
in a rePaf,ate chePter.
z. The Scmeritens'ieligious code was the Torah or Pentateuch; they lived
in the expectation ol th" Messiah and were faithful to most Jewish
obreryances, but they had built a rival Temple to the one at Jerusalem'
59
Itwaswrittentoshowthat"Jesusfulfilledthehistory ofIsrael",
asthecommentatorsofthe EcumenicalTra.nslation oftheBible
noteandonwhich weshallbedrawingheavily.Todoso,
MatthewconstantlyreferstoquotationsfromtheOldTestament
whichshowhowJesusacted
asifheweretheMessiahtheJews
wereawaiting.
ThisGospelbeginswithagenealogy
ofJesus
1
•
Matthewtraces
itbacktoAbrahamviaDavid.Weshallpresentlysee thefaultin
thetextthatmostcommentatorssilentlyignore.Matthew'sob­
viousintentionwasnevertheless
toindicatethegeneral tenorof
hisworkstraightawaybyestablishingthisline ofdescendants.
The
authorcontinuesthesamelineofthoughtbyconstantly
bringingtotheforefrontJesus'sattitudetowardJewishlaw, the
mainprinciplesofwhich(praying,fasting,anddispensingchar­
ity)aresummarizedhere.
JesusaddressesHisteachingsfirstandforemosttoHisown
people.ThisishowHespeaksto
thetwelveApostles:"Gono­
whereamong
theGentiles,andenternotownoftheSamaritans
2
butgorathertothelostsheepofthehouseofIsraeI."(Matthew
10,5-6)."IwassentonlytothelostsheepofthehouseofIsrael".
(Matthew15,24).
AttheendofhisGospel,insecondplace,
Matthewextends
theapostolicmission ofJesus'sfirstdisciples
toallnations.HemakesJesusgive thefollowingorder:"Go
thereforeandmakedisciplesofallnations"(Matthew
28,19),
buttheprimarydestinationmust bethe~houseofIsrael'.A.
Tricotsays ofthisGospel,"Beneath itsGreekgarb,theflesh
andbonesofthisbook areJewish,andsoisits spirit;ithasa
Jewishfeelandbears
itsdistinctivesigns".
Onthebasisoftheseobservationsalone,
theoriginsof
Matthew'sGospelmay
beplacedinthetraditionofaJudeo­
Christiancommunity.Accordingto
O.Culmann,thiscommunity
"was
tryingtobreakaway fromJudaismwhile atthesametime
preserving
thecontinuityoftheOldTestament.Themainpre­
occupationsandthegeneraltenorofthisGospelpointtowards
astrainedsituation."
1.ThefactthatitisincontradictionwithLuke'sGospelwillbedealtwith
inaseparatechapter.
2.TheSamaritans'religiouscode wastheTorahorPentateuch;theylived
in
theexpectationoftheMessiahandwerefaithfultomostJewish
observances,buttheyhadbuiltarivalTemple totheoneatJerusalem.

78. 60 THE BIBT FT THE QUn?N AND SCIENCE
There are also political factors to be found in the text. The
Roman oceupation of Palestine naturally heightened the desire
of this country to see itself liberated. They prayed for God to
intervene in favour of the people He had chosen among all others,
and as their omnipotent sovereign who could givg direct support
to the affairs of men, as He had already done-many times in the
course of history.
what sort of person was Matthew ? Let us say straight away
that he is no longer acknowredged to be one of Jesus's compan-
ions. A. Tricot nevertheless presents him as such in his com-
mentary to the translation of the New Testament, tg60:
"Matthew alias, Levi, was a customs officer employed at the toll-
gate or customs house at capharnaum when Jesus called him to
be one of His disciples." This is the opinion of the Fathers of the
church, origen, Jerome and Epiphanes. This opinion is no
longer held today. one point which is uncontested is that the
author is writing "for peopre who speak Greek, but nevertheress
know Jewish customs and the Aramaic language.,,
It would seem that for the commentators of the Ecumenicar
Translation, the origins of this Gospel are as follows:
"rt is normally considered to have been written in syria, p€r_
haps at Antioch (. . . ), or in
phoenicia,
because a great many
Jews lived in these countries.r (. . .) we have indications of a
polemic against the orthodox Judaism of the synagogue and the
Pharasees such as was manifested at the synagogal assembly at
Jamina circa 80 A.D." In such conditions, there are many authors
who date the first of the Gospels at about g0-g0
A.D.; perhaps
also a little earlier; it is not possible to be absolutely definite
about this . . . since we do not know the author's exact name, we
must be satisfied with a few ouflines traced in the Gospel itself :
the author can be recognized by his profession. He is well-versed
in Jewish writings and traditions. He knows, respects, but vigor_
ously challenges the religious leaders of his people. He is a past
master in the art of teaching artd makins Jesus understandable
to his listeners. He arways insists on the practical consequences
of his teachings. He would fit fairly well the description' of an
t' tt t* t*" thought that the Judeo-Christian community that Matthes
belonged to might just as eeairy have been situated at Alexandria. o.
culmann refers to this hypothesis along with many otherr.
60 THEBIB~THEQUR·ANANDSCIENCE
Therearealsopoliticalfactors tobefoundin thetext.The
Romanoccupation
ofPalestinenaturallyheightenedthedesire
ofthiscountrytoseeitselfliberated.Theyprayed
forGodto
interveneinfavourofthepeopleHehadchosenamongalIothers,
andastheiromnipotentsovereignwhocould
Biv~directsupport
totheaffairs
ofmen,asHehadalreadydone manytimesinthe
courseofhistory.
WhatsortofpersonwasMatthew? Letussaystraightaway
thatheisnolongeracknowledgedtobeone
ofJesus'scompan­
ions.
A.Tricotneverthelesspresentshim
assuchinhiscom­
mentarytothetranslation
oftheNewTestament,1960:
"Matthewalias,Levi,wasacustomsofficeremployed
atthetoll­
gateorcustomshouse atCapharnaumwhenJesuscalledhimto
beone
ofHisdisciples."Thisis theopinionoftheFathersofthe
Church,Origen,Jerome andEpiphanes.Thisopinionisno
longerheldtoday.Onepointwhichisuncontestedis
thatthe
authoriswriting"forpeoplewhospeakGreek, butnevertheless
knowJewishcustomsand
theAramaiclanguage."
Itwouldseem thatforthecommentators oftheEcumenical
Translation,theorigins
ofthisGospel areasfollows:
"Itisnormallyconsideredtohavebeen
writteninSyria,per­
haps
atAntioch( ...),orinPhoenicia,becausea greatmany
Jewslivedinthesecountries. l
(
•••)wehaveindications ofa
polemic
againsttheorthodoxJudaism oftheSynagogue andthe
Pharaseessuchaswasmanifested
atthesynagogalassembly at
Jaminacirca80 A.D."Insuchconditions,there aremanyauthors
whodatethefirst oftheGospelsatabout80-90A.D.,perhaps
alsoalittle
earlier;itisnotpossibletobeabsolutelydefinite
aboutthis
...sincewe donotknowthe author'sexactname,we
mustbesatisfiedwithafewoutlinestracedintheGospelitself:
theauthorcanberecognizedbyhisprofession.Heiswell-versed
inJewishwritingsandtraditions.Heknows,respects,
butvigor­
ouslychallengesthereligiousleaders
ofhispeople.Heisa past
masterintheartofteachingaridmakingJesusunderstandable
tohislisteners.Healwaysinsistson
thepracticalconsequences
ofhisteachings.Hewouldfitfairlywell
thedescriptionofan
1.IthasbeenthoughtthattheJudeo-ChristiancommunitythatMatthew
belongedtomightjustaseasilyhavebeensituatedatAlexandria.O.
Cubnannreferstothishypothesisalongwithmanyothers.

79. Tlw Fow Goqeh. Soutcet atd Hirtary 6l
educated Jew turned Christian; a householder "who brings out of'
his treasure what is new and what is old" as Matthew says
(1g,52). This is a long way from the civil servant at Caphar-
naum, whom Mark and Luke call Levi, and who had become one
of the twelve Apostles . ' .
Everyone agrees in thinking that Matthew wrote his Gospel
using the same sources as Mark and Luke. His narration is, as
we shall see, different on several essential points. In spite of this'
Matthew borrowed heavily from Mark's Gospel although the
latter was not one of Jesus's disciples (O. Culmann) '
Matthew takes very serious liberties with the text. We shall
see this when we discuss the Old Testament in relation to the
genealogy of Jesus whieh is placed at the beginning of his Gospel.
He inserts into his book deseriptions which are quite literally
incredible. This is the adjective used in the work mentioned above
by Father Kannengiesser referring to an episode in the Resur-
rection; the episode of the guard. He points out the improbability
of the story referring to military guards at the tomb, "these
Gentile soldiers" who "report, not to their hierarchical superiors,
but to the high priests who pay them to tell lies". He adds how-
ever: "One must not laugh at him because Mattherv's intention
was extremely serious. In his own way he incorporates ancient
data from the oral tradition into his written work. The scenario
is nevertheless worthy of Jesus Christ Supersiar."'
Let us not forget that this opinion on Matthew comes from
an eminent theologian teaching at the Catholic Institute of P*ris
(Institut Catholique de Paris).
Matthew relates in his narration the events accompanying the
death of Jesus' They are another example of his imaS:ination'
"And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from
top to bottom; and the earth shook, and the rocks'were split; the
tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had
fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of tombs after his
resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many"'
This pflssage from Matthew (27,61-53) has no corresponding
p*rt"g* in the other Gospels. It is difficult to see how the bodies
-ot
ttte saints in question could have raised from the dead at the
time of Jesus's d,eath (according to the Gospels it was on the eve
1. An American film which parodies the life of Jeeus'
ThePOUt'GOIpela.SOUt'ce,andHiltOfll 61
educatedJewturnedChristian;ahouseholder"whobringsout of
histreasurewhatisnewandwhatisold"asMatthewsays
(13,52).Thisisalongwayfromthecivil
servantatCaphar­
naum,whom
MarkandLukecallLevi, andwhohadbecomeone
ofthetwelve Apostles...
Everyoneagrees inthinkingthatMatthewwrotehisGospel
using
thesamesources asMarkandLuke.His narrationis,as
weshallsee,differentonseveralessentialpoints.
Inspiteofthis,
MatthewborrowedheavilyfromMark'sGospelalthoughthe
latterwasnotone ofJesus'sdisciples (0.Culmann).
Matthewtakesveryseriouslibertieswiththetext.Weshall
see
thiswhenwediscuss theOldTestamentinrelationto the
genealogyofJesuswhichisplaced atthebeginningofhisGospel.
Heinsertsintohisbookdescriptionswhich
arequiteliterally
incredible.
Thisistheadjectiveusedin theworkmentionedabove
by
FatherKannengiesserreferringtoanepisodeintheResur­
rection;theepisodeoftheguard.Hepointsouttheimprobability
ofthestoryreferringtomilitaryguardsatthetomb,"these
Gentilesoldiers"who"report,notto
theirhierarchicalsuperiors,
buttothehighpriestswhopaythemtotelllies".Headdshow­
ever:"One
mustnotlaughathimbecauseMatthew'sintention
wasextremelyserious.
Inhisownwayheincorporatesancient
datafromtheoraltraditionintohis writtenwork.Thescenario
isneverthelessworthy
ofJesusChristSuperslar,!"
LetusnotforgetthatthisopiniononMatthewcomesfrom
aneminenttheologianteaching attheCatholicInstituteofParis
(InstitutCatholiquede Paris).
Matthewrelatesinhis narrationtheeventsaccompanyingthe
death
ofJesus.They areanotherexampleofhisimagination.
"Andbehold,the curtainofthetemplewas tornintwo,from
toptobottom;andthe
earthshook,andtherocks·weresplit; the
tombsalsowereopened,andmanybodiesof thesaintswhohad
fallenasleepwereraised,andcomingoutoftombs
afterhis
resurrectiontheywentintotheholycity andappearedtomany."
ThispassagefromMatthew(27,51-53)has
nocorresponding
passageintheotherGospels.
Itisdifficulttoseehowthebodies
ofthesaintsinquestioncouldhaveraisedfromthedead
atthe
timeofJesus'sdeath (accordingtotheGospels itwasontheeve
1.AnAmericanfilmwhichparodies thelifeofJesus.

80. og THE BIETE, THE QUn AN AND SCTENCE
of the sabbath) and only emerge from their tombs after his res-
uveetion (according to the same sources on the day after the
Sabbath).
fire most notable improbabiliF is perhaps to be found in Mat-
thew. It is the most difficult to rationalize of all that the Gospel
authors claim Jesus said. He relates in chapter lz, Bg-40 the
episode concerning Jonah's sign:
Jesus was among the scribes and pharisees who addressed him
in the following terms:
"Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.,' But he answered
them, "An evil and adurterous generation seeks for a sign; but
no sign shall be given to it exeept the sign of the propheiJonah.
For as Jonah was three days and thre* night, in the iely of the
whale, so will the son of Man be three d"yr and three nishts in
the heart of the earth."
Jesus therefore proclaims that he will stay in the earth three
days and three nights. so Matthew, along with Luke and Mark,
place the death and burial of Jesus on the eve of the sabbath.
This, of course, makes the time spent in the earth three days
(treis 6mera,e in the Greek text), but this period ean only inelude
two and not three nights (treis nuktas initre Greek texi,;.
Gospel commerrtators frequenily ignore this episode.
'Father
Roguet nevertheless points out this improbability when he notes
that Jesus "only stayed in the tomb" three days (one of them
complete) and two nights. He adds however ttrat
.,it
is a set ex-
pression and really means three days". rt is disturbing to see
commentators reduced to using arguments that do not contain
any positive meaning. It would be much more satisfying intellec-
tually to say that a g:ross error such as this was the result of a
scribe's mistake !
Apart from these improbabilities, what mosily distinguishes
lt[atthew's Gospel is that it is the work of a Judeo-Christian
community in the process of breaking awey from Judaism while
remaining in line with the ord Testameni. From the point of
view of Judeo-christian history it is very important.
1Jfi 8fith-er part of'his Gospel Matthew again refers to this episode but
*ithout being precise about the time (ro, r-l). The same is true for
Luke (11,29-sz). we shall see rater on how in Dlark, Jesus is saia to
heve declared that no sign wourd be given to that s*rr*""ti* rlt*"t
8, 1t-12).
81 THEBIBLE, THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
oftheSabbath)andonlyemergefromtheirtombs
afterhisres­
urrection(accordingtothesamesourcesontheday
afterthe
Sabbath).
ThemostnotableimprobabilityisperhapstobefoundinMat­
thew.
Itisthemostdifficult torationalizeofallthattheGospel
authorsclaimJesussaid.Herelatesinchapter12,38-40the
episodeconcemingJonah's
sign:
Jesuswasamongthescribesandphariseeswhoaddressedhim
inthefollowing
terms:
"Teacher,wewishtoseeasignfromyou."
Butheanswered
them,
"Anevilandadulterousgenerationseeksforasign;
but
nosignshall begivento itexceptthesign oftheprophetJonah.
ForasJonahwas threedaysand threenightsinthebelly ofthe
whale,sowilltheSonofMan bethreedaysandthreenightsin
the
heartoftheearth."
Jesusthereforeproclaims thathewillstayintheearththree
daysandthreenights.SoMatthew,alongwithLukeandMark,
placethedeathandburial
ofJesusontheeve oftheSabbath.
This,ofcourse,makesthetimespentinthe
earththreedays
(treiBemeras intheGreek text),butthisperiodcanonlyinclude
twoandnotthreenights
(treisnuktasintheGreektext
l
).
Gospelcommentatorsfrequentlyignorethisepisode.
Father
Roguetneverthelesspointsoutthisimprobabilitywhenhenotes
thatJesus"onlystayedinthetomb"threedays(oneofthem
complete)andtwonights.Headdshowever
that"itisasetex­
pressionandreallymeansthreedays".
Itisdisturbingtosee
commentatorsreducedtousingarguments
thatdonotcontain
anypositivemeaning.
Itwouldbemuchmoresatisfyingintellec­
tuallytosay
thatagrosserrorsuchasthiswastheresult ofa
scribe'smistake!
Apartfromtheseimprobabilities, whatmostlydistinguishes
Matthew'sGospelis
thatitistheworkofaJudeo-Christian
community
intheprocessofbreakingawayfromJudaismwhile
remaininginlinewiththe
OldTestament.Fromthepointof
view
ofJudeo-Christianhistory itisveryimportant.
1.InanotherpartofhisGospelMatthewagainreferstothisepisodebut
withoutbeingpreciseaboutthetime(16,1-4).Thesameistruefor
Luke(11,29-32).We shallseelateronhowin Mark,Jesusissaidto
havedeclaredthatnosignwouldbe giventothatgeneration(Mark
8,11-12).

81. Tlu tow Gorllrh. $orroar nd nfffir.V
THE GOSPEL ACCOIf,.ING TO MANK
This is the shortest of the four Gospels. It is also the oldest'
but in spite of this it is not a book written by an apostle. At best
it was written by an apostle's disciple.
O. Culmann has written ttrat he does not consider Msrk to be
s disciple of Jesus. The author nevertheless points out, to those
who have misgivings shut the ascription of this Gospel to the
Apostle Mark, that "Matthew and Luke would not have used thie
Gospel in the way they did had they not known that it was indeed
based on the teachings of an apostle". This argument is in no
way decisive. O. Culmann backs up the reseruations he expresses
by saying that he frequently quotes from the New Testament the
sayings of a certain
'John
nicknamed Mark'. These quotations
do not however mention the name of a Gospel author, and the
text of Mark itself does not name any author.
The paucity of information on this point has led commentators
to dwell on details thst seem rsther extravagant: using the prer
text, for example, that Mark wss the only evangelist to relate
in his deseription of the Passion the story of the young man who
had nothing but a linen cloth about his body and, when seized,
left the linen cloth and ran away naked (Mark t4, 6L-62) ' they
conclude that the young men must have been Mark, "the faithful
disciple who tried to follow the teacher" (Ecumenical Transla-
tion). Other commentators see in this "personal memory a sign
of authenticity, en anonymous signature", which "proves that
he was an eyewitness" (O. Culmann).
O, Culmann considers that "m&ny turns of phrase corroborate
the hypothesis that the author was of Jewish origin," but the
presence of Latin expressions might suggest that he had written
his Gospel in Rome. "He addresses himself moreover to Chris:'
tians not living in Palestine and is careful to explain the Aramic
expressions he uses."
Tradition has indeed tended to see Mark as Peter's companion
in Rome. It is founded on the final section of Peter's first letter
(always supposing that he was indeed the author). Peter wrote in
his letter: "The community which is at Babylon, which is like-
wise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark." "By
Babylon, what is probably meant is Rome" we read in the com-
mentary to the Ecumenical Translation. From this, the com-
TileFourCuper..SourcaadHiatorri 83
THEGOSPELACCORDINC TOMAlU<
ThisistheshortestofthefourGospels.Itisalsotheoldest,
butinspiteofthisitisnotabookwrittenbyanapostle.Atbest
itwaswrittenbyanapostle'sdisciple.
O.CulmannhaswrittenthathedoesnotconsiderMark tobe
adiscipleofJesus.Theauthorneverthelesspointsout, tothose
whohavemisgivingsabout
theascriptionofthisGospeltothe
ApostleMark, that"MatthewandLukewouldnothaveused this
Gospelinthewaytheydid hadtheynotknown thatitwasindeed
basedon
theteachingsofanapostle".This argumentisinno
waydecisive.
O.Culmannbacksup thereservationsheexpresses
bysaying
thathefrequentlyquotesfrom theNewTestament the
sayingsofacertain 'JohnnicknamedMark'.Thesequotations
do
nothowevermention thenameofaGospelauthor, andthe
textofMarkitselfdoes notnameanyauthor.
Thepaucity
ofinformationon thispointhasledcommentators
todwellondetails
thatseemratherextravagant:usingthepre­
text,
forexample,thatMarkwastheonlyevangelisttorelate
inhisdescriptionofthePassionthestory oftheyoung manwho
hadnothing
butalinenclothabouthisbodyand,whenseized,
leftthelinencloth andranawaynaked (Mark14,51-52),they
conclude
thattheyoungmanmusthavebeenMark, "thefaithful
disciplewho triedtofollowtheteacher"(EcumenicalTransla­
tion).Othercommentatorssee inthis"personalmemoryasign
ofauthenticity,ananonymoussignature",which"proves that
hewasaneyewitness" (0.Culmann).
O.Culmannconsiders that"manyturnsofphrasecorroborate
thehypothesisthattheauthorwasofJewishorigin," butthe
presenceofLatinexpressionsmightsuggest thathehadwritten
hisGospelinRome. "Headdresseshimselfmoreoverto Chris~ ..
tiansnotlivinginPalestineandiscarefultoexplain theAramic
expressiansheuses."
Tradition
hasindeedtended toseeMarkas Peter'scompanion
inRome.Itisfoundedon thefinalsection ofPeter'sfirstletter
(alwayssupposing thathewasindeedthe author).Peterwrotein
hisletter:"Thecommunitywhichis atBabylon,whichislike­
wisechosen,sendsyou
greetings;andsodoesmysonMark." "By
Babylon,whatisprobably meantisRome"wereadinthecom­
mentar~ totheEcumenicalTranslation. Fromthis,thecom-

82. U THE BIBI,q THE QUn?N AND SCIENCE
mentators then imagine themselves authorized to conelude that
Mark, who was supposed to have been with
peter
in Rome, was
the Evangelist . . .one wonders whether it 'fuas
not the same line
of reasoning that led Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis in circa 160
4.D., to ascribe this Gospel to Mark as
.peter's
interpreter' and
the possible collaborator of
paul.
seen from this point of view, the composition of Mark's Gospel
could be placed after Peter's death, i.e. at between 66 and ?0 A.D.
for the Ecumenical rranslation and circa ?0 A.D. for o. Culmann.
The text itself unquestionably r€veals a major flaw; it is writ-
ten with a total disregard to chronology. Mark thereiore plaees,
at the beginning of his narration (1, 16-20), the episode of tt*
four fishermen whom Jesus leads to follow him by simply saying
"I will make you become fishers of men", though th;i do not
even know Him. The evangerist shows, among other ihingr, ,
complete lack of plausibility.
As Father Roguet has said, Mark is
'a
clumsy writer,,
.the
weakest of *ll the evangelists'; he hardly knows how to write a
nerrative. The commentator reinforces his observation by quot-
ing a passag:e sbout how the twelve Aposfles were selected.
Here is the literal translation:
"And he went up into the hills, and called to him those whom
he desired; and they came to him. And he made that the twelve
were to be with him, and to be sent out to preach and have au-
thority to cast out demons; and he made the twelve and imposed
the name Simon on Peter" (Mark, g,
18-16).
He contradicts Matthew and Luke, as has already been noted
above, with regard to the sign of Jonah. on the subject of signs
grven by Jesus to men ln the course of Iris mission Mark (g,
11-18) describes an episode that is hardly credible:
"The Pharisees came and began to argue with him, seeking
from him a sign from heaven, to test him. And he sighed deeply
in his spirit, and said,
'why
does this generation seek a sign?
Truly, I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation.' And
he left them, and getting into the boat again he departed to the
other side."
There can be no doubt that this is an affirmation coming from
Jesus Himself about his intention not to commit any act which
might appear supernatural. Therefore the commentators of the
THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
mentatorsthenimaginethemselvesauthorizedtoconclude that
Mark,whowassupposedtohavebeenwith PeterinRome,was
theEvangelist...Onewonderswhether itwasnotthesameline
ofreasoningthatledPapias,Bishop ofHierapolisincirca150
A.D.,toascribethisGospelto
MarkasIPeter'sinterpreter'and
thepossiblecollaborator ofPaul.
Seenfrom
thispointofview,thecompositionofMark'sGospel
eouldbeplaced
afterPeter'sdeath,Le.atbetween65and70A.D.
fortheEcumenicalTranslationandcirca 70A.D.for O.Culmann.
The
textitselfunquestionablyrevealsa majorflaw;itiswrit­
tenwithatotaldisregardtochronology.Markthereforeplaces,
atthebeginningofhisnarration(1,16-20),theepisodeof the
fourfishermenwhomJesusleadstofollowhimbysimplysaying
"Iwillmakeyoubecomefishers ofmen",thoughthey donot
evenknowHim.Theevangelistshows,amongotherthings,a
completelack
ofplausibility.
As
FatherRoguethassaid,Markislaclumsywriter','the
weakest
ofalltheevangelists';he hardlyknowshowto writea
narrative.Thecommentatorreinforceshisobservationbyquot­
ingapassageabouthowthetwelveApostleswereselected.
Hereis
theliteraltranslation:
"Andhewentupinto thehills,andcalledtohimthosewhom
hedesired;
andtheycametohim.Andhemade thatthetwelve
wereto
bewithhim,andtobesentouttopreachandhaveau­
thoritytocastoutdemons;andhemadethetwelveandimposed
thenameSimonon Peter"(Mark,3,13-16).
HecontradictsMatthew andLuke,ashasalreadybeennoted
above,
withregardtothesign ofJonah.Onthesubjectofsigns
givenbyJesustomen
inthec<lurseofHismissionMark(8,
11-18)describes
anepisodethatishardlycredible:
"ThePhariseescame andbeganto arguewithhim,seeking
fromhimasignfromheaven,to
testhim.Andhesigheddeeply
inhisspirit,andsaid,'Whydoesthisgenerationseekasign?
Truly,
Isaytoyou,nosignshall begivento thisgeneration.'And
heleftthem,andgettingintotheboatagainhedepartedtothe
otherside."
Therecan
benodoubtthatthisisanaffirmationcomingfrom
JesusHimselfabouthisintentionnottocommitany actwhich
mightapPearsupernatural.Thereforethecommentators ofthe

83. Tlw Fow Goqeb. Sornces and Hhtosg 65
Ecumenical Translation, who are surprised that Luke says Jesus
will only give one sign (the sign of Jsnah; see Matthew's Gospel),
consider it
'paradoxical'
that Mark should say "no sign shall be
given to this generation" seeing, 8s they note, the "miracles that
Jesus himself gives as a sign" ( Luke 7 ,22 and 1 1'20 ) -
Mark's Gospel as a whole is officially recognised as being
eanonic. All the same, the final section of Mark's Gospel (16'19-
20) is considered by modern authors to have been tacked on to
the basic work: the Ecumenical Translation is quite explicit
about this.
This final section is not contained in the two oldest complete
manuscripts of the Gospels, the Coder Vaticanus and lhe Codex
Sirnitieus that date from the Fourth century A.D. O. Culmann
notes on this subiect that: "More recent Greek manuscripts and
certain versions at this point added a conclusion on appearances
which is not drawn from Mark but from the other Gospels." In
fact, the verrsions of this added ending are very numerous. In the
texts there are long and short versions (both are reproduced in
the Bible, Revised Standard Version, 1952). Sometimes the long
version has some additional material.
Father Kannengiesser makes the following comments on the
ending: "The last verses must have been surpressed when his
work was offieially received (or the popular version of it) in the
community that guaranteed its validity. Neither Matthew, Luke
ot t fortior"a John saw the missing section. Nevertheless, the gap
was unacceptable. A long time afterwards, when the writings of
Matthew, Luke and John, all of them similar, had been in circula-
tion, a worthy ending to Mark was composed. Its elements were
taken from sources throughout the other Gospels. It would be
easy to recognise the pieces of the puzzle by enumerating Mark
(16,9-20). One would gain a more concrete idea of the free wsy
in which the literary genre of the evangelic narration was han-
dled until the beginnings of the Second century A'D'"
what a blunt
gdmission is provided for us here, in the thoughts
of a great theologian, that human manipulation exists in the texts
of the Scriptures !
TheFOUf'GoapelB.SouFceBandHiBtOf'!/ 65
EcumenicalTranslation,who aresurprisedthatLukesaysJesus
willonlygiveonesign
(thesignof Jonah;seeMatthew'sGospel),
consider
it'paradoxical'thatMarkshouldsay"nosignshall be
giventothisgeneration"seeing,astheynote,the"miracles that
Jesushimselfgives asasign"(Luke 7,22and11,20).
Mark'sGospelasawholeisofficiallyrecognisedasbeing
canonic.
Allthesame,thefinalsection ofMark'sGospel (16,19­
20)isconsideredbymodernauthorstohavebeentackedonto
thebasicwork:theEcumenicalTranslationisquiteexplicit
aboutthis.
Thisfinalsectionisnotcontained
inthetwooldestcomplete
manuscripts
oftheGospels,theCodexVaticanus andthe Codex
Sinaiticus
thatdatefrom th~FourthcenturyA.D.O.Culmann
noteson
thissubjectthat:"MorerecentGreekmanuscriptsand
certainversionsatthispointaddedaconclusiononappearances
whichis
notdrawnfromMark butfromtheotherGospels." In
fact,theversionsofthisaddedending areverynumerous. Inthe
texts
therearelongandshortversions(both arereproducedin
theBible,Revised StandardVersion,1952).Sometimesthelong
version
hassomeadditionalmaterial.
FatherKannengiessermakesthefollowingcommentson the
ending:"Thelastversesmusthavebeensurpressedwhenhis
work
wasofficiallyreceived (orthepopularversionof it)inthe
communitythatguaranteeditsvalidity.NeitherMatthew,Luke
orafortioriJohnsawthemissingsection.Nevertheless,the gap
wasunacceptable.Alongtimeafterwards,when thewritingsof
Matthew,Luke
andJohn,allofthemSImilar,hadbeen incircula­
tion,aworthyendingtoMarkwascomposed.
Itselementswere
takenfromsourcesthroughout theotherGospels. Itwouldbe
easytorecognisethepieces ofthepuzzlebyenumeratingMark
(16,9-20).Onewouldgainamoreconcreteideaof thefreeway
inwhichthe literarygenreoftheevangelic narrationwashan­
dleduntilthebeginningsoftheSecondcentury
A.D."
Whatabluntadmissionisprovidedforushere, inthethoughts
ofagreattheologian,thathumanmanipulationexists inthetexts
oftheScriptures!

84. 6S THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE
For o. culmann, Luke is a
'chronicler',
and for Father Kan-
nengiesser he is a
'true
novelist'. In his prologue to Theophilus,
Luke warns us that he, in his turn, following on from others who
have written accounts concerning Jesus, is going to write a nar-
rative of the same facts using the accounts and information of
eyewitnesses-implying that he himself is not one-including
information from the apostles' preachings. It is therefore to be
a methodical piece of work which he introduces in the following
terms:
"rnasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of
the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they
were delivered to us by those wlio from the beginning were eye-
witnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also,
having informed myself about all things from their beginnings,
to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Thlophilus,
that you may know the truth concerning things of which you
have been informed,"
From the very first line one can see all that separates Luke
from the'scribbler' Mark to whose work we have just referred.
Luke's Gospel is incontestably a literary work written in classical
Greek free from any barbarisms.
Luke was a cultivated Gentile convert to Christianity. His at-
titude towards the Jews is immediately apparent. As o. Culmann
points out, Luke leaves out Mark's most Judaic verses and high-
liehts the Jews' incredulity at Jesus's words, throwing into relief
his good relations with the samaritans, whom the Jews detested.
Matthew, on the other hand, has Jesus ask the aposiles to flee
from them. This is just one of many striking examples of the
fact that the evangelists make Jesus say whatever suits their
own personal outlook. They probably do so with sincere convic-
tion. They give us the version of Jesus's words that is adapted
to the point of view of their own community. How can one deriy
in the face of such evidence that the Gospels are
,combat
writ-
ings' or
'writings
suited to an occasion', as has been mentioned
already? The comparison between the general tone of Luke's
Gospel and lvlatthew's is in this respect a good demonstration.
who was Luke? An attempt has been made to identify him
with the physician of the same name referred to by
paul
in sev-
66 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
THEGOSPELACCORDING TO LUKE
ForO.Culrnann,Lukeisa'chronicler', andforFatherKan­
nengiesser
heisa'truenovelist'.InhisprologuetoTheophilus,
Luke
warnsusthathe,inhisturn,followingon fromotherswho
have
writtenaccountsconcerningJesus,isgoingto writeanar­
rativeofthesamefactsusing theaccountsandinformationof
eyewitnesses-implyingthathehimselfis notone-including
informationfromtheapostles'preachings. Itisthereforetobe
amethodicalpiece ofworkwhichheintroducesinthefollowing
terms:
"Inasmuchasmanyhaveundertakentocompilea narrativeof
thethingswhichhavebeenaccomplishedamongus, justasthey
weredeliveredtousbythosewho fromthebeginningwereeye­
witnesses
andministersoftheword,itseemedgoodtomealso,
havinginformedmyselfaboutall thingsfromtheirbeginnings,
to
writeanorderlyaccountforyou,mostexcellentTheophilus,
thatyoumayknowthetruthconcerningthings ofwhichyou
havebeeninformed."
Fromtheveryfirstlineonecanseeall thatseparatesLuke
from
the'scribbler'Marktowhoseworkwehave justreferred.
Luke'sGospelisincontestablya
literaryworkwritteninclassical
Greek
freefromanybarbarisms.
LukewasacultivatedGentileconverttoChristianity. Hisat­
titudetowardstheJewsisimmediatelyapparent.AsO.Culmann
pointsout,Lukeleaves
outMark'smostJudaicverses andhigh­
lights
theJews'incredulityatJesus'swords,throwingintorelief
hisgoodrelationswiththe Samaritan~, whomtheJewsdetested.
Matthew,on
theotherhand,hasJesusasktheapostlestoflee
fromthem.Thisis justoneofmanystrikingexamplesofthe
factthattheevangelistsmake Jesussaywhateversuits their
ownpersonaloutlook.Theyprobablydosowithsincereconvic­
tion.Theygiveus
theversionofJesus'swordsthatisadapted
tothepointofviewoftheirowncommunity.Howcanonedeny
inthefaceofsuchevidence thattheGospelsare'combatwrit­
ings'or'writingssuitedto anoccasion',ashasbeenmentioned
already?Thecomparisonbetween
thegeneraltone ofLuke's
GospelandMatthew'sis
inthisrespectagooddemonstration.
WhowasLuke?
Anattempthasbeenmadetoidentifyhim
withthephysicianofthesamename referredtobyPaulinsev-

85. TlnFowcorpeb' Sourcer uldil&rltry
gI
eral of his letters. The Ecumenical Translation notes that "sev-
eral commentators have found the medieal occupation of the
author of this Gospel confirmed by the precision with which he
describes the sick". This assessment is in fact exaggerated out
of all proportion. Luke does not properly speaking
'describe'
thingp of tt ir kind; "the vocabulary he uses is that of a cultivatcd
man of his time". There was a Luke who was Paul's travelling
companion, but was he the same person? O. Culmann thinks he
was.
The date of Luke's Gospel can be estimated according to sev-
ersl factors: Luke used Mark's and Matthew's Gospels. From
what we read in the Ecumenical Translation, it seems that he
witnessed the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by Titus's
armies in ?0 A.D. The Gospel probably dates from after this
time. Present-day critics situate the time it was written at circa
80-90 A.D., but several place it at an even earlier date.
The various narrations in Luke show important differences
when compared to his predecessofs. An outline of this has already
been given. The Ecumenieal Translation indicates them on pages
181 et sec. O. Culmann, in his book, The New Testament (Le
Nouveau Testament) page 18, cites descriptions in Luke's Gos-
pel that are not to be found anywhere else. And they are not
about minor points of detail.
The descriptions of Jesus's childhood are unique to Luke's Gos-
pel. Matthew describes Jesus's ehildhood differently from Luke,
and Mark does not mention it at all'
Matthew and Luke both provide different genealogies of Jesus:
the contradictions are so large and the improbabilities so great,
from a scientific point of view, that a special chapter of this book
has been devoted to the subject. It is possible to explain why
Matthew, who was addressing himself to Jews, should begin the
genealogy at Abraham, and include David in it, and that Luke,
as a converted Gentile, should want to go back even farther. We
shall see however that the two genealogies contradict eaeh other
from David onwards.
Jesus's mission is described differently on many points by
Luke, Matthew and Mark.
An event of such great importance to Christilns as the in-
stitution of the Eucharist gives rise to variations between Luke
TheFour GoIpeIa.SOUI'CB.andHiatory 87
eralofhisletters.TheEcumenicalTranslationnotes that"sev­
eralcommentatorshavefoundthemedicaloccupationof the
authorofthisGospelconfirmedbytheprecision withwhichhe
describesthesick".This assessmentis infactexaggeratedout
ofallproportion.Lukedoes notproperlyspeaking'describe'
things
ofthiskind;"thevocabularyheusesis thatofacultivated
manofhistime".TherewasaLukewhowasPaul'stravelling
companion,
butwashe thesameperson? O.Culmannthinks he
was.
Thedate
ofLuke'sGospelcanbeestimatedaccordingtosev­
eralfactors:LukeusedMark's andMatthew'sGospels. From
whatwereadintheEcumenicalTranslation, itseemsthathe
witnessed
thesiegeanddestructionofJerusalemby.Titus's
armies
in70A.D.TheGospelprobablydatesfrom afterthis
time.Present-daycritics
situatethetimeitwaswrittenatcirca
80-90A.D.,
butseveralplace itatanevenearlierdate.
Thevarious
narrationsinLukeshow importantdifferences
whencompared
tohispredecessors.Anoutline ofthishasalready
beengiven.TheEcumenicalTranslationindicatesthemonpages
181
etsec.O.Culmann,inhisbook,TheNewTestament(Le
NouveauTestament)page18,citesdescriptionsinLuke'sGos­
pel
thatarenottobefoundanywhereelse.Andthey arenot
aboutminorpointsofdetail.
ThedescriptionsofJesus'schildhood
areuniquetoLuke'sGos­
pel.MatthewdescribesJesus'schildhooddifferentlyfromLuke,
andMarkdoesnotmentionitatall.
Matthew
andLukebothprovidedifferentgenealogiesof Jesus:
thecontradictionsaresolargeandtheimprobabilitiessogreat,
fromascientificpoint
ofview,thataspecialchapterofthisbook
hasbeendevotedtothesubject. Itispossibletoexplainwhy
Matthew,whowasaddressinghimselftoJews,shouldbegin
the
genealogyatAbraham,andincludeDavidinit, andthatLuke,
asaconvertedGentile,should wanttogobackeven farther.We
shallseehowever
thatthetwogenealogiescontradicteach other
fromDavidonwards.
Jesus'smissionisdescribeddifferentlyonmanypoints
by
Luke,Matthew andMark.
Anevent
ofsuchgreatimportancetoChristians asthein­
stitutionof
theEucharistgivesrisetovariationsbetweenLuke

86. 08 THE BIBL4 firE QUn?N aND SCTENCE
and the other two evangelists.r Father Roguet notes in his book
Initi'ation to the Gospel (Initiation i l,Evangile) page ?8, that
the words used to institute the Eucharist are reported by Luke
(22,L9-24) in a form very different from the wording in ulttnew
(26,26'29) and in Mark (l4,zz-24) which is almost identical.
"on the contrary" he writes, "the wording transmitted by Luke
is very similar to that evoked by saint paul" (First Letter to the
Corinthians, 11,23-96) .
As we have seen, in his Gosper, Luke expresses ideas on the
subject of Jesus's Aseension which contr*a-i*t what he says in
the Acts of the Apostles. He is recognized as their author and
they form an integral part of the New Testament. In his Gospel
he situates the Ascension on Easter Day, and in the Acts forty
days later. we already know to what strange eommentaries this
contradiction has led christian experts in exegesis.
commentators wishing to be objective, such as those of the
Ecumenical rranslation of the Bible, have been obliged to recog-
nise as a general rule the fact that for Luke
,,the
**in preoccu-
pation was not to write faets corresponding to materi"l *..u-
racy". when Father Kannengiesser compares the descriptions in
the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke himself with the de-
seription of similar facts on Jesus raised from the dead by
paul,
he pronounees the following opinion on Luke:
,,Luke
is the most
sensitive and literary of the four evangelists, he has all the qual_
ities of a true novelist".
THE GOSPEL ACCONDINC TO IOHN
John's Gospel is radically different from the three others; to
such an extent indeed that Father Roguet in his book Initiation
to the Gospel (Initiation i I'Evangile), having commented on the
other three, immediately evokes a stariling image for the fourth.
He calls it
'
different world'. It is indeed a unique book; differ-
ent in the arrangement and choice of subject, description and
speech; different in its style, g:eography, chronology; there are
even differences in theological ouilook (o. Culmann). Jesus's
1. It is not possible to establish a comparison with John because he does
not refer to the institution of the Eueharist during the Last supper
prior to the Passion.
68 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'AN ANDSCIENCE
andtheothertwoevangelists.
1
FatherRoguetnotesinhisbook
InitiationtotheGospel (Initiationa]'Evangile)page75
1that
thewordsusedto institutetheEucharistarereportedbyLuke
(22,19-24)inaform
verydifferentfromthewordinginMatthew
(26,26-29)
andinMark(14,22-24)whichisalmostidentical.
"On
thecontrary"hewrites,"thewordingtransmittedbyLuke
isverysimilarto thatevokedby SaintPaul"(FirstLettertothe
Corinthians,11,23-25).
Aswehaveseen,inhisGospel,Lukeexpressesideason
the
subjectofJesus'sAscensionwhichcontradict whathesaysin
theActsoftheApostles.Heisrecognized astheirauthorand
theyform anintegralpartoftheNewTestament. InhisGospe]
hesituatestheAscensionon EasterDay,andintheActsforty
dayslater. Wealreadyknowto whatstrangecommentariesthis
contradictionhasledChristianexperts inexegesis.
Commentatorswishingtobeobjective,such
asthoseofthe
EcumenicalTranslation oftheBible,havebeenobligedtorecog­
nise
asageneralrule thefactthatforLuke"themainpreoccu­
pationwas
nottowritefactscorrespondingtomaterialaccu­
racy".When
FatherKannengiessercomparesthedescriptionsin
theActsoftheApostleswrittenbyLukehimselfwith thede­
scription
ofsimilarfactson Jesusraisedfromthedead byPaul,
hepronouncesthefollowingopiniononLuke:"Lukeis
themost
sensitive
andliteraryofthefourevangelists,hehasall thequal­
ities
ofatruenovelist".
THEGOSPELACCORDING TOJOHN
John'sGospelisradicallydifferentfromthe threeothers;to
such
anextentindeedthatFatherRoguetinhisbook Initiation
totheGospel(Initiational'Evangile),havingcommentedon the
otherthree,immediatelyevokesa startlingimageforthefourth.
Hecalls
it'differentworld'. Itisindeedauniquebook;differ­
entinthearrangementandchoiceofsubject,description and
speech;differentin itsstyle,geography,chronology; thereare
evendifferencesintheologicaloutlook (0.Culmann).Jesus's
1.Itisnotpossibleto establishacomparisonwithJohnbecausehedoes
notrefertotheinstitutionoftheEucharistduringtheLastSupper
priortothePassion.

87. Tlrc Fotn @h. Sowcet atrd Hiacorg 69
words are therefore differently recorded by John from the other
evengelists: Father Roguet notes on this that whereas the synop-
tics record Jesus's words in a style that is "striking, much nearer
to the oral style", in John all is meditation; to sueh an extent in-
deed that "one sometimes wonders if Jesus is still speaking or
whether His ideas have not imperceptibly been extended by the
Evangelist's own thoughts".
Who was the author ? This is a highly debated question and
extremely varying opinions have been expressed on this subject.
A. Tricot snd Father Roguet belong to a camp that does not
have the slightest misgivings: John's Gospel is the work of an
eyewitness, its author is John, son of Zebedee and brother of
James. Many details are known about this apostle and are set out
in works for mass publication. Popular iconography puts him
near Jesus, as in the Last Supper prior to the Passion. Who eould
imagine that John's Gospel was not the work of John the Apostle
whose figure is so familiar ?
The fact that the fourth Gospel was written so late is not a
serious argument against this opinion. The definitive version
was probably written around the end of the First century A-D.
To situate the time it was written at sixty years after Jesus
would be in keeping with an apostle who was very young at the
time of Jesus and who lived to be almost a hundred.
Father Kannengiesser, in his study on the Resurrection, ar-
rives at the eonclusion that none of the New Testament authors,
gave PaUI, can claim to have been eyewitnesses to Jesus's Resur-
rection. John nevertheless related the appearance to a number of
the assembled apostles, of which he was probably a member, in
the absence of Thomas (Z0,Lg-24), then eight days later to the
full group of apostles (20,25-29).
O. Culmann in his work The Neus Testamenf does not subscribe
to this view.
The Ecumenieal Translntion of the BiItIe states that the ma-
jority of critics do not accept the hypothesis that the Gospel was
written by John, although this possibility cannot be entirely
ruled out. Everything points however towards the fact that the
text we know today had several authors: "It is probable that the
Gospel as it stands today was put into circulation by the author's
disclples who added chapter 21 and very likely several annota-
ruFoureo.peq.Source,andHutory 69
wordsarethereforedifferentlyrecordedby Johnfromtheother
evangelists:FatherRoguetnotesonthis thatwhereasthesynop­
ticsrecordJesus'swords
inastylethatis"striking,muchnearer
totheoralstyle",inJohnallismeditation;tosuch anextentin­
deed
that"onesometimeswonders ifJesusisstillspeaking or
whetherHisideashavenotimperceptiblybeenextendedby the
Evangelist'sownthoughts".
Whowas
theauthor?Thisisahighlydebatedquestionand
extremely
varyingopinionshavebeenexpressedon thissubject.
A.
TricotandFatherRoguetbelongtoacamp thatdoesnot
havetheslightestmisgivings: John'sGospelisthework ofan
eyewitness,itsauthorisJohn,sonofZebedee andbrotherof
James.Manydetails
areknownaboutthisapostle andaresetout
inworksformasspublication.Populariconographyputshim
nearJesus,asintheLastSupperpriortothePassion.Whocould
imagine
thatJohn'sGospelwasnot theworkofJohntheApostle
whosefigureisso
familiar?
Thefactthatthe.fourthGospelwaswritten solateisnota
serious
argumentagainstthisopinion.Thedefinitiveversion
wasprobably
writtenaroundtheendofthe FirstcenturyA.D.
Tosituatethetimeitwaswrittenatsixtyyears afterJesus
wouldbe
inkeepingwith anapostlewhowasveryyoung atthe
time
ofJesusandwholivedtobealmostahundred.
FatherKannengiesser,inhisstudyontheResurrection, ar­
rivesattheconclusionthatnoneoftheNewTestamentauthors,
savePaul,canclaimtohavebeeneyewitnessestoJesus'sResur­
rection.
Johnneverthelessrelatedtheappearancetoanumber of
theassembledapostles,ofwhichhewasprobablyamember, in
the-absenceofThomas(20,19-24),theneightdays latertothe
fullgroupofapostles(20,25-29).
O.CulmanninhisworkTheNewTestament doesnotsubscribe
tothisview.
The
EcumenicalT1'anslation oftheBiblestatesthatthema­
jorityofcriticsdonotacceptthehypothesis thattheGospelwas
writtenbyJohn,althoughthispossibilitycannotbeentirely
ruledout.Everythingpointshowevertowardsthe
factthatthe
textweknowtodayhadseveral authors:"Itisprobablethatthe
Gospelas itstandstodaywas putintocirculationbytheauthor's
discipleswhoadded
chapter21andverylikelySEveralannota-

88. 70 THE BIBT F, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
tions (i.e. 4,2 and perhaps 4,1 ; 4,44; T,g7b; l1,Z; lg,BE). With
regard to the story of the adulterous woman (?,69-g,ll), *u""y-
one agrees that it is a fragment of unknown origin inserted later
(but nevertheless belonging to canonic scripture) ".
passage
19,35 appears &s a
'signature'
of an
.eyewitness'
(o. culmannJ,
the only explicit signature in the wtrole of Johnis Gospel; bui
commentators believe that it was probably added later.
O. Culmann thinks that latter additions are obvious in this
Gospel; such as chapter zl which is probably the work of a
,,dis-
ciple who may well have made slight alterations to the main body
of the Gospel".
It is not necessary to mention all the hypotheses suggested by
experts in exegesis. The remarks recorded here **a" by the
most eminent christian writers on the questions of the author-
ship of the fourth Gospel are sufficient to show the extent of the
confusion reigning on the subject of its authorship.
The historical value of John's stories has been eontested to a
great extent. The discrepancy between them and the other three
Gospels is quite blatant. o. culman offers an explanation for this;
he sees in John a different theological point of view from the
other evangelists. This aim "direcis the choice of stories from
the Logia' recorded, as well as the way in which they are repro-
duced . . . Thus the author often p"oiorg* the lines and makes
the historical Jesus say what the iTolv slpirit Itself revealed to
Him". This, for the exegete in question,'is the reason for the
discrepancies.
It is of course quite conceivable that John, who was writing
after the other evangerists, should have chosen certain stories
suitable for illustrating his own theories. one should not be sur_
prised by the fact that certain deseriptions contained in the other
Gospels are missing in John. The Ecumenical Translatr.on picks
out a certain number of such instances (page zgz). certain gaps
hardly seem credible however, like the fact th"t ttr" Institution of
the Eucharist is not deseribed. It is unthinkable that an episode
so basic to christianity, one indeed that was to be the rnainstay
of its liturgy, i"e. the mass, should not be mentioned by John, the
most pre-eminently meditative evangelist. The fact is, he limits
himself, in the narrative of the supper prior to the passion,
to
1. W""drl
70 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
tions(i.e.4,2 andperhaps4,1;4,44;7,37b;11,2; 19,35).
With
regardtothestoryoftheadulterouswoman(7,53-8,11),every­
oneagrees
thatitisafragmentofunknownorigininserted later
(butneverthelessbelongingtocanonic
Scripture)".Passage
19,35
appearsasa'signature'ofan'eyewitness'(0.Culmann),
theonlyexplicitsignatureinthewholeofJohn'sGospel;but
commentatorsbelieve thatitwasprobablyaddedlater.
O.Culmannthinks thatlatteradditionsareobviousinthis
Gospel;such aschapter21whichisprobably theworkofa"dis­
ciplewhomaywellhavemadeslightalterations
tothemainbody
oftheGospel".
Itisnotnecessarytomentionallthehypothesessuggestedby
experts
inexegesis.Theremarksrecordedheremadeby the
mosteminentChristian writersonthequestions oftheauthor­
ship
ofthefourthGospelaresufficienttoshow theextentofthe
confusionreigningon thesubjectofitsauthorship.
Thehistoricalvalueof John'sstorieshasbeencontestedtoa
greatextent.Thediscrepancybetweenthemandthe
otherthree
Gospelsisquiteblatant. O.Culmanoffers anexplanationforthis;
heseesinJohnadifferenttheologicalpoint ofviewfrom the
otherevangelists.Thisaim"directsthechoice
ofstoriesfrom
theLogia
1
recorded,aswell asthewayinwhichthey arerepro­
duced
...Thusthe authoroftenprolongsthelinesandmakes
thehistoricalJesus saywhattheHolySpiritItselfrevealedto
Him".This,
fortheexegeteinquestion,isthereason
forthe
discrepancies.
Itisofcoursequiteconceivable thatJohn,whowas writing
aftertheotherevangelists,shouldhavechosencertainstories
suitable
forillustratinghisowntheories.Oneshouldnotbesur­
prisedby
thefactthatcertaindescriptionscontainedinthe
other
GospelsaremissinginJohn.The Ecumenical Translationpicks
outacertainnumber
ofsuchinstances(page282).Certaingaps
hardlyseemcrediblehowever,likethefact
thattheInstitutionof
theEucharistisnotdescribed.Itisunthinkablethatanepisode
sobasictoChristianity,oneindeed
thatwastobethemainstay
of
itsliturgy,i.e.themass,shouldnotbementionedbyJohn,
the
mostpre-eminfmtlymeditativeevangelist.Thefactis,helimits
himself,inthe
narrativeofthesupper priortothePassion,to
1.Words.

89. Tln Forrl' Gotpeh. Sowcet ed Hhtotg 7l
simply describing the washing of the disciples' feet, the predic-
tion of Judas's betrayal and Peter's denial.
In contrast to this, there are stories which are unique to John
and not present in the other three. The Ecumenical Translation
mentions these (page 2S3). Here again, one could infer that the
three authors did not see the importance in these episodes that
John saw in them. It is difficult however not to be taken aback
when one finds in John a description of the appearance of Jesus
ra,ised, from the deud, to his disciples beside the Sea of Tiberias
(John 21,1-14). The description is nothing Iess than the repro-
duction (with numerous added details) of the miracle catch of
fish which Luke (5,1-11) presents as an episode that oceurred
duri,ng ,Iesus's lif e.Inhis description Luke alludes to the presence
of the Apostle John who, as tradition has it, was the evangelist.
Since this description in John's Gospel forms part of chapter 21,
agreed to be a later addition, one can easily imagine that the
reference to John's name in Luke could have led to its artificial
inclusion in the fourth Gospel. The necessity of transforming a
description from Jesus's life to a posthumous description in no
way prevented the evangelical text from being manipulated.
Another important point on which John's Gospel differs from
the other three is in the duration of Jesus's mission. Mark, Mat-
thew and tuke place it over a period of one year. John spreads
it over two years. O. Culmann notes this fact. On this subject the
Ecumenical Translation expresses the following :
"The synoptics describe a long period in Galilee followed by a
march that was more or less prolonged towards Judea, and finally
a brief stay in Jerusalem. John, on the other hand, describes fre-
quent journeys from one area to another and mentions a long
stay in Judea, especially in Jerusalem (1,L9-51 ; 2,13-8,36; 5,1-
47; L4,20-31). He mentions several Passover celebrations (2'13;
5,1 ; 6,4; 11,55) and thus suggests a ministry that lasted more
than two years".
Which one of them should one believe-Mark, Matthew, Luke
or John?
SOURCES OF THE GOSPELS
The general outline that has been given here of the Gospels
and which emerges from a critical examination of the texts tends
71
simplydescribing thewashingofthedisciples'feet, thepredic­
tion
ofJudas'sbetrayalandPeter'sdenial.
Incontrasttothis,therearestorieswhich areuniquetoJohn
andnotpresentintheotherthree.TheEcumenicalTranslation
mentionsthese(page283). Hereagain,onecould inferthatthe
threeauthorsdidnotseetheimportanceintheseepisodes that
Johnsawinthem.Itisdifficulthowever nottobetakenaback
whenonefinds
inJohnadescriptionoftheappearanceofJesus
raised
fromthedeadtohisdisciplesbeside theSeaofTiberias
(John21,1-14).Thedescriptionis nothinglessthantherepro­
duction
(withnumerousaddeddetails) ofthemiraclecatch of
fishwhichLuke(5,1-11) presentsasanepisodethatoccurred
during
Jesus'slife.InhisdescriptionLukealludes tothepresence
oftheApostleJohnwho,astraditionhasit,wastheevangelist.
Since
thisdescriptioninJohn'sGospelforms partofchapter21,
agreedtobea
lateraddition,one caneasilyimagine thatthe
referenceto John'snameinLukecouldhaveledto itsartificial
inclusion
inthefourthGospel.Thenecessityof transforminga
description
fromJesus'slifetoaposthumousdescription inno
wayprevented
theevangelicaltextfrombeingmanipulated.
Another
importantpointonwhich John'sGospeldiffers from
theotherthreeisinthedurationofJesus'smission.Mark,Mat­
thewandLukeplace itoveraperiod ofoneyear.Johnspreads
itovertwoyears. O.Culmannnotes thisfact.On thissubjectthe
EcumenicalTranslationexpressesthefollowing:
"Thesynopticsdescribealongperiod inGalileefollowed bya
marchthatwasmore orlessprolongedtowardsJudea, andfinally
a
briefstayinJerusalem.John,on theotherhand,describes fre­
quentjourneysfromone areatoanotherandmentionsalong
stayinJudea,especially inJerusalem(1,19-51;2,13-3,36;5,1­
47;14,20-31).
HementionsseveralPassovercelebrations(2,13;
5,1;6,4;11,55)
andthussuggestsa ministrythatlastedmore
thantwoyears".
Whichone
ofthemshouldone believe-Mark,Matthew,Luke
orJohn?
SOURCESOFTHEGOSPELS
Thegeneraloutline thathasbeengiven hereoftheGospels
andwhichemergesfromacriticalexamination ofthetextstends

90. 72 TIIE BIBT,E, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
to maku one think of a literature which is
,,disjointed,
with a
plan that lacks continuity" and
,'seemingly
insuperahle contra-
dictions". ?hese are the terms used in the judgement passed on
them by the commentators of the Ecumenical Translation of the
Bible.It is importan't to refer to their authority because the con-
sequences of an appraisat of this subject are extremely serioug.
It has already been seen how a few notions concerning the re-
Iigious history of the tirne when the Gospels were written helped
to explaln certain disconcerting aspects of this literature ap-
parent to the thoughtful reader. It is necessary to continue, how_
ever' and ascertain what present-day works can tell us about the
sources the Evangelists drew on when writing their texts. It is
also interesting to see whether the history of the texts once they
were established can help to explain certain aspects they present
today.
The problem of sources \ilas approaehed in a very simplistic
fashion at the time of the Fatheis of the church. In the'early
centuries of christianity, the only source available was the Gos-
pel that the complete manuscripts provided first, i.e. Matthew,s
Gospel. The problem of sources only concerned Mark and Luke
beeause John eonstituted a quite separate case. saint Augustine
held that Mark, who appears second in the traditional order of
presentation, had been inspired by Matthew and had summarized
his work. He further considered that Luke, who comes third in
tfte manuscripts, had used data from both; iri. prologue suggests
this, and has already been diseussed
The experts in exegesis at this per.iod were as able as we are
to estimate the degree of corroboration between the texts and find
a large number of verses common to two or three synoptics.
Today, the commentators of the Eeumenical rranslatiin of the
Bible provide the following figures:
verses common to all three synoptics ___--_---___.- ---..--Bg0
verses common to Mark and Matthew ..-_-_---1?g
verses common to Mark and Luke ---__-- _ _ 100
verses common to Matthew and Luke 230
The verses unique to each of the first three Gospels are as fol-
Iows: Matthew 3S0, lllark EB, and Luke 800.
From the Fathers of the church until the end of the Eigh-
tcenth century A.D., one and a half millenia passed without any
71 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
tomak~onethinkofaliteraturewhichis"disjointed,witha
plan
thatlackscontinuity" and"seeminglyinsnperablecontra­
dictions".These
arethetermsusedinthejudgementpassedon
themby
thecommentatorsoftheEcumenicalTranslation ofthe
Bible.
Itisimportanttorefertotheirauthoritybecausethecon­
sequences
ofanappraisalofthissubjectareextremelyserious.
Ithasalreadybeenseenhowafewnotionsconcerningthere­
ligioushistory
ofthetimewhentheGospelswere writtenhelped
toexplaincertaindisconcertingaspects ofthisliteratureap­
parenttothethoughtfulreader. Itisnecessarytocontinue,how­
ever,andascertain
whatpresent-dayworkscantellusaboutthe
sources
theEvangelistsdrewonwhen writingtheirtexts.Itis
also
interestingtoseewhetherthehistory ofthetextsoncethey
wereestablishedcanhelptoexplaincertainaspectstheypresent
today.
Theproblem
ofsourceswasapproachedinaverysimplistic
fashion
atthetimeoftheFathersoftheChurch. Intheearly
centuries
ofChristianity,theonlysourceavailablewastheGos­
pel
thatthecompletemanuscriptsprovidedfirst, Le.Matthew's
Gospel.Theproblem
ofsourcesonlyconcernedMarkandLuke
because
Johnconstitutedaquite separatecase.SaintAugustine
held
thatMark,whoappearssecond inthetraditionalorderof
presentation,hadbeeninspiredbyMatthewandhadsummarized
hiswork.He
furtherconsideredthatLuke,whocomes thirdin
themanuscripts,hadused datafromboth;hisprologuesuggests
this,and
hasalreadybeendiscussed.
Theexpertsinexegesis
atthisperiodwere asableaswe are
toestimatethedegreeofcorroborationbptween thetextsandfind
alargenumber
ofversescommontotwo orthreesynoptics.
Today,
thecommentatorsoftheEcumenicalTranslation ofthe
Bible
providethefollowingfigures:
versescommontoallthreesynoptics .
__330
versescommontoMarkandMatthew 178
versescommontoMarkandLuke
._. 100
versescommontoMatthew
andLuke ._..__. 230
Theversesuniquetoeach
ofthefirstthreeGospels areasfol­
lows:Matthew330,Mark53,andLuke500.
FromtheFathersoftheChurchuntiltheend oftheEigh­
teenthcenturyA.D.,oneandahalfmilleniapassedwithoutany

91. TIu Forar, Goapch, Sotncet atrld Hhtory 73
new problems being raised on the sources of the evangelists:
people eontinued to follow tradition. It was not until modern
times that it was realized, on the basis of these data, how each
evangelist had taken material found in the others and compiled
his own specific narration guided by his own personal views.
Great weight was attached to actual collection of material for the
narration. It came from the oral traditions of the communities
from which it originated on the one hand, and from a common
written Aramaic source that has not been rediscovered on the
other. This written source could have formed a compact mass or
have been composed of many fragments of different narrations
used by each evangelist to construct his own original work.
More intensive studies in circa the last hundred years have led
to theories which are more detailed and in time will become even
more complicated. The first of the modern theories is the so-called
'Holtzmann
Two Sources Theory', ( 1863 ) . O. Culmann and the
Ecumenical Translation explain that, according to this theory,
Matthew and Luke may have been inspired by Mark on the one
hand and on the other by a common document which has since
been lost. The first two moreover each had his own sources, This
leads to the following diagram:
Mark Comtnon Document
Matthcw's own Luke- .Luke'e ou)n Eourccs
Culmann criticises the above on the following points:
1. Mark's work, used by both Luke and Matthew, was prob-
ably not the author's Gospel but an earlier version.
2. The diagram does not lay enough emphasis on the oral
tradition. This appears to be of paramount importance be-
cause it alone preserved Jesus's words and the descriptions
of his mission during a period of thirty or forty years'
as each of the Evangelists was only the spokesman for
the Christian community which wrote down the oral tra'
dition.
TheFourGOBpez..Source,and HiatOf'!/ 73
newproblemsbeingraisedonthesourcesof theevangelists:
peoplecontinued
tofollowtradition. Itwasnotuntilmodern
times
thatitwasrealized,on thebasisofthesedata,howeach
evangelisthadtakenmaterialfound
intheothersandcompiled
hisownspecific
narrationguidedbyhisownpersonalviews.
Greatweightwasattached toactualcollectionof materialforthe
narration.Itcamefromtheoraltraditionsofthecommunities
fromwhich
itoriginatedon theonehand,andfromacommon
writtenAramaicsource thathasnotbeenrediscoveredonthe
other.This
writtensourcecouldhaveformedacompactmass or
havebeencomposedofmany fragmentsofdifferentnarrations
usedbyeachevangelisttoconstructhisownoriginalwork.
Moreintensivestudies
incircathe lasthundredyearshaveled
totheorieswhich aremoredetailed andintimewillbecomeeven
morecomplicated.Thefirst
ofthemoderntheoriesis theso-called
'HoltzmannTwoSourcesTheory',(1863).
O.Culmannandthe
EcumenicalTranslationexplainthat,accordingto
thistheory,
Matthew
andLukemayhavebeeninspiredby Markontheone·
handandontheotherbyacommondocumentwhichhassince
beenlost.Thefirsttwomoreovereachhadhisownsources.This
leadstothefollowing
diagram:
Mark CommonDocument
Luke-Luke'sownsource,
Culmanncriticisestheaboveon thefollowingpoints:
1.Mark'swork,usedbybothLukeandMatthew,wasprob­
ablynot
theauthor'sGospelbutanearlierversion.
2.Thediagramdoesnotlayenoughemphasison theoral
tradition.Thisappearsto
beofparamountimportancebe­
cause
italonepreservedJesus'swords andthedescriptions
ofhismissionduringaperiodof thirtyorfortyyears,
aseach
oftheEvangelistswasonlythespokesman for
theChristiancommunitywhichwrotedowntheoraltra­
dition.

92. 71 THE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
This is how it is possible to conclude that the Gospels we pos-
sess today are a refleetion of what the early Christian communi-
ties knew of Jesus's life and ministry. They also mirror their
beliefs and theological ideas, of which the evangelists were the
spokesmen.
The latest studies in textual criticism on the sources of the
Gospels have elearly shown an even more complicated formation
process of the texts. A book by Fathers Benoit and Boismard,
both professors at the Biblical school of Jerusalem (lg?p-lg?B),
called the Sgnopsis of the Four Gospels (Synopse des quatres
Evangiles) stresses the evolution of the text in *iag*r p"""u"l to
the evolution of the tradition. This implies the conquences set
out by Father Benoit in his introduction to Father Boismard's
part of the work. He presents them in the following terms:
"(. . .) the wording and form of description that result
from a long evolution of tradition are not as authentic as
in the original. some readers of this work will perhaps be
surprised or embarrassed to learn that eertain of Jesus's
sayings, parables, or predictions of His destiny were not
expressed in the way we read them today, but were altered
and adapted by those who transmitted them to us. This may
come 8s a source of amazement and even scandal to those
not used to this kind of historical investigation."
The alterations and adaptations to the texts made by those
transmitting them to us were done in a way that Father Bois-
mard explains by means of a highly complex diagram. It is a
development of the so-ealled
'Two
Sour*** ttt*ory', and is the
product of examination and comparison of the texts which it is
not possible to summarize here. Tnose readers who are interested
in obtaining further details should consult the original work
published by Les Editions du Cerf,
paris.
Four basic documents-A, B, C and e_represent the original
sourcn.s of the Gospels (see general diagram). page
?6.
Document A comes from a Judeo-christian source. Matthew
and Mark were inspired by it.
Document B is a reinterpretation of document A, for use in
Pagan-cum-Christian churches: all the evangelists were inspired
by it except Matthew.
74 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Thisishow itispossibletoconclude thattheGospelswepos­
sesstoday
areareflectionofwhattheearlyChristiancommuni­
tiesknew
ofJesus'slifeandministry.Theyalso mirrortheir
beliefsandtheologicalideas,ofwhichtheevangelistswerethe
spokesmen.
The
lateststudiesintextualcriticismonthesources ofthe
Gospelshaveclearlyshown
anevenmorecomplicatedformation
process
ofthetexts.Abookby FathersBenoitandBoismard,
bothprofessors
attheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalem(1972-1973),
calledthe
Synopsis01theFourGospels (Synopsedesquatres
EvangiIes)stressestheevolution
ofthetextinstagesparallelto
theevolutionofthetradition.Thisimpliestheconquencesset
outby
FatherBenoitinhisintroductionto FatherBoismard's
partofthework.Hepresentsthem inthefollowingterms:
"(...)thewordingandformofdescription thatresult
fromalongevolutionoftradition
arenotasauthenticas
intheoriginal.Somereaders ofthisworkwillperhapsbe
surprised
orembarrassedtolearn thatcertainofJesus's
sayings,parables,
orpredictionsofHisdestinywerenot
expressed
inthewaywereadthemtoday, butwerealtered
andadaptedbythosewho
transmittedthemtous.Thismay
come
asasourceofamazementandevenscandaltothose
notusedtothiskind
ofhistoricalinvestigation."
Thealterationsandadaptationstothetextsmade bythose
transmittingthemtousweredoneinaway thatFatherBois­
mardexplainsbymeansofahighlycomplexdiagram. Itisa
developmentoftheso-called'TwoSourcesTheory',andisthe
product
ofexaminationandcomparisonofthetextswhich itis
notpossibletosummarizehere.Tnosereaderswho
areinterested
inobtainingfurtherdetailsshouldconsulttheoriginalwork
publishedbyLesEditionsduCerf,
Paris.
Fourbasicdocuments-A,B,CandQ-representtheoriginal
sources
oftheGospels(seegeneral diagram).Page76.
DocumentAcomesfromaJudeo-Christiansource.Matthew
andMarkwereinspiredbyit.
DocumentBisareinterpretationofdocument
A,forusein
Pagan-cum-Christianchurches:alltheevangelistswereinspired
byitexceptMatthew.

93. TlreFow Gntpcb, Sorlr.cr;t sndfl:iltor9 75
Documeut C inspired Mark, Luke and John.
Document Q constitutes the majority of sourees common to
Matthew and Luke; it is the
'Common
Document' in the
'Two
Sources' theory refened to earlier.
None of these basic documents led to the production of the
definitive texts we know boday. Between them and the final ver-
eion lay the interrrediate versions: Intermediate Matthew, Inter-
mediate Mark, Intermediate Luke and Intermediatc John. These
four intermediste documents were to lead to the final versions of
the four Gospels, as well as to inspire the final corresponding
versions of other Gospels. One only has to consult the diagram to
see the intricate relationships the author has revealed.
The regults of this scriptural research are of great importance.
They show how the Gospel texts not only have a history (to be
discussed later) but also a'pre-history', to use Father Boismard's
expression. Whst is meant is that before the final versions ap-
peared, they underwent alterations at the Intermediate Docu-
ment stage. Thus it is possible to explain, for example, how a
well-known story from Jesus's life, such as the miracle catch
of fish, is shown in Luke to be an event that happened during His
Iife, and in John to be one of His appearances after His
Resurrection,
The conclusion to be drawn from the above is thst rrhen we
read the Gospel, we e&n no longer be at all sure that we are read-
ing Jesus's word. Father Benoit addresses himself to the readers
of the Gospel by warning them and giving them the following
compensation: "ff the reader is obliged in more than one.pase to
grve up the notion of hearing Jesus's voice directly, he still hears
the volce of the Church and he relies upon it as the divinely
appointed interpreter of the Master who long ago spoke to us
on earth and who notry speaks to us in His glory".
How can one reconcile this formal statement of the inauthen-
ticity of certain texts with the phrase used in the dogmatic
constitution on Divine Revelation by the Second Vatican Council
assuring us to the contrary, i.e. the faithful transmission of
Jesus's words: "These four Gospels, which it (the Chureh) un-
hesitatingly confirrns are historically authentic, faithfully trans-
mit what Jesus, Son of God, actually did and taught during his
75
DocumentCinspiredMark,Luke andJohn.
Document
Qconstitutesthemajorityofsourcescommon to
MatthewandLuke;itisthe'CommonDocument' inthe'Two
Sources'theory
referredtoearlier.
None
ofthesebasicdocumentsledtotheproductionof the
definitivetextsweknowtoday.Betweenthemand thefinalver­
sionlaytheintermediateversions:IntermediateMatthew,Inter­
mediateMark,IntermediateLukeandIntermediateJohn.These
fourintermediatedocumentsweretoleadtothefinalversions of
thefourGospels,aswellastoinspirethefinalcorresponding
versions
ofotherGospels.Oneonlyhastoconsultthediagram to
seetheintricaterelationships theauthorhasrevealed.
Theresultsof thisscripturalresearch areofgreatimportance.
TheyshowhowtheGospeltextsnotonlyhaveahistory(to
be
discussedlater)butalsoa'pre-history',touse FatherBoismard's
expression.
Whatismeantis thatbeforethefinalversionsap­
peared,theyunderwentalterations
attheIntermediateDocu­
mentstage.Thus
itispossibletoexplain, forexample,how a
well-knownstoryfromJesus'slife,such asthemiraclecatch
offish,isshowninLuketo beaneventthathappenedduringHis
life,
andinJohntobeoneofHisappearances afterHis
Resurrection.
Theconclusion
tobedrawnfromtheaboveis thatwhenwe
readtheGospel,wecannolonger
beatallsurethatweareread­
ingJesus'sword. FatherBenoitaddresseshimselftothereaders
oftheGospelby warningthemandgivingthem thefollowing
compensation:
"Ifthereaderisobligedinmore thanone..caseto
giveup
thenotionof hearingJesus'svoicedirectly,hestillhears
thevoiceoftheChurchandhereliesupon itasthedivinely
appointed
interpreteroftheMasterwholongagospoketous
on
earthandwhonowspeakstousinHisglory".
Howcanonereconcile
thisformalstatementof theinauthen­
ticity
ofcertaintextswiththephraseusedin thedogmatic
constitutiononDivineRevelationbytheSecondVaticanCouncil
assuringusto
thecontrary,Le.thefaithfultransmission of
Jesus'swords:"ThesefourGospels,which it(theChurch)un­
hesitatinglyconfirms
arehistoricallyauthentic,faithfullytrans­
mitwhatJesus,Son ofGod,actuallydidand taughtduringhis

94. 76 THE BIBTE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
life among men for their eternal salvation, until the day when
he was taken up into the heavens" ?
It is quite clear that the work of the Biblical School of Jeru-
salem flatly contradicts the Council's declaration.
M. E. BOISMARD
SYffOPSIS OF THE FOAN @SPEf,S'
GENENAL DIAGNAI|,il
( 1) Synopse des quatre Evangiles
Documents A, B, C, A
-
Basic documents used in the compiling
of the t€xts.
: Intermediate version of the textIntermediate
76 THEBIBLE,THEQURtANANDSCIENCE
lifeamongmenfor theireternalsalvation,untilthedaywhen
hewastakenupintotheheavens"?
Itisquiteclear thattheworkoftheBiblicalSchool ofJeru­
salemflatlycontradictstheCouncil'sdeclaration.
M.E.BOISMARD
SYNOPSIS
OFTHEFOURGOSPELSl
GENERALDIAGRAM
(1)SynapsedesquatreEvangiles
Documents
A,B,C,Q=Basicdocumentsusedinthecompiling
ofthetexts.
Intermediate =Intermediateversionofthetext

95. Tlw Fow Goqeh. Sowcer atd Hitl,otg
HI'$'TONY OF THE TEXTS
One would be mistsken in thinking that onee the Gospels were
written they constituted the basic Scriptures of the newly born
Christisnity and that people referred to them the same way they
referred to the Old Testament. At that time, the foremost author-
ity was the oral tradition as a vehicle for Jesus's words and the
teaehings of the apostles. The first writings to circulate were
Paul's letters and they occupied a prevalent position long before
the Gospels. They'were, after all, written several decades earlier.
It has already been shown, that contrary to what certain com-
mentators are still writing today, before 140 A.D. there was no
witness to the knowledge that a collection of Gospel writings
existed. It was not until circa 1?0 A.D, that the four Gospels ac-
quired the status of canonic literature.
In the early days of Christianity, many writings on Jesus
were in circulation. They were not subsequently retained as being
worthy of authenticity and the Church ordered them to be
hidden, hence their name
'Apocrypha'.
Some of the texts of these
works have been well preserved because they "benefitted from
the fact that they were generally valued", to quote the Ecumen-
ical Translation. The same was true for the Letter of Barnabas,
but unfortunately others rvere "more brutally thrust aside" and
only fragments of them remain. They were considered to be the
messengers of error and were removed from the sisht of the
faithful. Works such as the Gospels of the Nazarenes, the Gospels
of the Hebrews and the Gospels of the Egyptians, known through
quotations taken from the Fathers of the Church, were neverthe-
less fairly closely related to the canonic Gospels. The same holds
good for Thomas's Gospel and Barnabas's Gospel.
Some of these apocryphal writings contain imaginary details,
the product of popular fantasy. Authors of works on the Apoc-
rypha also quote with obvious satisfaction passages which are
literally ridiculous. Passages such as these are however to be
found in all the Gospels. One has only to think of the imaginary
description of events that trfiatthew claims took place at Jesus's
death. It is possible to find passages lacking seriousness in all the
early writings of Christianity: One must be honest enough to ad-
mit this.
77
TheFourGcnpe&.Source,aradHiltory
HISTORYOFTHETEXTS
77
Onewouldbemistaken inthinkingthatoncetheGospelswere
writtentheyconstitutedthebasicScripturesof thenewlyborn
Christianityand
thatpeoplereferredtothemthesamewaythey
referred
totheOldTestament.Atthattime,theforemostauthor­
itywastheoraltraditionasavehicleforJesus'swordsandthe
teachings
oftheapostles.Thefirstwritingstocirculatewere
Paul'slettersandtheyoccupiedaprevalentpositionlongbefore
theGospels.Theywere,
afterall,writtenseveraldecadesearlier.
Ithasalreadybeenshown, thatcontrarytowhatcertaincom­
mentators
arestillwritingtoday,before140A.D.therewas no
witnessto theknowledgethatacollectionofGospelwritings
existed.
Itwasnotuntilcirca170A.D. thatthefourGospelsac­
quiredthe
statusofcanonicliterature.
Intheearlydays ofChristianity,manywritingsonJesus
wereincirculation.Theywere
notsubsequentlyretain~d asbeing
worthy
ofauthenticityandtheChurchorderedthemtobe
hidden,hence
theirname'Apocrypha'.Someofthetexts ofthese
workshavebeenwellpreservedbecausethey"benefittedfrom
the
factthattheyweregenerallyvalued",toquotetheEcumen­
icalTranslation.Thesamewas
truefortheLetterofBarnabas,
butunfortunatelyotherswere"morebrutally thrustaside"and
only
fragmentsofthemremain.Theywereconsideredtobe the
messengersoferrorandwereremovedfromthe sightofthe
faithful.WorkssuchastheGospelsoftheNazarenes,theGospels
oftheHebrewsandtheGospelsoftheEgyptians,knownthrough
quotattonstakenfromthe
FathersoftheChurch,wereneverthe­
lessfairlycloselyrelatedtothecanonicGospels.Thesameholds
good
forThomas'sGospelandBarnabas'sGospel.
Someoftheseapocryphalwritingscontainimaginarydetails,
theproductofpopularfantasY.Authorsofworkson theApoc­
ryphaalsoquotewithobvioussatisfactionpassageswhich
are
literallyridiculous.Passagessuchasthese arehoweverto be
foundin alltheGospels.Onehasonlytothinkoftheimaginary
descriptionofevents
that:Matthewclaimstookplace atJesus's
death.
Itispossibleto findpassageslackingseriousnessinallthe
earlywritings
ofChristianity:Onemust behonestenoughtoad­
mitthis.

96. T8 fiIE BIBLE TIIE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
The abundance of literature concerning Jesus led the Church
to make certain excisions while the latter was in the process of
becoming organized. Perhaps a hundred Gospels wers sup-
pressed. Only four were retained and put on the offieial list of
neo-Testament writings making up what is called the
'Canon'.
In the middle of the Seeond century A.D., Marcion of Sinope
put heavy pressure on the ecclesiastic authorities to take a stsnd
on this. He was an ardent enemy of the Jews and at that time
rejected the whole of the Old Testament and everything in
writings produced after Jesus that seemed to him too close to
the Old Testament or to come from the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Marcion only acknowledged the value of Luke's Gospel because,
he believed Luke to be the spokesman of Paul and his writings.
The Church declared Marcion a heretic and put into its canon
all the .Letters of PauI, but included the other Gospels of
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They also added several other
works such as the Acts of the Apostles. The official list never
theless varies with time during the first centuries of Christianity.
For a while, works that were later considered not to be valid
(i.e. Apocrypha) figured in it, while other works contained in
today's New Testlment Canon were excluded from it at this
time. These hesitations lasted until the Councils of llippo Regius
in 393 and Carthage in 89?. The four Gospels always figurrcd in it
however.
One may join Father Boismard in regretting the disappear-
ance of a vast quantity of litersture declared apocryphal by the
Church elthough it was of historical interest. The above author
indeed gives it a place in his Synopsis of the Four Gospelt along-
side that of the official Gospels. He notes that these books still
existed in libraries near the end of the Fourth eentury A.D.
This was the eentury that saw things put into serious order.
The oldest manuscripts of the Gospels date from this period.
Documents prior to this, i.e. papyri from the Third century A.D.
and one possibly dating from the Second, only transmit frag-
ments to us. The two oldest parchment manuscripts are Greek,
Fourth century A.D. They are the Coden Vatieo,nus, preserved
in the Vatican Library and whose place of discovery is unknown,
and the Coder Sir:p;iti,an, which was discovered on Mount Sinai
78 TlIEBmLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
Theabundance ofliteratureconcerningJesusledtheChurch
tomakecertainexcisionswhile
thelatterwasintheprocess of
becomingorganized.PerhapsahundredGospelsweresup­
pressed.Onlyfourwereretained
andputontheofficiallist of
neo-Testamentwritingsmakingup whatiscalledthe'Canon'.
InthemiddleoftheSecondcenturyA.D.,Marcion ofSinope
putheavypressureontheecclesiasticauthoritiesto takeastand
onthis.Hewas
anardentenemyoftheJewsand atthattime
rejected
thewholeoftheOldTestament andeverythingin
writingsproduced afterJesusthatseemedtohimtooclose to
theOldTestamentortocomefromtheJudeo-Christiantradition.
MarciononlyacknowledgedthevalueofLuke'sGospelbecause,
hebelievedLuketo
bethespokesmanofPauland hiswritings.
TheChurchdeclaredMarcionahereticand
putintoitscanon
allthe
~Letters ofPaul,butincludedthe otherGospelsof
Matthew,Mark,LukeandJohn.Theyalsoaddedseveralother
workssuch
astheActsoftheApostles.Theofficial listnever
thelessvarieswithtimeduringthefirstcenturies
ofChristianity.
Forawhile,works thatwerelaterconsiderednotto bevalid
(i.e.Apocrypha)figuredinit,while
otherworkscontainedin
today'sNewTestamentCanonwereexcludedfrom
itatthis
time.Thesehesitationslasteduntil
theCouncilsofHippoRegius
in393andCarthagein397.ThefourGospelsalwaysfiguredin it
however.
Onemayjoin
FatherBoismardinregrettingthedisappear­
ance
ofavastquantity ofliteraturedeclaredapocryphalbythe
Churchalthough
itwasofhistoricalinterest.Theabove author
indeedgives itaplaceinhis SynopsisoftheFourGospels along­
side
thatoftheofficialGospels.Henotes thatthesebooksstill
existedinlibraries
neartheendofthe FourthcenturyA.D.
Thiswasthecentury
thatsawthings putintoseriousorder.
TheoldestmanuscriptsoftheG6spelsdatefromthisperiod.
Documents
priortothis,i.e.papyrifromtheThirdcenturyA.D.
andonepossiblydatingfromtheSecond,only
transmitfrag­
mentstous.Thetwooldestparchmentmanuscripts
areGreek,
FourthcenturyA.D.They aretheCodexVaticanus,preserved
intheVaticanLibraryandwhoseplaceofdiscoveryisunknown,
andtheCodexSinaiticus,whichwasdiscoveredonMountSinai

97. Tlle Font Gupeh. Sourcer and Hhtorg 7g
and is now preserved in the British Museum, London. The second
contains two apocryphal works.
According to the Ecumenical Translation, two hundred and
fifty other known parchments exist throughout the world, the
last of these being from the Eleventh century A.D. "Not all the
copies of the New Testament that have eome down to us are iden-
tical" however. "On the contr&ry, it is possible to distinguish
differences of varying degrees of importance between them, but
however important they may be, there is always a large number
of them. Some of these only concern differences of grammatical
detail, vocabulary or word order. Elsewhere however, differences
between manuscripts can be seen which afrect the meaning of
whole passages". If one wishes to see the extent of textual differ-
ences, one only has to glance through the iVounm Testamentum
Graeee.r This work contains a so-called
'middle-of-the-road'
Greek
text. It is a text of synthesis with notes containing all the varia-
tions found in the different versions.
The authenticity of a text, and of even the most venerable
manuscript, is always open to debate. The Coder Vaticanus is a
good example of this. The facsimile reproductions edited by the
Vatican City, 1965, contains an accompanying note from its edi-
tors informing us that "several centuries after it was copied
(believed to have been in circa the Tenth or Eleventh century),
a scribe inked over all the letters except those he thought
qrere a mistske". There are passages in the text where the orig-
inal letters in light brown still show through, contrasting visibly
with the rest of the text which is in dark brown. There is no
indication that it was a faithful restoration. The note states
moreover that "the different hands that corrected and anno-
teted the manuscript over the centuries have not yet been defini-
tively discerned; a certain number of corrections were undoubt-
edly made when the text was inked over." In all the religious
manuals the text is presented as a Fourth century copy. One hss
to go to sources at the Vaticsn to diseover that various hands
may have altered the text centuries later.
One might reply that other texts may be used for comparison,
but how does one ehoose between variations that change the
meaning? It is a well known fact that a very old scribds comec-
1. Nestla'Alend Pub. United Bible Societies, London, 1S?1'
TheFourGoapez,.Source.lindHiatory 79
andisnowpreserved intheBritishMuseum,London.Thesecond
containstwoapocryphalworks.
According
totheEcumenicalTranslation,twohundred and
fiftyotherknownparchmentsexistthroughout theworld,the
lastofthesebeingfrom theEleventhcenturyA.D. "Notallthe
copiesoftheNewTestament thathavecomedowntous areiden­
tical"however."Onthecontrary,
itispossibletodistinguish
differences
ofvaryingdegreesofimportancebetweenthem, but
howeverimportanttheymaybe,thereisalwaysalargenumber
ofthem.Some oftheseonlyconcerndifferences ofgrammatical
detail,vocabulary
orwordorder.Elsewherehowever,differences
betweenmanuscriptscan
beseenwhichaffect themeaningof
wholepassages".
Ifonewishestoseetheextentoftextualdiffer­
ences,oneonly
hastoglancethroughthe NovumTestamentum
Graece.
1
Thisworkcontainsaso-called'middle-of-the-road'Greek
text.
Itisatextofsynthesiswithnotescontainingall thevaria­
tionsfoundinthedifferentversions.
Theauthenticityofatext, andofeventhemostvenerable
manuscript,isalwaysopen
todebate.The CodexVaticanus isa
goodexample
ofthis.Thefacsimilereproductionseditedby the
VaticanCity,1965,contains anaccompanyingnotefrom itsedi­
torsinformingus that"severalcenturies afteritwascopied
(believed
tohavebeenincirca theTenthorEleventhcentury),
ascribeinkedoverallthelettersexceptthosehethought
wereamistake".There
arepassagesinthetextwheretheorig­
inallettersinlightbrownstillshowthrough,contrastingvisibly
withtherestofthetextwhichis indarkbrown.Thereisno
indication
thatitwasafaithfulrestoration.Thenotestates
moreover
that"thedifferenthands thatcorrectedandanno­
tatedthemanuscriptoverthecenturieshavenotyetbeendefini­
tivelydiscerned;acertainnumber
ofcorrectionswereundoubt­
edlymadewhen
thetextwasinkedover."Inallthereligious
manuals
thetextispresentedasa Fourthcenturycopy.One has
togotosourcesattheVaticantodiscover thatvarioushands
mayhavealtered
thetextcenturieslater.
One
mightreplythatothertexts maybeusedforcomparison,
buthowdoesonechoosebetweenvariations thatchangethe
meaning?Itisawellknown factthataveryoldscribe'scorrec-
1.Nestle-AlandPub.Unit.edBibleSocieties,London,1971.

98. 80 THE BIBI.4 THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
tion can leed to the definitive reproduction of the corrected text.
\il'e shall see further on how a single word in a passege from
John concerning the Paraclete radically alters its meaning and
eompletely changes its sense when viewed from a theological
point of view.
O. Culmann, in his book, The New Testarnenf, writes the fol-
Iowing on the subject of variations:
"Sometimes the latter are the result of inadvertant flaws: the
copier misses a word out, or conversely writes it twice, or a whole
section of a sentence is carelessly. omitted because in the manu-
script to be copied it appeared between two identical words.
Sometimes it is a matter of deliberate correetions, either the
copier has taken the liberty of
'correcting
the text according to
his own ideas or he has tried to bring it into line with a parallel
text in a more or less skilful attempt to reduce the number of
discrepaneies. As, little by little, the New Testament writings
broke away from the rest of early Christian literature, and came
to be regarded as lloly Scripture, so the copiers became more
and more hesitant about taking the same liberties as their
predecessors: they thousht they were copying the authentic
text, but in fact wrote down the variations. Finally, a copier
sometimes wrote annotations in the margin to explain an ob-
scure passage. The following copier, thinking that the sentence
he found in the margin had been left out of the passage by his
predecessor, thought it necessary to include the margin notes in
the text. This process often made the new text even more
obscure."
The scribes of some manuscripts sometimes took exceedingly
great liberties with the texts. This is the case of one of the most
venerable manuscripts after the two referred to above, the
sixth century coden Bezae Ca,nta,bri,giensis. The scribe prob-
ably noticed the difference between Luke's ancl Matthew's gene-
alogy of Jesus, so he put Matthew's genealogy into his copy of
Luke, but as the second contained fewer names than the first,
he padded it out with extra names (without balancing them up).
Is it possible to say that the Latin translations, such as Saint
Jerome's sixth century Vulgate, or older translations (V etw
Itala), or Syriae and Coptic translations are any more faithful
than the basic Greek manuscripts ? They might have been made
80 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANAND SCmNCE
tioncanleadtothedefinitivereproduction ofthecorrectedtext.
Weshallsee
furtheronhowasingleword inapassagefrom
JohnconcerningtheParacleteradically altersitsmeaningand
completelychanges
itssensewhenviewedfromatheological
point
ofview.
O.Culmann,inhisbook, TheNewTestament,writesthefol­
lowingon
thesubjectofvariations:
"Sometimesthelatteraretheresultof inadvertantflaws:the
copiermissesawordout, orconverselywrites ittwice,orawhole
section
ofasentenceiscarelessly.omittedbecause inthemanu­
scripttobecopied itappearedbetweentwoidenticalwords.
Sometimes
itisamatterofdeliberatecorrections, eitherthe
copierhastakentheliberty of·correctingthetextaccordingto
hisownideasorhehastriedtobringitintolinewithaparallel
textinamore orlessskilfulattempttoreducethenumber of
discrepancies.As,littlebylittle, theNewTestament writings
brokeawayfromthe restofearlyChristianliterature,andcame
to
beregardedasHolyScripture,sothecopiersbecamemore
andmorehesitantabouttakingthesamelibertiesas their
predecessors:they thoughttheywerecopying theauthentic
text,
butinfactwrotedown thevariations.Finally,acopier
sometimeswroteannotations
inthemargintoexplainanob­
scurepassage.Thefollowingcopier,thinking
thatthesentence
hefoundinthemarginhadbeenleftoutofthepassagebyhis
predecessor,thought
itnecessarytoinclude themarginnotesin
thetext.Thisprocessoftenmadethenew textevenmore
obscure."
Thescribes
ofsomemanuscriptssometimestookexceedingly
greatlibertieswiththetexts.Thisis thecaseofoneof themost
venerablemanuscripts
afterthetworeferredtoabove,the
SixthcenturyCodexBezaeCantabrigiensis. Thescribeprob­
ablynoticed
thedifferencebetweenLuke'sandMatthew'sgene­
alogyofJesus,sohe
putMatthew'sgenealogyintohiscopy of
Luke,butasthesecondcontainedfewernames thanthefirst,
hepaddeditoutwithextranames(withoutbalancingthem up).
Isitpossibletosay thattheLatintranslations,suchas Saint
Jerome'sSixthcenturyVulgate, oroldertranslations (Vetus
Itala),orSyriacandCoptictranslations areanymorefaithful
thanthebasicGreekmanuscripts?They mighthavebeenmade

99. Tlaa Fovt Gola,elr,. Sourcer ond Hhtwg
from manuscripts older than the ones referred to above and sub-
sequently lost to the present day. We iust do not know.
It has been possible to group the bulk of these versions into
families all bearing I certain number of common traits. Accord-
ing to O. Culmann, one can define:
-a so-called Syrian text, whose constitution eould have led to
the majority of the oldest Greek manuscripts; this text was
widety disseminated throughout Europe from the Sixteenth
century A.D. onwards thanks to printing; the specialists say that
it is probably the worst text.
-a so-called Western text, with old Latin versions and the Coden
Bezae Cantabri,giensis which is in both Greek and Latin ; accord-
ing to the Ecumenicel Translation, one of its characteristics is
a definite tendency to provide explanations, paraphrases' inaccu-
rate data and
'harmonizations'.
-the so-called Neutral text, eontaining the Coder Vaticanus and
the Coden Si,nai,tinus, is said to have a fairly high level of purity;
modern editions of the New Testament readily follow it, although
it too has its flaws' (Ecumenical Translation) .
All that modern textual criticism can do in this respect is to
try snd reconstitute "a text which has the most likelihood of
coming negr to the original. In any case, there can be no hope of
going back to the original text itself." (Ecumenical Translation)
TheFourGoJpeIB.Source,andHiatory
frommanuscriptsolder thantheonesreferredtoaboveandsub­
sequentlylost
tothepresentday.We justdonotknow.
Ithasbeenpossibletogroupthebulkoftheseversionsinto
familiesallbearingacertainnumberofcommon
traits.Accord­
ingtoO.Culmann,onecandefine:
-aso-calledSyriantext,whoseconstitutioncouldhaveledto
the
majorityoftheoldestGreekmanuscripts;this textwas
widelydisseminatedthroughoutEuropefromtheSixteenth
centuryA.D.onwardsthankstoprinting;thespecialistssay
that
itisprobablytheworsttext.
-aso-calledWesterntext, witholdLatinversionsandtheCodex
BezaeCantabrigiensiswhichisinbothGreekand
Latin;accord­
ingtotheEcumenicalTranslation,one ofitscharacteristicsis
adefinitetendencytoprovideexplanations,paraphrases,inaccu­
ratedataand'harmonizations'.
-theso-calledNeutraltext,containingtheCodexVaticanusand
theCodexSinaiticus,issaidtohaveafairlyhighlevelof
purity;
moderneditions oftheNewTestamentreadilyfollowit,although
ittoohasitsflaws'(EcumenicalTranslation).
All
thatmoderntextualcriticismcan dointhisrespectisto
tryandreconstitute"atextwhichhasthemostlikelihoodof
coming
neartotheoriginal.Inanycase,therecan benohopeof
goingbacktotheoriginaltextitself."(EcumenicalTranslation)

100. IY
The Gospels and
Modcrrr ScierrcG,
The Genealogies of Jesrrs.
The Gospels contain very few passages which give rise to a
confrontation with modern scientific data.
Firstly however, there are many descriptions referring to mir-
acles which hardly lend themselves to scientific comment. The
miraeles concern people-the healing of the sick (the insane,
blind, paralytic; the healing of lepers, resurrection of Lazarus) -
as well as the purely material phenomena that lie outside the
laws of nature (the description of Jesus walking on water that
held him up, the changing of the watOr into wine). sometimes
a natural phenomenom is seen from an unusual angle by virtue of
the fact that the time element is very short: the immediate calm-
ing of the storm, the instantaneous withering of the fig tree,
the miracle eatch of fish, as if all the fish in the sea had come
together at exactly the place where the nets were cast.
God intervenes in His omnipotent Power in all these episodes.
one need not be surprised by what He is able to achieve; by
human standards it is stupendous, but for Him it is not. This does
not at all mean that a believer should forget science. A belief in
divine miracles and in science is quite compatible: one is on a
divine scale, the other on a human one.
Personally, I am very willing to believe that Jesus cured a
leper, but I cannot accept the fact that a text is declared authen-
tic and inspired by God when I read that only twenty genera-
tions existed between the first man and Abraham. Luke says this
82
IV
ThEGo~pEI~ and
~odE..n ~t::iEn(:E.
Th~ GEnEilIOIiE~ ofJE~US.
TheGospelscontain veryfewpassageswhichgive risetoa
confrontationwithmodernscientificdata.
Firstlyhowever,therearemanydescriptionsreferringtomir­
acleswhich
hardlylendthemselvestoscientificcomment.The
miraclesconcern
people-thehealingofthesick(theinsane,
blind,
paralytic;thehealingoflepers,resurrectionofLazarus)­
aswellasthepurelymaterialphenomenathatlieoutsidethe
lawsofnature(thedescriptionofJesuswalkingon waterthat
heldhimup, thechangingofthewat~rintowine).Sometimes
a
naturalphenomenomisseen fromanunusualangleby virtueof
thefactthatthetimeelementis veryshort:theimmediatecalm­
ingofthestorm,theinstantaneouswitheringofthefigtree,
themiraclecatch offish,asifallthefishin theseahadcome
togetheratexactlytheplacewherethenetswerecast.
Godintervenesin
HisOmnipotentPowerinalltheseepisodes.
Oneneed
notbesurprisedbywhatHe i~abletoachieve; by
humanstandardsitisstupendous,butforHimitisnot.Thisdoes
notatallmeanthatabelievershould forgetscience.Abeliefin
divinemiracles
andinscienceisquitecompatible:one isona
divinescale,
theotheronahumanone.
Personally,Iam
verywillingtobelieve thatJesuscureda
leper,
butIcannotacceptthefactthatatextisdeclaredauthen­
ticandinspiredbyGodwhenI readthatonlytwentygenera­
tionsexistedbetween
thefirstmanandAbraham.Lukesaysthis
82

101. Tlw GoWb and Mdnnr Sclnrlao
8ll
in his Gospel (8, 23-28). we shall see in a moment the ressons
that show why iuke's text, like the Old Testament text on the
same theme, is quite simply a product of human imagination'
The Gosrcrr t}te tn. bo"'"tt)
giu" us thg same description of
Jesus's biological origins. The formation of Jesus in the materngl
uterus occurred in circumstances which lay outsiile the laws of
nature common to all human beings. The ovule produced by the
mother's ovary did not need to join with a spermatozoon'- yhich
should have come from his father, to form the embryo and hence
a viable infant. The phenomenon of the birth of a normal indi-
vidual without the fertilizing action of the male is called
'parthe-
nogenesis,. In the animal kingdom, parthenogenesis can.be ob-
served under certain conditions. This is true for various insects'
certain invertebrates and, very occasionally, a select breed of
bird. By way of experirnent, it has been possible, for example, in
certain mammal* if.*"le
rabbits), to obtain the beginnings of
a development of the ovule into an embryo at an extremely rudi-
mentary stage without any intervention of spermatozoon' It was
not possible to go any further however and an example of com-
plete parthenog"enesis, whether experimental or natural, is un-
known. Jesus is an unique ea$e. Mary was a virgin mother. she
preserved her virginity and did not have any children apart from
l*to*. Jesus is a biological exception'l
THE GENEALOGIES OF JESUS'
The two genealogies contsined in Matthew's and Luke's Gog-
pels give rise to p"Jbl**, of verisimilitude, and conformity with
scientific data, and hence authenticity. These problems are a
source of great embarassment to Christian commentators because
the latter refuse to see in them what is very obviously the prod-
uet of human imagination. The authors of the Sacerdotal text of
Genesis, Sixftr- cettlo"y 8.C., had already been in.spired by imag-
ination for ttreir genealogies of the first men' It again inspired
i]Tt-u C*prls sometimes refer to Jesus'g
'brothers'and'sist€rs' (Matth€w
ls,46-60
""a
rl-68; *rl* e,
f+i
i9rr1 ?,.1
T9,u'11]J *:S:::j:"*
ililr?"-r#J;;'irtpioi,
indeed sigsify biolosical brothers and rir
ters; they
""*
*ori pioUtUty a detective translation of the originrl
semitic worde which just mesn'kin'; in this inctsnce they were perbrpr
couging.
TheGoapelltmdModemScience
83
inhisGospel(3,23-28).Weshallsee inamomentthereasons
thatshowwhyLuke'stext,liketheOldTestament
textonthe
sametheme,isquitesimplyaproductofhumanimagination.
TheGospels(liketheQur'an)giveusthesamedescriptionof
Jesus'sbiologicalorigins.TheformationofJesus
inthematernal
uterusoccurred
incircumstanceswhichlayoutsiaethelaws
of
naturecommontoallhumanbeings.Theovuleproducedby
the
mother'sovarydidnotneedtojoinwithaspermatozoon,which
shouldhavecomefromhisfather,toform
theembryoandhence
aviableinfant.Thephenomenonofthe
birthofanormalindi­
vidualwithout
thefertilizingactionofthemaleiscaned'parthe­
nogenesis'.
Intheanimalkingdom,parthenogenesiscanbeob­
servedundercertainconditions.Thisis
trueforvariousinsects,
certaininvertebratesand,veryoccasionally,aselectbreedof
bird.Byway
ofexperiment,ithasbeenpossible,forexample,in
certainmammals(female
rabbits),toobtainthebeginningsof
adevelopmentof
theovuleintoanembryo atanextremelyrudi­
mentarystagewithoutanyinterventionofspermatozoon.
Itwas
notpossibletogoany
furtherhoweverandanexampleofcom­
pleteparthenogenesis,whetherexperimentalornatural,isun­
known.Jesusis
anuniquecase.Marywasavirginmother.She
preserved
hervirginityanddidnothaveanychildren
apartfrom
Jesus.Jesusisabiologicalexception.
l
THEGENEALOGIES OFJESUS.
ThetwogenealogiescontainedinMatthew'sandLuke'sGos­
pelsgiverisetoproblemsofverisimilitude,andconformity
with
scientificdata,andhenceauthenticity.Theseproblems
area
sourceof
greatembarassmenttoChristiancommentatorsbecause
thelatterrefusetoseeinthem whatisveryobviouslytheprod­
uctofhumanimagination.Theauthors
oftheSacerdotaltextof
Genesis,SixthcenturyB.C.,hadalreadybeeninspiredbyimag­
ination
fortheirgenealogiesof thefirstmen. Itagaininspired
1.TheGospelssometimes refertoJesus's'brothers'and'sisters'(Matthew
13,46-60and64-68;Mark6,1-6;John7,3and2,12).TheGreekworda
used,adelphoi andadelphai,indeed signifybiologicalbrothersandai...
ters;theyaremostprobablyadefective translationoftheoriginal
Semiticwordswhichjustmean'kin';inthisinstancetheywereperhaps
cousins.

102. 84
THE BTBLE, THE QUn'AN AND SCTENCE
Matthew and Luke for the data they did not take from th.e ord
Testament.
one must str-aight away note that the mare genearogies have
absolutely no relevanee to Jesus. were one to give a genealoHr to
Mary's only son, who was without a biologicat ratrrer, ii wourd
have to be the genealogy of his mother Mary.
Here is the text of the Revised standard version of the Bibre,
1952:
The genealogy according to Matthew is at the beginning of his
Gospel:
,,THE
BOOK OF THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST,
THE SON OF DAVID, THE SON OF ABRAHAM.
Abraham was the father of fsaac
fssac was the father of Jacob
Jecob was the fether of Judah and his brothers
Judah wes the father of perez
and Zerah by Tamar
Perez was the father of Hezron
Hezron was the father of Rarn
Ram was the father of Amminadab
Amminadab was the fsther of Nahshon
Nehshon was the father of Salmon
Salmon was the father of Boez by Rahab
Boaz was the father of Obed ti, n"ti-
Obed was the father of Jesse
Jene was the father of Devid the king
David was the father of solomon by th-e wife of uriah
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam
Rehobosm was the father of etijatr
Abijah was the father of Asa
Ate was the father of Jehoshaphat
Jehochaphat was the father of Joram
Jorsm was the father of Uzziah
Uzziah was the father of
jotnam
Jotham was the father of Ahaz
Ahaz was the fother of iezekiah
Ilezekiah war the father oi llarre"g"h
lflqnslreh was the father of A-os
Amol wes the father of iogiah
Jorirh wae the father of iechoniah and his brothers
at the time of the deportation to Babylon:
After the deportation to Babylon:
Jeehonieh war the father of Shealtiel
Sherltiel wal the father of Zerubbrbel
84 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
MatthewandLukeforthedatatheydidnottakefromtheOld
Testament.
Onemuststraightawaynotethatthemalegenealogieshave
absolutelynorelevance
toJesus.Wereonetogiveagenealogy to
Mary'sonlyson,whowas withoutabiologicalfather,itwould
havetobethegenealogyofhismotherMary.
HereisthetextoftheRevisedStandardVersionoftheBible,
1952:
Thegenealogyaccording toMatthewisatthebeginningofhis
Gospel:
"THEBOOKOFTHEGENEALOGY OFJESUSCHRIST,
THESONOFDAVID,THESONOFABRAHAM.
Abraham wasthefatherofIsaac
Isaac
wasthefatherofJacob
.Jacob wasthefatherofJudahandhisbrothers
Judah wasthefatherofPerezandZerahbyTamar
Perez wasthefatherofHezron
Hezron
wasthefatherofRam
Ram wasthefatherofAmminadab
Amminadab wasthefatherofNahshon
Nahshon
wasthefatherofSalmon
Salmon
wasthefatherofBoazbyRahab
Boaz wasthefatherofObedbyRuth
Obed wasthefatherofJesse
J.esse wasthefatherofDavidtheking
David wasthefatherofSolomonbythewifeof Uriah
Solomon wasthefatherofRehoboam
Rehoboam
wasthefatherofAbijah
Abijah wasthefatherofAsa
Asa
wasthefatherofJehoshaphat
JehoshaphatwasthefatherofJoram
Joram
wasthefatherofUzziah
Uzziah
wasthefatherofJotham
Jotham wasthefatherofAhaz
Ahaz
wasthefatherofHezekiah
Hezekiah
wasthefatherofManasseh
Man&l8eh
wasthefatherofAmos
Amos
wasthefatherofJosiah
Josiah wasthefatherofJechoniahandhisbrothers
atthetimeofthedeportationtoBabylon:
AfterthedeportationtoBabylon:
JechoniahwasthefatherofShealtiel
Shealtiel
wasthefatherofZerubbabel

103. lTu Gotrrrh ardModrirn Sclalrr
E
Zcmbbabel wer the frther ol Abtud
Abtud wrr t'lre fethsr of ElieHn
Elilkin wrr th€ fether of Alor
Azor wer the fether ol Zrdok
Zrdok wer the fether of Achin
Aehln wer tbe father of Eliud
Eliud *ar the father of Eleazer
Elerzu *u the frther of Metthan
Mrtthan war the father of Jacob
Jscob wer the father of Jorcph the hurband of Maty
olwhomJerurwelborn,whowarcalledChrirt.
So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen
generations, and from David to the deportation to Bsbylon four'
I*o generations, and from the deportation t9_pabylon to the
Christ fourtcen generatiolls". (Matthew, I, t'17)
Tlre genealogy given by Luke (3, 23-38) is different from
Matt;ew. The GJ reproduced here is from the Revised Stan-
dard Version of the Bible:
"J€sus, when he began his ministry, was sbout thirty years of
ege being the son (as was supposed) of Jos€ph, the son of Heli'
tt
"
*o oi Uattttot, the soo of l*tti, the son of Melchi, the son of
Jannei, the son oi Joseph, the son of Mattathias, the son of
Atttog, the son of Natrum, the eon of Esli, the eon of Naggai, the
soo oi Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son
of Joseeh, the son sf Joda, the son of Josnan, the son of Rhesa'
the son of Zembbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, the
son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of cosam, the son of
Elmedam, the gon of Er, the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer'
the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of
simeon, the son of Judatr, ttre son of Joseph, the son of Jonsm'
the son of Eliskim, the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son
of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of
Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son
of Nsh8hon, tihe son of Amminad*b, the son of Admin, the son
of Arni, the gon of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah'
the sou of Jacob, ttre son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of
Terah, the son of lr"nor, the eon of serug, the son of R-eu, the
son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Csinan'
the son of Arphaxad, the son of shem, the son of Noah, the son
of lra,mech, th. Bon of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of
85
Zerubbabel
Abilld
EliaJdm
Azor
Zadok
Achim
Eliud
Eleazar
Matthan
Jacob
was
thefatherofAbilld
was
thefatherofEliaJdm
wasthefatherofAzor
wasthefatherofZadok
wasthefatherofAchim
wasthe
fatherofEliud
wasthe
fatherofEleazar
was
thefatherofMatthan
was
thefatherofJacob
was
thefatherofJosephthehusbandofMary
ofwhomJesuswasborn,whowascalledChrist.
SoallthegenerationsfromAbraham
toDavidwerefourteen
generations,andfromDavid
tothedeportationtoBabylonfour­
teengenerations,andfromthedeportationtoBabylon
tothe
Christfourteengenerations".(Matthew,I,
1-17)
ThegenealogygivenbyLuke(8,23-38)isdifferentfrom
Matthew.The
textreproducedhereisfromtheRevisedStan­
dardVersion
oftheBible:
"Jesus,whenhebeganhisministry,wasabout
thirtyyearsof
age,beingtheson(aswassupposed)
ofJoseph,thesonofHeli,
theson
ofMatthat,thesonof Levi,thesonofMelchi,thesonof
Jannai,thesonofJoseph,
thesonofMattathias,thesonof
Amos,the
SODofNahum,thesonofEsli,thesonofNaggai,the
son
ofMaath,thesonofMattathias,thesonofSemein,theson
ofJoseeh,the SODofJoda,thesonofJoanan,theson ofRhesa,
theSODofZerubbabel,thesonofShealtiel,thesonofNeri,the
sonofMelchi,thesonofAddi,thesonofCosam,thesonof
Elmadam,
thesonofEr,thesonofJoshua,thesonofEliezer,
theson
ofJorim,thesonofMatthat,thesonofLevi,thesonof
Simeon,theson
ofJudah,theson ofJoseph,thesonofJonam,
thesonofEliakim,thesonofMelea,thesonofMenna,theson
ofMattatha,thesonofNathan,thesonofDavid,thesonof
Jesse,thesonofObed,thesonofBoaz,thesonofSala,
theson
ofNahshon,thesonofAmminadab,thesonofAdmin,theson
ofAmi,thesonofHezron,theson ofPerez,thesonofJudah,
theson
ofJ&Cob,thesonofIsaac,thesonofAbraham,thesonof
Terah,theson
ofNahor,thesonofSerug,thesonofReu,the
sonofPeleg,thesonofEber,thesonofShelah,
thesonofCainan,
thesonofArphaxad,thesonofShem,thesonofNoah,theson
ofLamech,the SODofMethuselah,thesonofEnoch,thesonof

104. t6 lUE EIDI4 THE QITnAN AND $CTENCE
Jarcd, the son of Mahalareel, the son of ceinen, the son of Enos
the son of seth the son of Adam, the son of God."
The gpnealogies rpp€sr moro clearly when presented in two
tables, one showing the genealogy beiore Devid snd the other
rfter him.
GENEALOCY OF JESUS, BEFORE DAVID
According te Urtthsr
Urtthflr doe! not mention
rny ntns bsfors Abrrhln"
Aecordilg to LuLo
I Adru
2 SGth
I Enor
{ Celnrn
6 trhrlrlccl
0 Jurd
7 Euoch
I Uethurelrh
0 Lrncch
10 Noeh
f 1 Shen
l2 Arphurd
18 Crlnrn
1{ ghGtrh
ftr Ebsr
16 Pclcg
17 Beu
fB Settg
19 Nrhor
20 Terrh
2l Abrahe,m
AD Inec
28 Jecob
21 Judrb
26 Perez
26 Eezron
27 Ami
?fi Adrnln
29 Anmindrb
80 Nrhrhon
g1
Sdr
82 Boer
88 Obcd
8{ Jcue
gE
Drvld
1 Abnhrn
2 Inec
I Jecob
I Judeh
5 Pcr.sl
6 Eca;r.o,n
7 BrE
8 Ann'inrdab
0 Nrhrhon
10 Srhon
11 Borr
12 Ob€d
l8 Joso
1l Drvld
88 THEBULE,THEQUI\'ANANDSCIENCE
Jared,theson ofXahalalee),theson ofCainan,theson ofEnos.
thesonofSeth,thesonofAdam,thesonofGad."
Thegenealogiesappearmoreclearlywhenpresentedintwo
tables,oneshowingthegenealogybeforeDavidandtheother
afterhim.
GENEALOGY OFJESUS,BEFOREDAVID
Accordingto Matthew
Matthewdoes notmention
an)'
namebeforeAbraham.
1Abraham
2Isaac
8Jacob
"
Judah
6Peru
8Baron
7Ram
8Amminadab
9Nahllhon
10Salmon
11Boas
12
Obed
18Jeaee
14Da-.fd
AceordiDtrtoLuke
1Adam
2Seth
8Enos
"Caman
6MahaJaleel
8Jared
7Enoch
8
Methu.elah
9Lamech
10Noah
11Shem
12Arphasad
18Cainan
14Shelah
16Eber
16Pelel'
17Rea
18Serue
19Neor
20Terah
21Abraham
22Isaac
23Jaeob
24Judah
25Perez
26Huron
27Ami
28Admin
29Amminadab
30Nah.hon
31Sala
32Bou
33Obed
34J....
85David

105. st
fTc Gnrylah crdffiod.rn Scftnot
GENEAI.oGY OF JESUS, AFTER DAYID
Accordlng to lfiettber
lt Drvid
16 Solomon
16 Rehoboa'n
1? AbUah
18 Are
19 JehorhePhet
20 Joram
2l Uzzith
22 Jotfian
2g Aher
21 Eezekiah
26 tenarreh
28 Amor
27 Joslch
28 Jechonleh
DePortetion to BebYlon
29 Shealtiel
g0 Zerubbebel
31 Abiud
82 Eliekim
88 Azor
84 Zedok
85 Achiu
86 Eliud
87 Eleazar
88 Matthan
80 Jrcob
{0 JorePb
41 Jerur
According to Luti
86 David
86 Nethen
g? Mettsthr
gB Mennc
Sg lfielee
{0 Eliakim
4l Jonem
12 Joreph
48 Juilrb
41 Simeon
{6 L€vi
46 Uatthat
1l Jorlm
48 Eliezer
49 Jorhua
60 Er
61 Elmaden
62 Corem
63 Addi
il Melchi
66 Neri
66 Sheeltiel
67 Zerubbebcl
68 Rheu
69 Josnan
60 Joda
61 Jorech
62, Semein
63 Msttsthier
64 Meeth
6E Neg8:ci
66 Esli
6? Nehun
68 Amos
69 Mattsthiar
?0 JorePh
?1 Jannai
72 Melchi
?8 LeYi
74 Matthat
76 Heli
76 JosePh
77 Jeeus
n.CoapelaandModernSdMee
87
GENEALOGYOFJESUS,AFTERDAVID
AccordingtoMatthew According
toLuke
IjDavid
35David
16Solomon
86Nathan
16Rehoboam
37Mattatha
17Abijab
38Menna
18Au
89Melea
19Jehoshaphat
40Eliakim
20Joram
41Jonam
21Uzzlah
42Joseph
22Jotham
43Judah
28Ahu
44Simeon
24Hezekiah
46Levi
26Manuseb
46Matthat
26Amos
47Jorim
27Josiah
48Eliezer
28Jecboniah
49JOlhua
60Er
DeportationtoBabylon 51Elmadam
62Cosam
29Shealtiel
63Addi
30Zerubbabel
54Kelchi
81Abiud
66Neri
32Eliakim
66Shealtiel
33Azor
67Zerubbabel
84Zadok
58Rhesa
35Achim
69Joanan
86Eliud
60Joda
37Eleazar
61JOleeh
38Matthan
62Semein
89Jacob
63Kattathial
40Josepb
64Maath
41Jeaul
66Naggai
66Esli
67Nahum
68Amos
69Mattathial
70Joseph
71Jannai
72Kelchi
73Levi
74Matthat
75Heli
76Joseph
77Jesus

106. E8
TIrE DIBL4 THE QUnaN at D $crENCE
VARIATIONS IN THE ITIANUSCRIPTS AND
IN RELATION TO THE OLD TESTAMNWT.
Apart from variations in spelling, the following mugt be
mentioned:
a) Mattheut,a Goepel
The genealogy has disappeared from the cod,eu Bezae canta_
brigiensis, a very impo"trt t- six century manuscript in both
Greek and Latin. It hag completery air"pi*red from the Greek
text and arso a rarge part of the Latil td;. It may quite simpry
be that the first page, were lost.
One must note here the great liberties Matthew has teken
with the old Tegtament. He rr*r p*d ;;; the genearosies for
the sake of a strange numericai a**onstration (which, in the
end, he does not give, as we shall -*).
---
b) Luke'e Gospel
l.-Before Abraham I Luke mentions Z0 names; the Old Tests_
ment only mentions 19 (eee table otaaam,s descendants in
the ord Testament section of this **tl. Af;; iipr,"*"a
(No. la), Luke has added r p*"r* ."ir*a cainan (No. rB) ,who is not mentioned in Genesis as trr* ,o' of Arphaxad.
Z'-From Abraham to David: 14 to 16 names are found ac_
cording to the manuscripts.
B.-From David to Jesus.
The most important variation is the cod,eu Bezae cantabri.g-
iewis which attributes to Luke a whimsical genealogy taken
from Matthew and to which the seribe rr"-laa-d five names. un_
fortunately, the genearoxgy of Matthew,s co*p*r has disappeared
from thie manuscript, sJlhat comparison is no ronger possibre.
CruTICAL EXAilTINATION OF THE TEXTS,
we sr* here faeed with two different genearogies havin*i one
essential point in common, i.e. they both;;;, via Abraham and
David. To make this examination easier,-we shail separate the
whole into three critical sections:
-From Adam to Abrahsm.
-From Abraham to David.
-From Dsvid to Jesus.
88 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
VARIATIONSIN THEMANUSCRIPTS AND
INRELATIONTOTHEOLDTESTAMENT.
Apartfromvariationsinspelling, thefollowingmustbe
mentioned:
a)Matthew'sGospel
Thegenealogy hasdisappearedfromtheCodexBezaeCanta­
brigiensiB,
averyimportantSixcenturymanuscriptinboth
Greek
andLatin.Ithascompletelydisappearedfrom theGreek
textandalsoa largepartoftheLatintext.Itmayquitesimply
bethatthefirstpageswerelost.
One
mustnoteherethegreatlibertiesMatthew hastaken
withtheOldTestament.Hehaspareddownthegenealogiesfor
thesakeofastrangenumericaldemonstration(which,in
the
end,hedoesnotgive,asweshallsee).
b)Luke'sGospel
I.-BeforeAbraham:Lukementions 20names;theOldTesta­
mentonlymentions 19(seetableofAdam'sdescendantsin
theOldTestamentsectionofthiswork).AfterArphaxad
(No.
12),LukehasaddedapersoncalledCainan(No.
13),
whoisnotmentionedinGenesisasthesonofArphaxad.
2.-FromAbrahamtoDavid:14 to16namesarefoundac­
cording
tothemanuscripts.
S.-FromDavidtoJesus.
Themost
importantvariationis theCodexBezaeCantabriu­
iensia
whichattributestoLukeawhimsicalgenealogytaken
fromMatthewandtowhichthescribehasadded fivenames.Un­
fortunately,
thegenealogyofMatthew'sGospelhasdisappeared
from
thismanuscript,so thatcomparisonisnolongerpossible.
CRITICALEXAMINATIONOFTHETEXTS.
Weareherefacedwithtwodifferentgenealogies havingone
essentialpointincommon,
Le.theybothpassviaAbrahamand
David.Tomakethisexaminationeasier,weshallseparatethe
wholeinto
threecriticalsections:
-FromAdamtoAbraham.
-FromAbrahamtoDavid.
-FromDavidtoJesus.

107. Thc furr,r;h and fuf don Scisrrcc
I. TIu Peadod frcm Mam to Abtullwm
Matthew began his genealogy with Abratram so we are not
concerned with his text here. Luke alone provides infotmation
on Abraham's ancestors going back to Adam: 20 Ua'mes' 19 of
which sre to be found in Genesis (chapterg 4' 6 and ll), as has
elready been ststed.
Is it possible to believe that only 19 or 20 generafionE of
human beings existed before Abraham? The problem has been
examined in the discussion of the Old Testsment. If one looks at
the table of Adam's descendants, based on Genesis and giving
figures for the time element contained in the Biblieal tert' one
can see that roughly nineteen centuries passed between man's
sppesrance on *a*tr and the birth of Abraham. Today it is esti-
*at*a that Abraham was alive in eirce 1860 B'C' snd it has been
deduced from this that the information provided by the old
Testament places man's sppearanee on earth at roughly thirty'
eight centuries B.C. Luke was obviously guided by these data for
his Gospel. He expresses a blatant untruth for having eopied
them down and we have alregdy seen the decisive historical argu-
ments leading to this stetement.
The idea that old Testament data are unacceptable in the
present day is duly admitted; they belong to the
'obsolete'
mate-
iial refe""ea to by the Second Vstican Council' The fact, however
that the Gospeh Lke up the same scientifically incompatible data
is an extremely seriour observation which msy be used- to oppos€
those who defend the historical accuracy of the c'ospel t€xts.
commentators have quickly sensed this danger. They try to
g"i round the difficulty by saying that it i.o not a complete genes-
Iogical tree, that the evangefis1 has missed names out' They
claim that this was done quite deliberately, and th*! his sole
,,intentior,
*""to establish ihe broad lines or essential elements
of a line of descent based on historical reality."' There is nothing
in the texts th;; permits them to form this hypothesis' In the
text it says quit. clearly: A was the father of B, or B was the
son of A. For the part preceding Abraham in particular, the
l.A.Tricot,LittteDictionatyo|theNcwTcttoment(PetitDictionnaire
du Nouveau Testament in "La Sainte Bible", Descl6e, Pub' Pcris)
EE
T'Meo.pelalindModemScfncs
88
1.ThePeriodfromAdamtoAbra1IcJm
MatthewbeganhisgenealogywithAbrahamsowe
arenot
concernedwithhis
texthere.Lukealoneprovidesinformation
onAbraham'sancestorsgoingback
toAdam:20names,19of
which
aretobefoundinGenesis(chapters 4,5and11),ashas
alreadybeenstated.
Isitpossibletobelievethatonly19or20generationsof
humanbeingsexistedbeforeAbraham?Theproblem
hasbeen
examined
inthediscussionof theOldTestament.Ifonelooksat
thetableofAdam'sdescendants,basedonGenesisandgiving
figures
forthetimeelementcontainedintheBiblical
text,one
cansee
thatroughlynineteencenturiespassedbetweenman's
appearance
onearthandthe birthofAbraham.Today itisesti­
mated
thatAbrahamwasalive incirca1850B.C.andithasbeen
deducedfromthis
thattheinformationprovidedby theOld
Testamentplacesman'sappearanceon
earthatroughlythirty·
eightcenturiesB.C.Lukewasobviouslyguidedbythese
datafor
hisGospel.Heexpressesablatant
untruthforhavingcopied
themdownandwehavealreadyseenthedecisivehistoricalargu­
mentsleading
tothisstatement.
Theidea
thatOldTestamentdata areunacceptableinthe
presentdayisdulyadmitted;theybelongtothe'obsolete'mate­
rialreferredtobytheSecondVaticanCouncil.Thefact,however
thattheGospelstakeupthesamescientificallyincompatibledata
is
anextremelyseriousobservationwhichmaybeused
tooppose
thosewhodefendthehistoricalaccuracyoftheGospel
texts.
Commentatorshavequicklysensedthisdanger.They
tryto
getroundthedifficultybysaying thatitisnotacompletegenea­
logicaltree,
thattheevangelisthasmissednamesout.They
claim
thatthiswasdonequitedeliberately,and
thathissole
"intentionwastoestablish
thebroadlinesoressentialelements
ofalineofdescentbasedonhistoricalreality."1Thereisnothing
inthetexts
thatpermitsthemtoformthishypothesis.
Inthe
text
itsaysquiteclearly:Awasthe fatherofB,orBwasthe
sonof
A.ForthepartprecedingAbrahaminparticular,the
1.A.Tricot,LittleDictionaryoftheNewTestament(PetitDietionnaire
duNouveau
Testamentin"LaSainteBible",Deselee,Pub.Paris)

108. 00 THE BIBLE' THE QUnAN AIrtD $CIENCE
€vrngelist draws moreover on the old Testament where the
gBnealogi'E &re set out in the following form:
Tvhen x had lived
?
years, he beeame-the fsther of y
. . . when
Y had lived ,0 years, he became ilre father of, z. . . .
theru is therefore no brealc.
The part of Jesus's genealogy according to Luke, which pre-
cedes Abraham, is not seceptabie in the rt"rrt of modern knowr-
edgp
2, TIla Pedd
frcm Ahralnm Jo Daold.
Eere the two genealogies tally (or almost), excepting one
or two name': the difference may be explained by copieis, errors.
Does thig mean thst the evangehJts are to be considered
accurate?
History situetes David at eircs 1000 B.c. and Abraham at
1E00-1850 B.c.: 14 to 16 generations for roughry eight c;uries.
con one believe this ? one might say trrat ror tnls p*"ioa trr"
Gospol t€rts are et the ve|ry li;it or ihe admissible.
$,TlrcPort Drordpeid"
rt is a great pity, but unfortunatery the texts no longer tally at
ell rrten it comes to establishing .lo"pt;, iine from David, and
figtrrrtlvely epcakin& Jesus's, folr th" b"gp€I.
_
r-caving aside the obvious falsification in the cod,en Beza,e
Canfahrigiewis concerning Luke, let us now compare what the
two most venerabre manurr"ipt.g have;;tr*": the cod,en vati_
ffinw and the Cod,eu Sinaiitiarn.
_
rn the genea_logy aceordins to Luke 42 nomes are praced after
Devid (No. sE) down to Je-sus (No. ??). In the genearogy ac-
eording to Matthew rI are mentioned after David (No. 14) down
to Jesus (No. 4l). The number of (fictitious) ancestors given to
JesuE after David is therefore different in the two Gospels. The
namoE themselves are different as well.
This is not all.
Matthew tellg us that he discovered how Jesus,s genearogy
rplit up after Abraham into three g,roups of 14 nurir**; n.rt
group from Abraham to David; second fro* David to the de_
portstion to Babylon; third from the deportation to Jesus. His
80 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
evangelistdrawsmoreoveron theOldTestamentwherethe
genealogiesaresetoutinthefollowingform:
WhenXhadlivednyears,hebecame thefatherofY...When
Y
hadlivednyears,hebecamethe fatherofZ....
Thereisthereforenobreak.
ThepartofJesus'sgenealogyaccording toLuke,whichpre­
eedesAbraham,isnotacceptableinthelightofmodemknowl­
edge.
J.ThePeriodfromAbraham toDaoid.
Herethe twogenealogiestally (oralmost),exceptingone
ortwonames:thedifferencemaybeexplainedbycopiers'errors.
Doesthismeanthattheevangelistsaretobeconsidered
accurate?
HistorysituatesDavidatcirca1000B.C. andAbrahamat
1800-1860B.C.:14 to16generationsforroughlyeightcenturies.
Canonebelieve
this?Onemightsaythatforthisperiodthe
Gospeltextsareattheverylimitoftheadmissible.
3.ThePoat-DGoidPeriod.
Itisagreatpity,butunfortunatelythetextsnolongertally at
aUwhenitcomestoestablishingJoseph'slinefromDavid,
and
figurativelyspeaking,Jesus's, fortheGospel.
Leavingasidetheobviousfalsification intheCodexBezae
Ca.'llttJ,brigienrisconcerningLuke,letusnowcomparewhatthe
twomostvenerablemanuscriptshavetooffer:the
CodexVati­
eGn.andtheCodezSinaiticus.
Inthegenealogyaccording toLuke42names areplacedafter
David(No.35)downto Jesus(No.77).Inthegenealogyac­
cording
toMatthew27 arementionedafterDavid(No.14)down
toJesus(No. 41).Thenumber of(fictitious)ancestorsgivento
JesusafterDavidis thereforedifferentinthetwoGospels.The
namesthemselves
aredifferentaswell.
Thisisnotall.
MatthewtensusthathediscoveredhowJesus'sgenealogy
splitupafterAbrahamintothreegroups of14names;first
groupfromAbrahamtoDavid;secondfromDavidto
thede­
portationtoBabylon;thirdfromthedeportationtoJesus.His

109. fir.Gplryrrbordilodrlruscftilcc
gt
tnrt does indeed contain 14 names in the first two groups' but
in the third-from the deportation to Jesus-there are only 18
end not 14, as expected; the table shows that Sheatthiel is No' 29
and Jesus No. 41. There is no variation of Matthew that gives 14
nemes for this group.
To eneble hims€lf to have 14 nemes in his second group'
Matthew takes veIT great liberties with the Old Testament text.
The ns.mes of the first six descendants of David (No. 15 to 20)
tally with the data in the old Testament, but the three descend-
rnts of Ioram (No. 20), giiven in chronicles II of the Bible as
Ahmislt, Joash, and Amaziah, are suppressed by Matthew. Else-
wherg Jechoniah (No. 28) is for Matthew the son of Josiah'
although Kings II of the Bible tells us thst Eliakim comes be-
tween Josiah and Jechoniah.
It mey be seen from this that Matthew has altered the genea-
logical linee in the Old Testament to present an artificial group
of fn Dames between Dsvid and the deportation to Babylon.
fitere is also the fact that on€ name is missing in Matthew's
thiril group, so that none of the present-day Gospel texts eontains
the 4? names mentioned. What is surprising is not so much the
existence of the omission itself (explained perhaps by a very old
ecribe's error that was subsequently perpetuated), but the almost
total gilenee of commentstors on this subject. How can one miss
thie omission? W. Trilling breaks this pious conspiracy of silence
in his book The Gospel, Aecording to Matthew (L'Evangile selon
Matthieu)' by devoting one line to it. It is a fact whieh is of con-
siderable importance because the commentators of this Gospel,
lncluding the Eeumenicsl Translation and Csrdinal Dani$lou
among: oth*"r, stress the great symbolical significance of Matth-
ew'ssx14'Thissignificaneewagsoimportantfortheevan-
gelist that he suppressed Biblical n&mes without hesitation to
arrive at his numerical demonstration.
To make this hold good, commentators will, no doubt, construct
Eome reessuring stat€ments of an apologetic nature, justifying
the fsct that ttt*"t have been craftily suppressed and carefully
avoiding the omission that undermines the whole point of what
the evangelist wss trying to show.
1. Pub. Deecl6e, coll.
tParole
et Pri&re', Paril'
91
textdoesindeedcontain14namesin thefirsttwogroups, but
inthethird-fromthedeportationtoJesus-thereareonly13
andnot14,asexpected;thetableshows thatShealthielisNo. 29
andJesusNo.41.ThereisnovariationofMatthew thatgives14
names
forthisgroup.
Toenablehimself tohave14names inhissecondgroup,
Matthewtakesvery
greatlibertieswith theOldTestamenttext.
ThenamesofthefirstsixdescendantsofDavid(No.15to20)
tally
withthedataintheOldTestament, butthethreedescend­
antsofIoram(No.20),given inChroniclesIIoftheBibleas
Ahaziah,Joash, andAmaziah,aresuppressedbyMatthew.Else­
where,Jechoniah(No.28)is
forMatthewthesonofJosiah,
althoughKings
IIoftheBibletellsus thatEliakimcomesbe­
tweenJosiah
andJechoniah.
Itmaybeseenfromthis thatMatthewhasalteredthegenea­
logicallines
intheOldTestament topresentanartificialgroup
of14namesbetweenDavidandthedeportationtoBabylon.
Thereisalso
thefactthatonenameismissing inMatthew's
thirdgroup,so thatnoneofthepresent-dayGospeltextscontains
the42namesmentioned. Whatissurprisingisnotsomuchthe
existence
oftheomissionitself(explainedperhapsbyaveryold
aeribe's
errorthatwassubsequentlyperpetuated), butthealmost
totalsilence
ofcommentatorsonthissubject.Howcan ODemiss
thisomission?W.Trillingbreaksthispiousconspiracyofsilence
inhisbookTheGospelAccording toMatthew(L'Evangileselon
Katthieu)1bydevotingonelinetoit. Itisafactwhichisofcon­
siderableimportancebecausethecommentatorsofthisGospel,
including
theEcumenicalTranslationandCardinalDanielou
amongothers,stressthe
greatsymbolicalsignificanceofMatth­
ew'sS
x14.Thissignificancewassoimportantfortheevan­
gelist
thathesuppressedBiblicalnameswithouthesitationto
arriveathisnumericaldemonstration.
Tomake
thisholdgood,commentatorswill, nodoubt,construct
somereassuringstatements
ofanapologeticnature,justifying
thefactthatnameshavebeencraftilysuppressedandcarefully
avoidingtheomission
thatunderminesthewholepointof what
theevangelistwas tryingtoshow.
1.Pub.Deael'e,colI.'Parole etPriere',Paria.

110. 9g TIIE BIELE, TIIE QUn'AN AnrD SCIENCE
COMMENTANIES OF MODENN EXPENTS IN EXEGESIS.
In his book rhe Gospels of child,Iwod (196?) Les Evangiles de
I'Enfance)
1,
Cardinal Danidlou invests Matthew's
,numerical
schematisation' with a symbolic vslue of paramount importance
since it is this that establishes Jesus's ancestry, whieh is asserted
also by Luke. For him Luke and Matthew are
'historiang'
who
have completed their
'historicsl
investigations', and the
,gene-
alogy' has been
'taken
down from the arehives of Jesus family'.
It must be added here that the archives have never been found.r
Cardinal Danidlou condemns out of hand anyone who criticizes
his point of view: "It is the Western mentality, ignorance of
Judeo-Christianity and the absenee of a Semitic outlook that have
made so many experts in exegesis loose their way when inter-
preting the Gospels. They have projected their own categories
onto them: (sic) Platonie, cartesian, Hegelian and Heidegger-
ian. It is easy to see why everything is mixed up in their minds."
Plato, Descartes, Hegel and Heidegger obviously have nothing
to do with the critieal attitude one may have towsrds these whim-
sical genealogies.
In his search for the meaning of Matthew's B x 14, the author
expands on strange suppositions. They are worth quoting here:
"what may be meant are the common ten weeks of the ]ewish
Apocalypse. The first three, eorresponding to the time from
Adam to Abraham, would have been subtracted; seven weeke of
years would then remain, the first six would correspond to the
six times seven representing the three groups of fourteen and
leaving the seventh, started by Christ with whom the seventh age
of the world begins." Explanations like this are beyond comment !
The commentators of the Ecumenieal Trawtation-Neut Testo-
vvvsnf,-a,lso give us numerical variations of an apologetic nature
which are equally unexpected:
ForMatthew'sB X 14:
Pub. Editions du Seuil, Parig.
Although the author &ssures ue that he knows of the exist€nce of thec€
supposed family archives from the Ecclesiaetic rristory by Euaebiua
Pamphili (about whose respectability much could be said), it is dificult
to see why Jesus's family should have two genealogical treer that were
necessarily different just because each of the two so-called
.higtorienl'
g:ave a genealogy substantially difrerent from the other coneerning the
names of those who figure among Jesus's encestors.
1.
2.
92 THE BOLE,THEQUR-ANANDSCIENCE
COMMENTARIESOFMODERNEXPERTSINEXEGESIS.
InhisbookTheGospels ofChildhood(1967) LesEvangilesde
l'Enfance)
1,CardinalDanielouinvestsMatthew's'numerical
schematisation'withasymbolicvalue
ofparamountimportance
since
itisthisthatestablishesJesus'sancestry,whichisasserted
alsobyLuke.
ForhimLukeandMatthew are'historians'who
havecompleted
their'historicalinvestigations',and the'gene­
alogy'hasbeen'takendownfrom
thearchivesofJesusfamily'.
Itmustbeaddedhere thatthearchiveshaveneverbeenfound.'
CardinalDanieloucondemnsout
ofhandanyonewhocriticizes
hispointofview:
ultistheWesternmentality,ignorance of
Judeo-Christianityand theabsenceofaSemiticoutlook thathave
madesomanyexpertsinexegesisloose
theirwaywheninter­
pretingtheGospels.Theyhaveprojected theirowncategories
onto
them:(sic)Platonic,Cartesian,HegelianandHeidegger­
ian.
Itiseasytoseewhyeverythingismixedup intheirminds."
Plato,Descartes,HegelandHeideggerobviouslyhavenothing
to
dowiththecriticalattitudeonemayhavetowardsthesewhim­
sicalgenealogies.
Inhissearchforthemeaning ofMatthew's3x14,theauthor
expandson strangesuppositions.They areworthquoting here:
uWhatmaybemeant arethecommontenweeksoftheJewish
Apocalypse.Thefirstthree,correspondingtothetimefrom
AdamtoAbraham,wouldhavebeensubtracted;sevenweeks
of
yearswouldthenremain, thefirstsixwouldcorrespondto the
sixtimessevenrepresentingthethreegroupsoffourteenand
leavingtheseventh,
startedbyChristwithwhomtheseventhage
oftheworldbegins."Explanationslikethis
arebeyondcomment!
Thecommentatorsof
thegcumenicalTranslation-NewTesta­
ment-alsogiveusnumericalvariationsof anapologeticnature
whichareequallyunexpected:
ForMatthew's3 X14:
1.Pub.EditionsduSeuil,Paris.
2.Althoughtheauthorassuresusthatheknowsoftheexistenceofthel:5e
supposedfamilyarchivesfromtheEcclesiasticHistorybyEusebius
Pamphili(aboutwhoserespectabilitymuchcouldbesaid),itisdifficult
toseewhyJesus'sfamilyshouldhave twogenealogicaltreesthatwere.
necessarilydifferentjustbecauseeachofthetwoso-called'historians'
gaveagenealogysubstantiallydifferentfromtheotherconcerningthe
namesofthosewhofigure amongJesus'sancestors.

111. Tlw G,ocpeh ardffi&rnscterlw,e 03
a) 14 could be the numerical total of the B consonants in the
Hebrew name Dsvid (D:4, V:6), hence 4+6*4:14.
b) 3 x 14
-
6 x 7 and "Jesus came at the end of the sixth week
of Holy history beginning with Abraham."
For Luke, this translation gives 77 names from Adam to Jesus,
allowing the number 7 to come up again, this time by dividing
77 by 7 (? X 1l : ??). It is quite apparent that for Luke the
numher of variations where words are added or subtracted is
such that a tist af.7T names is completely artificial. It does how-
ever have the advantage of adapting itself to these numerical
g8mes.
The genealogies of Jesus as they appear in the Gospels may
perhaps be the subject that has led Christian commentators'to
perform their most characteristic feats of dialectic acrobaties,
on par indeed with Luke's and Matthew's imagination.
TheGo8pez,andModemSciefICfI 93
a)14couldbe thenumericaltotalof the3consonantsinthe
HebrewnameDavid (D=4,V=6),hence4+6+4=14.
b)8 X14= 6 X7and"Jesuscameattheendofthesixthweek
ofHolyhistorybeginningwithAbraham."
ForLuke,thistranslationgives77namesfromAdamtoJesus,
allowingthenumber7tocomeupagain,thistimebydividing
77by7(7 X11=77).ItisquiteapparentthatforLukethe
numberofvariationswherewords
areaddedorsubtractedis
such
thatalistof77namesiscompletelyartificial. Itdoeshow­
everhavetheadvantageofadaptingitselftothesenumerical
games.
Thegenealogies
ofJesusasthey appearintheGospelsmay
perhapsbethesubject
thathasledChristiancommentators'to
perform
theirmostcharacteristicfeatsofdialecticacrobatics,
on
parindeedwithLuke'sandMatthew'simagination.

112. Contradiclions and
l-probabilities in the
l)escriptiorrs.
Each of the four Gospels contains a large number of descrip-
tions of events that may be unique to one single Gospel or com-
mon to several if not all of them. When they are unique to one
Gospel, they sometimes raise serious problems. Thus, in the case
of an event of considerable importance, it is surprising to find
the event mentioned by only one evangelist; Jesus's Ascension
into heaven on the day of Resurrection, for example. Elsewhere,
numerous events are differently described-sometimes very dif-
fently indeed-by two or more evangelists. Christians are very
often astonished at the existence of such contradictions between
the Gospels-if they ever discover them. This is because they
have been repeatedly told in tones of the greatest assurance that
the New Testament authors were the eyewitnesses of the events
they describe !
Some of these disturbing improbabilities and contradictions
have been shown in previous chapters. It is however the later
events of Jesus's life in partieular, along with the events follow-
ing the Passion, that form the subject of varying or contradictory
descriptions.
DESCN/?flOilS OF THE PASSIOff
Father Roguet himself notes that Passover is placed at differ-
ent times in relation to Jesus's Last Supper with IIis disciples in
g4
Conl..adi~lions and
Irnp..obabililiesinthe
()Es.:..iplions.
EachofthefourGospelscontainsalarge numberofdescrip­
tions
ofeventsthatmaybeuniquetoonesingleGospel orcom­
montoseveral
ifnotallofthem.Whenthey areuniquetoone
Gospel,theysometimesraiseseriousproblems.Thus,in
thecase
of
aneventofconsiderableimportance, itissurprisingtofind
theeventmentioned
byonlyoneevangelist; Jesus'sAscension
intoheavenon
thedayofResurrection,forexample.Elsewhere,
numerousevents
aredifferentlydescribed-sometimesverydif­
fently
indeed-bytwoormoreevangelists.Christians arevery
oftenastonished
attheexistenceofsuchcontradictionsbetween
theGospels-iftheyeverdiscoverthem.Thisisbecausethey
havebeenrepeatedlytold
intonesof thegreatestassurancethat
theNewTestament authorsweretheeyewitnessesof theevents
theydescribe
!
Someofthesedisturbingimprobabilities andcontradictions
havebeenshown
inpreviouschapters. Itishoweverthelater
eventsofJesus'slifeinparticular,alongwith theeventsfollow­
ingthePassion,thatformthesubjectofvaryingorcontradictory
descriptions.
DESCRIPTIONSOFTHEPASSION
FatherRoguethimselfnotes thatPassoverisplaced atdiffer­
enttimesinrelationtoJesus's LastSupperwithHisdisciplesin
94

113. Conttdictlotrt atdlmptob&ilttiu intlp Dermiqtions 05
the Synoptic Gospels and John's Gospel. John places the Last
Supper
'before
the Passover celebrations' and the other three
evangelists place it during the celebrations themselves. Obvious
improbabilities emerge from this divergence: a certain episode
becomes impossible because of the position of Passover in relation
to it. lVhen one knows the importance it had in the Jewish liturgy
and the importanee of the meal where Jesus bids farewell to his
disciples, how is it possible to believe that the memory of one
event in relation to the other could have faded to such an extent
in the trsdition recorded later by the evangelists?
On a more general level, the descriptions of the Passion differ
from one evangelist to another, and more partieularly between
John and the first three Gospels. The Last Supper and the Pas-
sion in John's Gospel are both very long, twice as long as in
Mark and Luke, and roughly one snd a half times as long as
Matthew's text. John records a very long speech of Jesus to His
disciples which takes up four chapters (14 to 17) of his Gospel.
During this erowning speeeh, Jesus snnounees thst He will leave
His last instructions and gives them His last spiritual testament.
There is no trace of this in the other Gospels. The same process
can work the other way however; Matthew, Luke and Mark all
relate Jesus's prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, but John does
not mention it.
TOHI\FS G;OSPEL DOES NOjr DESCNIBE THE
INSTITA?ION OF THE EACHARIST.
The most important fact that strikes the reader of the Passion
in John's Gospel is that he makes absolutely no reference to the
institution of the Eucharist during the Last Supper of Jesus
with His Apostles.
There is not a single Christian who does not know the icon-
ography of the Last Supper, where Jesus is for the last time
seated among His Apostles at table. The world's greatest painters
have always represented this final gathering with John sitting
near Jesus, John whom we are accustomed to considering as the
author of the Gospel bearing fhat name,
However astonishing it may appear to rnany, the majority of
specialists do not consider John to have been the author of the
ContTtJdictionaandImprobabilllie,intheDeacriptiOfll 95
theSynopticGospels andJohn'sGospel.Johnplaces theLast
Supper'before thePassovercelebrations'andtheotherthree
evangelistsplace
itduringthecelebrationsthemselves.Obvious
improbabilitiesemergefrom
thisdivergence:acertainepisode
becomesimpossiblebecause
ofthepositionofPassoverinrelation
toit.Whenoneknowstheimportance ithadintheJewishliturgy
andtheimportanceofthemealwhereJesusbidsfarewelltohis
disciples,howis
itpossibletobelieve thatthememoryofone
event
inrelationtotheothercouldhavefadedtosuch anextent
in
thetraditionrecorded laterbytheevangelists?
Onamoregenerallevel,
thedescriptionsofthePassiondiffer
fromoneevangelisttoanother,andmoreparticularlybetween
John
andthefirstthreeGospels.The LastSupperandthePas­
sioninJohn'sGospel
arebothverylong,twice aslongasin
MarkandLuke,androughlyone andahalftimesaslong as
Matthew'stext.Johnrecordsaverylongspeech ofJesustoHis
discipleswhichtakesupfourchapters(14to17)
ofhisGospel.
During
thiserowningspeech,Jesusannounces thatHewillleave
His
lastinstructionsandgivesthemHis lastspiritualtestament.
Thereisnotrace
ofthisintheotherGospels.Thesameprocess
canworkthe
otherwayhowever;Matthew,LukeandMarkall
relateJesus's
prayerintheGardenofGethsemane, butJohndoes
notmentionit.
JOHNSGOSPELDOESNOTDESCRIBETHE
INSTITUTIONOFTHEEUCHARIST.
Themostimportantfact thatstrikesthereaderofthePassion
inJohn'sGospelis
thathemakesabsolutelynoreference tothe
institutionoftheEucharistduringtheLastSupperofJesus
withHisApostles.
ThereisnotasingleChristianwhodoesnotknowtheicon­
ographyofthe
LastSupper,whereJesusisforthelasttime
seatedamongHisApostles
attable.Theworld'sgreatestpainters
havealwaysrepresentedthisfinalgatheringwithJohnsitting
nearJesus,Johnwhomwe
areaccustomedtoconsidering asthe
authoroftheGospelbearingfuatname.
Howeverastonishing
itmayappeartomany,themajority of
specialistsdonotconsiderJohntohavebeenthe authorofthe

114. 90 IIIE EIBLF" TrrE QUR'AN AND SCTENCE
fourth bospel, nor does the latter mention the institution of the
Eucharist. The consecration of the bread and wine, which be-
come the body and blood of Jesus, is the most essential act of
the Christian liturgy. The other evsngelists refer to it, even if
they do so in differing terms, a$ we have noted above. John does
noLsay anything about it. The four evangelists' descriptions have
only two single points in common: the prediction of
peter's
de-
nial and of the betrayal by one of the Aposiles (Judas Iscariot is
only actually named in Matthew and John). John's description
is the only one which refers to Jesus washing his disciples'
feet at the beginning of the meal.
How can this omission in John's Gospel be explained?
rf one reasons objectively, the hypothesis that springs immedi-
ately to mind (always supposing the story as told by the other
three evangelists is exact) is that a passage of John's Gospel
relatitg the said episode was lost. This is not the conclusion
arrived at by Christian commentators.
Let us now examine some of the positions they have adopted.
In his Little Di,cti,onara of the Neus Testament (petit Dic-
tionnaire du Nouveau Testament) A. Tricot makes the following
entry under Last Supper (C6ne) :
.,Last
meal Jesus partook of
with the Twelve Disciples during which he instituted the Euchar-
ist. It is described in the synoptic Gospers" (references to Matth-
ew, Mark and Luke).
,..
. . and the fourth Gospel gives us further
details" (references to John). In his entry on the Eucharist
(Eueharistie), the same author writes the fottowing:
,,The
insti-
tution of the Eueharist is briefly related in the first three Gos-
pels: it was an extremely important part of the Apostolic system
of religious instruction. saint John has added an indispensable
complement to these brief descriptions in his account oi Jesus's
speech on the bread of life (6, 82-68)." The commentator conse-
quently fails to mention that John does not describe Jesus's in-
titution of the Eucharist. The alrthor speaks of
.complementary
details', but they are not complementary to the inJtitution of
the Eucharist (he basically describes the ceremony of the wash-
ing of the Apostles' feet). The commentator speaks of the
,bread
of life', but it is Jesus's reference (quite separate from the Last
Suppe) to Godls daily gift of manua in the wilderness at the
time of the Jews' exodus led by Moses. John is the only one of
98 TIlEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
fourthGospel,nordoes thelattermentiontheinstitution ofthe
Eucharist.Theconsecration ofthebreadandwine,which be­
comethebodyandbloodofJesus,isthemostessential actof
theChristianliturgy.Theotherevangelists refertoit,even if
theydosoindifferingterms, aswehavenotedabove. Johndoes
notsayanythingaboutit.Thefourevangelists'descriptionshave
onlytwosinglepointsincommon:thepredictionof
Peter'sde­
nial
andofthebetrayalbyone oftheApostles(JudasIscariotis
onlyactualIynamedinMatthew
andJohn).John'sdescription
istheonlyonewhichreferstoJesuswashinghisdisciples'
feet
atthebeginningofthemeal.
Howcanthisomissionin
John'sGospelbeexplained?
Ifonereasonsobjectively,thehypothesis thatspringsimmedi­
atelytomind(alwayssupposing
thestoryastoldby theother
threeevangelistsisexact)is thatapassageofJohn'sGospel
relating
thesaidepisodewaslost.Thisis nottheconclusion
arrived
atbyChristiancommentators.
Letusnowexaminesome
ofthepositionstheyhaveadopted.
InhisLittleDictionary 0/theNewTestament (PetitDic­
tionnaireduNouveauTestament)A.Tricotmakesthefollowing
entryunderLastSupper(Cime):"LastmealJesuspartook of
withtheTwelveDisciplesduringwhichheinstitutedtheEuchar­
ist.
ItisdescribedintheSynopticGospels"(referencestoMatth­
ew,Mark
andLuke)." ...andthefourthGospelgivesus further
details"(referencesto John).InhisentryontheEucharist
(Eucharistie),thesame authorwritesthefollowing:"Theinsti­
tutionof
theEucharistisbrieflyrelatedinthefirstthreeGos­
pels:
itwasanextremelyimportantpartoftheApostolicsystem
ofreligiousinstruction.
SaintJohnhasaddedanindispensable
complementtothese
briefdescriptionsinhisaccountofJesus's
speechonthebreadoflife(6,32-58)."Thecommentatorconse­
quentlyfailstomention
thatJohndoesnotdescribeJesus'sin­
titution
oftheEucharist.The apthorspeaksof'complementary
details',
buttheyarenotcomplementarytotheinstitution of
theEucharist(hebasicallydescribestheceremony ofthewash­
ingoftheApostles'feet).Thecommentatorspeaksof the'bread
oflife',butitisJesus'sreference(quiteseparatefrom theLast
Suppt!r)toGod'sdaily giftofmannainthewildernessatthe
timeofthe
Jews'exodusledbyMoses.Johnistheonlyone of

115. Crn/r'rudlfctfrlnt odlmpohabilitir;t in rtu Derctiptiotu 97
the evangelists who records this allusion. In the following pass-
age of his Gospel, John does, of course, mention Jesus's reference
to the Eucharist in the form of s digression on the bread, but no
other evangelist speaks of this episode.
One is surprised therefore both by John's silence on what the
other three evangelists relate and their silence on what, accord-
ing to John, Jesus is said to have predicted.
The commentetors of the Eunnenical Translation of the Bible,
New Teetament, do actually acknowledge this omission in John's
Gospel. This is the explanation they come up with to account for
the fgct that the description of the institution of the Eucharist
is missing: "fn general, John is not very interested in the tradi-
tions snd institutions of a bygone Israel. This may have dis-
suaded him from showing the establishment of the Eucharist in
the Possover liturglp". Are we seriously to believe that it was a
laek of interest in the Jewish Passover liturgy that led John not
to deseribe the institution of the most fundamental act in the
liturgy of the new religion ?
The experts in -exegesis are so embarrassed by the prohlem
thst theologians rack their brains to find prefigurations or equiv-
alents of the Eucharist in episodes of Jesus's life reeorded by
John. O. Culmann for example, in his book, The I:'leu Testament
(Lc Nouveau Testament), states that "the changing of the water
into wine and the feeding of the five thousand prefigure the
sacrament of the Last Supper (the'Eucharist')". It is to be re-
membered that the water was changed into wine because the
latter had failed at a wedding in Cana. (This was Jesus's first
miracle, described by John in chapter 2, 1-12. He is the only
evangelist to do so). In the case of the feeding of the five thou-
sand, this wss the number of peoBle who were fed on 5 barley
loaves that were miraculously multiplied. When describing these
events, John makes no special comment, and the parallel exists
only in the mind of this expert in exegesis. One can no more
understand the reasoning behind the parallel he draws than his
view thst the curing of a paralized man and of a man born blind
'predict
the baptism' and that
'the
water and blood issuing from
Jegus'g side after his death unite in a single fact' a reference to
both baptism and the Eucharist.
COfllrtulidionltmtIlmprobcJbililie, intheDe,cri"Uoru 91
theevangelistswhorecords thisallusion.Inthefollowingpass­
age
ofhisGospel,Johndoes,ofcourse,mentionJesus'sreference
totheEucharistintheformofadigressiononthebread, butno
otherevangelistspeaks ofthisepisode.
One
issurprisedthereforebothby John'ssilenceon whatthe
otherthreeevangelistsrelate andtheirsilenceonwhat,accord­
ingtoJohn,Jesusissaidto havepredicted.
Thecommentators
oftheEcumenicalTranslation oftheBible,
NewTestament,doactuallyacknowledgethisomissioninJohn's
Gospel.Thisis
theexplanationtheycomeupwithtoaccountfor
thefactthatthedescriptionoftheinstitutionofthe Eucharist
ismissing:HIngeneral,Johnisnotveryinterestedinthetradi­
tions
andinstitutionsofabygoneIsrael.Thismayhavedis­
suadedhimfromshowingtheestablishmentoftheEucharistin
thePassoverliturgy".Are weseriouslytobelieve thatitwasa
lack
ofinterestintheJewishPassoverliturgy thatledJohnnot
todescribetheinstitutionofthemostfundamentalactinthe
Iiturgyofthenewreligion?
Theexpertsin.exegesis
aresoembarrassedbytheproblem
thattheologiansrack theirbrainstofindprefigurations orequiv­
alents
oftheEucharistinepisodesofJesus'sliferecordedby
John.
O.Culmannforexample, inhisbook,TheNewTestament
(LeNouveauTestament),states that"thechangingofthewater
intowine
andthefeedingofthe fivethousandprefigurethe
sacrament
oftheLastSupper(the'Eucharist')".Itistobere­
membered
thatthewaterwaschangedintowinebecausethe
latterhadfailedataweddinginCana.(ThiswasJesus'sfirst
miracle,describedby
Johninchapter2,1-12.Heistheonly
evangelist
todoso).Inthecaseofthefeedingofthe fivethou­
sand,thiswas
thenumberofpeoplewhowerefedon5barley
loaves
thatweremiraculouslymultiplied.Whendescribingthese
events,Johnmakesnospecialcomment,andtheparallelexists
only
inthemindofthisexpertinexegesis.Onecannomore
understand
thereasoningbehind theparallelhedraws thanhis
view
thatthecuringofaparalizedmanandofa manbornblind
'predictthebaptism'and
that'thewaterandbloodissuingfrom
Jesus'sside
afterhisd~thuniteinasinglefact'areferenceto
bothbaptism
andtheEucharist.

116. 98 THE BIBLF.' THE QUn AN AND SCTENCE
Another parallel drawn by the same expert in exegesis con-
concerning the Eueharist is quoted by Father Roguet in his book
Initintion to the Gospel (Initiation i I'Evangile).
,,Some
theo-
logians, such as osear Culmann, see in the description of the
washing of the feet before the Last Supper a symbolical equiva-
lent to the institution of the Eucharist . . ."
It is difficult to see the cogency of all the parallels that com-
mentators have invented to help people accept more readily the
most disconcerting omission in John's Gospel.
APPEANAIVCES OF JESU$ ftAISED FnoM THE DEILD.
A prime example of imagination at work in a description has
already been given in the portrayal of the abnormal phenomena
said to have aecompanied Jesus's death given in Matfhew's Gos-
pel. The events that followed the Resurrection provided material
for contradictory and even absurd descriptions on the part of all
the evangelists.
Father Boguet in his Ini.tiati,on to the Gospel (Initiation e
I'Evangile), page 182, provides exampres of the confusion, dis-
order and contradiction reigning in these writings:
"The list of women who came to the tomb is not exacfly the
same in each of the three Synoptic Gospels. In John only one
woman came: Mary Megdalene. She speakb in the plural how-
ever, as if she were accompanied:
'we
do not know where they
have laid him.' In Matthew the Angel predicts to the women,that
they will see Jesus in Galilee. A few moments later however,
Jesus joins them beside the tomb. Luke probably sensed this
difficulty and altered the source a litile. The Angel says:
,.Re-
member how he told you, while he was still in Galilee . .' rn
faet, Luke only actually refers to three appearances . . ."-..Jsfun
plaees two appearances at an interval of one week in the upper
room at Jerusalem and the third beside the lake, in Galilee there-
fore. Matthew records only one appearance in Galilee.,' The
commentator excludes from this examination the last section of
Mark's Gospel concerning the eppearances because he believes
this was
'probably
written by another hand'.
AII these facts contradict the mention bf J"*u*'s appearances,
contained in Paul's First Letter to the corinthians (18, b-?), to
98 THEBmLE,THEQUR·ANANDSCIENCE
Anotherparallel drawnbythesameexpertinexegesiscon­
concerningthe
Eucharistisquotedby FatherRoguetinhisbook
InitiationtotheGospel (Initiational'Evangile)."Sometheo­
logians,suchasOscarCulmann,see
inthedescriptionofthe
washingofthefeetbefore theLastSupperasymbolicalequiva­
lentto
theinstitutionoftheEucharist..."
Itisdifficulttosee thecogencyofalltheparallelsthatcom­
mentatorshaveinventedtohelppeopleacceptmorereadily
the
mostdisconcertingomissionin John'sGospel.
APPEARANCES OFJESUSRAISEDFROMTHEDEAD.
Aprimeexample ofimaginationatworkinadescriptionhas
alreadybeengiveninthe portrayaloftheabnormalphenomena
saidtohaveaccompaniedJesus'sdeathgiven
inMatthew'sGos­
pel.Theevents
thatfollowedtheResurrectionprovidedmaterial
forcontradictoryandevenabsurddescriptionson thepartofall
theevangelists.
FatherRoguetinhis InitiationtotheGospel (Initiationa
I'Evangile),page182,providesexamples oftheconfusion,dis­
orderandcontradictionreigninginthese writings:
"Thelistofwomenwhocametothetombisnotexactly the
sameineachofthethreeSynopticGospels. InJohnonlyone
womancame:
MaryM&gdalene.She speak'Sinthepluralhow­
ever,as
ifshewereaccompanied:'we donotknowwherethey
havelaidhim.'
InMatthewtheAngelpredictstothewomen. that
theywillseeJesusinGalilee. Afewmoments laterhowever,
Jesusjoinsthembesidethetomb.Lukeprobablysensed
this
difficultyandalteredthesourcealittle.TheAngel says:"Re­
memberhowhetoldyou,whilehewasstillinGalilee. .
.'In
fact,Lukeonlyactually referstothreeappearances..."-"John
placestwoappearances atanintervalofoneweekin theupper
room
atJerusalemand thethirdbesidethelake,inGalileethere­
fore.MatthewrecordsonlyoneappearanceinGalilee."The
commentatorexcludesfromthisexaminationthelastsection
of
Mark'sGospelconcerningtheappearancesbecausehebelieves
thiswas'probablywrittenbyanotherhand'.
Allthesefactscontradictthemention
·ofJesus'sappearances,
containedin
Paul'sFirstLetter totheCorinthians(15,5-7),to

117. Confiadictiont atd Imptobabilitiec in the Dercfiptiow
gg
more than five hundred people at once, to James, to all the
Apostles and' of course, to Paul himself.
After this, it is surprising therefore to find that Father Roguet
stiematizes, in the same book, the
'grandiloquent
and puerile
phantasms of certain Apocrypha' when talking of the Besurrec-
iion. Surely these terms are perfeotly appropriate to Matthew
and Paul themselves: they are indeed in complete contradiction
with the other Apostles on the subiect of the appearances of
Jesus raised from the dead.
Apart from this, there is a contradiction between Luke's de-
seription, in the Acts of the Apostles, of Jesus's appearance to
paui and what Paul himself suecinctly tells us of it. This has led
Father Kannengiesser in his book, Faith in tft.e Resuryection,
Resu.ITecti,on of Faittt, (Foi en la R6surrection, R{surrection
de la Foi) , Lg'l4, to stress that Paul, who was
'the
sole eyewitness
of Christ's resurrection, whose voice comes directly to us from
his writings', never speaks of his personal encounter with Him
Who was raised from the dead-'. . . except for three extremely
discreet references . . .'-'[s refrains moreover from deseribing
it.'
The eontradiction between Paul, who was the sole eyewitness
but is dubious, and the Gospels is quite obvious.
O. Culmsnn in his book, The New Testament (Le Nouveau
Testament), notes the contradictions between Luke and Matthew'
The first situstes Jesus's appearances in Judea, the second in
Galilee.
One should also remember the Luke-John contradiction'
John (21, 1-14) relates an episode in which Jesus raised from
the dead Bppears to the fishermen beside the $ea of Tiberias;
they subsequently catch so many fish that they are unable to
bring them all in. This is nothing other than a repetition of the
miracle catch of fish episode which took place at the same spot
and was also described by Luke (6, 1-11)' as an event of Jesus's
life.
When talking of these appearances, Father Roguet assures
us in his book thst
'their
disjointed, blurred and disordered
character inspires confidence' because all these facts go to show
1.
.No
other New Testament author can claim that distirrction" he notes'
ContradictionatJntllmprobtJbilitie,iratheDe,cnptioru 99
morethanfivehundredpeople atonce,toJames,toallthe
Apostlesand,
ofcourse,toPaulhimself.
Afterthis,itissurprisingthereforetofindthatFatherRoguet
stigmatizes,
inthesamebook, the'grandiloquentandpuerile
phantasms
ofcertainApocrypha'whentalkingof theResurrec­
tion.Surelythese
termsareperfectlyappropriatetoMatthew
andPaulthemselves:they areindeedincompletecontradiction
withtheotherApostleson
thesubjectoftheappearancesof
Jesusraisedfrom
thedead.
Apartfromthis,thereisacontradictionbetweenLuke'sde­
scription,
intheActs oftheApostles,ofJesus'sappearanceto
PaulandwhatPaulhimselfsuccinctlytellsusofit.This hasled
FatherKannengiesserinhisbook,FaithintheResurrection,
Resurrection
ofFaith(FoienlaResurrection,Resurrection
dela
Foi),1974,tostress thatPaul,whowas'thesoleeyewitness
ofChrist'sresurrection,whosevoicecomesdirectlytousfrom
hiswritings!,neverspeaks
ofhispersonalencounterwithHim
Whowasraisedfromthe
dead-'...exceptfor threeextremely
discreetreferences
...'-'herefrainsmoreoverfromdescribing
it.'
ThecontradictionbetweenPaul,whowasthesoleeyewitness
butisdubious,andtheGospelsisquiteobvious.
O.Culmanninhisbook,TheNewTestament(LeNouveau
Testament),notesthecontradictionsbetweenLukeandMatthew.
ThefirstsituatesJesus'sappearances
inJudea,thesecond in
Galilee.
Oneshouldalsoremember
theLuke-Johncontradiction.
John(21,1-14)relates anepisodeinwhichJesusraisedfrom
thedeadappears tothefishermenbesidetheSeaofTiberias;
theysubsequentlycatchsomanyfish
thattheyareunableto
bringthemallin.Thisisnothingother thanarepetitionofthe
miraclecatch
offishepisodewhichtookplace atthesamespot
andwasalsodescribedbyLuke (5,1-11),asanevent ofJesus's
life.
Whentalking
oftheseappearances, FatherRoguetassures
usinhisbook that'theirdisjointed,blurredanddisordered
characterinspiresconfidence'becauseallthesefacts gotoshow
1.'NootherNewTestamentauthorcanclaimthatdistil.dion',henotes.

118. l0o THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCTENCE
that there was no connivance between the evangelists', other-
wise they would definitely have co-ordinated their stories. This
is indeed a strange line of argument. In actual fact, they could
all have recorded, with comprete sincerity, tr.aditions of the com-
munities which (unknown to them) all contained elements of
fantasy. This hypothesis in unavoidable when one is faced with
so many contradictions and improbabilities in the description of
of events.
ASC^ENSIOil OF tEsus
contradictions are present until the very end of the descrip-
tions because neither John nor Matthew
""i""
to Jesus's Ascen-
sion. Mark and Luke are the onry one to speak of it.
-
For Mark (16, 19), Jesus was'tak.n up into heaven, and sat
down at the risht hand of God' without
"ny
p"".ise date being
given in relation to His Resurrection. rt must however be noted
that the final passage of Mark containing this sentence is, for
Father Roguet, an
'invented'
text, althoug:h for the church it is
csnonic !
There remains Luke, the onry evangerist to provide an undis-
puted text of the Ascension episode iZl, Of ),
,he
parted from
them2 and was carried up into heaven'. Tire evangerist praces the
event at the end of the description of the Resurrection and ap-
pearance to the eleven Aposiles: the details of the Gospel de_
scription imply that the Ascension took place on the day of the
Resurrection. In the Acts of the Aposfles, Luke (whom every_
body believes to be their author) describes in chapter l, B Jesug,s
appearance to the Apostles, between the Passion and the Ascen-
sion, in the following terms:
"To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many
proofs, appearing to them during forty days,
"rrd
,p"rking of the
lu'ngdom of God."
.
The placing of the christian festivar of the Ascension at forty
days after Easter, the Festival of the Resurrection, originates
from this passage in the Acts of the Apostles. The date is there-
l. It is dificult to s€e how there could have been!
?'
i'e. the eleverr Aposiles; Judos, the twerfth, ras already dead.
100 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
thattherewasnoconnivancebetweentheevangelists 1
,
other­
wisetheywoulddefinitelyhaveco-ordinated
theirstories.This
isindeeda
strangelineofargument.Inactualfact,theycould
allhaverecorded,withcompletesincerity,traditionsofthecom­
munitieswhich(unknowntothem)
ancontainedelements of
fantasy.Thishypothesisinunavoidablewhenoneisfacedwith
somanycontradictionsandimprobabilitiesin
thedescriptionof
ofevents.
ASCENSIONOFJESUS
Contradictionsarepresentuntiltheveryendofthedescrip­
tionsbecause
neitherJohnnorMatthew refertoJesus'sAscen­
sion.Mark
andLukearetheonlyonetospeak ofit.
ForMark(16, 19),Jesuswas'takenupintoheaven,
andsat
downattherighthandofGod'without anyprecisedatebeing
giveninrelationtoHisResurrection.
Itmusthoweverbenoted
thatthefinalpassage ofMarkcontainingthissentenceis, for
FatherRoguet,an'invented'text,although fortheChurchitis
canonic
r
ThereremainsLuke, theonlyevangelistto provide anundis­
puted
textoftheAscensionepisode(24, 51):'hepartedfrom
them
2
andwascarried upintoheaven'.Theevangelistplacesthe
event
attheend ofthedescriptionoftheResurrectionandap­
pearanceto
theelevenApostles:thedetailsof
theGospelde­
scriptionimply
thattheAscensiontookplaceon thedayofthe
Resurrection.IntheActs oftheApostles,Luke(whomevery­
bodybelievestobe
theirauthor)describesin chapter1,3Jesus's
appearanceto theApostles,between thePassionandtheAscen­
sion,in
thefollowingterms:
"Tothemhepresentedhimselfalive
afterhispassionby many
proofs,appearingtothem duringfortydays,andspeakingofthe
kingdomofGod."
Theplacing
oftheChristianfestival oftheAscensionatforty
daysafterEaster,theFestivaloftheResurrection,originates
from
thispass,agein theAct$oftheApostles.Thedateisthere-
1.Itisdifficulttoseebow therecouldhavebeen!
2.i.e.theeleVel:lApostles;Judos,thetwelfth,wasalreadydead.

119. Cffitiota ondrmrnob&ikifrcrln t+c Delr,ri?front l0r
fore set in contradiction to Luke's Gospel: none of the other
Gospel texts say anything to iustify this in a difrerent w&y'
The Christian who is awere of this situation is highly dis-
concerted by the obviousness of the contradiction. The Eeurn'enF
ieal Translation of the Bib|e, New Testa'ment, ackno'wledges the
fects but does not expand on the contradiction. It limits itself to
noting the relevsnce the forty days may have had to Jesus's
miggion.
commentators wishing to explain everything and reconcile the
irreconciliable provide some strange interpretations on this
subject.
The Sgnopsis of the Forr Gospels edited in 19?2 bv the Bibli'
cal School of Jerusalem (vol. 2, page 461) contains, for example,
some very strange commentaries.
The very word
'Ascension'
is criticized as follows: "In fact
there was no ascension in the actual physieal sense because God
is no more
'on
high' than he is
'below'
" (sic). It is difficult to
grgsp the sense of this comment beeause one wonders how Luke
eould otherwise have expressed himself.
Elsewhere, the author of this commentary sees s
'literary
artiftce' in the fact that "in the Acts, the Ascension is said to
have taken place forty days after the resurrection"; this
'artifice'
is "intended to stress the notion that the period of Jesus's ap-
Ilearances on earth is at an end". He adds however, in relation to
the fact that in Luke's Gospel, "the event is situated during the
evening of Easter Sunday, because the evangelist does not put
any breaks between the various episodes recorded following the
discovery of the empty tomb on the morning of the resurrec-
tion . . ."-... , . ru"Lly this is also a literary artifice, intended
to allow a certain lapse of time before the appearance of Jesus
raised from the dead." (sic)
The feeling of embarrassment that surrounds these interpreta-
tions is even more obvious in Father Roguet's book' He discerns
not one, but two Ascensions !
"Whereas from Jesus's point of view the Ascension coincides
with the Resurrection' from the disciples' point of view it does
not take place until Jesus ceases definitely to present Himself to
them, so that the spirit may be given to them and the period
of the Church may begin."
101
foresetincontradictiontoLuke'sGospel:none oftheother
Gospeltextssayanythingtojustifythisinadifferentway.
TheChristianwhoisawareofthissituationishighlydis­
concertedby
theobviousnessofthecontradiction.TheEcumen­
icalTranslation
oftheBible,NewTestament, acknowledgesthe
factsbutdoesnotexpandon thecontradiction.Itlimitsitselfto
notingtherelevancethefortydaysmayhavehadtoJesus's
mission.
Commentatorswishingtoexplaineverything
andreconcilethe
irreconciliableprovidesome
strangeinterpretationsonthis
subject.
TheSynopsisoftheFourGospels editedin1972by theBibli·
calSchool
ofJerusalem(vol.2,page451)contains, forexample,
some
verystrangecommentaries.
Theveryword'Ascension' iscriticizedasfollows:"Infact
therewasnoascensionintheactualphysicalsensebecauseGod
isnomore'on high'thanheis'below'"(sic).Itisdifficultto
graspthesenseofthiscommentbecauseonewondershowLuke
couldotherwisehaveexpressedhimself.
Elsewhere,
theauthorofthiscommentaryseesa 'literary
artifice'inthefactthat"intheActs,theAscensionissaid to
havetakenplacefortydaysaftertheresurrection";this'artifice'
is"intendedtostressthenotionthattheperiod ofJesus'sap·
pearanceson earthisatanend".Headdshowever, inrelationto
thefactthatinLuke'sGospel, "theeventissituatedduringthe
eveningofEasterSunday,because theevangelistdoes notput
anybreaksbetweenthevariousepisodesrecordedfollowing the
discoveryoftheemptytombon themorningoftheresurrec·
tion..."-"...surelythisisalsoa literaryartifice,intended
toallowa certainlapseoftimebeforetheappearance ofJesus
raisedfromthedead."(sic)
Thefeelingofembarrassmentthatsurroundstheseinterpreta.
tionsisevenmoreobvious inFatherRoguet'sbook.Hediscerns
notone,buttwoAscensions!
"WhereasfromJesus'spointofviewtheAscensioncoincides
withtheResurrection,from thedisciples'point ofviewitdoes
nottakeplaceuntilJesusceasesdefinitelyto presentHimselfto
them,so thattheSpiritmaybegiventothem andtheperiod
oftheChurchmaybegin."

120. rO2 THE BIBLE, TIIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
To those readers who are not quite able to grasp the theological
subtlety of his argument (which ha.s absolutely no Scriptural
basis whatsoever), the author issues the following general warn-
ing, which is a model of apologetical verbiage:
"Here, as in many similar cases, the probrem only appears
insuperable if one takes Biblical statements riterally, and forgets
their religious significance. It is not a matter of breaking down
the faetual reality into a syrnbolism which is inconsistent, but
rather of looking for the theological intentions of those reveal-
ing these mysteries to us by providing us with facts we can
apprehend with our senses and signs appropriate to our incar-
nate spirit."
JESUS'S LAST DIALOGUES.
THE PARACLETE OF IOHIVS GOSPEL.
John is the only evangelist to report the episode of the last
dialogue with the Aposfles. It takes place at the end of the
Last supper and before Jesus's arrest. It ends in a very long
speech: four chapters in John's Gospel (14 to l?) are devoted
to this narration which is not mentioned anywhere in the other
Gospels. These chapters of John nevertheless deal with questions
of prime importance and fundamental significance to the future
outlook. They are set out with ail the grandeur and solemnity
that characterizes the farewell scene between the Master and
His disciples.
This very touching farewell scene whieh contains Jesus's spir-
itual testament, is entirely absent from Matthew, Mark and Luke.
How can the absence of this description be explained ? one might
ask the followins: did the text initiaily exist in the first three
Gospels? was it subsequenily suppressed? why? It must be
stated immediately that no answer can be found; the mystery
surrounding this huge gap in the narrations of the first three
evangelists remains as obscure as ever.
The dominating feature of this narration-seen in the crown-
ing speech-is the view of man's future that Jesus describes, His
care in addressing His disciples, and through them the whole of
humanity, Hirs recommendations and commandments and His
concern to spe:ify the guide whom man must follow after His de-
102 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Tothosereaderswho arenotquiteableto graspthetheological
subtlety
ofhisargument(whichha.sabsolutelynoScriptural
basiswhatsoever),
theauthorissuesthefollowinggeneralwarn­
ing,whichisamodelofapologeticalverbiage:
"Here,as
inmanysimilarcases,theproblemonlyappears
insuperable
ifonetakesBiblicalstatementsliterally,andforgets
theirreligioussignificance. Itisnotamatterofbreakingdown
thefactualrealityintoasymbolismwhichisinconsistent,
but
ratheroflookingforthetheologicalintentionsofthosereveal­
ingthesemysteriestousbyprovidinguswithfactswecan
apprehendwithoursensesandsigns
appropriatetoourincar­
natespirit."
JESUS'SLASTDIALOGUES.
THEPARACLETEOFJOHNSGOSPEL.
Johnis theonlyevangelistto reporttheepisodeof thelast
dialoguewith theApostles.Ittakesplaceattheendofthe
LastSupperandbeforeJesus's arrest.Itendsinaverylong
speech:fourchapters
inJohn'sGospel(14to17) aredevoted
tothis
narrationwhichisnotmentionedanywherein theother
Gospels.ThesechaptersofJohnneverthelessdealwithquestions
ofprimeimportance andfundamentalsignificanceto thefuture
outlook.They aresetoutwithall thegrandeurandsolemnity
thatcharacterizesthefarewellscenebetweentheMasterand
HisdiscipIes.
ThisverytouchingfarewellscenewhichcontainsJesus'sspir­
itualtestament,isentirelyabsentfromMatthew,Mark
andLuke.
Howcantheabsence
ofthisdescriptionbeexplained?One might
askthefollowing:didthe textinitiallyexistinthefirst three
Gospels?Was itsubsequentlysuppressed?Why? Itmustbe
statedimmediately thatnoanswercanbefound;themystery
surroundingthishugegapin thenarrationsofthefirstthree
evangelistsremainsasobscureasever.
Thedominatingfeature
ofthisnarration-seeninthecrown­
ing
speech-istheviewofman'sfuturethatJesusdescribes,His
careinaddressingHisdisciples,
andthroughthemthewhole of
humanity,Hisrecommendations andcommandmentsandHis
concernto
spe~ifytheguidewhomman mustfollowafterHisde-

121. confidiction atd lmptobabilities in tlrv Derctiptiow
r03
perture. The text of John's Gospel is the o$y one to desigRate
iri* ** Parakletos in Greek, which in English has become
'Para-
clete'. The following are the essential passages:
,,If
you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will
pray t-t * r"*t*r, *rrd he will give you another Paraclete."
(14'
16-16)
What does
'Paraclete'
mean? The present text of John's Gos-
pel explains its meaning as follows:
.,But
the Paraclete, the Holy spirit, whom the Father will send
in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your re-
*"*Lt*nce all that I have said to you" (14' 26)'
"he will bear witness to me" (15' 26) '
.,it
is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go
away, the Paraclete will not come tJ you; but if I go, I will send
him to you. And when he comes, he will convince the world of sin
and of tight"ousness and of judgment ' ' '" (16' 7-8) '
"When the Spirit of truth comes' he will guide you into all the
truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever
he hears he wiit speak, and he will declare to you the things that
are to come. He will glorify me . . '" (16' 13-14) '
(It must be noted that the passages in John, chapters L4-t7,
which have not been cited here, in no way alter the general mean-
ing of these quotations).
on a cursory reading, the text which identifies the Greek word
,paraclete'wiih
the Holy Spirit is unlikely to attract much atten-
tion. This is especially true when the subtitles of the text are
generally used ior ttanslations and the terminology commenta-
[o"* .*!loy in works for mass publication direct the reader to-
wards the meaning in these p"**"g"* that an exemplary ortho-
doxy would like them to have. Should one have the slightest diffi-
culty in compilt
""*ion,
there are many explanations available'
such as those ;i".; by A. Tricot in his Littte DietionarA of the
New Testa,meit (Petii Dictionnaire du Nouveau Testament) to
enlighten one on this subject. In his entry on the Paraclete this
commentator writes the following:
,,This
name or title translated from the Greek is only used in
the New Testament by John: he uses it four times in his account
Cont1'adictiomandImprobabilitiesintheDe,cnptions 103
parture.ThetextofJohn'sGospelis theonlyone todesignate
himasParakletosinGreek,whichinEnglishhasbecome
'Para­
clete'.Thefollowing aretheessentialpassages:
"Ifyouloveme,youwillkeepmycommandments.AndIwill
praytheFather,andhewillgiveyouanotherParaclete."(14,
15-16)
Whatdoes'Paraclete'mean?The presenttextofJohn'sGos­
pelexplains
itsmeaningasfollows:
"ButtheParaclete,theHolySpirit,whom theFatherwillsend
inmyname,hewillteachyouallthings,
andbringtoyourre­
membranceall
thatIhavesaidtoyou"(14, 26).
"hewillbearwitnesstome"(15,26).
"itistoyouradvantagethatIgoaway,forifIdonotgo
away,theParacletewill notcometoyou; butifIgo,Iwillsend
him
toyou.Andwhenhecomes,hewillconvince
theworldofsin
andofrighteousnessandofjudgment..."(16,7-8).
"When
theSpiritoftruthcomes,hewillguideyouintoallthe
truth;forhewillnotspeakonhisownauthority, butwhatever
hehearshewillspeak, andhewilldeclaretoyouthethings that
aretocome.Hewillglorifyme ..."(16,13-14).
(ItmustbenotedthatthepassagesinJohn,chapters14-17,
whichhave
notbeencitedhere,innoway alterthegeneralmean­
ingofthesequotations).
Onacursoryreading,
thetextwhichidentifies theGreekword
'Paraclete'
withtheHoly Spiritisunlikelyto attractmuchatten­
tion.Thisisespecially
truewhenthesubtitlesofthe textare
generallyused fortranslationsandtheterminologycommenta­
torsemployinworksformasspublicationdirect thereaderto­
wardsthemeaninginthesepassages thatanexemplaryortho­
doxywouldlikethemtohave.Shouldonehave
theslightestdiffi­
culty
incomprehension,therearemanyexplanationsavailable,
such
asthosegivenby A.TricotinhisLittleDictionary ofthe
NewTestament(PetitDictionnaireduNouveauTestament)to
enlightenoneon
thissubject.InhisentryontheParacletethis
commentator
writesthefollowing:
"ThisnameortitletranslatedfromtheGreekisonlyusedin
theNew
TestamentbyJohn:heusesitfourtimesinhisaccount

122. 104 THE BIBLE, THE QUrAN AND SCIENCE
of Jesus's speech after the Last supper' (14, 16 and 26; lE, 26;
l8' ?) snd once in his First L,etter (2, L). In John's Gospel the
wgrd is applied to the Holy spirit; in the Letter it reiers to
christ.
'Paraelete'
was a term in current usage among the Hel-
lenist Jews, First century A.D", meaning
,intereessor,,
-,defender,
(. . . ) Jesus predicts that the spirit witt be sent by the Father
and son. rts mission will be to take the place of the son in the
role he played during his mortal life
"r
* helper for the benefit
of his disciples. The Spirit will intervene and act as a substitute
for christ, adopting the rore of paracrete
or omnipotent inter-
ceggor,tt
This commentary therefore makes the Hory spirit into the ulti-
mste guide of man after Jegus's departure. How does it square
with John's text?
It is a necessary question because a pr"iori it seems strange to
ascribe the last paragraph quoted above to the Holy spirit:
"for he wilt not speak on his own authority, but rvhatever he
hears he will speak, and he will declare to vou ilre things that are
to come." rt seems inconceivabre that on! could ascribe to the
Holy spirit the a-birity to speak and decrare whatever he hears . . .
Logic demands that this question be raised, but to my knowledge,
it is not usually the subject of commentaries.
To gain an exact idea of the problem, one has to go back to the
basic Greek text. This is especiarry important because John is
universally recognized to have written in Greek instead of an_
other language. The Greek text consulted was the Noattm Testa-
mentum Graecez,
Any serious textual criticism begins with a search for varia-
tions. Here it would seem that in all the known manuscripts of
John's Gospel, the onry variation rikery to change the meaning
of the sentenee is in pessage 14, 26 of the famous palimpsest
version written in syriac'. Here it is not the Holy spirit that is
mentioned, but quite simply the spirit. Did ttre scriue merely
lJ" f".tJ"r John it was during the Last supper itserf that Jesus
delivered the long epeech that mentions the paraclete.
2' Nestld and Aland. pub.
united Bibles societies, London, lg?r.
3. This manuacript was written in the Fourttr or ritth century A.D. It
was discovered in 1gl2 on Mount sinai by Agnes s.-Lewis and is so
named because the first text had been cove.*J ty a later one which,
when obliterated, revealed the original.
104 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
ofJesus'sspeech aftertheLastSupper
1
(14,16and26;15,26;
16,7)andonceinhis
FirstLetter(2,1).InJohn'sGospel the
wordisappliedtotheHoly Spirit;intheLetter itrefersto
Christ.'Paraclete'wasa termincurrentusageamongtheHel­
lenistJews,
FirstcenturyA.D.,meaning'intercessor','defender'
(
...)Jesuspredicts thattheSpiritwillbesentbythe Father
andSon.Itsmissionwillbetotake theplaceoftheSoninthe
roleheplayedduringhismortallife
asahelperforthebenefit
ofhisdisciples.The Spiritwillinterveneandact asasubstitute
forChrist,adoptingtheroleofParaclete
oromnipotentinter­
cessor."
ThiscommentarythereforemakestheHoly
Spiritintotheulti­
mateguide
ofmanafterJesus'sdeparture.Howdoes itsquare
withJohn's
text?
Itisanecessaryquestionbecause apTi01'iitseemsstrangeto
ascribethe
lastparagraphquotedabovetotheHoly Spirit:
"forhewillnotspeakonhisownauthority,
butwhateverhe
hearshewillspeak,andhewilldeclaretoyouthethings
thatare
tocome."Itseemsinconceivable thatonecouldascribetothe
Holy
Spirittheabilitytospeakanddeclarewhateverhe
hears...
Logicdemands thatthisquestionberaised,buttomyknowledge,
itisnotusuallythesubjectofcommentaries.
Togain
anexactideaoftheproblem,onehasto
gobacktothe
basicGreektext.ThisisespeciallyimportantbecauseJohnis
universallyrecognizedtohavewritteninGreekinsteadofan­
otherlanguage.TheGreektextconsultedwasthe
NovumTesta­
mentumGraece
2
•
Anyserioustextualcriticismbeginswithasearchforvaria­
tions.Here
itwouldseem thatinalltheknownmanuscriptsof
John'sGospel,theonlyvariationlikelytochangethemeaning
ofthesentenceisinpassage14,
26ofthefamousPalimpsest
versionwritteninSyriac:l.Here
itisnottheHoly Spiritthatis
mentioned,butquitesimplytheSpirit.Didthescribemerely
1.Infact,forJohnitwasduringtheLastSupperitselfthatJesus
deliveredthelongspeechthatmentionstheParaclete.
2.NestleandAland.Pub.UnitedBiblesSocieties,London, 1971.
3.ThismanuscriptwaswrittenintheFourthorFifthcenturyA.D.It
wasdiscoveredin 1812onMountSinaibyAgnesS.-Lewisandisso
namedbecausethefirsttexthadbeencoveredbya lateronewhich,
whenobliterated,revealedtheoriginal.

123. conttdtrctiot t atdhmptobobilitbtlntlnDarc'rlptionr
ros
miss out a ord or, knowing full well that the text he was to copy
claimed to make the Holy Spirit hear and speak, did he perhaps
lack the audacity to write something thst seemed absurd to him?
.lp"* from this observation there is little need to labour the
ot-h*" variations, they &re grammatical and do not change the
general meaning. The impor'tant thing is that what has been
Iemonstrated here with regard to the exast meening of the verbs
.to
hesr' and
'to
speak' should apply to all the other manuscripts
of John's Gospel, as is indeed the case.
The verb
'to
hear, in the translation is the Greek verb
'ahou6'
meaning to perceive sounds. It has, for example, given us the
word'acoustics', the science of sounds.
The verb'to speak' in the translstion is the Greek verb
'Ial'e6'
which has the general meaning of
'to
emit sounds' and the spe-
cific meaning o1
'to
speak'. This verb occurs very frequently in
the Greek text of the bospels. It designates a solemn declarstion
made by Jesus during His preachings. It therefore becomes clear
that the communication to man whieh He here proclaims does not
in any way consist of s statement inspired hy the egency of the
Holy spirit. It has a very obvious material character moreover'
which comes from the idea of the emission of sounds conveyed
by the Greek word that defines it.
The two Greek verbs
'akou6'
and
'lnleri'
therefore define con-
crete sctions which can only be applied to a being with hesring
and speech organs. It is consequently impossible to apply them to
the Holy Spirit.
For this reason, the text of this passage from John's Gospel, as
handed down to us in Greek manuscripts, is quite incomprehensi-
ble if one takes it as a whole, including the words
'Holy
Spirit'
in passage 14, 26: "But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the
Father will send in my name" etc. It is the only passsge in John's
Gospel that identifies the Paraclete with the Holy $pirit'
If the words
'Holy
Spirit' (to pneum,a to agion) are ommitted
from the passage, the complete text of John then conveys a mean-
ing whictt i* p*"t*tly elear. It is confirmed moreover, by snother
teit uy the sam* *t"ng"list, the First Letter, where John uses
the same word
'Paraclete'
simply to mean Jegus, the interce$sor
ContradictionaandImprobabilitiesintileDeacriptiotll 105
missoutawordor,knowingfullwell thatthetexthewastocopy
claimedtomaketheHoly
Spirithearandspeak,didheperhaps
lacktheaudacitytowritesomething
thatseemedabsurdtohim?
Apartfromthisobservationthereislittleneed tolabourthe
othervariations,they
aregrammaticaland donotchangethe
generalmeaning.Theimportantthingis
thatwhathasbeen
demonstratedherewithregardtotheexactmeaningoftheverbs
'tohear'and 'tospeak'shouldapplytoalltheothermanuscripts
ofJohn'sGospel,asisindeedthecase.
Theverb'tohear,inthetranslationistheGreekverb
'akouo'
meaningtoperceivesounds. Ithas,forexample,givenus the
word'acoustics',thescience ofsounds.
Theverb
'tospeak'inthetranslationistheGreekverb 'laleo'
whichhas thegeneralmeaningof'toemitsounds'andthespe­
cificmeaningof'tospeak'.Thisverboccursveryfrequentlyin
theGreek
textoftheGospels.Itdesignatesasolemndeclaration
madebyJesusduringHispreachings.
Itthereforebecomesclear
thatthecommunicationtomanwhichHehereproclaimsdoesnot
inanywayconsistofastatementinspiredby theagencyof the
HolySpirit.Ithasaveryobviousmaterialcharactermoreover,
whichcomesfromtheideaoftheemissionofsoundsconveyed
bytheGreekword
thatdefinesit.
The'twoGreekverbs
'akouo'and'laZeD'thereforedefinecon­
creteactionswhichcanonly
beappliedtoabeingwithhearing
andspeechorgans.
Itisconsequentlyimpossibletoapplythem to
theHolySpirit.
Forthisreason,thetextofthispassagefromJohn'sGospel,as
handeddowntous
inGreekmanuscripts,isquiteincomprehensi­
ble
ifonetakesitasawhole,includingthewords'HolySpirit'
inpassage
14,26:"ButtheParaclete,theHolySpirit,whomthe
Fatherwillsendin myname"etc. ItistheonlypassageinJohn's
Gospel
thatidentifiestheParacletewiththeHolySpirit.
Ifthewords'HolySpirit' (topneumatoagion)areommitted
fromthepassage,thecompletetextofJohnthenconveysamean­
ingwhichisperfectlyclear.
Itisconfirmedmoreover,byanother
textbythesameevangelist,the
FirstLetter,whereJohnuses
thesameword'Parac1ete'simplytomeanJesus,theintercessor

124. 106 THE BIBLq THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
at God's sider. Aeeording to John, when Jesus says (14, 16) :
'lAnd
I will pray the Father, and he will give you another para-
clete", what He is saying is that'another'intercessor will be sent
to man, as He Himself was at God's side on man's behalf during
His egrthly life.
According to the rules of logic therefore, one is brought to
see in John's Paraclete a human being like Jesus, possessiig the
faculties of hearing and speech formally implied in John's Greek
text. Jesus therefore predicts that God witi later send a human
being to Earth to take up the role defined by John, i.e. to be a
prophet who hears God's word and repeats his message to man.
This is the Iogical interpretation of iohn's texts arrived at if
one attributes to the words their proper meaning.
The presence of the term
,Holy
spirit' in today's text could
easily have come from a later addition made quite deliberately.
rt may have been intended to change the origin*l m*"rring which
predicted the advent of a prophet subsequent to Jesus and was
therefore in contradiction with the teac-hings of the Christian
churches at the time of their formation; these teachings main-
tained that Jesus was the last of the prophets.
l. M""y t"*slations and commentaries of the Gospel, espeeially older
oneB' use the word
'Congoler'
to translate this, but it is totally inaJcurat€.
108 THE BmLE,THEQUR'AN ANDSCmNCE
atGod'sside
1
•
AccordingtoJohn,when Jesussays(14, 16):
"AndIwillpraytheFather,andhewillgiveyouanother Para­
clete",whatHeissayingis that'another'intercessorwill besent
toman,asHeHimselfwas atGod'ssideon man'sbehalfduring
Hisearthlylife.
Accordingto
therulesoflogictherefore,oneisbroughtto
see
inJohn'sParaeIeteahumanbeinglikeJesus,possessingthe
faculties
ofhearingandspeechformallyimpliedin John'sGreek
text.Jesusthereforepredicts
thatGodwilllatersendahuman
beingto
EarthtotakeuptheroledefinedbyJohn,
Le.tobea
prophetwho
hearsGod'sword andrepeatshismessagetoman.
Thisis
thelogicalinterpretationofJohn'stextsarrived atif
oneattributestothewords theirpropermeaning.
Thepresenceofthe
term'HolySpirit'intoday'stextcould
easilyhavecomefroma
lateradditionmadequitedeliberately.
Itmayhavebeenintendedtochangetheoriginalmeaningwhich
predicted
theadventofaprophetsubsequenttoJesus andwas
thereforeincontradictionwiththeteachingsoftheChristian
churches
atthetimeoftheirformation;theseteachingsmain­
tained
thatJesuswasthe lastoftheprophets.
1.ManytranslationsandcommentariesoftheGospel,especiallyolder
ones,use
theword'Consoler'to translatethis,butitistotallyinaccurate.

125. vr
Conclusions
The facts recorded here and the commentaries quoted from
several extremely eminent Christian experts in exegesis have
refuted affinnrations of orthodory supported by the line adopted
by the last Council on the absolute historicsl authenticity of the
Gospels. fireee are said to have fsithfully transmitted what Jesus
actually did and taugbt.
Several different kinds of argument have been given.
Firstln quotations from the Gospels themselves show flat con-
tradictions. It is impossible to believe two facts that contradict
each other. Neither can one accept certain improbabilities and
affirmations that go against the casLiron data provided by mod-
ern knowledge. In this respect, the two genealogies of Jesus
given in the Gospels and the untruths implied in them are quite
conclusive.
These contradictions, improbabilities and incompatibilities
pass unnoticed by many Christisns. They are astonished when
they discover them beesuse they have been influenced by their
reading of eommentaries that provide subtle explanations calcu-
latcd to reassure them and orchestrated by an apologetic lyric-
ism. Some very typical examples have been given of the skill em-
ployed by certain experts in exegesis in camouflaglng what they
modestly call
'difficulties'.
There &re very few passages indeed
in the Gospels that have been acknowledged as inauthentic al-
though the Church declares them canonic"
According to Father Kannengiesser, works of modern textual
eriticism have revealed data which constitute a
'revolution
in
methods of Biblical exegesis' so that the facts relating to Jesus
recorded in the Gospels are no longer'to be taken literally', they
~I
Con€:lusions
Thefactsrecordedhereand thecommentariesquotedfrom
severalextremelyeminentChristianexperts
inexegesishave
refutedaffirmations
oforthodoxysupportedbythelineadopted
by
thelastCouncilontheabsolutehistoricalauthenticityofthe
Gospels.These
aresaidtohavefaithfullytransmitted whatJesus
actuallydidandtaught.
Severaldifferentkinds
ofargumenthavebeengiven.
Firstly,quotationsfrom
theGospelsthemselvesshowflatcon­
tradictions.
Itisimpossibletobelievetwofacts thatcontradict
eachother.Neithercanoneacceptcertainimprobabilitiesand
affirmations
thatgoagainstthecast-iron dataprovidedbymod­
ernknowledge.Inthisrespect,thetwogenealogiesofJesus
givenintheGospelsandthe
untruthsimpliedinthem arequite
conclusive.
Thesecontradictions,improbabilitiesandincompatibilities
passunnoticedbymanyChristians.They
areastonishedwhen
theydiscoverthembecausetheyhavebeeninfluencedby
their
readingofcommentariesthatprovidesubtleexplanationscalcu­
lated
toreassurethem andorchestratedby anapologeticlyric­
ism.Someverytypicalexampleshavebeengiven
oftheskillem­
ployedbycertainexpertsinexegesisincamouflaging
whatthey
modestlycall'difficulties'.
Thereareveryfewpassagesindeed
intheGospels
thathavebeenacknowledgedasinauthentical­
though
theChurchdeclaresthemcanonic.
According
toFatherKannengiesser,worksofmoderntextual
criticismhaverevealed
datawhichconstitutea'revolutionin
methods
ofBiblicalexegesis' sothatthefactsrelatingtoJesus
recorded
intheGospelsarenolonger'tobetakenliterally',they
107

126. r08 TIIE BIBI4 lIrE QIrn'AN AiltD $CIENGE
are
'writings
suited to an occasion' or
'combat
writings'. Modern
knowledge has brought to light the history of Judeo-Christianity
and the rivalry between communities which accounts for the
existence of facts that today's readers find disconcerting. The
concept of eyewitness evangelists is no longer defensible, al-
though numerous Christians still retain it today. The work done
at the Biblical School of Jerusalem (Fathers Benoit and Boia-
mard) shows very elearly that the Gospels were written, revised
and eorrected several times. They also warn the reader that he is
"obliged in more than one case to give up the notion of hearing
Jesus's voice directly".
The historieal nature of the Gospels is beyond question.
Through descriptions referring to Jesus however, these docu-
ments provide us above all with information about the character
of their authors, the spokesmen for the tradition of the early
Christian communities to which they belonged, and in particular
about the struggle between the Judeo-Christians and paul:
Car-
dinal Dani€lou's work is authoritative on these points.
why be surprised by the fact that some evangelists distort
certain events in Jesus's life with the object of defending a per-
sonal point of view? Why be surprised by the omission of certain
events ? Why be surprised by the fictitious nature of other events
described?
This leads us to compare the Gospels with the narrative poems
found in Medieval literature. A vivid comparison could be msde
with the Song of Rola,nd, (Chanson de Rotand), the most well-
known of all poerns of this kind, which relates a real event in a
fictitious light. It will be remembered that it describes an actual
episode: Roland was leading Charlemagne's rear-guard when it
was ambushed on the pess at Roncevaux. The episode which wss
of minor importance, is said to have taken place on the l6th
August, ?78 according to historical records (Eginhard). It was
raised to the stature of a great feat of arms, a battle in a war of
religion. rt is a whimsical description, but the imaginary element
does not obliterate one of the real battles that Charlemagne hsd
to fig:ht in order to proteet his frontiers against the attemptg
made by neighbouring peoples to penetrate his borders. That is
the element of truth and the epic style of nsrrative does not r+
move it.
108 THEBIBLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
are'writingssuited toanoccasion'or'combatwritings'.Modem
knowledge
hasbroughtto lightthehistoryofJudeo-Christianity
andtherivalrybetweencommunitieswhichaccounts forthe
existenceoffacts thattoday'sreadersfinddisconcerting.The
concept
ofeyewitnessevangelistsisnolonger.defensible,al­
thoughnumerousChristiansstill
retainittoday.Theworkdone
attheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalem(FathersBenoitandBois­
mard)showsveryclearly thattheGospelswerewritten,revised
andcorrectedseveraltimes.Theyalso warnthereaderthatheis
"obliged
inmorethanonecasetogiveup thenotionofhearing
Jesus'svoicedirectly".
Thehistorical
natureoftheGospelsisbeyondquestion.
Throughdescriptions
referringtoJesushowever,thesedocu­
mentsprovideusaboveallwithinformationabout
thecharacter
oftheirauthors,thespokesmenforthetraditionoftheearly
Christiancommunitiestowhichtheybelonged,and
inparticular
aboutthestrugglebetweentheJudeo-Christians andPaul:Car­
dinalDanielou'sworkisauthoritativeonthesepoints.
Whybesurprisedby thefactthatsomeevangelistsdistort
certainevents
inJesus'slifewith theobjectofdefendingaper­
sonalpointofview?Why
besurprisedby theomissionofcertain
events?Why
besurprisedby thefictitiousnatureofotherevents
described?
Thisleadsustocompare
theGospelswith thenarrativepoems
found
inMedievalliterature.Avividcomparisoncouldbemade
withthe
SongofRoland(ChansondeRoland),themostweIl­
known
ofaUpoetnsofthiskind,whichrelatesarealevent ina
fictitiouslight.
Itwillberememberedthatitdescribesanactual
episode:RolandwasleadingCharlemagne's
rear-guardwhenit
wasambushedon thepassatRoncevaux.Theepisodewhichwas
ofminorimportance,issaidtohavetakenplaceon
the15th
August,778accordingtohistoricalrecords
(Eginhard).Itwas
raisedtothe
statureofagreatfeatofarms,abattle inawarof
religion.Itisawhimsicaldescription, buttheimaginaryelement
doesnotobliterateoneoftherealbattles
thatCharlemagnehad
tofightinordertoprotecthisfrontiers againsttheattempts
madebyneighbouringpeoples topenetratehisborders. Thatis
theelementof truthandtheepicstyleof narrativedoesnotre­
moveit.

127. r00
Collrl&rfplnt
The same hotds tnre for the Gospels: Mattheq/s phsntasms'
the flat contrsdictions between Gospels, the improbabilities, the
iucompatibilities wittr modern scientific data, the successive dis-
tortions of the text--all these things add up to the fact that the
GospelE contein chapters and passages that are the sole product
of the human imagination. These flaws do not however csst
doubt on the existence of Jesus's mission: the doubt is solely con-
fined to the course it took.
Cone..... 109
Thesameholds truefortheGospels:Matthew'sphantasms,
theflatcontradictionsbetweenGospels,theimprobabilities,
the
incompatibilitieswithmodemscientificdata,thesuccessivedis­
tortions
ofthetext-allthesethingsaddup tothefactthatthe
Gospelscontainchaptersandpassages
thatarethesoleproduct
ofthehumanimagination.Theseflaws
donothowever cast
doubtontheexistenceofJesus'smission:thedoubtissolelycon­
finedtothecourseittook.

128. I
fhe Qrrr'arr -rnd
Dlodern Scierrce
lntroducliorr
The relationship between the eur'an and science is a priori a
surprisg espeeially when it turns out to be one of harmony and
not of diseord. A eonfrontation between a religious book and the
secular ideas proclaimed by scienee is perhaps, in the eyes of
many people today, something of a paradox. The majority of to-
day's scientists, with a small number of exeeptions of course, are
indeed bound up in materialist theories, and have only indifference
or contempt for religious questions which they often consider to
be founded on legend. rn the West moreover, when seience snd
religion are discussed, people are quite willing to mention Juda-
ism and Christianity among the religions referred to, but they
hardly ever think of Islam. So many false judgements based on
inaccurate ideas have indeed been made about it, that today it is
very difficult to form an exact notion of the reality of rslam.
As s prelude to any confrontation between the Islamic Revela-
tion and science, it would seem essential that an ou,iline be given
of a religion that is so little known in the West.
fire totally erroneous statements made about Islam in the West
are sometimes the result of ignorance, and sometimes of system-
atic denigration. The most serious of all the untruths told about
it are however those dealing with facts; for while mistaken opin-
tt0
I
TheQo..'anand
~ode..nSt:ient:e
Inl..odu~lion
TherelationshipbetweentheQur'anandscienceis aprioria
surprise,especiallywhen
itturnsouttobeoneofharmonyand
notofdiscord.Aconfrontationbetweenareligiousbookand the
secularideasproclaimedbyscienceisperhaps, intheeyes of
manypeopletoday,somethingofaparadox.The majorityofto­
day'sscientists,withasmallnumber ofexceptionsofcourse, are
indeedboundupinmaterialisttheories,andhaveonlyindifference
orcontemptforreligiousquestionswhichtheyoftenconsider to
befoundedonlegend. IntheWestmoreover,whenscience and
religionarediscussed,people arequitewilling tomentionJuda­
ismandChristianityamongthereligions referredto,butthey
hardlyever
thinkofIslam.Somanyfalsejudgementsbasedon
inaccurateideashaveindeedbeenmadeaboutit,
thattodayitis
verydifficult
toformanexactnotionoftherealityofIslam.
Asapreludeto
anyconfrontationbetween theIslamicRevela­
tion
andscience,itwouldseemessential thatanoutlinebegiven
ofareligionthatissolittleknown intheWest.
ThetotallyerroneousstatementsmadeaboutIslamin theWest
aresometimestheresult ofignorance,andsometimes ofsystem­
aticdenigration.Themostseriousofallthe
untruthstoldabout
itarehoweverthosedealingwith facts;forwhilemistakenopin-
110

129. rffin lll
ions are excusable, the presentation of facts running contrarT to
the reality is not. It is disturbing to read blatant untruths in
eminently respectable works written by authors who a Priori arc
hishly qualified. The following: is an example taken from the
uniaersatis EncAclopeilia (Eneyclopedia Universalis) vol.6. Un-
der the heading Gospels (Evsngiles) the author alludes to the
differences between the Istter and the Qur'an: "The evangelists
(. . .) do not (. .), 8s in the Qur'an, claim to transmit en
autobiogrsphy that God miraculously dictated to the Prophet
, . .". In fact, the Qur'an has nothing to do with an autobiogra-
phy: it is a preaching; a consultation of even the worst trans'
iation would have made thet clear to the author. The statement
we have quoted is as far from reality as if one were to define
a Gospel as an account of an evangelist's life. The person re-
sponsible for this untruth about the Qur'an is a professor at the
Jesuit Fsculff of Theology, Lyon ! The fact that people utter such
untruths helps to give a false impression of the Qur'an and
Islam.
There is hope today howeyer because religions are no longer
as inwardJooking as they were and many of them ane seeking
for mutual understanding. One must indeed be impressed by a
knowledge oi' the fact that an attempt is being made on the
highest level of the hierarchy by Roman Catholics to establish
contact with Muslims; they are trying to fight incomprehension
and are doing their utmost to change the inaccurate views on
Islam that are so widely held.
In the Introduction to this work, I mentioned the great change
that has taken place in the last few years and I quoted a document
produced by the Office for Non-Christian Affairs at the Vatican
under the title Ori,enta,tions for a Di,alogue between Chrwtians
anil Muslims (orientations pour un dialogue entre chr6tiens et
musulmans). It is a very important document in that it shows
the new position adopted towards Islam. As we read in the third
edition of this study (f9?0), this new position ealls for'a revi-
sion of our attitude towards it and a critical examination of our
prejudices' . . .
''We
should first set about progressively changing
ih" *"y our Christian brothers see it. This is the most important
of all.' . . . We must clear sway the
'out-dated
image inherited
from the past, or distorted by prejudice and slander' . . . , and
Ifllroducfion III
ionsareexcusable,thepresentationoffactsrunningcontraryto
therealityisnot. Itisdisturbingto read blatantuntruthsin
eminentlyrespectableworks writtenbyauthorswho aprioriare
highlyqualified.Thefollowingis anexampletakenfrom the
UniversalisEncyclopedia (EncyclopediaUniversalis) vo1.6.Un­
dertheheadingGospels(Evangiles)theauthoralludestothe
differencesbetween thelatterandtheQur'an:"Theevangelists
(
...)donot(...),asintheQur'an,claim totransmitan
autobiographythatGodmiraculouslydictatedtothe Prophet
...".Infact,theQur'anhasnothingtodowithanautobiogra­
phy:itisapreaching;aconsultation ofeventheworsttrans­
lationwouldhavemade thatclearto theauthor.Thestatement
wehavequotedis
asfarfrom realityasifoneweretodefine
aGospel
asanaccountofanevangelist'slife.Thepersonre­
sponsible
forthisuntruthabouttheQur'anisaprofessoratthe
JesuitFacultyofTheology,Lyon!The factthatpeopleuttersuch
untruthshelpstogiveafalseimpression oftheQur'anand
Islam.
Thereishopetodayhoweverbecausereligions
arenolonger
asinward-lookingastheywereandmany ofthemareseeking
formutualunderstanding.One mustindeedbeimpressedbya
knowledge
0:thefactthatanattemptisbeingmadeonthe
highestlevelof
thehierarchybyRomanCatholicstoestablish
contactwithMuslims;they
aretryingtofightincomprehension
andaredoingtheirutmosttochangetheinaccurateviewson
Islam
thataresowidelyheld.
IntheIntroductiontothiswork,Imentioned thegreatchange
thathastakenplaceinthe lastfewyearsandIquotedadocument
producedbythe
OfficeforNon-ChristianAffairs attheVatican
under
thetitleOrientationsforaDialoguebetweenChristians
andMuslims
(Orientationspour undialogueentrechretienset
musulmans).Itisavery importantdocumentin thatitshows
thenewpositionadoptedtowardsIslam.Aswereadin
thethird
editionofthisstudy(1970), thisnewpositioncalls for'arevi­
sionof
ourattitudetowardsitandacriticalexaminationof our
prejudices'...'Weshouldfirst setaboutprogressivelychanging
theway
ourChristianbrothersseeit.Thisisthemost important
ofall.'...Wemustclearawaythe'out-datedimageinherited
from
thepast,ordistortedby prejudiceandslander'. . . ,and

130. II8 THE 8IBI.q TIIE QUN'AN AI\ID SCIENCE
'recognize
the past injustice towards the Muslims for which the
west, with its christian education, is to blame." The Vatican
document is nearly tgo pages long. It therefore expands on the
refutation of classic views held by christians on Islam and sets
out the reality.
Under the title Emaneipa,ti,ng ourael,aes from our rnornt rrei-
ud;ices (Nous lib6rer de nos pr6jug6s les plus notables) the
authors address the following suggestions to christian*:
i
He""
also, we must surrender to a deep purification of our attitude. In
particular, what is meant by this are certain
.set
judgements'
that are all too often and too lighily made about Islam. It is
essential not to cultivate in the secret of our hearts views such
as these, too easily or arbitrarily arrived 8t, and which the
sincere Muslim finds confusing."
One extremely important view of this kind is the attitude which
leads people to repeatedly use the term
.Allah'
to mean the God
of the Muslims, as if the Muslims believed in a God who was
difierent from the God of the Christians. At Inh means
.the
Divinity' in Arabic: it is a single God, implying that a correct
transcription can only render the exact meaning of the word with
the help of the expression
'God'.
For the Musllm, al lfr,h is none
other than the God of Moses and Jesus.
The document produced by the office for Non-christian Affairs
at the vatican stresses this fundamentar point in the following
terms:
"It would seem pointless to maintain that Alleh is not really
God, as do eertain people in the West ! The conciliar documents
have put the above assertion in its proper place. There is no
better way of illustrating Islamic faith in God than by quoting
1. At a certain priod of history, hostility to lalam, in whatever ehape or
form, even coming from declared enemies of the church, wae received
with the most heartfelt approbation by hish dignitaries of the Catholic
chureh. Thus Pope Benedict xrv, who is reputed to have been the
greatest Pontifr of the Eighteenth century, unhesitatingly sent his blear-
ing to Voltsire. This waE in thanks for the dedication to him of the
tragpdy Mohamtncd or Fanaticrszr (Mahomet ou le Fanatisme) 1?41, e
coar8e satire that any clever scribbler of bad faith could have written
on any rubject. rn spite of a bad start, the play gained suffcient pres-
ti8e to be included in the repertoire ol the comddie-Francaiae.
111 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Crecognizethepastinjusticetowards theMuslimsforwhichthe
West,with itsChristianeducation,istoblame.'tTheVatican
document
isnearly150pageslong. Itthereforeexpandson the
refutationofclassicviewsheldbyChristiansonIslam andsets
outthereality.
UnderthetitleEmancipatingourselvesfromourworstprej­
udices
(Nouslibererdenosprejugeslesplusnotables)the
authorsaddressthefollowingsuggestionsto Christians:"Here
also,we mustsurrendertoadeeppurificationof ourattitude.In
particular,whatismeantby thisarecertaincsetjudgements'
thatarealltoooftenandtoolightlymadeaboutIslam. Itis
essential
nottocultivateinthesecretof ourheartsviewssuch
asthese,tooeasily orarbitrarilyarrivedat,andwhichthe
sincereMuslimfindsconfusing."
Oneextremely
importantviewofthiskindistheattitudewhich
leadspeopletorepeatedlyuse
theterm'Allah'tomeantheGod
oftheMuslims, asiftheMuslimsbelievedinaGodwhowas
different
fromtheGodoftheChristians.AlldhmeansCthe
Divinity'inArabic: itisasingleGod,implying thatacorrect
transcriptioncanonlyrendertheexactmeaning ofthewordwith
thehelpoftheexpression'God'. FortheMuslim, alldhisnone
other.thantheGod
ofMosesandJesus.
Thedocumentproducedbythe OfficeforNon-ChristianAffairs
attheVaticanstresses thisfundamentalpoint inthefollowing
terms:
"Itwouldseempointlesstomaintain thatAllahisnotreally
God,
asdocertainpeopleintheWest!Theconciliardocuments
have
puttheaboveassertioninits properplace.Thereisno
betterwayofillustratingIslamic faithinGodthanbyquoting
1.Atacertainperiodofhistory,hostilitytoIslam,inwhatevershapeor
form,evencoming fromdeclaredenemies ofthechurch,wasreceived
withthemostheartfeltapprobationbyhighdignitariesoftheCatholic
Church.
ThusPopeBenedict XIV,whoisreputedtohavebeenthe
greatestPontiffoftheEighteenthcentury,unhesitatinglysenthisbleS&­
ingtoVoltaire.Thiswasinthanksforthededicationtohimofthe
tragedyMohamm6dorFanaticism(MahometouIeFanatisme)1741,a
coarsesatirethatanycleverscribblerofbadfaithcouldhavewritten
onanysubject.Inspiteofabadstart,theplaygainedsufficientpres­
tigetobeincludedintherepertoire"oftheComedie-Francaise.

131. lntrr/luctior.
llg
the following extracts from Lumen Gentium':
'The
Muslims
profess the iaith of Abraham and worship with us the sole
merciful God, who is the future iudge of men on the Day of
Reckoning..."'
One can therefore understand the Muslims' protest at the all too
frequent custom in European languages of saying
'Allfih'
instead
of
.dod'
. . . Cultivated Muslims have praised D. Masson's French
translation of the Qur'an for having
'at
last' written
'Dieu'3
instead of
'Allah'.
The vatican document points out the following: "Allih is the
only word that Arabic-speaking Christians have for God"'
Muslims and Christians worship a single God'
The vatican document then undertakes a critieal examination
of the other false iudgements
made on Islam'
'Islamic
fatalism' is a widely-spread prejudice; the document
examines this and quoting the Qur'an for support, it puts in
opposition to this the notion of the responsibility man has, who
is to be judged by his actions. It shows that the concept of an
Islamic legalism is false; on the contrary, it opposes the sincerity
of faith to ttris by quoting trvo phrases in the Qur'an that are
highly misunderstood in the West:
,,There
is no compulsion in religion" (sura 2, verse 256)
,,(God)
has not laid upon you in religion any hardship"
(sura 22, verse 78)
The document opposes the widely-spread notion of
'Islam,
religion of fear'to
'is1am,
religion of love'Jove of one's neighbor
based on faith in God. It refutes the falsely spread notion that
Muslim morality hardly exists and the other notion, shared by
so many Jews and christians, of Islamic fanatieism. It makes
the following comment on this: "In fact, Islam was hardly any
more fanatical during its history than the sacred bastions of
Christiantty whenever the Christian faith took on' as it were'
a political value." At this point, the authors quote expressions
from the Qur'an that show how, in the west, the expression
'Holy
1. L,umen Gcntium is the title of a document produced by the second Ysti-
can Council (1962-1965)
2. ffi.
lnlroduction
113
thefollowingextractsfromLumenGentium!: 'TheMuslims
profess
thefaithofAbrahamandworshipwithus thesole
merciful
God,whois thefuturejudgeofmenon theDayof
Reckoning. . . ' "
Onecanthereforeunderstand
theMuslims'protest atthealltoo
frequentcustominEuropeanlanguages ofsaying'Allah'instead
of'God'
...CultivatedMuslimshavepraised D.Masson'sFrench
translationoftheQur'anforhaving'atlast'written'Dieu'2
insteadof'Allah'.
TheVaticandocumentpoints
outthefollowing:"Allahis the
onlyword thatArabic-speakingChristianshave
forGod."
MuslimsandChristiansworshipasingleGod.
TheVaticandocumentthenundertakesacriticalexamination
oftheotherfalsejudgementsmadeonIslam.
'Islamicfatalism' isawidely-spreadprejudice;thedocument
examinesthis
andquotingtheQur'anforsupport,itputsin
oppositiontothis
thenotionoftheresponsibility manhas,who
istobejudgedbyhisactions.
Itshowsthattheconceptof an
Islamiclegalismisfalse;on thecontrary,itopposesthesincerity
offaithtothisbyquotingtwophrasesinthe Qur'anthatare
highlymisunderstoodin theWest:
"Thereisnocompulsioninreligion"
(sura2,verse256)
U(God)has notlaiduponyouinreligionany hardship"
(sura22,verse78)
Thedocumentopposesthewidely-spreadnotionof'Islam,
religion
offear'to'Islam,religionoflove' -loveofone'sneighbor
basedon
faithinGod.Itrefutesthefalselyspreadnotion that
Muslimmoralityhardlyexistsand
theothernotion,sharedby
so
manyJewsandChristians,ofIslamicfanaticism. Itmakes
thefollowingcommenton this:"Infact,Islamwas hardlyany
morefanatical
duringitshistorythanthesacredbastions of
Christianitywhenever theChristianfaithtookon, asitwere,
apoliticalvalue."
Atthispoint,theauthorsquoteexpressions
fromtheQur'anthatshowhow,in theWest,theexpression'Holy
1.LumenGentiumisthetitleofadocumentproduced bytheSecondVati­
canCouncil(1962-1965)
I.God.

132. r14 TEE BIBLE, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
war" has been mis-translated;
,.i'
Arabic it is .4t iihnd ft, sabtt
Alld"h, tlre effort on God's road",
,,the
effort to spread Islam and
defend it against its aggressors." The vatican document con-
tinues as follows: "The iihad is not at all the Bibl ical kherem;
it does not lead to extermination, but to the sp,reading of God,s
and man's rights to ner,v lsnds."-"The past violence of tn* iihad
generally follorved the rttles of rvar; at the time of the Crusades
moreover, it rras not alrvays the Il{uslims that perpetrated the
rvorst slanghters."
Finally, the document deals *'ith the prejudice aceording to
rvhich "Islam is a hide-bottnd religion rvhich keeps its followers in
a kind of superannuated Middle Ages, making them unfit to
adapt to the technical conquests of the modern age.', It com-
pares analogous situations observed in christian eountries and
states the follorving: "11,e find, (. . .) in the traditional expansion
of Muslim thought, a principle of possible evolution in civilian
society."
I am certain that this defense of Isram by the vatican wilr
surprise many believers torla1.. be the.y Muslims, Jews or Chris_
tians. It is a demonstration of sincerity and open-mindedness
that is singularly in contrast rvith ttre attitudes inherited from
the past. The numbe' of people in the west who are aware of
the new attitudes adopted b.v the highest authorities in the
Catholic Church is hourever very small.
once one is aware of this faet, it comes as less of a surprise
to learn of ttre actions that sealed this reconciliation: firsfly, ih*..
was the offficial visit made by the president
of the office for
Itlon-christian Affairs at the vatican to King Faisal of saudi
1' Translators of the Qur'an, even famous ones, have not resisted the secu-
lar habit of putting into their translations things that are not realiy in
the Arabic text at all. one ean indeed add titles to the text that are not
in the original without changing the text itself, but this addition changes
the general meaning. R. Blachire, for example, in his well-known trans-
lation (Pub. Maisonneuve et Larose, paris,
1966, page rlb) inserta a
title that does not figure in the eur'an : Duiics of' the-Hory war touri-
gations de Ia guerre sainte). This is at the beginning of a passage that
is indisputably a call to arms, but does not have the character that hac
been aseribed to it. After reading this, how can the reader who only har
access to the Qur'an via translations fail to think that a Muslim's-duty
is to wage holy war?
114 THEBIBLE,THEQUR"ANANDSCIENCE
War'lhasbeenmis-translated;"inArabicitisAijihadIisabil
Allah,theeffortonGod's road","theeffortto spreadIslamand
defenditagainstitsaggressors."TheVaticandocumentcon­
tinuesasfollows:"ThejihadisnotatalltheBiblicalkherem;
itdoesnotleadtoextermination, buttothespreadingofGod's
andman'srightstonewlands."-"Thepastviolenceofthejihad
generallyfollowed therulesofwar;atthetimeoftheCrusades
moreover,
itwasnotalways theluslims thatperpetratedthe
worstslaughters."
Finally,thedocumentdealswith theprejudiceaccordingto
which"Islamisahide-boundreligionwhichkeeps
itsfollowersin
akindofsuperannuatedMiddleAges, makingthemunfitto
adapttothetechnicalconquests ofthemodernage."Itcom­
paresanalogoussituationsobservedinChristiancountriesand
statesthefollowing:"wefino,(...)inthe traditionalexpansion
ofMuslimthought,aprincipleofpossibleevolution incivilian
society."
I
amcertainthatthisdefenseofIslamby theVaticanwill
surprisemanybelieverstoday.be theyMuslims,JewsorChris­
tians.
Itisademonstrationofsincerityandopen-mindedness
thatissingularlyincontrastwiththeattitudesinheritedfrom
thepast.The numberofpeoplein the\Vestwho areawareof
thenewattitudesaooptedbythehighest authoritiesinthe
CatholicChurchishoweververysmall.
Onceoneis
awareofthisfact,itcomesaslessofasurprise
tolearnoftheactionsthatsealedthisreconciliation:firstly, there
wastheofficialvisit madebythePresidentoftheOfficefor
Non-ChristianAffairs attheVaticanto KingFaisalofSaudi
1.TranslatorsoftheQur'an,evenfamousones,havenotresistedthesecu­
larhabitofputtingintotheirtranslationsthingsthatarenotreallyin
theArabictextatall.One canindeedadd titlestothetextthatarenot
intheoriginalwithoutchangingthetextitself,butthisadditionchanges
thegeneralmeaning.R.Blachere,forexample,inhiswell-knowntrans­
lation(Pub.MaisonneuveetLarose,Paris,1966,page115)insertsa
titlethatdoesnotfigureintheQur'an:Duties01theHolyWar(Obli­
gationsdelaguerresainte).Thisisatthebeginningofapassagethat
isindisputablyacalltoarms,butdoesnothavethecharacterthathaH
beenascribedtoit.Afterreadingthis,howcanthereaderwhoonlyhas
accesstotheQur'anviatranslationsfailtothinkthataMuslim'sduty
istowageholywar?

133. h*ffir
fftr
Arabia; then the official reception given by Pope Peul VI tn the
Grand ulema of saudi Arabia in the course of 19?4. Henceforth,
one understands more clearly the spiritual significance of the fact
thst His Graee Biehop Elchinger received the Grand Ulema at
his cathedral in Strasbourg and invited them during their visit
to pray in the choir. This they did before the altar, turned
towards Ma,kka.
Thus the representatives of the Muslim and christian worlds
at their highest level, who share a faith in the same God and a
mutual respect for their differences of opinion, have agreed to
open a diatosue. This being so, it is surely quite natural for other
aspects of each respective Revelation to be confronted. The sub
ject of this confrontation is the examination of the Scriptures
in the light of scientific data and knowledge eoncerning the
authentieity of the texts. This examination is to be undertaken
for the Qur'an as it was for the Judeo-Christian Revelation'
The relationship between religions and science has not always
been the same in any one place or time. It is a fact that there is
no writing belonging to a monotheistic religion that condemns
science. In practise however, it must be admitted that scientists
have had great difficulties with the religious authorities of certain
creeds. For many centuries, in the christian world, scientific
development was opposed by the authorities in question, on their
own initiative and without reference to the authentic Scriptures.
We already know the measures taken against those who sought
to enlarge science, measures which often made scientists Eo into
exile to avoid being burnt at the stake, unless they recanted,
changed their attitude and begged for pardon. The case of Galileo
is always cited in this context: he was tried for having aceepted
the discoveries made by copernicus on the rotation of the Earth.
Galileo was condemned as the result of a mistaken interpretation
of the Bible, since not a single Scripture could reasonably be
brought against him.
In the case of Islam, the attitude towards science was' generally
speaking, quite different. Nothing could be clearer than the
famous Hadith of the Prophet: "seek for seience, even in china",
or the other hadith which says that the search for knowledge is
a strict duty for every Muslim man and woman. As we shall
see further on in this section, another crucial fact is that the
ltllrocfucdoa liS
Arabia;thentheofficialreceptiongiven byPopePaulVItothe
GrandUlema ofSaudiArabiain thecourseof1974.Henceforth,
oneunderstandsmoreclearlythespiritualsignificance
ofthefact
thatHisGraceBishopEIchingerreceived theGrandUlema at
hiscathedralinStrasbourgandinvitedthemduring theirvisit
toprayinthechoir.Thistheydidbeforethe altar,turned
towardsMakka.
Thus
therepresentativesoftheMuslim andChristianworlds
attheirhighestlevel,whosharea faithinthesameGodanda
mutualrespect
fortheirdifferencesofopinion,haveagreedto
openadialogue.Thisbeingso,
itissurelyquite naturalforother
aspectsofeachrespectiveRevelationtobeconfronted.Thesub­
ject
ofthisconfrontationis theexaminationof theScriptures
in
thelightofscientificdataandknowledgeconcerning the
authenticityofthetexts.Thisexaminationisto beundertaken
fortheQur'anas itwasfortheJudeo-ChristianRevelation.
Therelationshipbetweenreligionsandscience
hasnotalways
beenthesamein
anyoneplaceortime.Itisafactthatthereis
no
writingbelongingtoamonotheisticreligion thatcondemns
science.
Inpractisehowever, itmustbeadmittedthatscientists
have
hadgreatdifficultieswiththereligiousauthoritiesofcertain
creeds.
Formanycenturies,intheChristianworld,scientific
developmentwasopposedby
theauthoritiesinquestion,on their
owninitiativeandwithoutreferencetotheauthenticScriptures.
Wealreadyknowthemeasurestakenagainstthosewhosought
toenlargescience,measureswhichoftenmadescientists
gointo
exiletoavoidbeing
burntatthestake,unlesstheyrecanted,
changed
theirattitudeandbeggedforpardon.ThecaseofGalileo
isalwayscitedinthiscontext:hewas
triedforhavingaccepted
thediscoveriesmadebyCopernicuson therotationoftheEarth.
Galileowascondemnedastheresultofamistakeninterpretation
oftheBible,since notasingleScripturecouldreasonablybe
broughtagainsthim.
InthecaseofIslam,the attitudetowardssciencewas,generally
speaking',quitedifferent.Nothingcouldbeclearer
thanthe
famousHadithoftheProphet:"Seekforscience,eveninChina",
ortheotherhadithwhichsays thatthesearchforknowledgeis
a
strictdutyforeveryMuslimmanandwoman.Asweshall
see
furtheroninthissection,anothercrucial factisthatthe

134. lt0 TIIE BIDLE, IIIE QUB?N AIttD $GrnN6'g
Qur'an, while inviting us to cultivate scienee, itself contains many
observations on natural phenomena and includes explanatory
details which are seen to be in total agreement with modern
scientific data. There is no equal to this in the Judeo-christian
Revelation.
It would nevertheless be wrong to imagine that, in the history
of Islam, certain believers had never harboured a different atti-
tude towards science. It is a fact that, at eertain periods, the
obligation to educate oneself and others was rathei neglected.
It is equally true that in the Muslim world, as elsewhlre, an
attempt was sometimes made to stop scientific development. AII
the same it will be remembered that at the heisht of Islam,
between the Eighth and rwelfth centuries A.D., i.e. at a time
when restrictions on scientific development were in force in the
christian world, a very large number of studies and discoveries
were being made at Islamic nniversities. It was there that the
remarkable cultural resources of the time were to be found. The
califs library at cordoba contained 400,000 volumes. Averro€s
was teaching there, and Greek, Indian and
persian
sciences were
taught. This is why scholars from all over Europe went to study
at Cordoba, just as today people go to the United States to perfect
their studies. A very great number of ancient manuscripts have
come down to us thanks to cultivated Arabs who acted as the
vehicle for the culture of conquered countries. we are also greaily
indebted to Arabic culture for mathematics (algebra *"s an
Arabic invention), astronohr, physics (optics), g*logy, botany,
medicine (Avicenna) etc. For the very first time, science toqk on
an international character in the Islamic universities of the Mid-
dle Ages. At this time, men rvere more steeped in the religious
spirit than they are today; but in the Islamic world, this did not
prevent them from being both believers and scientists. Science
was the twin of religion and it shourd never have ceased to be so.
The Medieval period was, for the christian world, a time of
stagnation and absolute conformity. It must be stressed that
scientific research was not srowed down by the Judeo-christian
Revelation itself, but rather by those people who claimed to be
its servants. Following the Renaissance, the scientists' natural
reaction was to take vengeance on their former enemies; thiq
vengeance still continues today, to such an extent indeed that in
118 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Qur'an,whileinvitingustocultivatescience,itselfcontains many
observationson naturalphenomenaandincludesexplanatory
detailswhich
areseentobeintotalagreementwithmodem
scientificdata.Thereisnoequal
tothisintheJudea-Christian
Revelation.
Itwouldneverthelessbewrongtoimagine that,inthehistory
ofIslam,certainbelievershadneverharbouredadifferentatti­
tudetowardsscience.
Itisafactthat,atcertainperiods,the
obligationtoeducateoneselfandotherswas
ratherneglected.
ItisequallytruethatintheMuslimworld, aselsewhere,an
attemptwassometimesmadetostopscientificdevelopment. AlI
thesame itwillberemembered thatattheheightofIslam,
betweentheEighth
andTwelfthcenturiesA.D., Le.atatime
whenrestrictionsonscientificdevelopmentwereinforce
inthe
Christianworld,averylargenumber ofstudiesanddiscoveries
werebeingmade
atIslamicuniversities. Itwastherethatthe
remarkableculturalresources ofthetimeweretobefound.The
Calif's
libraryatCordobacontained400,000volumes.Averroes
wasteachingthere,
andGreek,Indian andPersianscienceswere
taught.ThisiswhyscholarsfromalloverEuropewenttostudy
atCordoba,justastodaypeoplegototheUnitedStatestoperfect
theirstudies.Avery greatnumberofancientmanuscriptshave
comedowntous
thankstocultivatedArahswhoactedas the
vehicleforthecultureofconqueredcountries. Wearealsogreatly
indebtedtoArabiccultureformathematics(algebrawas
an
Arabicinvention),astronomy,physics(optics),geology,botany,
medicine(Avicenna)etc.
Fortheveryfirsttime,sciencetookon
aninternationalcharacterintheIslamicuniversities oftheMid­
dleAges.
Atthistime,menweremoresteepedinthereligious
spiritthantheyaretoday;butintheIslamicworld,thisdidnot
preventthemfrombeingbothbelievers
andscientists.Science
wasthetwinofreligionand
itshouldneverhaveceasedto beso.
TheMedievalperiodwas,
fortheChristianworld,atime of
stagnationandabsoluteconformity. Itmustbestressedthat
scientificresearchwasnotsloweddown bytheJudeo-Christian
Revelationitself,but
ratherbythosepeoplewhoclaimed tobe
itsservants.FollowingtheRenaissance, thescientists'natural
reactionwastotakevengeanceon theirformerenemies; thi&
vengeancestillcontinuestoday,tosuch anextentindeed thatin

135. I*&tfutt
u7
the west, anyone who talks of God in scientific cireles really does
stand out. Ttris attitude affects the thinking of all young Beople
who receive a university education, Muslims included'
Their thinking could-hardly be different from what it is con-
sidering the exireme positions adopted by the most eminent
scientists. A Nobel prize winner tor ltleaicine has tried in the last
few years to perso*fl" people, in a book intended for mass publi-
cstion, that living matter was able to create itself by chance from
several basic .oriporr.nts. Starting, he says, with this primitive
living matter, and under the influence of various external cir-
cumstanees, organized living beings were formed, resulting in
the formidable complex being that constitutes man.
Surely these marvels of contemporary scientific knowledge in
the fietd of life should lead a thinking person to the opposite
conclusion. The organization presiding over the birth and main-
tenance of life surely appears more and more complicated as one
studies it; the *or" details one knows, the more admiration it
commands. A knowledge of this organization must surely lead
one to consider as less and less probable the part chance has to
play in the phenomenon of life. The further one advances along
the road to knowledge, especially of the infinitely small, the more
eloquent are the *"go**rrts in favor of the existence of a Creator'
Instead of being filled with humility in the face of such facts' man
is filled with
"l""ogrn.e.
He sneers at any idea of God, in the
same way he runs ao* anything that detracts from his pleasure
and enjoyment. This is the image of the materialist society that
is flourishing at present in the West'
what spiritual forces can be used to oppose this pollution of
thought practised by many contemporary seientists?
Judaism and christianity make no secret of their inability to
cope with the tide of materialism and invasion of the West by
atheism. Both of them are comrlletely taken oft guard, and from
one decade to the next one can surely see how seriously dimin-
ished their resistance is to this tide that threatens to sweep
evenrthing away. The materialist atheist sees in classic Chris-
tianity nothing more than a system constructed by men over the
last two thousand years designed to ensure the authority of a
minority over their fellow **tt. He is unable to find in Judeo-
Christisu writings any language that is even vaguely similar to
Inlroducliora
117
theWest,anyonewhotalks ofGodinscientificcirclesreallydoes
standout.This attitudeaffectsthethinkingofallyoungpeople
whoreceiveauniversityeducation,Muslimsincluded.
Theirthinkingcouldhardlybedifferentfrom
whatitiscon­
sidering
theextremepositionsadoptedby themosteminent
scientists.ANobelprizewinner
forMedicinehas triedinthelast
fewyearstopersuadepeople,inabookintended
formasspubli­
cation,
thatlivingmatterwasabletocreateitselfbychance
from
severalbasiccomponents. Starting,hesays,withthisprimitive
living
matter,andundertheinfluenceofvariousexternalcir­
cumstances,organizedlivingbeingswereformed,resulting
in
theformidablecomplexbeing thatconstitutesman.
Surelythesemarvels ofcontemporaryscientificknowledgein
thefieldoflifeshouldleadathinkingpersonto
theopposite
conclusion.Theorganizationpresidingoverthe
birthandmain­
tenance
oflifesurelyappearsmore andmorecomplicated asone
studies
it;themoredetailsoneknows, themoreadmiration it
commands.Aknowledge ofthisorganization mustsurelylead
onetoconsideraslessandlessprobable
thepartchancehas to
playin thephenomenonoflife.The furtheroneadvancesalong
theroadtoknowledge,especiallyof theinfinitelysmall, themore
eloquent
aretheargumentsinfavoroftheexistenceofaCreator.
Insteadofbeingfilled
withhumilityintheface ofsuchfacts,man
isfilledwitharrogance.Hesneers atanyideaofGod,in the
samewayhe runsdownanythingthatdetractsfromhispleasure
andenjoyment.Thisistheimageof thematerialistsociety that
isflourishingatpresentintheWest.
Whatspiritualforcescanbeusedtooppose
thispollutionof
thoughtpractisedbymanycontemporaryscientists?
Judaism
andChristianitymakenosecretof theirinabilityto
copewiththetide
ofmaterialismandinvasionoftheWestby
atheism.Both
ofthemarecompletelytakenoffguard, andfrom
onedecadetothenextonecansurelyseehowseriouslydimin­
ished
theirresistanceisto thistidethatthreatenstosweep
everythingaway.Thematerialist
atheistseesinclassicChris­
tianitynothingmorethanasystemconstructedbymenoverthe
lasttwothousandyearsdesigned toensuretheauthority ofa
minorityover
theirfellowmen.HeisunabletofindinJudea­
Christianwritings
anylanguagethatisevenvaguelysimilarto

136. ll8
TIIE BIBLq TIIE QUR AN AND SCIENCE
his_ own; they contain so many improbabilities, eontradictions
and ineompatibilities with modern scientific data, that he refuses
to take texts into consideration that the vast majority of theo-
Iogians would like to see aceepted as an inseparable whote.
When one mentions Islam to the materialist atheist, he smileg
with a eomplaeency that is only equal to his ignorance of the
stlb;gct rn common with the maiority of western intellectuals,
of whatever religious persuasion, he has an impressive collection
of false notions about Islam.
one must, on this point, allow him one or two excuses: Firsfly,
apart from the newly-adopted attitudes prevailing among the
highest catholic authorities, Isram has arways beJn subject in
the west to a so-called
'secular
slander'. Anyone in the west who
has aequired a deep knowledg.e of rslam knows just to whst
extent its history, dogma, and aims have been distorted. One
must also take into account the fact that documents pubrished
in European Ianguages on this subjeet (reaving aside hishly
speeialized studies) do not make the work of a person wiling
to learn any easier.
_
A knowledge of the Isramic Revelation is indeed fundamental
from this point of view. unfortunatery, passages from the
Qur'an, espeeially those relating to seientinc data, are badly
translated and interpreted, so that a scientist has every right to
make critieisms-with apparent justification-that
the Book
does not actually deserve at all. This detail is worth rting
henceforth: inaccuracies in translation or erroneous commen_
taries (the one is often associated with the other), which would
not have surprised anybody one or two centuries'ago, offend to-
day's seientists. when faced with a badly transrated phrase con-
taining a scientificalry unaeceptable statement, the scientist is
prevented from taking the phrase into serious consideration. rn
the chapter on human reproduction, a very typical example will
be given of this kind of enor.
why do such errors in translation exist? They may be explained
by the fact that modern translators often take up, rather uncriti-
cally, the interpretations given by older commentators. In their
day, the latter had an excuse for having given an inappropriate
definition to an Arabic rvord containins r.rr"""t possiul *"rn-
ings; they could not possibly have understood the real sense of
118 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
hisown;theycontainsomanyimprobabilities,contradictions
andincompatibilitieswithmodemscientificdata,
thatherefuses
totaketextsintoconsideration
thatthevastmajorityoftheo­
logianswouldliketoseeaccepted
asaninseparablewhole.
WhenonementionsIslam
tothematerialistatheist, hesmiles
withacomplacency
thatisonlyequaltohisignorance ofthe
subject.Incommonwiththe majorityofwesternintellectuals,
ofwhateverreligiouspersuasion, hehasanimpressivecollection
offalsenotionsaboutIslam.
Onemust,onthispoint,allowhimone
ortwoexcuses:Firstly,
apartfromthenewly-adoptedattitudesprevailingamongthe
highestCatholicauthorities,Islamhasalwaysbeensubjectin
theWesttoaso-called'secularslander'.AnyoneintheWestwho
hasacquiredadeepknowledge
ofIslamknows justtowhat
extentitshistory,dogma,andaimshavebeendistorted.One
mustalsotakeintoaccountthe
factthatdocumentspublished
inEuropeanlanguageson
thissubject(leavingasidehighly
specializedstudies)donotmake
theworkofapersonwilling
tolearn
anyeasier.
Aknowledge
oftheIslamicRevelationisindeedfundamental
fromthispoint
ofview.Unfortunately,passagesfrom
the
Qur'an,especiallythoserelatingtoscientificdata,
arebadly
translatedandinterpreted,so thatascientisthaseveryrightto
makecriticisms-withapparentjustification-thattheBook
doesnotactuallydeserve
atall.Thisdetail isworth)ting
henceforth:inaccuracies
intranslationorerroneouscommen­
taries(theoneisoftenassociatedwith theother),whichwould
nothavesurprisedanybodyone
ortwocenturiesago,offendto­
day'sscientists.Whenfacedwithabadly
translatedphrasecon­
tainingascientificallyunacceptablestatement,
thescientistis
prevented
fromtakingthephraseintoseriousconsideration.
In
thechapteronhumanreproduction,averytypicalexamplewill
begivenofthiskindoferror.
Whydosucherrorsintranslationexist?They maybeexplained
bythefact
thatmoderntranslatorsoftentakeup, ratheruncriti­
cally,theinterpretationsgivenbyoldercommentators.
Intheir
day,the latterhadanexcuseforhavinggiven aninappropriate
definitionto
anArabicwordcontainingseveralpossiblemean­
ings;theycouldnotpossiblyhaveunderstood
therealsense of

137. Iffin
ll0
the word or phrase which has only become clear in the present
day thanks to scientific knowledge. In other words, the problem
is raised of the n€cessary revision of translations and com-
mentaries. It was not possible to do this at a certain period in
the past, but nowadays we have knowledge that enubles us to
render their true sense. These problems of translation are not
preent for the texts of the Judeo-Christian Revelation: the case
described here is absolutely unique to the Qur'an'
These scientific considerations, which sre very specific to the
Qur'an,
gfeatly surprised me at first. Up until then, I had not
thought it possible for one to find so many statements in a tnxt
"o*piled
more than thirteen centuries ago referring to extremely
diverse subjects and all of them totally in keeping with modern
scientific knowledge. In the beginning, I had no faith whatsoever
in Islam. I began lhis
"**mination
of the texts with a completely
open mind and a total obiectivity. If there was any influence
".ting
upon me, it was gained from what I had been taught in
my youttr; people did not speak of Muslims, but of
'Muhamma-
dens" to mahe it quite clear that what was meant was a religion
founded by a, tttttt and which could not therefore have any
kind of vslue in terms of God. Like many in the west, I could
hsve retained the same false notions about Islam; they are so
widely-spread today, that I am indeed surprised when I come
across &nyone, other than a specialist, who can talk in an enlighL
ened manner on this subject. I therefore admit that before I was
glven a view of Islam difrerent from the one received in the west'
I was myself extremelY ignorant.
I owe the fact that I was able to realize the false nature of the
judgements generally made in the West about Islam to excep-
tional circumstances. It was in saudi Arabia itself that an inkling
was given to me of the extent to which opinions held in the West
on this subject are liable to error.
The debt of gratitude I owe to the late King Faisal, whose
memory I salute with deepest respect, is indeed very great: the
fact that I was given the signal honour of hearing him speak on
Islam and was ubl. to raise u'ith him certain problems concerning
the interpretation of the Qur'an in relation to modern science is
a very cherished memory. It was an extremely great privilege
lralrodudiort
------
118
thewordorphrasewhichhasonlybecomeclear inthepresent
daythankstoscientificknowledge. Inotherwords,theproblem
israisedof
thenecessaryrevision oftranslationsandcom­
mentaries.
Itwasnotpossibleto dothisatacertainperiod in
thepast,butnowadayswehaveknowledge thatenablesus to
rendertheirtruesense.Theseproblems oftranslationarenot
presentforthetextsoftheJudeo-ChristianRevelation:thecase
describedhereisabsolutelyunique
totheQur'an.
Thesescientificconsiderations,which
areveryspecifictothe
Qur'an,greatlysurprisedme atfirst.Upuntilthen,Ihad not
thoughtitpossibleforonetofind somanystatementsina text
compiledmore thanthirteencenturiesago referringtoextremely
diversesubjectsandallofthemtotallyinkeeping
withmodem
scientificknowledge.
Inthebeginning,Ihad nofaithwhatsoever
inIslam.Ibeganthisexaminationofthetextswithacompletely
openmindandatotalobjectivity.
Iftherewasanyinfluence
actinguponme,
itwasgainedfrom whatIhadbeen taughtin
myyouth;peopledidnotspeak ofMuslims,butof'Muhamma­
dans',
tomakeitquiteclear thatwhatwasmeantwasareligion
foundedbya
manandwhichcould notthereforehaveany
kindofvalue
intermsofGod.Like manyintheWest,Icould
haveretained
thesamefalsenotionsaboutIslam;they areso
widely-spreadtoday, thatIamindeedsurprisedwhenIcome
acrossanyone,
otherthanaspecialist,whocan talkinanenlight­
ened
manneronthissubject.Ithereforeadmit thatbeforeIwas
givenaview
ofIslamdifferentfrom theonereceivedintheWest,
Iwasmyselfextremelyignorant.
Iowethefact
thatIwasabletorealizethefalse natureofthe
judgementsgenerallymadeintheWestaboutIslamtoexcep­
tionalcircumstances.
ItwasinSaudiArabiaitself thataninkling
wasgiventomeoftheextenttowhichopinionsheldintheWest
onthissubject
areliableto error.
Thedebtofgratitude lowetothelateKingFaisa!,whose
memoryIsalutewithdeepestrespect,isindeedvery
great:the
factthatIwasgiventhesignalhonourofhearinghimspeak on
Is1amandwasabletoraisewithhimcertainproblemsconcerning
theinterpretationoftheQur'aninrelationtomodernscienceis
averycherishedmemory.
Itwasanextremely greatprivilege

138. 180 TIIE BBLE fiIE QI'R'AN AND SCTENGE
for me to have gathered so much preeious information from him
personally and those around him.
sinee r had now seen the wide gap separating the reality of
Islsm from the image we have of it in the west, I experienced
a great need to learn Arabie (rvhieh I did not speak) to be suffi-
ciently well-equipped to progress in the study of such a misunder-
stood religion. My first goal was to read the eur'an and to make
a sentence-by-sentenee analysis of it with the help of various
commentaries essential to a eritical study. My approach was to
pay special attention to the deseription of numerous natural
phenomena given in the eur'an; the hishly accurate nature of
certain details referring to them in thJ BLok, which was only
apparent in the original, struek me by the fact that they were
in keeping with present-day ideas, although a man living: at the
time of Muhammad could not have *urp..t.d this at all. I sub.
sequently read several works written by Muslim authors on the
scientific aspects of the eur'anic text: they \4rere extremely helpful
in my appreciation of it, but I have not sofar discovered a general
study of this subjeet made in the West.
What initially strikes the reader confronted for the first time
with a text of this kind is the sheer abundance of subjects dis-
cussed: the Creation, astronomy, the explanation of .*"t*in maL
ters concerning the earth, and the animal and vegetable kingdoms,
human reproduction. whereas monumental e*ors are to be found
in the Bible, I could not find a single error in the eur'an. I had to
stop and ask myself : if a man was the author of the eur'an,
how could he have written facts in the Seventh century A.D. that
today are shown to be in keeping with modern scientific knowl-
edge? There was absolutely no doubt about it: the text of the
Qur'an we have today is most definitely a text of the period, if
I may be allowed to put it in these terms (in the next cirapter of
the present section of the book I shall be dealins with this prob-
lem). lVhat human explanation can there be for this observation?
In my opinion there is no explanation; there is no special reason
why an inhabitant of the Arabian peninsula
shouid , at a time
when King Dagobert was reigning in France (629-689 A.D.),
have had scientific knowledge on certain subjects that was ten
centuries ahead of our own.
110 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
formetohavegatheredsomuchpreciousinformationfromhim
personally
andthosearoundhim.
SinceI
hadnowseenthewidegap separatingtherealityof
Islamfrom theimagewehave ofitintheWest,Iexperienced
a
greatneedtolearnArabic(whichIdidnotspeak)tobesuffi­
cientlywell-equipped
toprogressinthestudyofsuchamisunder­
stoodreligion.Myfirstgoalwas
toreadtheQur'anand tomake
asentence-by-sentenceanalysis
ofitwiththehelpofvarious
commentariesessentialtoacriticalstudy.Myapproachwas
to
payspecialattentiontothedescription ofnumerousnatural
phenomenagiven intheQur'an;thehighlyaccurate natureof
certaindetails referringtothemin theBook,whichwasonly
apparentintheoriginal,struckmebythefact thattheywere
inkeepingwithpresent-dayideas,althoughamanliving
atthe
timeofMuhammadcouldnothavesuspected thisatall.Isub­
sequentlyreadseveralworks
writtenbyMuslimauthorson the
scientificaspectsofthe Qur'anictext:theywereextremelyhelpful
inmyappreciation
ofit,butIhavenotso fardiscoveredageneral
studyofthissubjectmadeintheWest.
Whatinitiallystrikesthe readerconfrontedforthefirsttime
witha
textofthiskindisthesheerabundance ofsubjectsdis­
cussed:theCreation,astronomy,theexplanationofcertainmat­
tersconcerningtheearth,andtheanimalandvegetablekingdoms,
humanreproduction.Whereasmonumental
errorsaretobefound
intheBible,Icouldnotfindasingle
errorintheQur'an.Ihad to
stopand askmyself:ifamanwasthe authoroftheQur'an,
howcouldhehavewrittenfactsintheSeventhcenturyA.D.
that
todayareshowntobeinkeepingwithmodernscientificknowl­
edge?Therewasabsolutely
nodoubtabout it:thetextofthe
Qur'anwehavetodayismostdefinitelya textoftheperiod, if
Imaybeallowedto putitintheseterms(inthenextchapterof
thepresentsectionofthebookIshall bedealingwiththisprob­
lem).
Whathumanexplanationcanthere beforthisobservation?
Inmyopinionthereis
noexplanation;thereis nospecialreason
whyaninhabitantoftheArabianPeninsulashould,
atatime
whenKingDagobertwasreigninginFrance(629-639
A.D.),
have hadscientificknowledge oncertainsubjects thatwasten
centuriesaheadof
ourown.

139. /rrrfrtdluc'drr;
lll
It is an establistred fact that at the time of the Qut'anic Revela'
tion, i.e. within a period of roughly twenty years straddling
Hegira (622 A.D.), scientific knowledge had not progressed for
eenturies and the period of activity in Isla,mic civilization, witlh
its accompanying scientific upsurgp' ci1lne after the cloee of the
eur'anic it"tr.t*t]on. Only ignorance of such religious and s€culrr
a"t" ean lead to the following bizarre suggestion I have hesrd
several times: if surprising statements of s scientifie nature
exigt in the Qurran, they may be accounted for by the fact t,hst
Arab scientists were so fer shesd of their time and Muha'mmad
was influenced by their work. Anyone who knows anything sbout
Islemic history is aware that the period of the Middle ASeB which
sew the cultural and scientific upsurge in the Arab world came
after Muhammad, and would not therefore indulge in such
whims. Susgestions of this kind are particula"lry ofi the mark
because the-maiority of scientific facts which are either 8ug-
gested or very *t**itv recorded in the Qut'an have only bo€n
confirmed in modern times.
It is e88y to see therefore how for centuries commetrtators on
the Qurtan
(including those writing at the height of Islamic
culture) have inevitably made errors of interTretation ilF" csse
of certain verses whose exact meaning could not possibly have
been rasped. It was not until much later, at a period not far
from our own, that it was possible to translate and interaret thert
eorreetly. Thi; implies thal a thorough linguistic lrnowledge is not
in itseli sufficient to understand these verses frtm the Qurtan'
what is neeaea abng with this is a hishly diversified knowledge
of science. A study such gs the frresent one embraees many
dise,iplines and is in that sense encyclopedic. As the qrrestions
raised are'discussed, the variety of scientific lrnowledgB essential
to the understanding of certain verses of the Qur'an will become
clear.
The Qur'an does not aim at explaining eertain lsws gpverning
the universe, however; it has an absolutely bssic religious objec-
tive. The descriptions of Divine Omnipotence sre what princi-
pally incite *an to reflect on the works of Creation' They are
"."i*p"nied
by reference$ to fscts aceessible to human observl-
tion or to laws hefined by God who presides over the organization
of the universe both in the sciences of nature and as regard'r man'
lfllroduclloa
III
Itisanestablishedfact thatatthetimeoftheQur'anicRevela­
tion,i.e.withinaperiodofroughlytwentyyearsstraddling
Hegira(622A.D.),scientificknowledgehad
notprogressedfor
centuriesandtheperiodofactivityinIslamiccivilization,
with
itsaccompanyingscientificupsurge,came
a,fte:rthecloseofthe
Qur'anicRevelation.Onlyignorance
ofsuchreligiousandsecular
datacanleadto thefollowingbizarresuggestionIhaveheard
severaltimes:
ifsurprisingstatements ofascientificnature
existin theQur'an,theymay beaccountedforby thefactthat
Arabscientistswereso faraheadof theirtimeandMuhammad
wasinfluencedby
theirwork.Anyonewhoknowsanythingabout
Islamichistory
isawarethattheperiodof theMiddleAgeswhich
saw
theculturalandscientificupsurgein theArabworldcame
afterMuhammad,andwouldnotthereforeindulgeinsuch
whims.Suggestions
ofthiskind areparticularlyoff themark
becausethemajorityofscientificfactswhich
areeithersug­
gested
orveryclearlyrecordedin theQur'anhaveonly been
confirmedinmoderntimes.
Itiseasytoseethereforehowforcenturiescommentatorson
theQur'an(includingthosewriting
attheheight ofIslamic
culture)haveinevitablymade
errorsofinterpretationintheease
ofcertainverseswhoseexactmeaningcould
notpossiblyhave
beengrasped.
Itwasnotuntilmuchlater, ataperiodnotfar
fromourown, thatitwaspossibletotranslateandinterpretthem
correctly.Thisimplies
thatathoroughlinguisticknowledgeis not
initselfsufficienttounderstandtheseversesfrom
theQur'an.
Whatisneededalongwiththisisahighlydiversifiedknowledge
ofscience.Astudysuch
asthepresentoneembracesmany
disciplinesandis
inthatsenseencyclopedic. Asthequestions
raisedare-discussed,thevarietyofscientificknowledgeessential
totheunderstandingofcertainversesof
theQur'anwillbecome
clear.
TheQur'andoesnotaim
atexplainingcertainlawsgoverning
theUniverse,however; ithasanabsolutelybasicreligiousobjec­
tive_ThedescriptionsofDivineOmnipotence
arewhatprinci­
pallyinciteman
toreflecton theworksofCreation.They are
accompaniedbyreferences tofactsaccessibletohumanobserva­
tion
ortolawsdefinedby Godwhopresidesovertheorganization
oftheuniversebothinthesciencesof
natureandasregardsman.

140. lll
TF BIBLE THE QTTR AN AND SCTENGE
One pert of these assertions is eesily understood, but the mean_
ing of the other can only be grasped if one has the essential scien-
ti{tc knowledge it requires. This means that in former times, man
eould only distinguish an apparent meaning which led him to
draw the wrong conclusions on aecount of ttre inaa.qo**y of his
lnowledge at the time in guestion.
It is possible that the ehoiee of verses from the eur'an whieh
are to be studied for their scientific content may plrhaps seem
too small for certain llruslim writers who have- aiready d""*r,
attention to them before I have. In general, I believe I have
r_etained a slighfly smaller number of vers"* th*n they have. on
the other hand, I have singred out several verses which untir
now have not, in my opinion, been granted the importance they
deserye from-a
_scientific
point of view. whereu"" I **" have
mistakenly failed to take verses into eonsideration for this study
that were seleeted by these writers, I hope that they will not hold
it againet me. I heve also found, on oceasion, that certain books
contain scientific interpretations which do not appear to me to
be correct; it is with an open mind and a elear eonscience that I
have provided personal interpretations of such verses.
By the same token, I have tried to find references in the eur'an
to phenomena accessibre to human comprehension but which h^ave
not been confirmed by modern science- In this context, I think I
may have found references in the eur'an to the presence of
planets in the universe that are similar to the Earttr. tt must be
added that many scientists think this is a perfectly feasible fact,
although modern data cannot provide rr,y hirrt of certainty. I
thought r owed it to myself to mention this, whilst retaining atl
the attendant reservations that might be appried.
Had this study been made thirty years ago, it would have been
necessary to add another fact predicted by the eur'an to what
would have been eited concerning astrotto*y; this fact is the con-
quest of space. At that time, subsequent to the first trials of
ballistic missiles, people imagined a day when man rvould perhaps
have the material possibirity of reaving his earthly habitat and
exploring space. It was then known ttrat a verse existed in the
Qur'an predicting how one day man would make this conquest.
This statement has now been verified.
10 1'IJEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Onepartoftheseassertionsiseasilyunderstood, butthemean­
ingoftheothercanonlybe graspedifonehastheessentialscien­
tificknowledge
itrequires.Thismeansthatinformertimes,man
couldonly distinguishanapparentmeaningwhichled himto
drawthewrongconclusionsonaccount oftheinadequacyofhis
knowledge
atthetimeinquestion.
ItispossiblethatthechoiceofversesfromtheQur'anwhich
aretobestudiedfortheirscientificcontentmayperhapsseem
toosmallforcertainMuslimwriterswhohavealreadydrawn
atte.ntiontothembeforeIhave. Ingeneral,IbelieveI have
retainedaslightlysmaller numberofversesthantheyhave.On
theotherhand,Ihavesingled outseveralverseswhichuntil
nowhavenot,
inmyopinion,been grantedtheimportancethey
deservefromascientificpointofview.WhereverImayhave
mistakenlyfailed totakeversesintoconsideration forthisstudy
thatwereselectedbythese writers,Ihopethattheywillnothold
itagainstme.I havealsofound, onoccasion,thatcertainbooks
containscientific
interpretationswhichdo notappeartometo
becorrect;itiswithanopenmindandaclearconsciencethatI
haveprovidedpersonal interpretationsofsuchverses.
Bythesametoken,Ihave triedtofindreferencesintheQur'an
tophenomenaaccessible tohumancomprehensionbutwhichhave
notbeenconfirmed bymodernscience. Inthiscontext,I thinkI
mayhavefoundreferences intheQur'antothepresenceof
planetsintheUniversethataresimilartotheEarth.Itmustbe
added
thatmanyscientiststhinkthisisaperfectlyfeasiblefact,
although
moderndatacannotprovide anyhintofcertainty.I
thoughtlowedittomyselftomentionthis,whilst retainingall
theattendantreservationsthatmightbeapplied.
Hadthisstudybeenmade thirtyyearsago,itwouldhavebeen
necessaryto
addanotherfactpredictedbythe Qur'antowhat
wouldhavebeencitedconcerning astronomy;thisfactisthecon­
quest
ofspace.Atthattime,subsequent tothefirsttrialsof
ballisticmissiles,peopleimaginedadaywhen
manwouldperhaps
havethematerialpossibilityofleavinghis earthlyhabitatand
exploringspace. Itwasthenknownthataverseexisted inthe
Qur'anpredictinghowone daymanwouldmake thisconquest.
Thisstatementhasnowbeenverified.

141. htfioilwfutt
The present confrontation between Holy Scripture and science
bringS id""s into play, both for the Bible and the Qur'an, which
concern scientific truth. For this confrontation to be valid' the
scientific arguments to be relied upon must be quite soundly
established and must leave no room for doubt. Those who balk
at the idea of accepting the intervention of science in an appreci-
ation of the Scriptures deny that it is possible for science to
constitute a valid term of comparison (whether it be the Bible'
which does not escape the comparison unscathed-and we have
seen why-or the Qur'an, which has nothing to fear from sci-
ence). Science, they say, is changing with the times and a fact
aceepted today may be rejected later.
This last comment calls for the following observation: a dis-
tinetion must be drawn between scientific theory and duly con-
trolled observed fact. Theory is intended to explain a phenomenon
or a series of phenomena not readily undershandable. In many
instances theory changes: it is liable to be modified or replaeed
by another theory when scientific progress makes it easier to
analyse facts and invisage a more viable explanation. On the
other hand, an observed fact checked by experimentation is not
liable to modification: it becomes easier to define its character-
istics, but it remains the same. It has been established that the
Earth revolves around the Sun and the Moon around the Earth'
and this fact will not be subjeet to revision; all that may be done
in the future is to define the orbits more clearly.
A regard for the changlng nature of theorY is, for example,
what made me reiect a verse from the Qur'an thought by a
Muslim physicist to predict the concept of anti-matter, a theory
which is at present the subject of much debate' One can, on the
other hand, quite legitimately devote great attention to a verse
from the Qur'an describing the aquatic origins of life, a pheno-
menon we shall never be able to verify, but which has many argu-
ments that speak in its favour. As for observed facts such as the
evolution of the human embryo, it is quite possible to confront
different stages described in the Qur'an with the data of modern
embryology and find complete concordance between modern sci-
ence and the verses of the Qur'an referring to this subject'
This confrontation between the Qur'an and science has been
completed by two other comparisons: one is the confrontation
12tl
Introduction 123
ThepresentconfrontationbetweenHolyScriptureandscience
bringsideasintoplay,both
fortheBibleandtheQur'an,which
concernscientific
truth.Forthisconfrontationtobevalid,the
scientificargumentstobereliedupon
mustbequitesoundly
established
andmustleavenoroom fordoubt.Thosewhobalk
attheideaofacceptingtheinterventionofscience inanappreci­
ation
oftheScripturesdeny thatitispossibleforscienceto
constituteavalid
tennofcomparison(whether itbetheBible,
whichdoes
notescapethecomparisonunscathed-andwehave
seen
why--ortheQur'an,whichhasnothingto fearfromsci­
ence).Science,theysay,ischangingwiththetimesandafact
acceptedtoday
mayberejectedlater.
This
lastcommentcalls forthefollowingobservation:adis­
tinction
mustbedrawnbetweenscientifictheoryanddulycon­
trolledobservedfact.Theoryisintendedtoexplainaphenomenon
oraseriesofphenomenanotreadilyunderstandable. Inmany
instancestheorychanges:
itisliabletobemodified orreplaced
byanothertheorywhenscientificprogressmakes iteasierto
analysefacts andinvisageamoreviableexplanation. Onthe
otherhand, anobservedfactcheckedbyexperimentationisnot
liable
tomodification:itbecomeseasiertodefine itscharacter­
istics,
butitremainsthesame. Ithasbeenestablished thatthe
EarthrevolvesaroundtheSunandtheMoon aroundtheEarth,
and.thisfactwillnotbesubjecttorevision;all thatmaybedone
inthe
futureistodefinetheorbitsmoreclearly.
A
regardforthechangingnatureoftheoryis, forexample,
whatmademerejectaversefromtheQur'an thoughtbya
Muslimphysicist
topredicttheconceptofanti-matter,atheory
whichis
atpresentthesubjectofmuchdebate.Onecan,on the
otherhand,quitelegitimatelydevote greatattentiontoaverse
from
theQur'andescribingtheaquaticoriginsoflife,apheno­
menonweshallneverbeabletoverify,butwhichhasmanyargu­
ments
thatspeakinitsfavour.As forobservedfactssuch asthe
evolutionofthehumanembryo, itisquitepossibletoconfront
differentstagesdescribedin
theQur'anwiththe dataofmodern
embryology
andfindcompleteconcordancebetweenmodernsci­
ence
andtheversesoftheQur'an referringtothissubject.
ThisconfrontationbetweentheQur'anandsciencehasbeen
completedbytwoothercomparisons:oneistheconfrontation

142. I'g1 TIIE BIBI.FO TIIE QIIN'AI{ AND SCIEN@
of modern knowledge with Biblieal data on the same subjects;
and the other is the comparison from the same seientific point of
view between the date in the eurran, the Book of Bevelation
transmitted by God to the Prophet, and the data in the Hadiths,
books narrating the deeds and sayings of Muhammad that lie
ouLgide the written Revelstion.
At the end of this, the third section of the present work, the
detailed results of the comparison between the Biblical and
Qur'anic description of a single event are given, along with an
aceount of how the passage fared when subjected to the scientific
criticism of each description. An examination has, for example,
been made in the case of the Creation and of the Flood. In eaeh
instance, the incompatibilities with science in the Biblical descrip-
tion have been made clear. Also to be seen is the complete agree-
ment between science and the descriptions in the eur'an referring
to them. We shall note precisely those differences that make one
description seigntifically acceptable in the present day and the
other unacceptable.
firis observation is of prime importanee, since in the west,
Jews, Christians and Atheists are unanimous in stating (without
a scrap of evidenee however) that lvruhammad wrote the eur'an
or had it written as an imitation of the Bible. It is claimed thet
stories of religious history in the Qur'an resume Biblical stories.
This attitude is as thoughtless as saying that Jesus Himself
duped Iris contemporaries by drawing inspiration from the old
Testament during His preachings: the whole of Matthew's Gos-
pel is based on this continuation of the old restament, as we
have indeed seen already. What expert in exegesis would dream
of depriving Jesus of his status ag God's envoy for this reason?
This is nevertheless the way thst Muhammad is judged more
often than not in the West: "all he did was to copy ttre Bible".
rt is a summary judgement that does not take account of the faet
that the Qur'an and the Bible provide different versions of a
single event. People prefer not to talk about the difference in the
descriptions. They are pronounced to be the same and thus sciep-
tific knowledge need not be brought in. we shall enlarge on these
problems when dealing with the description of the Creation and
the Flood.
124 THEBmLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
ofmodernknowledgewithBiblical dataonthesamesubjects;
andtheotheristhecomparisonfrom thesamescientificpoint of
viewbetweenthe dataintheQur'an, theBookofRevelation
transmittedbyGodtotheProphet,and thedataintheHadiths,
books
narratingthedeedsandsayingsofMuhammad thatlie
out.CJidethewrittenRevelation.
Attheendofthis,thethirdsectionofthepresentwork,the
detailedresultsofthecomparisonbetween theBiblicaland
Qur'anicdescriptionofasingleevent aregiven,along withan
accountofhowthepassagefaredwhensubjectedto thescientific
criticism
ofeachdescription.Anexaminationhas, forexample,
beenmadein
thecaseoftheCreationandof theFlood.Ineach
instance,theincompatibilitieswithsciencein
theBiblicaldescrip­
tionhavebeenmadeclear.Alsotobeseenis
thecompleteagree­
mentbetweenscienceandthedescriptionsin theQur'anreferring
tothem.Weshallnotepreciselythosedifferences thatmakeone
description
sci~ntifically acceptablein thepresentdayandthe
otherunacceptable.
Thisobservationis
ofprimeimportance,sincein theWest,
Jews,ChristiansandAtheists
areunanimousin stating(without
ascrapofevidencehowever) thatMuhammadwrotetheQur'an
orhaditwrittenasanimitationoftheBible.Itisclaimedthat
storiesofreligioushistoryintheQur'anresumeBiblicalstories.
Thisattitudeis
asthoughtlessassayingthatJesusHimself
dupedHiscontemporariesby
drawinginspirationfrom theOld
Testament
duringHispreachings:thewhole ofMatthew'sGos­
pelisbasedonthiscontinuation
oftheOldTestament,aswe
haveindeedseenalready.
Whatexpertinexegesiswoulddream
ofdeprivingJesus ofhisstatusasGod'senvoy forthisreason?
Thisisneverthelesstheway
thatMuhammadisjudgedmore
often
thannotinthe West:"allhedidwas tocopytheBible".
Itisasummaryjudgementthatdoesnottakeaccount ofthefact
thattheQur'anand theBibleprovidedifferentversionsofa
singleevent.People
prefernottotalkaboutthedifferencein the
descriptions.They arepronouncedtobethesameand thussciep­
tificknowledgeneednot
bebroughtin.Weshallenlargeonthese
problemswhendealingwiththedescription
oftheCreationand
theFlood.

143. IffiuLcro,l_
lgt
The collection of hadiths are to Muhammad what the Gospels
are to JesUs: descriptions of the actions and sayings of the
Pnophet. Their authors were not eyewitnesses- (This applies at
leas,t to the compilers of the collections of hadiths which are said
to be the moet authentic and were collected much later than the
time when Muhammad was alive). They do not in any way con-
stitute books containing the written Revelation. They are not the
word of God, but the sayings of the Prophet. In these books,
which are very widely read, statements are to be found containing
errors from a scientific point of view, especially medical remedies'
We nsturally discount anything relating to problems of a relig-
ious kind, since they are not discussed here in the context of the
hadiths. Many hadiths are of doubtful authenticity; they are
discussed by Muslim scientists themselves. When the scientific
nature of one of the hadiths is touehed upon in the present work'
it is essentially to put into relief all that distinguishes them from
the Qur'an itself when seen from this point of view, since the
latter does not contain a single scientific statement that is unae-
ceptable. The difference, as we shall see, is quite startling.
The above observation makes the hypothesis advanced by those
who see Muhammad as the author of the Qur'an
quite untenable.
How eould a man, from being illiterate, become the most impor-
tant author, in terms of literary merit, in the whole of Arabic
literature? How could he then pronounce truths of a scientifie
nature that no other human being could possibly have developed
at the time, and all this rvithout once making the slightest error
in his pronouncements on the subject?
The ideas in this study are developed from a purely scientific
point of view. They lead to the conclusion.that it is inconceivable
io"
"
human being living in the Seventh century A.D' to have
inade statements in the Qur'an on a great variety of subjects that
do not belong to his period and for them to be in keeping with
what was to be known only centuries later- Fdr me, there can be
no human explanation to the Qur'an.
125
ThecollectionofhadithsaretoMuhammad whattheGospels
aretoJesus:descriptionsoftheactionsandsayings ofthe
Prophet.Theirauthorswere noteyewitnesses.(Thisapplies at
leasttothecompilersofthecollections ofhadithswhich aresaid
tobethemostauthentic andwerecollectedmuch laterthanthe
timewhenMuhammadwasalive).They donotinanywaycon­
stitutebookscontaining thewrittenRevelation.They arenotthe
word
ofGod,butthesayingsoftheProphet.Inthesebooks,
which
areverywidelyread,statements aretobefoundcontaining
errorsfromascientificpoint ofview,especiallymedicalremedies.
Wenaturallydis'count
anythingrelatingtoproblemsofarelig­
iouskind,sincethey
arenotdiscussedhereinthecontext ofthe
hadiths.Manyhadiths
areofdoubtfulauthenticity;they are
discussedbyMuslimscientiststhemselves.Whenthescientific
natureofoneof thehadithsistoucheduponinthepresentwork,
itisessentiallyto putintoreliefall thatdistinguishesthemfrom
theQur'anitselfwhenseenfrom thispointofview,since the
latterdoesnotcontainasinglescientificstatement thatisunac­
ceptable.Thedifference,asweshallsee,isquitestartling.
Theaboveobservationmakesthehypothesisadvancedbythose
whoseeMuhammad
astheauthoroftheQur'anquiteuntenable.
Howcouldaman,frombeingilliterate,becomethemostimpor­
tantauthor,intermsofliterarymerit,inthewhole ofArabic
literature?Howcouldhethenpronounce truthsofascientific
naturethatnootherhumanbeingcouldpossiblyhavedeveloped
atthetime,andallthiswithoutoncemaking theslightesterror
inhispronouncementsonthesubject?
Theideasinthisstudy
aredevelopedfromapurelyscientific
pointofview.Theyleadto
theconclusionthatitisinconceivable
forahumanbeinglivingin theSeventh'centuryA.D.to have
madestatementsintheQur'anona
greatvarietyofsubjectsthat
donotbelongtohisperiodandforthemtobeinkeepingwith
whatwastobeknownonlycenturieslater. Forme,therecanbe
no
humanexplanationtotheQur'an.

144. il
Authenticity of the Qur'arr,
How lt Carrre
To Be Wrillerr.
Thanks to its undisputed authenticity, the text of the eur'an
holds a unique place among the books of Revelation, slared
neither by the old nor the New Testament. In the first two sec-
tions of this work, a review rvas made of the alterations under-
gone by the old restament and the Gospels before they were
handed down to us in the form we know today. The same is not
true for the Qur'an for the simpre reason that it was. written
down at the time of the prophet;
we shall see how it came to be
written, i.e. the process involved.
In this context, the differences separating the eur'an from the
Bible are in no way due to question* *sr.nlially ioncerned with
date. such questions are constanfly put forward by certain people
without regard to the cireumstanees prevailing at the time when
the Judeo-christian and the eur'anic Revetations were written;
they have an equal disregard for the circumstances surrounding
the transmission of the eur'an to the
prophet.
It is suggested
that a seventh century text had more rikelihood of cominstown
to us unaltered than other texts that are as many as fifteen cen-
turies older. This comment, although correct, does not constitute
a sufficient reason; it is made more to excuse the alterations made
in the Judeo-christian texts in the course of centuries than to
underline the notion that the text of the eur'an, which was more
recent, had less to fear from being modified by man.
rg0
II
4.uthEntit:il}'oftheQo..'an.
Ho~ItCaIRE
Tol3eW ..illen.
Thanksto itsundisputedauthenticity, thetextoftheQur'an
holdsauniqueplaceamongthebooks ofRevelation,shared
neitherby
theOldnortheNewTestament. Inthefirsttwosec­
tions
ofthiswork,areviewwasmade ofthealterationsunder­
gonebytheOldTestamentandtheGospelsbefore
theywere
handeddowntousintheformweknowtoday.Thesameisnot
truefortheQur'anforthesimplereason thatitwas.written
downatthetimeofthe Prophet;weshallseehow itcameto be
written,Le.theprocessinvolved.
Inthiscontext,thedifferences separatingtheQur'anfromthe
Bible
areinnowayduetoquestionsessentiallyconcernedwith
date.Suchquestions
areconstantlyputforwardbycertainpeople
without
regardtothecircumstancesprevailing atthetimewhen
theJudeo-Christian
andtheQur'anicRevelationswere written;
theyhave anequaldisregardforthecircumstancessurrounding
thetransmissionoftheQur'antotheProphet. Itissuggested
thataSeventhcenturytexthadmorelikelihood ofcomingdown
tousunaltered
thanothertexts thatareasmanyasfifteencen­
turiesolder.Thiscomment,althoughcorrect,does notconstitute
asufficientreason;
itismademoretoexcusethealterationsmade
in
theJudeo-Christiantextsinthecourse ofcenturiesthanto
underlinethenotionthatthetextoftheQur'an,whichwasmore
recent,hadlessto
fearfrombeing'modifiedbyman.
126

145. Autlrrlnffitg ol tllo Qrdan. How lt CanP to be Written L27
In the case of the Old Testament, the sheer number of authors
who tell the same story, plus all the revisions carried out on the
text of certain books from the pre-Christian era, constitute as
msny reasons for inaccuracy and contradiction. As for the
Gospels, nobody can claim that they invariably contain faithful
accounts of Jesus's words or a description of his actions strictly
in keeping with reality. We have seen how successive versions
of the texts showed a lack of definite authenticity and moreover
that their authors were not eyewitnesses.
Also to be underlined is the distinction to be made between
the Qur'fln, a book of written Revelation, and the hadiths, col-
leetions of statements concerning the actions and sayings of
Muhammad. Some of the Prophet's companions started to write
them down from the moment of his death. As an element of hu-
man error could have slipped in, the collection had to be resumed
later and subjected to rigorous criticism so that the greatest
credit is in prsctise given to documents that came along after
Muhammad. Their authenticity varies, like that of the Gospels.
Not a single Gospel was written down at the time of Jesus (they
were all written long after his earthly mission had come to an
end), and not a single collection of hadiths was compiled during
the time of the Prophet.
The situation is very different for the Qur'an. As the Revelation
progressed, the Prophet and the believers following him recited
the text by heart and it was also written down by the scribes in
his following. It therefore starts off with two elements of authen-
ticity that the Gospels do not possess. This continued up to the
Prophet's death. At a time lvhen not everybody could write, but
everyone was able to reeite, r'ecitntion afforded a considerable
advantage because of the double-checking possible when the
definitive text was compiled.
The Qur'anic Revelation was made by Archangel Gabriel to
Muhammad. It took place over a period of more than twenty
years of the Prophet's life, beginning n'ith the first verses of
Sura 96, then resuming after a three-year break for a long period
of twenty years up to the death of the Prophet in 632 A.D., i.e.
ten years before Hegira and ten years after Hegira.l
1. Muhsmmad's departure from Makka to Madina,622 A'D'
AuthenticityoftMQut'an.HowItCametobeWritten 127
IntheeaseoftheOldTestament,thesheernumber ofauthors
whotell
thesamestory,plusalltherevisionscarried outonthe
textofcertainbooksfromthepre-Christianera,constitute as
manyreasonsforinaccuracyandcontradiction.As forthe
Gospels,nobodycanclaim thattheyinvariablycontainfaithful
accounts
ofJesus'swords oradescriptionofhisactionsstrictly
inkeepingwithreality.Wehaveseenhowsuccessiveversions
ofthetextsshowedalack ofdefiniteauthenticityandmoreover
thattheirauthorswerenoteyewitnesses.
Also
tobeunderlinedis thedistinctiontobemadebetween
theQur'an,abookof writtenRevelation,andthehadiths,col­
leetions
ofstatementsconcerning theactionsandsayingsof
Muhammad.Some
oftheProphet'scompanions startedtowrite
themdownfrom
themomentofhisdeath.As anelementofhu­
manerrorcouldhaveslippedin,thecollectionhadtoberesumed
laterandsubjeetedtorigorouscriticismso thatthegreatest
creditisinpractisegiventodocumentsthatcamealong after
Muhammad.Theirauthenticityvaries,like thatoftheGospels.
NotasingleGospelwas writtendownatthetimeofJesus(they
wereall
writtenlongafterhisearthlymission hadcometo an
end),andnotasinglecollection ofhadithswascompiledduring
thetimeoftheProphet.
Thesituationisverydifferentfor
theQur'an.As theRevelation
progressed,theProphetandthebelieversfollowinghimrecited
thetextbyheartanditwasalsowrittendownbythescribesin
hisfollowing.
Itthereforestartsoffwithtwoelementsofauthen­
ticity
thattheGospelsdonotpossess.Thiscontinued uptothe
Prophet'sdeath.
Atatimewhennoteverybodycouldwrite,but
everyonewasabletorecite,recitationaffordedaconsiderable
advantagebecauseofthedouble-checkingpossiblewhenthe
definitive
textwascompiled.
TheQur'anicRevelationwasmade
byArchangelGabrielto
Muhammad.
Ittookplaceoveraperiodofmore thantwenty
years
oftheProphet'slife,beginning withthefirstversesof
Sura96,thenresuming afterathree-yearbreak foralongperiod
oftwentyyearsuptothedeath oftheProphetin632A.D.,
Le.
tenyearsbeforeHegiraandtenyears afterHegira.
1
1.Muhammad'sdeparturefromMakkatoMarlina, 622A.D.

146. I88 TTIE BIBI,4 MIE QT'N'AN AIID SCIENCE
fire following wss ttre first Revelation (sure 96, verses I to 6)
r
:
"Bead: In the narne of thy Inrd who created,
Slho erested man from something whieh clings
Read ! Thy Iord is the most Noble
TVho taught by the pen
Iilho taught man what he did not know."
Professor Hamidullah notes in the Introduction to his French
tranelstion of the Qur'an that one of the themes of this first
Revelation wasr the
'praise
of the pen as a means of human
knowledge' which would
'explain
the
prophet's
concern for the
pnesenration of the Qur'an in writing.'
Texts formally prove that long before the prophet
left Msl*s
for Madina (i.e. long before rlegrra), the eur'anie text so far
revealed had been written down. lve shall see how the eur'an
is authentic in this. We know that llluhammad and the Believers
who surrounded him were accustomed to reciting the revealed
text from memory. It is therefore inconceivable for the eur'an
to refer to facts that did not square with reality because the
Iattcr could so easily be checked with people in the
prophet's
following, by asking the authors of the transcription.
Four suras dating from a period prior to Hegira refer to the
urriting dourn of the Qur'an before the prophet
left Mskka in
622 (sura 80, verses 1l to 16):
"By no means ! Indeed it is a message of instruction
Thenefore whoever wills, should remember
On leaves held in honor
Exalted, purified
In the hands of seribes
Noble and pious."
Yusuf Ali, in the commentary to his translation, rg84, wrote
thst when the Revelation of this sur& was made, forty-two or
forty-five others had been written and were kept by Muslims in
Mskka (out of s total of 114).
1. Muhemmad wac totslly overwhelmed by these words. We shall retrrn to
an interpretation of them, especially with regard to the fect that Mu-
hrnmgd could neither reed nor writo,
118 TIlEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
ThefollowingwasthefirstRevelation(sura96,verses1to5) 1 :
"Read:InthenameofthyLordwhocreated,
Whocreatedmanfromsomethingwhichclings
Read!ThyLordisthemostNoble
Whotaughtbythepen
Whotaughtmanwhathedidnotknow."
ProfessorHamidullahnotesintheIntroduction
tohisFrench
translationoftheQur'an
thatoneofthethemesofthisfirst
Revelationwasthe'praiseofthepenasameansofhuman
knowledge'whichwould'explaintheProphet'sconcernforthe
preservationoftheQur'aninwriting.'
Textsformallyprove
thatlongbeforetheProphetleftMakka
forMadina(i.e.longbeforeHegira),theQur'anictext sofar
revealedhadbeenwrittendown.'VeshallseehowtheQur'an
isauthenticinthis.
WeknowthatM:uhammadandtheBelievers
whosurroundedhimwereaccustomed
torecitingtherevealed
textfrommemory.
Itisthereforeinconceivable fortheQur'an
torefertofacts thatdidnotsquarewithrealitybecause the
lattercouldsoeasilybecheekedwithpeopleintheProphet's
following,byaskingtheauthorsofthetranscription.
FoursurasdatingfromaperiodpriortoHegirarefer
tothe
writingdown
oftheQur'anbeforetheProphetleftMakkain
622(sura80,verses 11to16):
"Bynomeans!Indeed
itisamessageofinstruction
Thereforewhoeverwills,shouldremember
Onleavesheldinhonor
Exalted,purified
Inthehandsofscribes
Nobleand
pious."
YusufAli,inthecommentarytohistranslation,1984,wrote
thatwhentheRevelationofthis surawasmade,forty-two or
forty-fiveothershadbeenwrittenandwerekeptbyMuslimsin
Maleka(outofatotalof114).
1.Muhammad wastotallyoverwhelmedbythesewords.Weshall returnto
aninterpretationofthem,especiallywith regardtothefactthatMu­
hammadeould
neitherreadnorwrite.

147. AuJheaticitg of tle Qufan. Hotp ItCamr* tobeWdtten 129
-Sura 85, verses 21 and 22:
"Nay, this is a glorious readingr
On a Preserved tablet"
-Sura 56, verses 7? to 80:
"This is a glorious reading'
In a book well kePt
\4lhich none but the Purified teach.
This is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds'"
-Sura 26, verse 5:
"They said: Tales of the ancients which he has caused to be
written and they are dictated to him morning and evening."
Here we have a reference to the accusations made by the
Prophet's enemies who treated him as an imposter. They spread
the rumour that stories of antiquity rvere being dictated to him
and he was rvriting them down or having them transeribed (the
meaning of the word is debatable, but one must remember that
Muhammad was illiterate) . However this may be, the verse refers
to this act of making a written reeortl which is pointed out by
Muhammad's enemies themselves.
A sura that came after Hegira makes one last mention of the
Ieaves on which these divine instructions were written:
-Sura 98, verses 2 and 3:
"An (apostle) from God recites leaves
Kept pure where are decrees right and straight."
The Qur'an itself therefore provides indications as to the fact
that it was set down in writing at the time of the Prophet. It is
a known fact that there were several scribes in his following,
the most famous of whom , Zaid Ibn ThAbit, has left his name to
posterity.
In the preface to his French translation of the Qur'an
(19?1) '
Professor Hamidullah gives an excellent description of the condi-
tions that prevailed when the text of the Qur'an was written,
lasting up until the time of the Prophet's death:
"The sources all agree in stating that rvhenever a fragaent of
the Qurtan wag revealed, the Prophet called one of his literate
companions and dictated it to him, indicating at the same time
the exact position of the new fragment in the fabric of what
had already been received . . . Descriptions note that Muhammad
l* fo tn" tcxt: Qtlr'dln which elso meang'reading''
Au'henticityof,heQur'an.How"Came'0beWritten 129
-Sura85,verses21and22:
"Nay,thisisagloriousreading
1
Onapreservedtablet"
-Sura56,verses77to80:
"Thisisagloriousreading
1
Inabookwell kept
Whichnonebutthepurifiedteach.
ThisisaRevelationfromtheLordoftheWorlds."
-Sura25,verse5:
"Theysaid:Talesoftheancientswhichhe hascausedtobe
writtenandtheyaredictatedto himmorningandevening."
Herewehaveareferencetotheaccusationsmade bythe
Prophet'senemieswho treatedhimasanimposter.They spread
therumourthatstoriesofantiquitywerebeingdictated tohim
andhewaswritingthemdownorhavingthemtranscribed(the
meaningofthewordisdebatable,butonemustrememberthat
Muhammadwasilliterate).Howeverthismaybe,theverserefers
tothisactofmakingawrittenrecord.whichispointed outby
Muhammad'senemiesthemselves.
A
surathatcameafterHegiramakesone lastmentionofthe
leavesonwhichthesedivine instructionswerewritten:
-Sura98,verses2and3:
"An(apostle)fromGodrecitesleaves
Keptpurewherearedecreesrightandstraight."
TheQur'anitselfthereforeprovidesindications astothefact
thatitwassetdownin writingatthetimeoftheProphet.Itis
aknown
factthattherewereseveralscribes inhisfollowing,
themostfamousofwhom,Zaid IbnThabit,haslefthisnameto
posterity.
IntheprefacetohisFrenchtranslationoftheQur'an(1971),
ProfessorHamidullahgivesanexcellentdescriptionof thecondi­
tionsthatprevailedwhenthetextoftheQur'anwaswritten,
lastingupuntilthetimeoftheProphet'sdeath:
"Thesourcesall agreeinstatingthatwhenevera fragmentof
theQur'anwasrevealed,theProphetcalledone ofhisliterate
companionsanddictatedittohim,indicatingatthesametime
theexactpositionofthenewfragmentinthefabricofwhat
hadalreadybeenreceived...Descriptionsnote thatMuhammad
1.Inthetext:Qu,.'ci-nwhichalsomeans'reading'.

148. 130 THE BTBLE, TrIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
nsked the scribe to reread to him what had been dictated so that
he could correct any deficiencies . . . Another famous story tells
how every year in the month of Ramadan, the
prophet
would
recite the rvhole of ilre eur'an (so far revealed) to Ganriel . . .,
that in the Ramadan preceding Muhammad's death, Gabriel had
made him recite it twiee . . . It is known horv since the prophet's
time, Muslims aequired the habit of keeping vigil during B"*"-
dan, and of reciting the whole of the eur'an in addition to th"
usual praysl* expected of them. several sources add that Muham-
mad's scribe zaid was present at this final bringing-together of
the texts' Elsewhere, nurnerous other personalities are rnentioned
as well."
Extremely diverse materials were used for this first record:
parchment, leather, wooden tablets, camels' scapula, soft stone
for inscriptions, etc.
At the same time horvever, Muhammad recommended that the
faithful learn the Qur'an by heart. They did this for a part if
not all of the text recited during prayers. Thus there were
Hafi.zil,n rvho knerv the whore of the eurian by heart and spread
it abroad. The method of doubry preserving the text both in writ-
ing and by memorization proved to be extremely precious.
Not long after the prophet's
death (682), his successor Abu
Bakr, the first caliph of tsram, asked Muhammad's former head
scribe, zaid lbn Thdbit, to make a copy; this he did. on omar's
initiative (the future second caliph), zaid consulted all the in-
formation he could assemble at Madina: the witness of the
Vafizun, copies of the Book written on various materials belong-
ing to private individuals, all with the object of avoiding possible
errors in transcription. Thus an extremely faithful copy of the
Book was obtained.
The sources tell us that caliph omar, Abu Bakr's successor in
634, subsequently made a single volume (mushnf) that he pre-
served and gave on his death to his daughter Harsa, the
prophet's
widow.
The third caliph of Islam, uthman, who held the caliphate
from 644 to 655, entrusted a commission of experts with the
preparation of the great recension that bears his name. It checked
the authenticity of the document produced under Abu Bakr whieh
had remained in Hafsa's possession until that time. The commis-
130 THEBIBLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
askedthescribeto rereadtohimwhathadbeendictatedsothat
hecouldcorrect anydeficiencies. . . Anotherfamousstorytells
howevery
yearinthemonthofRamadan,theProphetwould
recitethewhole
oftheQur'an(sofarrevealed)toGabriel 0 00'
thatintheRamadanprecedingMuhammad'sdeath,Gabriel had
madehimrecite ittwice...Itisknownhowsince theProphet's
time,Muslimsacquired thehabitofkeepingvigil duringRama­
dan,andofrecitingthewholeoftheQur'aninadditiontothe
usualprayersexpectedofthem.Severalsources addthatMuham­
mad'sscribeZaidwas
presentatthisfinalbringing-togetherof
thetexts.Elsewhere,numerous otherpersonalitiesarementioned
aswell."
Extremelydiversematerialswereusedforthisfirstrecord:
parchment,leather,woodentablets,camels'scapula,
softstone
forinscriptions,etc.
Atthesametimehowever,Muhammadrecommended thatthe
faithfullearntheQur'anbyheart.Theydid thisforapartif
notallof thetextrecitedduringprayers.Thustherewere
lJaf~zun whoknewthewhole oftheQur'anbyheartandspread
itabroad.Themethodofdoublypreservingthetextbothin writ­
ingandbymemorizationproved tobeextremelyprecious.
NotlongaftertheProphet'sdeath(632),hissuccessorAbu
Bakr,thefirstCaliph
ofIslam,askedMuhammad's formerhead
scribe,ZaidIbnThtibit,tomakeacopy;thishedid.On Omar's
initiative(thefuturesecondCaliph),Zaidconsultedall thein­
formation
hecouldassemble atMadina:thewitnessofthe
lfaf~zun, copiesof theBookwrittenonvariousmaterialsbelong­
ingto
privateindividuals,all withtheobjectofavoidingpossible
errorsintranscription.Thusanextremelyfaithfulcopyofthe
Bookwasobtained.
Thesourcestellus thatCaliphOmar,Abu Bakr'ssuccessorin
634,subsequentlymadeasinglevolume (mufllJaf)thathepre­
served
andgaveon hisdeathto hisdaughterHafsa,theProphet's
widow.
ThethirdCaliphofIslam,Uthman,whoheld thecaliphate
from644to655,entrustedacommissionofexpertswiththe
preparationofthegreatrecensionthatbearshisname.Itchecked
theauthenticityofthedocumentproduced underAbuBakrwhich
hadremainedin Hafsa'spossessionuntil thattime.Thecommis-

149. Autlenticttg ol t E Qufan. How ItCamc tobeWfitten l3l
sion consulted Muslims who knerv the text by heart. The critical
analysis of the authentieity of the text was earried out very rigor-
ously. The agreement of the witnesses was deemed necessary be-
fore the slightest verse containing debatable material was re-
tained. It is indeed known how some verses of the Qur'an correet
others in the case of prescriptions: this may be readily explained
when one rem€mbers that the Prophet's period of apostolic activ-
ity stretched over twenty years (in round figures). The result is
a text containing an order of suras that reflects the order fol-
lowed by the Prophet in his complete recital of the Qur'an during
Ramadan, as mentioned above.
One might perhaps ponder the motives that led the first three
Caliphs, especially Uthman, to commission collections and recen-
sions of the text. The reasons are in fact very simple: Islam's
expansion in the very first decades following Muhammad's death
was very rapid indeed and it happened among peoples whose na-
tive language was not Arabic. It was absolutely necessary to
ensure the spread of a text that retained its original purity:
Uthman's recension had this as its objective.
Uthman sent copies of the text of the recension to the centres
of the Islamic Empire and that is why, according to Professor
Hamidullah, copies attributed to Uthman exist in Tashkent and
Istanbul. Apart from one or two possible mistakes in copying, the
oldest documents known to the present day, that are to be found
throughout the Islamic world, are identical; the same is true for
documents preserved in Europe (there are fragments in the Bib-
lioth}que Nationale in Paris which, according to the experts, date
from the Eighth and Ninth centuries A.D., i'e. the Second and
Third Hegirian centuries). The numerous ancient texts that are
known to be in existence all agree except for very minor varia-
tions which do not change the general meaning of the text at all'
If the context sometimes allows more than one interpretation, it
may well have to do with the fact that ancient writing rvas sim-
pler than that of the Present day.'
1. The absence of diacritical marks, for example, could make a verb either
active or passive and in some instances, masculine or feminine, More
often thsn not however, this was hardly of any great c'lnseguence sinee
the context indicsted the meaning in many instances'
AutJumlicityoftheQur'an.How ItClimeto beWritten 131
sionconsultedMuslimswhoknew thetextbyheart.Thecritical
analysisoftheauthenticityofthetextwascarriedoutveryrigor­
ously.Theagreementofthewitnesseswasdeemednecessarybe­
foretheslightestversecontainingdebatablematerialwasre­
tained.Itisindeedknownhowsomeverses oftheQur'ancorrect
othersinthecaseofprescriptions:thismaybereadilyexplained
whenoneremembersthattheProphet'speriodofapostolicactiv­
itystretchedovertwentyyears(inroundfigures).Theresultis
a
textcontaininganorderofsurasthatreflectstheorderfol­
lowed
bytheProphetinhiscompleterecital oftheQur'anduring
Ramadan,asmentionedabove.
One
mightperhapsponderthemotivesthatledthefirstthree
Caliphs,especially Uthman,tocommissioncollections andrecen­
sions
ofthetext.Thereasonsareinfactverysimple: Islam's
expansionintheveryfirstdecadesfollowingMuhammad's death
wasveryrapidindeedandithappenedamongpeopleswhose na­
tivelanguagewasnotArabic.Itwasabsolutelynecessaryto
ensurethespreadofatextthatretaineditsoriginalpurity:
Uthman'srecensionhad thisasitsobjective.
Uthmansentcopiesof thetextoftherecensionto thecentres
oftheIslamicEmpireandthatiswhy,according toProfessor
Hamidullah,copies attributedtoUthmanexistin Tashkentand
Istanbul.
Apartfromoneortwopossiblemistakes incopying,the
oldestdocumentsknownto thepresentday,thataretobefound
throughouttheIslamicworld, areidentical;thesameis truefor
documentspreservedin Europe(therearefragmentsintheBib­
liothequeNationalein
Pariswhich,accordingto theexperts,date
fromtheEighthandNinthcenturiesA.D.,Le.theSecondand
ThirdHegiriancenturies).Thenumerousancient textsthatare
knowntobeinexistenceallagreeexcept forveryminorvaria­
tionswhichdo notchangethegeneralmeaning ofthetextatall.
Ifthecontextsometimesallowsmore thanoneinterpretation,it
maywellhave todowiththefactthatancientwritingwassim­
plerthanthatofthepresentday.1
1.Theabsenceofdiacriticalmarks,forexample,couldmakeaverbeither
activeorpassiveandinsomeinstances,masculineorfeminine.More
oftenthannothowever,thiswashardlyofanygreatcmsequencesince
thecontextindicatedthemeaninginmanyinstances.

150. 138 TIIE BIEI,E, IIIE QI,R'AN AND SCIENGE
The 114 suras were arranged in decreasing order of length;
there were nevertheless exceptions. The chronological sequence
of the Revelation was not followed. In the majority of cases how-
ever, this sequence is known. A large number of descriptions are
mentioned at several points in the text, sometimes giving rise to
repetitions. Very frequently a passage will add details to a de-
scription that appears elsewhere in an incomplete form. Every-
thing conneeted with modern science is, like meny subjects dealt
with in the Qur'an, scattered throughout the book without any
semblance of classification.
131 THEBIBLE,TIlEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
The114auraswerearrangedindecreasingorderoflength;
therewereneverthelessexceptions.Thechronologicalsequence
oftheRevelationwasnotfollowed.
Inthemajorityofcaseshow­
ever,thissequenceisknown.Alargenumberofdescriptions
are
mentionedatseveralpointsinthetext,sometimesgivingrise to
repetitions.Veryfrequentlyapassagewilladddetailstoade­
scription
thatappearselsewhereinanincompleteform.Every­
thingconnectedwithmodemscienceis,likemanysubjectsdealt
withintheQur'an,scatteredthroughoutthebookwithoutany
semblanceofclassification.

151. ril
The Creation of the
Heaverrs and the Earth.
DIFFEREIVCES FROM AND NESEMBLENCES TO
THE BIBLICAL DESCNIPTION'
In contrast to the Otd Testament, the Qur'an does not provide
a unified description of the Creation. Instead of a continuous nar-
ration, there are passages scattered all over the Book which dc'al
with certain aspects of the Creation and provide information on
the successive events marking its development with varying de-
gTe€s of detail. To g1Iin a clear idea of how these events are pre-
sented, the fragm*nt* r.*ttered throughout a large number of
sur88 have to be brought togPther'
This dispersal throughout the Book of references to the same
subject is not unique to the theme of the Creation. Many import-
ant subjects are treated in the same manner in the Qur'an:
earthly or celestial phenomena, or problems concerning man that
are of interest to scientists. For each of these themes, the same
efrort has been made here to bring all the verses together'
For ma4y European commentators, the description of the Cre-
stion in thC Qur'an is very similar to the one in the Bible and they
are quite content to present the two descriptions side by side' I
believe this concept is mistaken because there are very obvious
difrerences. On subjects that are by no means unimportant from
a scientific point of view, rve find statements in the Qur'an whose
eguivalents we search for in vain in the Bible. The latter con-
taing descriptions that have no equiyalent in the Qur'an.
The obvious resemblanees between the two texts are well
knowu; emong them is the fact that, at first glance, the number
133
III
TheC..ealionofthe
Hea.ensandtheEarth.
DIFFERENCESFROM ANDRESEMBLENCES TO
THEBIBLICALDESCRIPTION.
Incontrastto theOldTestament,theQur'andoesnotprovide
aunifieddescriptionof
theCreation.Insteadofacontinuous nar­
ration,there arepassagesscatteredallovertheBookwhich d(·:ll
withcertainaspectsof theCreationandprovideinformationon
thesuccessiveeventsmarkingitsdevelopmentwithvaryingde­
greesofdetail.To
giinaclearideaofhowtheseevents arepre­
sented,thefragmentsscatteredthroughoutalargenumberof
surashavetobebroughttogether.
ThisdispersalthroughouttheBookofreferencestothesame
subjectis
notuniquetothethemeoftheCreation.Manyimport­
antsubjectsaretreatedinthesamemannerin theQur'an:
earthlyorcelestialphenomena, orproblemsconcerningman that
areofinteresttoscientists. Foreachofthesethemes,thesame
efforthasbeenmadehereto
bringalltheversestogether.
FormanyEuropeancommentators, thedescriptionof theCre­
ationintheQur'anisverysimilarto
theoneintheBibleandthey
arequitecontenttopresentthetwodescriptionssidebyside.I
believethisconceptismistakenbecausethere
areveryobvious
differences.
Onsubjectsthatarebynomeansunimportantfrom
ascientificpoint
ofview,wefindstatementsin theQur'anwhose
equivalentswesearchforinvainintheBible.The
lattercon­
tainsdescriptions
thathavenoequivalentintheQur'an.
Theobviousresemblancesbetweenthetwotexts
arewell
known;amongthemisthefact
that,atfirstglance,thenumber
133

152. 134 TrrE BrBL4 THE QIrn'AN AND SCIEnGE
grven to the successive stages of the Creation is identical: the
six days in the Bible correspond to the six days in the eurran. rn
fact however, the problem is more complex thsn this and it is
worth pausing to examine it.
The SlcPerioih of tLe Cretfnn.
There is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever in the Biblical'
description of the Creation in six days followed by a day of rest,
the sabbath, analogous with the days of the week. rt hss been
shown how this mode of narration practiced by the priests of the
sixth century B.c. serrred the purpose of encouraging the people
to obserrre the sabbath. All Jews were expeeted to restr on the
sabbath as the rnrd had done after he had laboured during the
six days of the week.
The way the Bible interprets it, the word
'day'
means the inter-
val of time between two successive sunrises or sunsets for an
inhabitant of the Earth. When defined in this wey, the day is con-
ditioned by the rotation of the Earth on its own axis. It is obvious
that logically-speaking there can be no question of
,days'
as de-
fined just now, if the meehanism that causes them to appeal-i.g.
the existence of the Earth and itg rotation around the Sun-has
not already been fixed in the early etages of the Crestion sccord-
ing to the Biblical description. This ifirpossibility has slresdy
been emphasized in the first part of the present book.
When we refer to the majority of translations of the-eur'an,
we read that-analogous with the Bibliesl description-the prr>
eess of the Creation for the Islamic Revelation also took place
over a period of six days. It is difficult to hold against the trans-
lators the fact that they have translated the Arabic word by its
most common meaning. This is how it is usually expressed in
translations so that in the Qur'an, verse 84, sura ? reads as
follows:
"Your Iord is God who created the heavens and the earth
in six days,"
The Btblied description mentioned here is taken from the so-cglled Se-
eerdotal vergion discussed in the first part of this rork; the degcripdon
taken from the so-called Yahvist version has been comprecged into the
tpace of a fer lines in today'r vergion of the Bible and is too ingubstan-
tial to be congidered her.e.
'Sabbstht
in llebrew means
,to
rert'.
134 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
giventothesuccessivestages oftheCreationisidentical: the
sixdaysintheBiblecorrespondtothesixdaysin theQur'an.In
facthowever,theproblemismorecomplex thanthisanditis
worthpausing
toexamineit.
TheS&PeriodsoftheCreafion.
There
isabsolutelynoambiguitywhatsoeverin theBiblical!
description
oftheCreationinsixdaysfollowedbyaday ofrest,
thesabbath,analogouswiththedays
oftheweek.Ithasbeen
shownhowthismode ofnarrationpracticedbythepriests ofthe
SixthcenturyB.C.servedthepurpose ofencouragingthepeople
toobservethesabbath.AllJewswereexpected torest'onthe
sabbathas theLordhaddoneafterhehadlabouredduring the
sixdaysoftheweek.
ThewaytheBibleinterpretsit,theword'day'meanstheinter­
valoftimebetweentwosuccessivesunrises
orsunsetsforan
inhabitantoftheEarth.Whendefined inthisway,thedayiscon­
ditionedbytherotation
oftheEarthonitsownaxis.Itisobvious
thatlogically-speakingtherecanbenoquestion of'days'asde­
fined
justnow,ifthemechanismthatcausesthemto appear-i.e.
theexistenceoftheEarthanditsrotationaroundthe Sun-has
notalreadybeenfixed intheearlystagesof theCreationaccord­
ingtotheBiblicaldescription.Thisitnpossibilityhasalready
beenemphasizedinthefirst
partofthepresentbook.
Whenwe
refertothemajorityoftranslationsof th~Qur'an,
wereadthat-analogouswiththeBiblical description-thepro­
cess
oftheCreationfortheIslamicRevelationalsotookplace
overaperiod
ofsixdays.Itisdifficulttoholdagainstthe trans­
latorsthefact thattheyhavetranslatedtheArabicwordbyits
mostcommonmeaning.Thisishow
itisusuallyexpressed in
translationsso thatintheQur'an,verse 54,sura7readsas
follows:
uYourLordis
GodWhocreatedtheheavensandthe earth
insixdays."
1.TheBiblicaldescriptionmentionedhereistaken fromtheso-calledSa­
cerdotalversiondiscussed intbefirstpartofthiswork;thedescription
takenfromtheso-calledYahvistversionbasbeencompressedinto the
spaceofafe'wlinesintoday'sversion oftheBibleandis tooinsubstan­
tialtobeconllideredhere.
2.'Sabbath'inHebrewmeans 'torest'.

153. TIw Cteation of tlw Heaoew ald the Eafih f35
There are very few translations and commentaries of the Qur'an
that note how the word
'days'
should really be taken to mesn
'periods'.
It has moreover been maintained that if the Qur'anie
texts on the Creation divided its stages into
'days',
it was with
the deliberate intention of taking up beliefs held by all the Jews
and Christians at the dawn of Islam and of avoiding a head-on
confrontation rvith such a widely-held belief.
Without in any way wishing to reject this way of seeing it, one
could perhaps examine the problem a little more elosely and scru-
Li'nize in the Qur'an itself , and more generally in the lang:uage of
the time, the possible meaning of the word that many translators
themselves still continue to translate by the word
'day'i
AQ,unL,
plural agyd,m in Arabic.'
Its most common meaning is
'day'
but it must be stressed that
it tends more to mean the diurnal light than the length of time
that lapses between one day's sunset and the next. The plural
aEgd,m *"r, **tn, not iust
'days',
but also
'long
length of time',
*tt ind.finite period of time (but always long). The meaning
'pe-
riod of time' that the word contains is to be found elsewhere in
the Qur'an. Hence the following:
-Sura 32, verSe 5:
,,.
. . in a period of time (aattm) whereof the measure is a
thousand years of your reckoning."
(It is to be noted that the Creation in six periods is precisely
what the verse preceding verse 5 refers to) '
-Sura 70, verse 4:
,,.
. . in a period of time (yattm) whereof the measure is 50,000
years."
The fact that the word
'yaum'could
mean a period of time that
was quite different from the period that we mean by the word
.day'
struck very early commentators who, of course, did not
have the hnowledge we possess today concerning the length of
the stages in the formation of the Universe. In the Sixteenth
century A.D. for example, Abu al s['ud, who could not have had
any idea of the day as defined astronomically in terms of the
Earth's rotation, thought that for the Creation a division must
1. See table on last page of present wolk for equivalence between Latin
and Arabic letters.
TheCreationoftheHetJ.,emandtheEarth 135
Thereareveryfew translationsandcommentariesoftheQur'an
thatnotehowtheword'days'shouldreally betakentomean
'periods'.Ithasmoreoverbeen maintainedthatiftheQur'anic
textsontheCreationdivided itsstagesinto'days',itwaswith
thedeliberateintention oftakingupbeliefsheld byalltheJews
andChristiansatthedawnofIslamandofavoidingahead-on
confrontation
withsuchawidely-heldbelief.
Withoutinanywaywishingto rejectthiswayofseeingit,one
could
perhapsexaminetheproblemalittle morecloselyandscru­
tinize
intheQur'anitself,andmoregenerallyin thelanguageof
thetime,thepossiblemeaningoftheword thatmanytranslators
themselvesstillcontinueto translatebytheword'day':yaum,
pluralayyaminArabic.
1
Itsmostcommonmeaningis'day' butitmustbestressedthat
ittendsmore tomeanthediurnallightthanthelengthoftime
thatlapsesbetweenoneday's sunsetandthenext.Theplural
ayyamcanmean,notjust'days',butalso'longlength oftime',
anindefiniteperiod oftime(butalwayslong).Themeaning'pe­
riod
oftime'thatthewordcontainsistobefoundelsewherein
theQur'an.Hence thefollowing:
-sura32,verse5:
"...inaperiod oftime(yaum)whereofthe measureisa
thousandyearsofyourreckoning."
(Itistobenoted thattheCreationinsixperiodsisprecisely
whattheverseprecedingverse5 refersto).
-sura70,verse4:
"...inaperiodoftime (yaum)whereofthemeasureis50,000
years."
Thefactthattheword'yaum'couldmeanaperiod oftimethat
wasquitedifferentfromtheperiod thatwemeanby theword
'day'struckveryearlycommentatorswho,ofcourse,did not
havetheltnowledgewepossesstodayconcerning thelengthof
thestagesintheformationoftheUniverse.IntheSixteenth
centuryA.D.forexample,AbualSii'ud,whocouldnothave had
anyideaof thedayasdefinedastronomicallyin termsofthe
Earth'srotation,thoughtthatfortheCreationadivision must
1.SeetableonlastpageofpresentworkforequivalencebetweenLatin
andArabicletters.

154. I38 THE BIBI.E, IIIE QURAN AND SCIENGE
be considered that was not into days as we usually understand
the word, but into
'events'
(in Arabie nauba) .
Modern commentators have gone back to this interrpretation.
Yusuf Ali (1934), in his commentary on eaeh of the verses that
deals with the stages in the Creation, insists on the importance
of taking the word, elsewhere interpreted as meaning
'days',
to
mean in reality
'very
long Periods, or Ages, or Aeons'.
It is therefore possible to say that in the ease of the Creation
of the world, the Qur'an allows for long periods of time number-
ing six. It is obvious that modern scienee has not permitted man
to establish the fact that the complicated stages in the process
leading to the formation of the Universe numbered six, but it
has clearly shown that long periods of time were involved com-
pared to whieh
'days'
as we conceive them would be ridiculous.
one of the Iongest passages of the eur'an, which deals with
the Creation, describes the latter by juxtaposing an aeeount of
earthly events and one of celestial events. The verses in question
are verses I to 12, sura 41:
(God is srreaking to the Prophet)
"say: Do you disbelieve Him who ereated the earth in two
periods? Do you ascribe equals to Him. He is the Lord of the
Worlds.
"He set in the (earth) mountains standing firm. He blessed it.
He measured therein its sustenance in four periods, in due
proportion, in aceordance with the needs of those who ask
for (sustenance? or information?).
"Moreover (!umma) He turned to heaven when it was smoke
and said to it and to the earth: come willingly or unwill-
ingly ! They said: we come in willing obedience.
"Then He ordained them seven heavens in two periods, and
He assigtred to each heaven its mandate by Revelation. And
we adorned the lower heaven with luminaries and provided
it a guard. such is the decree of the AII Mighty, the Full of
Knowledge."
These four verses of sura 41 contain several points to which
we shall return: the initially gaseous state of celestial matter
and the highly symbolic definition of the number of heavens as
seven. We shall see the meaning behind this figure. Also of a
symbolic nature is the dialogue between God on the one hand
136 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
beconsideredthatwasnotintodays asweusuallyunderstand
theword,butinto'events'(inArabic nauba).
Moderncommentatorshavegonebackto thisinterpretation.
YusufAli(1934),in hiscommentaryoneach oftheversesthat
dealswiththestagesintheCreation,insistsontheimportance
oftakingtheword,elsewhere interpretedasmeaning'days', to
meanin reality'verylongPeriods, orAges,orAeons'.
Itisthereforepossibleto saythatinthecaseoftheCreation
oftheworld,the Qur'anallowsforlongperiods oftimenumber­
ingsix.Itisobviousthatmodernscience hasnotpermittedman
toestablishthefactthatthecomplicatedstagesin theprocess
leadingtotheformation
oftheUniversenumberedsix, butit
hasclearlyshown thatlongperiods oftimewereinvolvedcom­
paredtowhich'days' asweconceivethemwouldberidiculous.
One
ofthelongestpassages oftheQur'an,whichdeals with
theCreation,describesthe latterbyjuxtaposinganaccountof
earthlyeventsandoneofcelestialevents.Theversesinquestion
areverses9 to12,sura41:
(Godisspeakingto
theProphet)
"Say:DoyoudisbelieveHimWhocreatedthe earthintwo
periods?DoyouascribeequalstoHim.Heis theLordofthe
Worlds.
"Hesetinthe(earth)mountainsstandingfirm.Heblessedit.
Hemeasured
thereinitssustenancein fourperiods,indue
proportion,inaccordance
withtheneedsofthosewho ask
for(sustenance?orinformation?).
"Moreover(!umma)Heturnedtoheavenwhen itwassmoke
andsaidto itandtotheearth:comewillingly orunwill­
ingly!They
said:wecomeinwillingobedience.
"ThenHeordainedthemsevenheavensintwoperiods, and
Heassignedtoeachheavenits mandatebyRevelation.And
Weadornedthelowerheavenwithluminaries
andprovided
itaguard.Suchis thedecreeoftheAllMighty, theFullof
Knowledge."
Thesefourverses
ofsura41containseveralpoints towhich
weshall
return:theinitiallygaseous stateofcelestialmatter
andthehighlysymbolicdefinition ofthenumberofheavensas
seven.Weshallseethemeaningbehindthisfigure.Also ofa
symbolic
natureisthedialoguebetweenGodontheone hand

155. TIle Crcation ol the Eeaosan atd tln Mh f$f
and the primordial sky and earth on the other: here however it
is only to express the submission of the Hes'rens and Earth, once
they were formed, to divine order$.
Critics have seen in this passage a contradiction with the state-
ment of the six periods of the Creation. By adding the two peri-
ods of the formation of the Earth to the four periods of the
spreading of its sustenance to the inhabitants, plus the two peri-
ods of the formation of the Heavens, w€ arrive at eight periods.
This would then be in contradiction with the six periods men-
tioned above.
In fact however, this text, whieh leads man to refleci on divine
Omnipotence, beginning with the Earth and ending with the
Heavens, provides two sections that are expressed by the Arabie
word
'tulntna',
translated by
'moreover',
but which also means
'furth&more'or'then'.
The sense of a
'sequence'
may therefore
be implied referring to a sequence of events or a series of m&n's
reflections on the events mentioned here. It may equally be a
simple reference to events juxtaposed without any intention of
bringing in the notion of the one following the other. However
this may be, the periods of the Creation of the Heavens may just
as easily coincide with the two periods of the Earth's creation. A
Iittle later we shall examine how the basic process of the forma-
tion of the Universe is presented in the Qur'an and we shall see
how it can be jointly applied to the Heavens and the Earth in
keeping with modern ideas. We ehall then realize how perfectly
reasonable this way is of conceiving the simultaneous nature of
the events here described.
There does not appear to be any contradiction between the
passage quoted here and the concept of the formation of the
world in six stages that is to be found in other texts in the Qur'an'
THE OUR'AN DOES NOr LAv DOWN A SEQ_AENCE
FOR TEE CnEATION OF THE EILRTH AI\ID IIEAvENS.
In the two passages from the Qur'an
quoted above, reference
was made in one of the verses to the Creation of the Heavens and
the Earth (sura ?, verse 54), and elsewhere to the Creation of the
Earth and the Heavens (sura 41, verses I to 12). The Qur'an does
not therefore appear to lay down a sequence for the creation of
the Heavens and the Earth.
TheCreationof theHeaoenaandtheEtmIa 137
andtheprimordialsky andearthontheother:herehowever it
isonlytoexpressthesubmissionoftheHeavens andEarth,once
theywerefanned,todivineorders.
Criticshaveseeninthispassageacontradictionwiththe
state..
mentofthesixperiodsoftheCreation.Byadding thetwoperi­
odsoftheformationof
theEarthtothefourperiodsof the
spreadingofitssustenancetotheinhabitants,plus thetwoperi­
odsoftheformationoftheHeavens,we
arriveateightperiods.
Thiswouldthenbeincontradictionwiththesixperiodsmen­
tionedabove.
Infacthowever,thistext,whichleadsmantoreflectondivine
Omnipotence,beginningwiththe
Earthandendingwith the
Heavens,providestwosections thatareexpressedby theArabic
word'tumma',translated
by'moreover',butwhichalsomeans
'furthermore'or'then'.Thesenseofa'sequence'maytherefore
beimplied
referringtoasequenceofevents oraseriesofman's
reflectionson
theeventsmentionedhere. Itmayequallybea
simplereferencetoeventsjuxtaposedwithoutanyintentionof
bringingin
thenotionof theonefollowingtheother.However
thismaybe,theperiodsoftheCreationoftheHeavensmay just
aseasilycoincidewith thetwoperiodsofthe Earth'screation.A
little
laterweshallexaminehowthebasicprocessoftheforma­
tionoftheUniverseispresentedin
theQur'anandweshallsee
how
itcanbejointlyappliedto theHeavensand theEarthin
keepingwithmodernideas.Weshallthenrealizehowperfectly
reasonablethiswayisofconceivingthesimultaneous
natureof
theeventsheredescribed.
Theredoesnot
appeartobeanycontradictionbetween the
passagequotedhereandtheconceptoftheformation ofthe
worldinsixstages
thatistobefoundinothertextsin theQur'an.
THEQUR'ANDOESNOTLAYDOWNASEQUENCE
FOR
THECREATIONOFTHEEARTHANDHEAVENS.
InthetwopassagesfromtheQur'anquotedabove,reference
wasmadeinoneof
theversestotheCreationoftheHeavensand
the
Earth(sura7,verse54),andelsewhereto theCreationof the
EarthandtheHeavens (sura41,verses9 to12).TheQur'andoes
notthereforeappeartolaydownasequence fortheCreationof
theHeavens
andtheEarth.

156. r38 THE BIEI.E, TTIE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
The number of verses in which the Earth is mentioned first is
quite small, e.g. sura 2, verse 29 and sura 20, verse 4, where a
reference is made to "Him who created the earth and the high
heavens". The number of verses where the Heavens are men-
tioned before the Earth is, on the other hand, much larger: (sura
7, verse 54; sura 10, verse 3; sura ll, verse ?; sura zb, verse 6g;
sura 32, verse 4; sura 50, verse 38; sura F?, verse 4; sura ?g,
verses 27 to 33; sura gl,
verses E to 10).
In actual fact, apart from sura ?g, there is not a single passage
in the Qur'an that lays down a definite sequence; a simple co-
ordinating conjunction haa) meaning
.and'
links two terms, or
the word tummn which, as has been seen in the above passage,
can indicate either a simple juxtaposition
or a sequence.
There appears to me to be onry one passage in the eur'an
where a definite sequence is plainly established between different
events in the Creation. It is contained in verses z? to BB, sura ?g:
"Are you the harder to er.eate or is it the heaven that (God)
built? He raised its canopy and fashioned it with harmony. He
made dark the night
4nd he brought out the forenoon. And after
that ( bu' dn daliln) He spread it out. Therefr.om he drerv out its
water and its pasture. And the mountains He has fixed firmly.
Goods for you and your catile."
This list of earthly gifts from God to man, which is expressed
in a languag:e suited to farmers or nomads on the Arabian-penin-
sula, is preceded by an invitation to r.eflect on the creation of the
heavens. The reference to the stage rvhen God spreads out the
earth and renders it arable is very precisely situated in time after
the alternating of night and day has been achieved. Two groups
are therefore referred to her.e, one of celestial phenomena, and
the other of earthll' phenomena articulated in time. The refer-
enee made here implies that the ear.th must necessarily have
existed before being spread out and that it consequenily existed
when God ereated the Heavens. The idea of a concomitance there-
f,ore arises from the heavenly and earthly evolutions with the
interlocking of the two phenomena. Hence, one must not look for
any special significance in the reference in the eur'anic text to
the creation of the Earth before the Heavens or the Heavens be-
fore the Earth: the position of the words does not influence the
138 THEBmLE,THEQUR'AN ANDSCIENCE
ThenumberofversesinwhichtheEarthismentionedfirst is
quitesmall,e.g. sura2,verse29 andsura20,verse4,wherea
referenceismade
to"HimWhocreated theearthandthehigh
heavens".
ThenumberofverseswheretheHeavensaremen­
tionedbefore
theEarthis,ontheotherhand,much larger:(sura
7,verse54;sura10,verse3;sura11,verse7;sura25,verse59;
sura32,verse4;sura50,verse38;sura57,verse4;sura79,
verses27
to33;sura91,verses5to 10).
Inactualfact, apartfromsura79,thereisnotasinglepassage
in
theQur'anthatlaysdownadefinitesequence;asimpleco­
ordinatingconjunction(wa)meaning'and'linkstwoterms, or
thewordlummawhich,ashasbeenseenin theabovepassage,
canindicate
eitherasimplejuxtaposition orasequence.
Thereappearstometo beonlyonepassagein theQur'an
whereadefinitesequenceisplainlyestablishedbetweendifferent
events
intheCreation.Itiscontainedinverses27to33, sura79:
"Areyouthehardertocreateorisittheheaventhat(God)
built?Heraiseditscanopyandfashioned itwithharmony. He
madedarkthenight~ndhebroughtouttheforenoon.And after
that(bu'da!1.alikn)Hespreaditout.Therefromhedrewoutits
wateranditspasture.And themountainsHe hasfixedfirmly.
Goods
foryouandyourcattle."
This
listofearthlygiftsfromGodtoman,whichisexpressed
inalanguagesuitedto
farmersornomadson theArabianPenin­
sula,isprecededby
aninvitationtoreflectonthecreationof the
heavens.Thereferencetothestagewhen Godspreadsoutthe
earthandrendersitarableisverypreciselysituatedintime after
thealternatingofnightanddayhasbeenachieved.Twogroups
arethereforereferredtohere,one ofcelestialphenomena,and
the
otherofearthlyphenomenaarticulatedintime.Therefer­
encemadehereimplies
thattheearthmustnecessarilyhave
existed beforebeing
spreadoutandthatitconsequentlyexisted
whenGodcreatedtheHeavens.Theideaofa
concomitancethere­
forearisesfromtheheavenlyand
earthlyevolutionswiththe
interlockingofthetwophenomena.Hence,one
mustnotlookfor
anyspecialsignificancein thereferencein theQur'anictextto
theCreationoftheEarthbeforetheHeavensortheHeavensbe­
fore
theEarth:thepositionof thewordsdoesnotinfluence the

157. T7a.Cf'ctrdd{'trof iheEaoanr o'i'ilt..Mh 130
ord€r in which the Creation took place, unless however it is spe-
cifically statcd.
TNE BASIC PNOCESS OF TEE FONMATION OF THE
UIVIT/EASE AIVD THE NESULTING COMPOSITIOIV
OF THE ITONLDS.
Ttre Qur'an presents in two verses a brief synthesis of the
phenomena that eonstituted the basie process of the formation
of the Univense.
-€ur:a 21, verse 80:
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth
were joined together, then We clove them asunder and TVe gpt
every living thing out of the water. Will they not then believe?"
+ura 41, verse 11: C'od orders the Prophet to speak after inviL
ing him to reflect on the subiect of the earth's ereation:
"Moreover
(God) turned to the Heaven when it was smoke
and said to it and to the earttr . . ."
There then follow the orders to submit, referred to on page
186.
We ehall come back to the aquatic origins of life and examine
them along with other biological problems raised by the Qut'an.
fire important things to remember at present are the following:
s) fire ststement of the existence of a gaseous mass with fine
perticles, for this is how the word
'smoke'
(dufiEn in Arsbic) is
to be interpreted. Smoke is generally made up of a gaseous
substratum, plus, in more or less stable suspensioil, fine particles
that msy belong to solid and even liquid states of matter at high
or low tempereture;
b) T[e reference to a separetion process (fatql of an primary
single ma$t whose elements were initially fused together (rotql.
It must be noted that in Arabie'fatq'is the action of breaking'
diffusing, separating, and that
'rntq'
is the action of fusing or
binding together elements to make a homogenous whole.
This concept of the separation of a whole into several parts
is noted in other passeges of the Book with reference to multiple
worlds. The first verse of the first sura in the Qurtan proclaims,
after the opening invoeation, the following: "In the name of
God, ttte Beneficent, the Merciful", "Praise be to God, Ltlrd of
the lVorlds."
139
orderinwhichtheCreationtookplace,unlesshowever itisspe­
cificallystated.
THEBASICPROCESS OFTHEFOHMATION OFTHE
UNIVERSEANDTHERESULTINGCOMPOSITION
OFTHEWORLDS.
TheQur'anpresentsintwoversesa briefsynthesisofthe
phenomenathatconstitutedthebasicprocessof theformation
oftheUniverse.
--aura21,verse80:
"Donot
theUnbelieverssee thattheheavensand theearth
werejoinedtogether,thenWeclovethemasunderandWegot
everylivingthingoutof
thewater.Willtheynotthenbelieve?"
--aura41,verse11:Godordersthe Prophettospeakafterinvit­
inghimtoreflectonthesubjectofthe
earth'screation:
"Moreover(God)
turnedtotheHeavenwhen itwassmoke
andsaid
toitandtotheearth. .."
Therethenfollow theorderstosubmit,referred toonpage
186.
Weshallcomeback
totheaquaticorigins oflifeandexamine
themalongwithotherbiologicalproblemsraisedby
theQur'an.
Theimportantthings
torememberatpresentarethefollowing:
a)Thestatement oftheexistenceofagaseousmasswithfine
particles,
forthisishowtheword'smoke' (dukin,inArabie)is
tobeinterpreted.Smokeisgenerallymade-up ofagaseous
substratum,plus,inmore
orlessstablesuspension,fineparticles
thatmaybelongtosolidandevenliquidstates ofmatterathigh
orlowtemperature;
b)Thereferencetoaseparationprocess (fatq)ofanprimary
singlemasswhoseelementswereinitiallyfusedtogether (ratq).
ItmustbenotedthatinArabic'fatq'istheaction ofbreaking,
diffusing,separating,and
that'ratq'istheactionoffusingor
bindingtogetherelementstomake ahomogenouswhole.
Thisconcept
oftheseparationofawholeintoseveral parts
isnotedin otherpassagesoftheBook withreferencetomultiple
worlds.Thefirstverseofthefirst
suraintheQur'anproclaims,
aftertheopeninginvocation,thefonowing: "Inthename of
God,theBeneficent,theMerciful","PraisebetoGod,Lordof
theWorlds."

158. 140 THE BIBLE, TIIE QT'R'AN AND SCIENGE
The terms
'worlds'
reappears dozens of times in the Qur'an.
The Heavens are referred to as multiple as well, not only on
account of their plural form, but also because of their symbolic
numerical quantity: 7.
This number is used 24 times throughout the Qur'an for var-
ious numerical quantities. It often carries the meaning of
'many'
although we do not know exactly why this meaning of the figure
was used. The Greeks and Romans also Beem to have used the
number ? to mean an undefined idea of plurality. In the eur'an,
the number ? refers to the Heavens themselves (aamd,utdt). It
slone is understood to mean
'Heavens'.
The r roads of the
Heavens are mentioned once:
-,gUfA 2, VefSe 29:
" (God) is the one who erebted for you all that is on the earth.
Moreover He turned to the heaven and fashioned seven heavens
with harmony. He is Full of Knowledge of all things."
-SUfa 28, Verse 17:
"And we have ereated above you seven paths: we have never
been unmindful of the Creation."
-sura 6?, verse 3:
" (God; is the one who created seven heavens one sbove an-
other. Thou eanst see no fault in the creation of the Beneficent.
Turn the vision again! Canst thou see any rift?"
-sura 71, veree 15-16:
"Did you see how God ereated seven heavens one above another
and made the moon a light therein and made the sun a lamp F"
-sura 78, verse 12:
"we have built above you seven strong (heavens) and placed
a blazing lamp,"
Here the blazing lamp is the Sun.
The commentators on the Qur'an are in agreement on all these
verses: the number ? means no more than plurality.t
It is to be noted that while the Bible callr both Sun and Moon
.ligbte',
here, as alwaya in the Qur'an, they are difrerently named; the firrt tr
called'Light' (nilrl and the second is compared in this verre to a.lamp
(sird.i) producing light'. We shsll see later how other epithete are aD-
plied to the Sun.
Apart from the Qur'an, we often find the number ? meaning plurality
in texts from Muhammad's time, or from the ffrst eenturier folloring
him, which record hir words (hadithr).
140 THEBmLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
Theterms'worlds'reappearsdozens oftimesintheQur'an.
TheHeavens
arereferredto asmultipleaswell,notonlyon
accountof
theirpluralform,butalsobecause oftheirsymbolic
numericalquantity:
7.
Thisnumberisused 24timesthroughout theQur'anforvar­
iousnumericalquantities.
Itoftencarriesthemeaningof'many'
althoughwe
donotknowexactlywhythismeaningofthefigure
wasused.TheGreeksandRomansalsoseemtohaveusedthe
number7tomeananundefinedideaofplurality.
IntheQur'an,
thenumber7referstotheHeavensthemselves
(samciwcit).It
aloneisunderstood tomean'Heavens'.The7roadsofthe
Heavens
arementionedonce:
-sura2,verse29:
"(God)isthe OneWhocreatedforyouall thatisontheearth.
MoreoverHeturnedtotheheavenandfashionedsevenheavens
withharmony.HeisFullofKnowledgeofallthings."
-sura23,verse17:
"And
Wehavecreatedaboveyouseven paths:Wehavenever
beenunmindful
oftheCreation."
-sura67,verse3:
"(God)istheOneWhocreatedsevenheavensoneabovean­
other.ThoucanstseenofaultinthecreationoftheBeneficent.
Turnthevisionagain!Canstthousee anyrift?"
-sura71,verse15-16:
"Didyouseehow
Godcreatedsevenheavensoneaboveanother
andmadethemoonalightthereinandmadethesunalamp
?I"
-sura78,verse12:
"Wehavebuiltaboveyousevenstrong(heavens) andplaced
ablazinglamp."
HeretheblazinglampistheSun.
ThecommentatorsontheQur'an
areinagreementonallthese
verses:thenumber7means
nomorethanplurality.2
1.ItistobenotedthatwhiletheBiblecallsboth SunandMoon'lights',
here,asalwaysintheQur'an,theyaredifferentlynamed;thefirstis
called'Light'(nur)andthesecondiscomparedin thisversetoa'lamp
(_ira;)producinglight'.Weshallsee laterhowotherepithetsareap­
pliedtotheSun.
2.ApartfromtheQur'an,weoftenfind thenumber7 meaningpluralitJ
intextsfromMuhammad'stime, orfromthefirstcenturiesfollowing
him,whichrecordhiswords
(hadiths).

159. Tlw Crcation ol tlle Heaoeta atd tln Eafih t4t
There are therefore many Heavens and Earths, and it comes as
no small surprise to the reader of the Qur'an to find that earths
such as our own may be found in the Universe, a fact that has not
yet been verified by man in our time.
Verse 12 of sura 65 does however predict the following:
"God is the One Who created seven heavens and of the earth
(ar{) a similar number. The Command descends among them
so that you know that God has power over all things and eom-
prehends all things in His knou'ledge."
Since ? indicates an indefinite plurality (as we have seen), it
is possible to conclude that the Qur'anic text clearly indicates
the existence of more than one single Earth, our own Earth
(ard); there are others like it in the Universe.
Another observation which may surprise the Twentieth cen-
tury reader of the Qur'an is the fact that verses refer to three
groups of things created, i.e.
-things in the Heavens
-things on the Earth
-things between thg Heavens and the Earth
Here are several of these verses:
-Sura 20, verse 6;
"To Him (God) belongs what is in the heavens, on earth, be-
tween them and beneath the soil."
-sura 25, verse 59:
". . . the One Who created the heavens, the earth and what is
between them in six periods."
-Sura 32, verSe 4:
"God is the One Who created the heavens, the earth and what is
between them in six periods."
-sura 50, verse 38:
"W'e created the heavens, the earth and what is between them
in six periods, and no weariness touched IJs."'
The reference in the Qur'an to
'what
is between the Heavens
and the Earth' is again to be found in the following verses: sura
1. This statement that the Creation did not make God at all weary stands
out as an obvious reply to the Biblical description, referred to in the
first part of the present book, where God is said to have reeted on the
seventh day from the preceding days'work!
TheCreationoftheHeaoet18andtheEarth 141
TherearethereforemanyHeavensandEarths,anditcomesas
nosmallsurprisetothereaderoftheQur'antofindthatearths
suchasourownmaybefoundin theUniverse,a factthathasnot
yetbeenverifiedby maninourtime.
Verse12
ofsura65doeshoweverpredict thefollowing:
"Godis
theOneWhocreatedsevenheavens andoftheearth
(ard)asimilarnumber.TheCommanddescendsamong them
sothatyouknow thatGodhaspoweroverallthings andcom­
prehendsall
thingsinHisknowledge."
Since7indicates
anindefiniteplurality (aswehaveseen),it
is possibletoconclude thattheQur'anic textclearlyindicates
theexistenceofmorethanonesingle Earth,ourownEarth
(ard);thereareotherslikeitintheUniverse.
Anotherobservationwhichmay surprisetheTwentiethcen­
turyreaderoftheQur'anisthe factthatversesrefertothree
groupsofthingscreated,Le.
-thingsintheHeavens
-thingsontheEarth
-thingsbetweenth~HeavensandtheEarth
Hereareseveraloftheseverses:
-sura20,verse6;
"ToHim(God)belongs whatisintheheavens,on earth,be­
tween
themandbeneath thesoiL"
-sura25,verse59:
ct•••theOneWhocreatedtheheavens, theearthandwhatis
betweenthem
insixperiods."
-sura32,verse4:
"GodistheOneWhocreatedtheheavens,the earthandwhatis
between
theminsixperiods."
-sura50,verse38:
"Wecreatedtheheavens,theearthandwhatisbetweenthem
insixperiods, andnowearinesstouched US."1
Thereference intheQur'anto 'whatisbetweentheHeavens
andtheEarth'isagaintobefoundin thefollowingverses: sura
1.ThisstatementthattheCreationdidnotmakeGodatallwearystands
outasanobviousreplytotheBiblicaldescription,referredtointhe
firstpartofthepresentbook,whereGodissaidtohaverestedonthe
seventhdayfromtheprecedingdays'work!

160. t12 THE BrBLB firE QIJR'AN AND SCTENCE
21, verse 16; sura 44, verses 7 and 38; sura 78, verse 37; sura 16,
verse 86; sura 46, verse 3; sura 43, verse 85.
firis Crestion outside the Heavens and outside the Earth, men-
tioned several times, is a pri,on difficult to imagine. To under-
stand these verses, reference must be made to the most recent
human observations on the existenee of cosmic extra-galagtic
material and one must indeed go back to ideas established by
contemporory science on the formation of the Universe, starting
with the simplest and proceeding to the most complex. These are
the subject of the following paragraph.
Before passing on to these purely scientific matters however,
it is advisable to recapitulate the main points on which the
Qur'an gives us information about the Creation. Aceording to
the preceding quotations, they are as follows:
1) Existence of six periods for the Creation in general.
2) Interlocking of stages in the Creation of the Heavens and the
Earth.
Creetion of the Universe out of an initially unique mass
forming a block that subsequently split up.
Plurality of the Heavens and of the Esrths.
Existence of an intermediary creation
'between
the Heavens
and the Earth'.
SOME MODENN SCIENflFIC DATA CONCERIVIIVG
TIIE FONUATION OF THE UIVIYERSE.
Tfu Solan Sgilen.
The Earth and planets rotating around the sun constitute an
organized world of dimensions whieh, to our human scale, appear
quite colossal. The Earth is, after all, roughly gs
million miles
from the Sun. This is a very great distance for a human being,
but it is very small in comparison to the distance separating the
Sun from the furthermost planet from it in the solar system
(Pluto) ; in round numbers it is 40 times the distance from the
Earth to the Sun, i.e. approximately 3,672 million miles away.
This distance, when doubled, represents the largest dimension of
our solar system. The Sun's light takes nearly 6 hours to reaeh
8)
4l
6)
141 THEBIBLE, THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
21,verse16;sura44,verses7 and38;sura78,verse37;sura15,
verse
85;sura46,verse3;sura43,verse85.
This Creationoutside
theHeavensandoutside theEarth,men-
Jtionedseveraltimes,is
aprioridifficulttoimagine.Tounder­
standtheseverses,reference
mustbemadeto themostrecent
humanobservationsontheexistenceofcosmicextra-galactic
material
andonemustindeedgobacktoideasestablishedby
contemporaryscienceontheformation
oftheUniverse,starting
withthesimplestandproceedingtothemostcomplex.These are
thesubjectofthefollowingparagraph.
Beforepassingontothesepurelyscientific
mattershowever,
itisadvisabletorecapitulatethemainpointsonwhichthe
Qur'angives
usinformationabout theCreation.According to
theprecedingquotations,they areasfollows:
1)ExistenceofsixperiodsfortheCreationingeneral.
·2)InterlockingofstagesintheCreation oftheHeavensand the
Earth.
3)CreationoftheUniverse outofaninitiallyuniquemass
formingablock
thatsubsequentlysplitup.
4)
PluralityoftheHeavensandofthe Earths.
5)Existenceofanintermediarycreation'betweentheHeavens
andthe
Earth'.
SOMEMODERN SCIENTIFICDATACONCERNING
THEFORMATION OFTHEUNIVERSE.
TheSolarSyatem.
TheEarthandplanetsrotatingaroundtheSunconstitutean
organizedworld ofdimensionswhich, toourhumanscale,appear
quitecolossal.The
Earthis,afterall,roughly 93millionmiles
fromtheSun.Thisisavery
greatdistanceforahumanbeing,
butitisverysmallincomparisonto thedistanceseparatingthe
Sunfromthefurthermostplanetfrom itinthesolarsystem
(Pluto);inroundnumbers
itis40timesthedistancefromthe
EarthtotheSun,i.e.approximately3,672minionmilesaway.
Thisdistance,whendoubled,representsthelargestdimensionof
oursolarsystem.TheSun'slighttakesnearly6hourstoreach

161. Trrc Crog-lfon of tlrc E.guocrl aniltlp Mh l4it
Pluto, and yet the journey is made at the terrifying speed of over
186,000 miles per second. The light coming from stans on the
very eonfines of the known celestiel world therefore takes billions
of years to reach ug.
TlnfuI&t.
fite Sun, of which we are & satellite like the other planets
surrounding it, is itself an infinitesmally small element among
a hundred billion stam that form a whole, called a galaxy. On a
fine summer night, the whole of space seems to be filled with stara
thst make up what is known as the Milky Way. This group has
extremely large dimensions. Whereas light could crosft the solar
system in units of one hour, it would require something like
90,000 years to go from one extreme to the other of the most
compact group of stars that make up our galaxy.
The galaxy that we belong to however, even though it is so
incredibly huge, is only a small part of the Heavens. There are
grsnt agglomerates of stars similar to the Milky Way that lie
outside our galaxy. They were discovered a little over fifW year"s
agp, when astronomy was able to make use of an optical instru-
ment as sophistieated as the one that made possible the construc-
tion of the Mount Wilson telescope in the United Statcs. Thus I
very large number indeed of isolated galaxies and masses of gnl-
axies have been discovered that are so far away that it was
necessary to institute a special unit of light-years, the
'parsec'
(the distance light travels in 8.26 years at 186,000 miles per
second).
F ormafu ard Eoohfion ol &Iarilrl4 Stan atd
PIanenw Sgficmt.
What was there originally in the immensely large spsce the
galaxies now occupy ? Modern science can only answer this ques'
tion as of e eertsin period in the evolution of the Universe; it
eannot put into numbers the length of time that separates this
period from us.
At the earliest time it can provide us with, modern science h88
evely reason to maintain that the Universe was formed of s
143
Pluto,andyetthejourneyismade attheterrifyingspeedofover
186,000miles
persecond.Thelightcomingfrom starsonthe
veryconfinesoftheknowncelestialworldthereforetakesbillions
ofyearstoreachus.
TheCaltJsie,.
TheSun, ofwhichweareasatellitelike theotherplanets
surroundingit,isitself
aninfinitesmallysmallelementamong
ahundredbillionstars.
thatformawhole,calledagalaxy.Ona
finesummernight,thewholeofspaceseemsto
befilledwith stars
thatmakeup whatisknownastheMilkyWay.Thisgroup has
extremelylargedimensions.Whereaslightcouldcross thesolar
systeminunits
ofonehour, itwouldrequiresomethinglike
90,000years
togofromoneextreme totheotherofthemost
compactgroup
ofstarsthatmakeup ourgalaxy.
Thegalaxy
thatwebelongtohowever,eventhough itisso
incrediblyhuge,
isonlyasmall partoftheHeavens.There are
giantagglomeratesof starssimilarto theMilkyWay thatlie
outside
ourgalaxy.Theywerediscoveredalittleoverfiftyyears
ago,whenastronomywasable
tomakeuseof anopticalinstru­
ment
assophisticatedastheone thatmadepossibletheconstruc­
tion
oftheMountWilsontelescopein theUnitedStates.Thusa
verylargenumberindeedofisolatedgalaxiesandmassesofgal­
axieshavebeendiscovered
thataresofarawaythatitwas
necessarytoinstituteaspecialunit
oflight-years,the'parsec'
(thedistancelighttravelsin3.26years at186,000miles per
second).
Formationand EooluticmofCaltJsie"Starsand
PlanetatYSf/stema.
Whatwas thereoriginallyintheimmenselylargespace the
galaxiesnowoccupy?Modernsciencecanonlyanswerthisques­
tion
asofacertainperiodintheevolutionoftheUniverse;it
cannotputintonumbers t.helengthoftime thatseparatesthis
period
fromus.
Attheearliesttime itcanprovide uswith,modernscience has
everyreason tomaintainthattheUniversewasformed ofa

162. ru TIIE BIBLE, TrIE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
gaseous mas$ principally composed of hydrogen and a certain
amount of helium that was slowly rotating. This nebula subse-
quently split up into multiple fragments with very large dimen-
sions and masses, so large indeed, that specialists in astrophysies
are able to estimate their mass from r to 100 billion times the
present mass of the Sun (the latter represents a mass that is over
300,000 times that of the Earth). These figures give an idea of
the large size of the fragments of primary gaseous mass that
were to give birth to the galaxies.
A new fragmentation was to form the stars. There then fol-
lowed the intervention of a eondensing process where gravita-
tional forces came into play, (since these bodies were moving
and rotating more and more quickly), along with pressures and
the influence of magnetic fields and of radiations. The stars
became shiny as they contracted and transformed the gravita-
tional forces into thermal energy. Thermonuclear reactions came
into play, and heavier atoms were formed by fusion at the expense
of others that were lighter; this is how the transition was made
from hydrogen to helium, then to carbon and oxygen, ending with
metals and metalloids. Thus the stars have a life of their own and
modern astronomy classifies them according to their present stage
of evolution. The stars also have a death; in the final stage of
their evolution, the violent implosion of certain stars has been
observed so that they become veritable
,corpses'.
The planets, and in particular the Earth, originated in a separ-
ation process starting from an initial constituent that in the
beginning was the primary nebula. A fact that has no longer
been contested for over twenty-five years is that the Sun con-
densed inside the single nebula and that the planets did the same
inside the surrounding nebnlar. disc. one must stress-and this
is of prime importance for the subject in hand-that there was
no sequence in the formation of the celestial elements such as
the Sun nor in the formatiou of an earthly element. There is an
evolutionary parallelism r,r'ith the identity of origin.
Here, science can give us information on the period during
which the events just mentioned took place. Having estimated
the age of our galaxy at roughll' ten billion years, according to
this hypothesis, the formation of the solal system took place a
little over five billion years later'. The stud.y of naturat radio
144 THEBmLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
gaseousmassprincipallycomposed ofhydrogenandacertain
amountofheliumthatwasslowlyrotating.Thisnebulasubse­
quently
splitupintomultiple fragmentswithverylargedimen­
sions
andmasses,so largeindeed,thatspecialistsinastrophysics
areabletoestimate theirmassfrom1to100billiontimes the
presentmassoftheSun(thelatterrepresentsa massthatisover
300,000times
thatoftheEarth).Thesefiguresgive anideaof
thelargesizeofthefragmentsofprimarygaseousmass that
weretogive birthtothegalaxies.
Anew
fragmentationwastoform thestars.Therethenfol­
lowed
theinterventionofacondensingprocesswhere gravita­
tionalforcescameintoplay,(sincethesebodiesweremoving
androtatingmoreandmorequickly),along withpressuresand
theinfluenceofmagneticfields andofradiations.Thestars
becameshiny astheycontractedandtransformedthegravita­
tionalforcesinto thermalenergy.Thermonuclearreactionscame
intoplay,
andheavieratomswereformedbyfusion attheexpense
ofothersthatwerelighter;thisishowthe transitionwasmade
fromhydrogentohelium,thentocarbon andoxygen,ending with
metalsandmetalloids.Thusthestarshavealife oftheirownand
modernastronomyclassifiesthemaccordingto theirpresentstage
ofevolution.The starsalsohavea death;inthefinalstage of
theirevolution,theviolentimplosion ofcertainstarshasbeen
observedso
thattheybecomeveritable'corpses'.
Theplanets,andinparticulartheEarth,originatedinasepar­
ationprocess
startingfromaninitialconstituent thatinthe
beginningwas theprimarynebula.A factthathasnolonger
beencontested
forovertwenty-five yearsisthattheSuncon­
densedinside
thesinglenebula andthattheplanetsdid thesame
inside
thesurroundingnebulardisc.One muststress-andthis
isofprimeimportanceforthesubjectinhand-thattherewas
nosequenceintheformationof
thecelestialelementssuchas
theSunnorintheformation ofanearthlyelement.Thereisan
evolutionaryparallelismwith theidentityoforigin.
Here,sciencecangiveusinformationontheperiod
during
whichtheeventsjustmentionedtookplace.Havingestimated
theageofourgalaxyatroughlytenbillionyears,accordingto
thishypothesis,theformationofthesolarsystemtookplacea
littleoverfivebillion
yearslater.The studyofnaturalradio

163. Tlre Cteatiwr of tle Heaoens otd' tlw Eafih f45
activity makes it possible to place the age of the Earth and the
time the Sun was formed at 4.5 billion years ago, to within a
present-day accuracy of 100 million years' according to some
scientists' calculations. This accuracy is to be admired, since 100
million years may represent a long time to us but the ratio
'maximum
error/total time-to-be-measured' is 0.1/4.5, i.e. 2.2%.
Specialists in astrophysies have therefore attained ^ high
degree of knowledge concerning the general proeess involved in
the formation of the solar system. It may be summarized as
follows: condensation and contraction of a rotating gaseous mass'
splitting up into fragments that leave the Sun and planets in
their places, among them the Earth.' The knowledge that science
has gained on the primary nebula and the way it split up into
an incommensurable quantity of stArs grouped into galaxies
leaves absolutely no doubt as to the legitimacy of a concept of
the plurality of worlds. It does not however provide any kind
of certainty concerning the existence in the Universe of anything
that might, either closely or vaguely, resemble the Earth.
TIw Concept of th'e Pluralitg of thcWorlds.
In spite of the above, modern specialists in astrophysics con-
sider it highly likely that planets similar to Earth are present
in the Universe. As far as the solar system is concerned, nobody
seriously entertains the possibility of finding general conditions
similar to those on Earth on another planet in this system. We
must therefore seek for them outside the solar system. The like-
lihood of their existing outside it is considered quite probable
for the following reasons:
It is thought that in our galaxy half of the 100 billion stars
must, like the Sun, have a planetary system. The fifty billion
stars do indeed, like the Sun, rotate very slowly; a characteristic
which suggests that they are surrounded by planets that are their
satellites. These stars are so far away that the possible planets
are unobservable, but their existence is thought to be highly
probable on account of certain trajectory characteristies; a
slight undulation of the star's trajeetory indicates the presence
l. As regards the Moon, its gradual separation from the Earth following
the deceleration of its rotation is an acknowledged probability.
TheCreationoftheHeaeemand theEarth 145
activitymakesitpossibletoplacetheageoftheEarthandthe
timetheSunwasformed at4.5billionyearsago,towithina:
present~day accuracyof100millionyears,accordingtosome
scientists'calculations.
Thisaccuracyis tobeadmired,since100
million
yearsmayrepresentalongtimetousbuttheratio
'maximumerror/totaltime-to-be-measured'is0.1/4.5, Le.2.2%.
Specialists
inastrophysicshave thereforeattainedahigh
degreeofknowledgeconcerning thegeneralprocessinvolved in
theformationofthesolarsystem. Itmaybesummarizedas
follows:condensationandcontraction ofarotatinggaseousmass,
splittingupintofragmentsthatleavetheSunandplanetsin
theirplaces,among themtheEarth.
l
Theknowledgethatscience
hasgainedontheprimarynebulaandthewayitsplitupinto
anincommensurablequantityofst.ilrsgroupedintogalaxies
leavesabsolutelynodoubt
astothelegitimacyofaconceptof
thepluralityofworlds.Itdoesnothoweverprovide anykind
ofcertaintyconcerningtheexistenceintheUniverseofanything
thatmight,eithercloselyorvaguely,resemble theEarth.
TheConcept ofthePluralityoftheWorlels.
Inspiteoftheabove,modernspecialists inastrophysicscon­
siderithighlylikelythatplanetssimilartoEartharepresent
intheUniverse.As farasthesolarsystemisconcerned,nobody
seriously
entertainsthepossibilityoffindinggeneralconditions
similartothoseon Earthonanotherplanetinthissystem.We
mustthereforeseekforthemoutsidethesolarsystem.Thelike­
lihood
oftheirexistingoutsideitisconsideredquiteprobable
forthefollowingreasons:
Itisthoughtthatinourgalaxyhalfofthe100billionstars
must,liketheSun,haveaplanetarysystem.Thefiftybillion
starsdoindeed,like theSun,rotateveryslowly;a characteristic
whichsuggeststhattheyaresurroundedbyplanetsthataretheir
satellites.These starsaresofarawaythatthepossibleplanets
areunobservable,buttheirexistenceis thoughttobehighly
probableonaccount
ofcertaintrajectorycharacteristics;a
slightundulationofthestar'strajectoryindicatesthepresence
1.AsregardstheMoon, itsgradualseparationfromthe Earthfollowing
thedecelerationof itsrotationis anacknowledgedprobability.

164. 146 THE BIBLE, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
of a companion planetary satellite. Thus the Barnard Star prob-
ably has at least one planetary companion with a mass greater
than that of Jupiter and may even have two satellites. As p.
Gudrin writes: "AII the evidence points to the fact that planetary
systems are scattered in profusion all over the universe. The
solar system and the Earth are not unique." And as a corollary:
"Life, like the planets that harbour it, is scattered throughout
the universe, in those places where the physico-chemical condi-
tions necessary for its flowering and development are to be
found."
Interstelhr Matwial.
The basie process in the formation of the Universe therefore
lay in the condensation of material in the primary nebula fol-
lowed by its division into fragments that originally eonstituted
galaetic masses. The latter in their turn split up into stars that
provided the sub-product of the process, i.e. the planets. These
successive separations left among the groups of principle ele-
ments what one might perhaps call
'remains'.
Their more scien-
tific name is
'interstellar
galactic material'. It has been described
in various ways; there are bright nebulae that reflect the light
received from other stars and are perhaps composed of
.dusts'
or
'smokes',
to use the terminology of experts in astrophysics,
and then there are the dark nebulae that are less dense, cott*isting
of interstellar material that is even more modest, known for its
tendency to interfere with photometric measurements in astron-
omy. There can be no doubt about the existence of
,bridges'
of
material between the galaxies themserves. Although these gases
may be very rarefied, the fact that they oecupy such a colossal
space, in view of the great distance separating the galaxies, could
make them correspond to a mass possibly greater than the total
mass of the galaxies in spite of the low density of the former.
A. Boichot considers the presence of these intergalactic masses
to be of prime importance which could
',consider"uty
alter ideas
on the evolution of the ljniverse."
We must now go back to the basic ideas on the creation of the
Universe that were taken from the Qur'an and look at them in
the light of modern scientific data.
146 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
ofacompanionplanetarysatellite.Thus theBarnardStarprob­
ably
hasatleastoneplanetarycompanionwithamass greater
thanthatofJupiterandmayevenhavetwosatellites.As P.
Guerinwrites:"Alltheevidencepointstothefact thatplanetary
systems
arescatteredinprofusionallovertheuniverse.The
solarsystemandthe
Eartharenotunique."And asacorollary:
"Life,like
theplanetsthatharbourit,isscatteredthroughout
theuniverse,inthoseplaceswhere
thephysico-chemicalcondi­
tionsnecessaryforitsfloweringanddevelopment
aretobe
found."
InterstellarMaterial.
ThebasicprocessintheformationoftheUniversetherefore
layinthecondensationofmaterialinthe
primarynebulafol­
lowedbyitsdivisionintofragments
thatoriginallyconstituted
galacticmasses.The
latterintheirturnsplitupinto starsthat
providedthesub-product oftheprocess,Le.theplanets.These
successiveseparationsleftamongthegroupsofprincipleele­
ments
whatonemightperhapscall'remains'. Theirmorescien­
tificnameis'interstellargalacticmaterial'.
Ithasbeendescribed
invariousways;therearebrightnebulaethatreflectthelight
receivedfromother
starsandareperhapscomposed of'dusts'
or'smokes',tousetheterminologyofexpertsinastrophysics,
andthentherearethedarknebulaethatarelessdense,consisting
ofinterstellarmaterial thatisevenmoremodest,knownfor its
tendencyto interferewithphotometricmeasurementsinastron­
omy.Therecanbenodoubtabouttheexistence
of'bridges'of
materialbetweenthegalaxiesthemselves.Althoughthesegases
maybeveryrarefied,thefact thattheyoccupysuchacolossal
space,inviewofthe
greatdistanceseparatingthegalaxies,could
makethemcorrespondtoamasspossibly
greaterthanthetotal
massofthegalaxiesinspite ofthelowdensityoftheformer.
A.Boichotconsiders
thepresenceoftheseintergalacticmasses
tobeofprimeimportancewhichcould"considerably
alterideas
on
theevolutionoftheUniverse."
We
mustnowgoback tothebasicideasontheCreation ofthe
UniversethatweretakenfromtheQur'anandlook atthemin
thelightofmodernscientificdata.

165. Tlv Clrn/irln of the Heaoelaa ard- tlrr Earlh
CONFNONTATION WITH THE DATA IN THE
QUn'Ail
CONCEA ryNG TEE Cn^EAflON'
We shall examine the five main points on which the Qur'an
gives information about the Creation.
t) The six periods of the Creation of the Heavens and the Esrth
covered, according to the Qur'an, the formation of the celestial
bodies and the Earth, and the development of the latter until
(with its
'sustenance;)
it became inhabitable by man. In the
case of the Earth, the events described in the Qur'an happened
over four periods. one could perhaps see in them the four
geological periods described by modern science, with man's ap-
pearance, as we already know, taking plaee in the quaternary era.
This is purely a trypoihesis sincc nobody has an answer to this
question.
It must be noted however, that the formation of the heavenly
bodies and the Earth, as explained in verses 9 to 12, sura 41 (see
page 136) required two phases. If we take the sun and its sub-
proauct tire Earth as an example (the only one accessible to us) '
science informs us that their formation occurred by a process of
condensAtion of the primary nebula and then their separation'
This is exactly rvhat the Qur'an expresses very elearly when it
refers to the processes that produced a fusion and subsequent
separation starting from a celestial
'smoke'.
Hence there is
complete correspottd.tt.. between the facts of the Qur'an and
the facts of science.
Zl Science showed the interlocking of the two stages in the for-
mation of a star (like the sun) and its satellite (like the Earth) '
This interconnection is surely very evident in the text of the
Qur'an examined.
3) The existence at an early stage of the Universe of the
'smoke'
referred to in the Qur'an, me&ning the predominently gaseous
state of the material that composes it, obviously corresponds to
the concept of the primary nebula put forrvard by modern science'
4) The plurality of the heavens, expressed in the Qur'an
by the
nUmber 7, rvhose meaning lve have fliscnssed, is confirmed by
modern science due to the observations experts in astrophysies
have made on galactic systems and their very large number' On
the other hand the plurality of earths that are similar to ours
r17
TlasC,.tionoftheHeaoemafldtlasEarth 147
CONFRONTATION WITHTHEDATAINTHE
QUR'ANCONCERNING THECREATION.
Weshallexaminethefive mainpointsonwhichtheQur'an
givesinformationabouttheCreation.
1)ThesixperiodsoftheCreationoftheHeavensandtheE'arlh
covered,accordingtotheQur'an,
theformationofthecelestial
bodies
andtheEarth,andthedevelopmentof thelatteruntil
(withits'sustenance')itbecameinhabitable byman.Inthe
caseoftheEarth,theeventsdescribedin theQur'anhappened
over
fourperiods.Onecould perhapsseeinthemthefour
geologicalperiodsdescribedbymodernscience,
withman'sap­
pearance,
aswealreadyknow,takingplacein thequaternaryera.
Thisispurelyahypothesissincenobody hasananswertothis
question.
Itmustbenotedhowever, thattheformationoftheheavenly
bodies
andtheEarth,asexplainedinverses9to12, sura41(see
page136)requiredtwophases. IfwetaketheSunanditssub­
producttheEarthasanexample(theonlyoneaccessibleto us),
scienceinformsusthattheirformationoccurred byaprocessof
condensationoftheprimarynebulaandthentheirseparation.
ThisisexactlywhattheQur'anexpressesveryclearlywhen it
referstotheprocessesthatproducedafusion andsubsequent
separationstartingfromacelestial'smoke'.Hence thereis
completecorrespondencebetween
thefactsoftheQur'anand
thefactsofscience.
2)Scienceshowed
theinterlockingofthetwostagesin thefor­
mationofastar(liketheSun)anditssatellite(like theEarth).
Thisinterconnectionissurelyveryevidentin
thetextofthe
Qur'anexamined.
3)
TheexistenceatanearlystageoftheUniverseof the'smoke'
referredtointheQur'an,meaningthepredominentlygaseous
stateofthematerialthatcomposesit,obviouslycorrespondsto
theconceptoftheprimarynebulaputforwardbymodernscience.
4)Thepluralityoftheheavens,expressedinthe Qur'anbythe
number7,whosemeaningwehavediscussed,isconfirmedby
modernscienceduetotheobservationsexpertsinastrophysics
havemadeongalacticsystems
a~dtheirverylargenumber.On
theotherhandthepluralityofearthsthataresimilartoours

166. l{8
TrrE BIBLE, TIIE QItn'AN AND SCTENCE
(from eertain points of view at least) is an idea that arises in
the text of the Qur'an but has not yet been demonstrated to be
true by science; all the samg speciaiists eonsider this to be quite
feasible.
6) The existenee of an intermediate creation between
.the
Heav-
ens' and
'the
Earth' expressed in the eur'Bn may be compared
to the discovery of those bridges of material present outside
organized astronomic systems.
Although not all the questions raised by the deseriptions in
the Qur'an have been completely confirmed by scientifie data,
there is in any case absorutely no opposition between the data
in the Qur'an on the creation and modern knowledge on the
formation of the universe. This fact is worth stressirig for the
Qur'anic Revelation, whereas it is very obvious inaeedthat the
present-day text of the ord restament provides data on the same
events that are unacceptable from a scientific point of view. It
is hardly surprising, since the description of the Creation in the
secerdotal version of the Bible' was written by priests at the
time of the deportation to Babylon who had the legalist intentions
already described and therefore compiled a deseription that fitted
their theological views. The existence of such an enorrnous differ-
ence between the Biblical description and the data in the eur'an
concerning the creation is worth underlining once
"g"i'
on
aeeount of the totally gratuitous aecusations leveled asainst
Muhammad sinee the beginnings of Islam to the effect tnat ne
eopied the Biblical deseriptions. As far as the creation is con-
cerned, this aceusation is totally unfound ed. How eould, a mrrn
Iiaing fourteen hund,red,
uears ago haue mad,e eoryecti.ons to the
existi.ng deseriyttion to snch an ertent that he el:i,mi,nated, eeienti-
fieally innecurnte material and,, on his own initiattue, m,ad,e state-
ments that seienee has been able to uertfy only i,n the'present dey?
This hypoth.esz's is eomTtretely untenable. Tie d,eseiption of the
Creation giaen i,n the ew"an is quite d,iferent from the one in
the Bible.
1' This text eompletely overshadows the few lines eontained in the
yshvirt
version' The latter is too brief and too vagle for the scientist to talc
account of it.
148 TIlEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
(fromcertainpointsofviewatleast)isanideathatarisesin
thetextoftheQur'anbuthasnotyetbeendemonstrated tobe
truebyscience;all thesame,specialistsconsider thistobequite
feasible.
5)Theexistenceofanintermediatecreationbetween'theHeav­
ens'and'theEarth'expressedintheQur'anmaybecompared
tothediscoveryofthosebridges ofmaterialpresentoutside
organizedastronomicsystems.
Although
notallthequestionsraised bythedescriptionsin
theQur'anhavebeencompletelyconfirmed
byscientificdata,
thereisinanycaseabsolutelynooppositionbetween
thedata
intheQur'anontheCreationandmodernknowledgeon the
formationoftheUniverse.Thisfactisworthstressingforthe
Qur'anicRevelation,whereas itisveryobviousindeed t~atthe
present-daytextoftheOldTestamentprovidesdataonthesame
events
thatareunacceptablefromascientificpoint ofview.It
ishardlysurprising,sincethedescription oftheCreationin the
Sacerdotalversion oftheBible
1
waswrittenbypriestsatthe
timeofthedeportationtoBabylonwhohad
thelegalistintentions
alreadydescribedandthereforecompiledadescription thatfitted
theirtheologicalviews. Theexistenceofsuchanenormousdiffer­
encebetween
theBiblicaldescription andthedataintheQur'an
concerningtheCreationis worthunderliningonce againon
account
ofthetotallygratuitousaccusationsleveled against
Muhammadsince thebeginningsofIslam totheeffectthathe
copied
theBiblicaldescriptions.As farastheCreationiscon­
cerned,
thisaccusationistotallyunfounded.
Howcoulda man
livingfourteenhundredyearsagohavemadecorrectionsto
the
existingdescriptiontosuchan extentthatheeliminatedscienti­
ficallyinaccuratematerialand,onhisowninitiative,madestate­
mentsthatsciencehasbeenableto verifyonlyinthepresentday?
Thishypothesisiscompletelyuntenable.Thedescription
ofthe
Creation
givenintheQur'an isquitedifferentfromtheonein
theBible.
1.Thistextcompletelyovershadows thefewlinescontainedin theYahviat
version.Thelatteristoobriefandtoovagueforthescientisttotake
accountofit.

167. tla Cr"rdlfon of t p Hlrlorial atd tlra Enilh r{0
AIVSWENS TO CENTAIN OBTECflOilS
Indisputebly, reaemblances do exist between narrations dealing
with other subiects, particularly religious history, in the Bible
and in the Qur'an. It is moreover interesting to note from this
point of view how nobody holds against Jesus the fact that he
iat.r up the same sort of facts and Biblical teaehings. This does
not, of course, stop people in the West from accusing Muhammad
of referring to such facts in his teaehing with the suggestion
that he is an imposter beeause he presents them as a Revelation.
As for the proof that Muhammad reproduced in the Qur'an what
he had been told or dictated by the rabbis, it has no more sub-
stance than the statement that a Christian monk gave him a
sound religious education. one would do well to re-read what
R. BlachEre in his hook, The Probletn of Muhammad' (Le Prob-
llme de Mahomet)
r,
has to say about this
'fable"
A hint of a resemblance is also advaneed between other state-
ments in the Qur'an and beliefs that go back a very long w&Y'
probably muctr further in time than the Bible.
More generally speaking, f,he traces of eertain cosmogonic
myths have been-sought in the4loly Scriptures; for example the
belief held by the Polynesians in the existenee of primeval waters
that were eovered in darkness until they separated when light
eppeared; thus Heaven and Earth were formed. This myth is
*olnp*t tl to the description of the Creation in the Bible, where
there is undoubtedly a resemblanee. It would however be super-
ficial to then accuse the Bible of having copied this from the
cosmogonic myth.
It irjust asisuperficial to see the Qur'anic concept of the divi-
sion of the primlval material constituting the Universe at its
initial stage-a concept held by modern scienee-as one that
comes from various cosmogonic myths in one form or another
that express something resembling it.
It is worth analysing these mythical beliefs and descriptions
more closely. Often an initial idea appears among them which is
reasonable in itself, and is in some cas€s borne out by what we
today know (or think we know) to be true, except that fantastic
aescriptions are attached to it in the myth. This is the case of
l. Pub. Pregser Universitaries de France, Paris, 1962'
149
ANSWERSTO CERTAINOBJECTIONS
Indisputably,resemblances doexistbetween narrationsdealing
with
othersubjects,particularlyreligioushistory,intheBible
andintheQur'an.Itismoreoverinterestingtonotefromthis
point
ofviewhownobodyholdsagainstJesusthe factthathe
takesupthesame
sortoffactsandBiblicalteachings.Thisdoes
not,
ofcourse,stoppeopleintheWestfromaccusingMuhammad
ofreferringtosuchfactsinhisteachingwiththesuggestion
thatheisanimposterbecausehepresentsthemasaRevelation.
As
fortheproofthatMuhammadreproducedintheQur'an what
hehadbeentold ordictatedbytherabbis, ithasnomoresub­
stance
thanthestatementthataChristianmonkgavehima
soundreligiouseducation.Onewould
dowelltore-read what
R.Blachereinhisbook, TheProblem ofMuhammad(LeProb­
IernedeMahomet>
t,hastosayaboutthis'fable'.
A
hintofaresemblanceisalsoadvancedbetweenotherstate­
mentsintheQur'anandbeliefs
thatgobackaverylongway,
probablymuch
furtherintimethantheBible.
Moregenerallyspeaking,
t.hetracesofcertaincosmogonic
mythshavebeensoughtintherHoly
Scriptures;forexamplethe
beliefheldbythePolynesiansintheexistence ofprimevalwaters
thatwerecoveredindarknessuntiltheyseparatedwhenlight
appeared;
thusHeavenandEarthwereformed.Thismythis
comparedto
thedescriptionoftheCreationintheBible,where
thereisundoubtedlyaresemblance.
Itwouldhoweverbesuper­
ficialtothenaccusetheBibleofhavingcopiedthisfrom
the
cosmogoniemyth.
Itisjustas\superficialtoseetheQur'anicconceptof thedivi­
sion
oftheprimevalmaterialconstitutingtheUniverse atits
initialstage-aconceptheldbymodern science-asonethat
comesfromvariouscosmogonicmyths inoneform oranother
thatexpresssomethingresemblingit.
Itisworthanalysingthesemythicalbeliefsanddescriptions
moreclosely.Oftenaninitialideaappearsamongthemwhichis
reasonableinitself,andisinsomecasesborneoutbywhatwe
todayknow
(orthinkweknow)tobetrue,except thatfantastic
descriptions
areattachedto itinthemyth.Thisisthecase of
1.Pub.PressesUniversitariesdeFrance.Paris.1952.

168. lfll mrE DDLF' rHE QIrn'AN AND SCIENCE
the fairly widespreed concept of the Ireavens and the Eartr
originally being united then subsequenily separated. vfhen, as in
Japan, the image of the egg plus an expression of elraos ie
attaehed to the above with the idea of a seed inside ttre esg (as
for all eggs), the imaginative addition makes the cone.ti m.
all semblance of seriousness. In other countries, the idea of a
plant is associated with it; the plant grows and in so doing raises
up the sky and separates the Heavens from the Earth-. Here
again, the imaginative quality of the added detail lends the myth
its very distinetive eharscter. Nevertheless I common character-
istic remains, i.e. the notion of a single mass at the tresinning of
the evolutionary process leading to the formation of the universe
which then divided to form the various
,worlds'
that we know
today.
The reason these cosmogonic myths are mentioned here is to
underline the way they have been embroidered by man,s imagine-
tion and to show the basic differenee between thern and the
statements in the Qur'an on the same subject. The latter are free
from any of the whimsical details accompanying such beliefs;
on the contrary, they are distinguished uv tr,L *ob." qualiW of
the words in which they are made and their *gr"**"nt with
scientific data.
sueh statements in the eur'an concerning the creation, which
appeared nearly fourteen centuries ag'o, obviously do not lend
themselves to a human explanation.
ISO TIlEBIBLE.THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
thefairlywidespreadconcept oftheHeavensand theEarth
originallybeingunitedthensubsequentlyseparated.When.
&8in
Japan,theimage
oftheeggplus anexpressionofchaos;8
attachedtotheabovewiththeideaofaseedinside
theegg(as
foralleggs),theimaginativeadditionmakes
theconceptlose
allsemblance
ofseriousness.Inothercountries,theidea
ofa
plantisassociatedwith
it;theplantgrows andinsodoingraises
up
theskyandseparates theHeavensfrom theEarth.Here
again,
theimaginativequality oftheaddeddetaillends themyth
itsverydistinctivecharacter.Neverthelessacommoncharacter­
isticremains,
Le.thenotionofasinglemass atthebeginningof
theevolutionaryprocessleadingto
theformationoftheUniverse
whichthendividedtoformthevarious'worlds'
thatweknow
today.
Thereasonthesecosmogonicmyths
arementionedhereis to
underlinethewaytheyhavebeenembroideredbyman'simagina­
tionandtoshowthebasicdifferencebetweenthemandthe
statementsintheQur'anonthesamesubject.The
latterarefree
fromany
ofthewhimsicaldetailsaccompanyingsuchbeliefs;
onthecontrary,they
aredistinguishedbythesoberquality
of
thewordsinwhichthey aremadeand theiragreementwith
scientificdata.
SuchstatementsintheQur'anconcerning
theCreation,which
appearednearlyfourteencenturiesago,obviously
donotlend
themselvestoahumanexplanation.

169. rY
Astrorrrrrrry ln the Qut'arr
Ttre Qur'sn is full of reflections on the Heavens. In the preced-
ing chapter on the creation, we saw how the plurality of the
neavens and Earths was referred to, as well as what the Qut'sn
calls an intermediary creation
'between
the Heavens and the
Earth': modern science has verified the latter. The verses refer-
iins to the Creation already contain a broad idea of what is to
be found in the heavens, i.e. of everything outside the earth'
Apart from the verses that specifically describe the Creation,
there are roughly another fqrty verseg in the Qur'an which
provide infoniration on astronomy complementing rvhat hss
atready been gi'ien. Some of them are not much more than
reflections on ihe glory of the Creator, the Organizer of all the
stellar and planetary systems. These we know to be arranged
aecording to balancing positions whose stability Newton ex-
plained in tti* law of the mutual attraetion of bodies.
The first verses to be quoted here hardly furnish much mater-
ial for scientific analysis: the aim is simply to draw attention
to God's Omnipotence They must be mentioned however to give
a realistic idea of the way the Qur'anic text deseribed the organiz-
ation of the Universe fourteen centuries 8go'
These references constitute a new fact of divine Revelation'
The organization of the world is treated in neither the Gospels
nor the Old Testament (except for a few notions whose general
inaccuracy we have already seen in the Biblical description of
the Creation). The Qur'an however deals with this subject in
depth. what it describes is important, but so is what it does not
,ont"irr. It does not in fact provide an account of the theories
prevalen t at the time of the Revelation that deal with the organi-
t5l
IV
Asl..onoDl}'InthEQuran
TheQur'anisfullofreflectionson theHeavens.Inthepreced­
ingchapteron
theCreation,wesawhow thepluralityofthe
HeavensandEarthswasreferredto,aswellaswhattheQur'an
callsanintermediarycreation'between theHeavensand the
Earth':modemscience hasverifiedthelatter.Theversesrefer­
ringtotheCreationalreadycontainabroadidea
ofwhatisto
befoundintheheavens, Le.ofeverythingoutside theearth.
ApartfromtheversesthatspecificallydescribetheCreation,
thereareroughlyanotherfQrtyversesin
theQur'anwhich
provideinformationonastronomycomplementing
whathas
alreadybeen gi~en.Someofthemarenotmuchmore than
reflectionson thegloryoftheCreator, theOrganizerofall the
stellarandplanetarysystems.Theseweknowtobe
arranged
accordingtobalancingpositionswhosestabilityNewtonex­
plained
inhislaw ofthemutualattraction ofbodies.
Thefirstversestobequotedherehardlyfurnishmuchmater­
ial
forscientificanalysis:theaimissimplyto
drawattention
toGod'sOmnipotence.Theymustbementionedhowevertogive
arealisticideaoftheway
theQur'anictextdescribedtheorganiz­
ation
oftheUniversefourteencenturiesago.
Thesereferencesconstituteanewfact
ofdivineRevelation.
TheorganizationoftheworldistreatedinneithertheGospels
northeOldTestament(except forafewnotionswhosegeneral
inaccuracywehavealreadyseenintheBiblicaldescriptionof
theCreation).TheQur'anhoweverdealswiththissubject
in
depth.Whatitdescribesisimportant, butsoiswhatitdoesnot
contain.Itdoesnotinfactprovideanaccountofthetheories
prevalent
atthetime oftheRevelation thatdealwith theorgani-
151

170. r58 THE BIBLE, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
zation of the celestial world, theories that
show were inaccurate. An example of this
This negative consideration must however
science was later to
will be given later.
be pointed out.r
A. GENERAL NEFLECflONS CONCENNTNG THE SKT.
-sura
50, verse 6. The subjeet is man in general.
"Do they not look at the sky above them, how we have built
it and adorned it, and there are no rifts in it."
-sura 31, verse l0:
" (God) ereated the heavens rvithout any pillars that you can
ggg.
. .tt
-sura 18, verse p:
"God is the one who raisecl the heavens without any pillars
that you ean see, then He firmly established Himself on the
throne and He subjected the sun and moon . . .,,
These two verses refute the belief that the vault of the heavens
was held up by pillars, the only things preventing the former from
crushing the earth.
-sura 55, verse ?:
"the sky (God) raised it . . ."
-sura 22, verse 6E:
"(God) holds back the sky from fallirlg on the earth unless
by His leave . . .,,
It is knorvn horv the remoteness of celestial masses at*great
distance and in proportion to the magnitude of their mass itself
constitutes the foundation of their equilibrium. The more remote
the masses ere, the weaker the force is that attracts one to the
other. The nearer they are, the stronger the attraction is that
one has to the other: this is true for the Moon, rvhich is near to
lJ h"*
"f"n
heard those who go to great lengths to find a human ex-
planation-and no other-to ail the problems raised by the eur,an say
the following: "if the Book contains surprising statements on astron-
omy, it is because the Arabs were very knowledgeable on this subject."
In so doing they forget the fact that, in general, science in Isiamie
countries is very much post-eur'an, and that the scientific knowledge of
this great period would in any case not have been suffcient for a h.r-.r,
being to write some of the verses to be found in the eur'an. This wiil
be shown in the following paragraphs.
152 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
zationofthecelestialworld,theories thatsciencewas laterto
showwereinaccurate.Anexampleofthiswillbegivenlater.
Thisnegativeconsiderationmusthoweverbepointedout.!
A.GENERALREFLECTIONS CONCERNING
THESKY.
-sura50,verse6.Thesubjectismaningeneral.
"Dotheynotlook
attheskyal10vethem,howWehavebuilt
itandadornedit,and therearenoriftsinit."
-sura31,verse10:
"(God)createdtheheavenswithout anypillarsthatyoucan
see
..."
-sura18,verse2:
"Godis theOneWhoraised theheavenswithout anypillars
thatyoucansee,thenHefirmlyestablishedHimselfon
the
throneandHesubjectedthesunandmoon..."
Thesetwoverses
refutethebeliefthatthevaultoftheheavens
washeldupbypillars,theonlythingspreventingthe
formerfrom
crushingthe earth.
-sura55,verse7:
"thesky(God)raised it.."
-sura22,verse65:
#I(God)holdsbacktheskyfromfalHftg
ontheearthunless
byHisleave. .."
Itisknownhowtheremotenessofcelestialmasses
at-great
distanceandinproportiontothemagnitude oftheirmassitself
constitutesthefoundationof
theirequilibrium.Themoreremote
themassesare,theweaker theforceis thatattractsonetothe
other.The
nearertheyare,the strongertheattractionis that
onehastothe other:thisistruefortheMoon,whichis nearto
1.Ihaveoftenheardthosewhogotogreatlengthstofinda humanex­
planation-andnoother-toalltheproblemsraisedbytheQur'ansay
thefollowing:"iftheBookcontainssurprisingstatementsonastron­
omy,itisbecausetheArabswereveryknowledgeableonthissubject."
Insodoingtheyforgetthefactthat,ingeneral,sciencein Islamic
countriesisverymuchpost-Qur'an,andthatthescientificknowledgeof
thisgreatperiodwouldin anycaSenothavebeensufficientforahuman
beingtowritesomeoftheversestobefoundintheQur'an.Thiswill
beshowninthefollowingparagraphs.

171. /vlfionorrrg tn ttlr- Qlu/rllt
t53
the Earth (astronomically speaking) and exercises an influence
by laws of attraction on the position occupied by the waters of
the sea, hence the phenomenon of the tides. If two celestial bodies
come too close to one another, eollision is inevitable. fire fact
that they are subjected to an order is the sine qua non for thie
absence of disturbances.
The subjection of the Heavens to divine order is often referred
to as well:
-sura 23, verse 86: God is speaking to the Prophet'
"Say: Who is Lord of the seven heavens and Lord of the
tremendous throne?"
We have already seen how by
'seven
heavens' what is megnt
is not ?, but an indefinite number of lfesvens.
-sura 46, verse 18:
"For you (God) subiected all that is in the heavens and on
the earth, all from Him. Behold ! In that are signs for
people who reflect."
-sura 66, verse 6:
"The sun and moon (are subjected) to caleulations"
-sura 6, verse 96:
" (God) appointed the night for rest and the sun and the moon
for reckoning."
-sura 14, verse 38:
,,For
you (God) subjected the sun and the moon, both dil-
igently pursuing their courses. And for you He subiected the
night and the day."
Here one verse completes another: the calculations referred to
result in the regularity of the course described by the heavenly
bodies in question, this is expressed by the word dd'ib, the present
participle of a verb whose original meaning was
'to
work eagerly
snd assiduously at something'. Here it is given the meaning of
,to
apply orr.**jf to something with care in a perseverant, invari-
able manner, in accordance with set habits'.
-sura 36, verse 39 : God is sPeaking:
"And for the moon We have appointed mansions till she re-
turns like an old shriveled palm branch'"
153
theEarth(astronomicallyspeaking) andexercisesaninfluence
bylaws
ofattractiononthepositionoccupied bythewatersof
thesea,hencethephenomenon ofthetides.Iftwocelestialbodies
cometooclosetooneanother,collisionisinevitable.The
fact
thattheyaresubjectedtoan orderisthesinequanon forthe
absenceofdisturbances.
Thesubjection
oftheHeavens todivineorderisoftenreferred
toaswell:
-sura23,verse86: Godisspeakingto theProphet.
"Say:WhoisLord ofthesevenheavens andLordofthe
tremendousthrone1"
Wehavealreadyseenhowby'sevenheavens' whatismeant
is
not7,butanindefinitenumber ofHeavens.
-sura45,verse13:
"Foryou(God)subjectedall thatisintheheavens andon
theearth,allfromHim.Behold!In
thataresignsfor
peoplewhoreflect."
-sura55,verse5:
"Thesunandmoon (aresubjected)tocalculations"
-sura6,verse96:
"(God)appointedthe nightforrestandthesunandthemoon
forreckoning."
-sura14,verse33:
"Foryou(God)subjectedthesun andthemoon,bothdil­
igentlypursuing
theircourses.AndforyouHesubjectedthe
nightand
theday."
Hereoneversecompletes
another:thecalculationsreferredto
resultintheregularityofthecoursedescribedby theheavenly
bodiesinquestion,thisisexpressedbytheword
da'ib,thepresent
pa"rticipleofaverbwhoseoriginalmeaningwas'toworkeagerly
andassiduously
atsomething'.Here itisgiventhemeaningof
'toapplyoneselftosomething
withcareinaperseverant,invari­
ablemanner,inaccordancewithsethabits'.
-sura36,verse39:Godisspeaking:
"AndforthemoonWehaveappointedmansionstillshere­
turnslikeanoldshriveledpalmbranch."

172. rs{ TIIE BIBI"E, TIIE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
This is a reference to the eurled form of the palm branch
which, as it shrivels up, takes on the moon's crescent. This eom-
mentary will be completed later.
-gura 16, verse 12:
"For you (God) subjected the night and the day, the sun and
the moon; the stars are in subjection to His command.
verily in this are signs for people who are wise."
The practical angle from which this perfect celestial order is
seen is underlined on account of its value as an aid to man's
travel on earth and by sea, and to his caleulation of time. This
eomment beeomes clear when one bears in mind the fact that
the Qur'an was originally a preaching adriressed to men who only
understood the simple language of their everyday lives. This
explains the presence of the following reflections:
-'sura 6, verse g7:
" (God) is the one who has set out for you the stars, that you
may guide yourselves by them through the darkness of the
land and of the sea. we have detailed the signs for people
who know.t'
-sura 16, verse 16:
" (God sets on the earth) randmarks and by the stars (men)
guide themselves."
-gura 10, verse 5:
"God is the one who made the sun a shining glory and the
moon a lig:ht and for her ordained mansions, so that you
might lcnow the number of years and the reckoning (of the
time). God ereated this in truth. He explains the signs in
detail for people who know."
This calls for some comment. whereas the Bible calls the sun
and Moon
'lights',
and merely adds to one the adjeetive
,greater'
and to the other
'lesser',
the eur'an aseribes differences other
than that of dimension to each respectively. Agreed, this is
nothing more than a verbal distinetion, but how was one to
communicate to men at this time without confusing them, while
at the same time expressing the notion that the sun and Moon
were not absolutely identical
.lights'?
154 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Thisisareferenceto thecurledformof thepalmbranch
which,asitshrivelsup,takeson themoon'screscent.Thiscom­
mentarywillbecompletedlater.
--sura16,verse12:
"Foryou(God)subjectedthe nightandtheday,thesunand
themoon;the
starsareinsubjectiontoHisCommand.
Verilyin
thisaresignsforpeoplewho arewise."
Thepracticalanglefromwhichthisperfectcelestial
orderis
seenisunderlinedonaccount
ofitsvalueasanaidtoman's
travelon
earthandbysea,andtohiscalculation oftime.This
commentbecomesclearwhenonebears
inmindthe factthat
theQur'anwasoriginallyapreachingaddressedtomenwhoonly
understoodthesimplelanguage
oftheireverydaylives.This
explainsthepresence
ofthefollowingreflections:
---sura
6,verse97:
"(God)istheOneWhohas setoutforyouthe stars,thatyou
mayguideyourselvesbythemthroughthedarkness ofthe
land
andofthesea.Wehavedetailedthesignsforpeople
whoknow."
-sura16,verse16:
"(Godsetson theearth)landmarksandbythe stars(men)
guidethemselves."
-sura10,verse5:
"Godis
theOneWhomadethesunashininggloryandthe
moonalight
andforherordainedmansions,so thatyou
mightknowthenumberofyearsandthereckoning(ofthe
time).Godcreatedthisin truth.Heexplainsthesignsin
detail
forpeoplewhoknow."
Thiscallsforsomecomment.WhereastheBiblecallstheSun
and
Moon'lights',andmerelyaddstoonetheb.djective 'greater'
andtothe other'lesser',theQur'anascribesdifferencesother
than
thatofdimensiontoeachrespectively.Agreed,thisis
nothingmorethanaverbaldistinction,buthowwasoneto
communicatetomen
atthistimewithoutconfusingthem,while
atthesametimeexpressingthenotion thattheSunandMoon
werenotabsolutelyidentical'lights'?

173. tlffittry h ttt Qrdcr
B. IVATUNE OF EEAVEIYLT EODIES.
Ilra $wr arndtlrcilootu
Ilre Sun is e thining glory ((iVill and the Moon e tight (nfrrl'
Tfris transletion would appear to be more correct than those
given by others, where the two terms are inverted. In fact thert
ir Uttt" hifr.t o* in maning since Wil
belongs to a root-( tl*'!
*hirt, according to Kazimirski's iuthoritative Arabic/French
dictionary, meaos
'to
bc brigbt, to shine' (e'g. like s fire). fiie
same autho" attributes to the substantive in question the meaning
of
'Ilght'.
tne OferensE between Sun and Moon wiil bG made Clearer
by further quotes from the Qurran.
---sura 96, verse 61:
..Bless€d
is the One lVho placed the constellations in heeven
and plaeed therein a lamp and a moon giving light'"
---sura ?1, 16-16:
"Did
you see how God created seven heavens one above an-
other and msde the moon s light therein and rnade the sun
s lamp?'
-'Eura ?8, verg€s 12-1$:
'Te
have built above you seven strong (heavens) and placed
e blszing lamP."
The blazing lamp ir qulte ohviously the sun.
Here the moon is defined ss I body thst grves light (trrunhl
from the sgme root es nfrr (the light *pplied b the Moon). The
Sun however is compared to a torch (drd,il or a blezing
(uohhfti) lemP.-
A nan of Mutrammad's time could easily distinguish betwGor
the !lun, a blazing heavenly body well known to the inhabitants
of the deeert, ana tne Moon, the body of the cool of the night' The
comparisons found in the Qur'an on this subiect are therdort
quit€ normsl. What is interesting to note here is the sober qu1lity
of tne comparisons, and the absence in the text of the Qurren of
any elem€ot" of comperison thst might have prevailed at the
fi-- rnd which in our dsy would eppear as phantasmagorial.
It i8 knowu thst the sun is a star thst generates intense hest
enit light b'y its intemal combustions, and that the Moon, which
rsr
155
B.NATUMOFHEAVENLYBODIES.
TIaeSUfItmdIIaeMoon.
TheSunisashiningglory (tUri')andtheMoona light(nur).
ThistranslationwouldappeAr tobemorecorrect thanthose
givenbyothers,wherethetwoterms
areinverted.Infactthere
islittledi1fereneeinmeaningsince g,i1la'belongstoaroot (~w')
whieh,aceording toKazimirski'sauthoritative Arabie/Freneh
dictionary,means 'tobebright,toshine'(e.g.likeafire).The
same
authorattributestothesubstantiveinquestion themeaning
of'Ught'.
ThedifferencebetweenSun
andMoonwillbemade ~learer
byfurtherquotesfrom theQur'an.
-aura25,verse61:
"Blessedis
theOneWhoplacedtheconstellations inheaven
andplacedthereinalampandamoongivinglight."
-sura71,16-16:
"Didyouseehow
Godcreatedseven·heavensoneabove an­
otherandmadethemoona lightthereinandmadethe sun
aIampr'
-sura78,verses12-18:
"Wehavebuiltaboveyouseven
strong(heavens)andplaced
ablazinglamp."
Theblazinglampisquiteobviously thesun.
Herethemoonisdefinedasabodythatgiveslight (munir)
fromthesamerootas nur(thelightapplied totheMoon).The
Sunhoweveriscompared toatorch(simi)orablazing
(wa1f,hili)lamp.
A
manofMuhammad'stimecould easilydistinguishbetween
theSun,ablazingheavenlybodywellknown totheinhabitants
ofthedesert,andtheMoon,thebodyof thecoolof thenight.The
comparisonsfound intheQur'anonthissubject aretherefore
quitenormal.Whatisinteresting
tonotehereisthesoberquality
ofthecomparisons,andtheabseneein thetextoftheQur'anof
anyelementsofcomparisonthatmighthaveprevailed atthe
time
andwhichinourdaywould appearasphantasmagoriaI.
ItisknownthattheSunisa starthatgeneratesintense heat
andlightbyitsinternalcombustions, andthattheMoon,which

174. r5O ITIE BBI,E' THE QT'N'AN AND SCIENCE
does not give off lisht itself, and is an inert bedy (on its exteraal
layers at least) merely reflects the light received from the Sun.
There is nothing in the text of the eur'an that eontradiets
what we know today about these two celestial bodies.
Tln Stan,
As we know, the stars are heavenly bodies like the sun. firey
are the scene of various phyeical phenomena of which the easiest
to observe is their generation of ligtt. firey are heavenly bodies
thst produce their own light.
The word
'star'
appears thirteen times in the eur'an (naim,
plural rniiil,m); it comes from a root meaning to appear, to come
into sight. The word designates a visible heavenly body without
sayrng of what kind, i.e. either generetor of lisht or mere reflector
of light received. To make it clear that the object so designated
is e star, a qualifying phrase is added ae in the following sura:
-sura 86, verses 1-8:
"By the sky and the NighLVisitor, who will tell thee what
the Night-visitor is, the star of piereing brishtnesg."r
The evening star is qualified in the eur'an by the word tfihib
meaning
'that
whieh pierces through something, (here the night
shadows). The same word is moreover used to designate shootiog
stars (sura 37, verse 10) : the latter are the result of combustion.
Tlw Plarrrots.
It is di.fficult to say whether these are refemed to in the eurrsn
with the same exact meaning that is given to the heavenly noaiet
in the present day.
The planets do not have their own light. They revolve around
the Sun, Earth being one of them. while one nray presume thst
others exist'elsewhere, the only ones known are thos€ in the
solar system.
Five planets other than Earth were known to the ancients:
Mercury, venus, Mars, Jupiter and saturn. Three have been
discovered in recent times: uranus, Neptune and pluto.
1. E9re, the rky and r star are uscd to beer witnert to the importancc of
whrt it to come in the tort.
158 THEBIBLE,THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
doesnotgive offlightitself,andis aninertbedy(on itsexternal
layers
atleast)merelyreft.ectsthelightreceivedfrom theSun.
ThereisnothinginthetextoftheQur'an
thatcontradicts
what
weknowtodayaboutthesetwocelestialbodies.
TheSttm.
Asweknow,the starsareheavenlybodiesliketheSun.They
arethesceneofvariousphysicalphenomenaofwhichtheeasiest
toobserveistheirgenerationoflight.They areheavenlybodies
thatproducetheirownlight.
Theword
'star'appearsthirteentimesin theQur'an(naim,
pluralnujum);itcomesfromarootmeaningtoappear, tocome
intosight.Theworddesignatesavisibleheavenlybodywithout
sayingofwhatkind,
Le.eithergeneratoroflight ormerereft.ector
oflightreceived.Tomake
itclearthattheobjectsodesignated
isastar,aqualifyingphraseisadded
asinthefollowing sura:
-sura86,verses1-3:
"BytheskyandtheNight-Visitor,whowilltelltheewhat
theNight-Visitor
is,theStarofpiercingbrightness."1
Theevening
starisqualifiedintheQur'anbytheword tikib
meaning'thatwhichpiercesthroughsomething'(herethenight
shadows).Thesamewordismoreoverusedtodesignateshooting
stars(sura37,verse10):thelatteraretheresultofcombustion.
ThePlaneta.
Itisdifficulttosaywhetherthese arereferredtointheQur'an
withthesameexactmeaning
thatisgiventotheheavenlybodies
inthepresentday.
Theplanets
donothavetheirownlight.Theyrevolvearound
theSun,Earthbeingoneofthem.Whileonemaypresume that
othersexist-elsewhere,theonlyonesknown arethosein the
solarsystem.
Fiveplanetsotherthan
Earthwereknown totheancients:
Mercury,Venus,Mars,JupiterandSaturn.Threehavebeen
discoveredinrecenttimes:Uranus,NeptuneandPluto.
1.Here,theskyanda starareusedtobearwitnesstotheimportanceof
whatistocomein thetext.

175. l*oarllntktlnQrr/an lgl
The Qufan would seem to designate these by the word lm;ulm;b
(plursl Inlu)Ahib) without stating their number. Joseph's dream
(sura 12) refers to eleven of them, but the description is, by
definition, an irnaginary one.
A epod definition of the meaning of the word kaulrub in the
Qurtan seems to have been given in a very famous verse. Tlte
eminently spiritusl nature of its deeper meaning stands forth,
and is mor€over the subiect of much debate among experts in
exegeais. It is nevertheless of great interest to offer an aecount
of the comparison it eontains on the subiect of the word that
would seem to designate e
'planet'.
Here is the text in question: (sura 24, verse 35)
"God is the lig:ht of the heavens and the earth. fire similitude
cf His lisht is as if there were a niche and within it a lurninary'
The luminary is in a gless. The glass is as if it were a planet
glittering like I pearl."
Ifere the subject is the projeqtion of light onto a body that re-
flects it (glass) and grves it the glitter of a pearl, like a planet
that is lit by the sun. Ttis is the only e:rplanatory detail referring
to this word to be found in the Qur'an.
fite word is quoted in other verses. fn some of them it is diffi"
cult to distinguish which heavenly bodies are meant (sura 6,
verse 76; sura 82, verses l-2).
fn one verse however, when seen in the light of modern science,
it would seem very mueh that these ean only be the heavenly
bodies that we know to be planets. In sura S?, verse 6, we see the
following:
"We have indeed adorned the lowest heaven with an ornament,
the planets."
Is it possible that the e:cpression in the Qur'an
'lowest
heaven'
means the
'solar
system'? It is known that among the celestial
elements nearest to us, there are no other permanent elernents
apart from the planets: the Sun is the only star in the system
that bears its name. It is diffieult to see what other heavenly
bodies could be meant if not the planets. The translation given
would therefore seem to be correct and the Qur'an to refer to
the existence of the planets as defined in modern times.
157
TheQur'anwouldseem todesignatethesebythewordkaukab
(pluralkawcikib)withoutstatingtheirnumber.Joseph'sdream
(sura12)referstoelevenofthem,butthedescriptionis, by
definition,animaginaryone.
Agooddefinition
ofthemeaningofthewordkaukabinthe
Qur'anseemstohavebeengiven inaveryfamousverse. The
eminentlyspiritualnatureofitsdeepermeaningstandsforth,
andismoreoverthesubjectofmuchdebate amongexpertsin
exegesis.Itisneverthelessofgreatinteresttoofferanaccount
ofthecomparisonitcontainson thesubjectofthewordthat
wouldseem todesignatea'planet'.
Hereisthetextinquestion:(sura24,verse35)
"God
isthelightoftheheavensandtheearth.Thesimilitude
ofHislightisasiftherewereaniche andwithinitaluminary.
Theluminaryisinaglass.Theglassisasifitwereaplanet
glitteringlikea pearl."
Herethesubjectistheproje<;tionoflightontoabody thatre­
flectsit(glass)andgivesittheglitterofapearl,likea planet
thatislitbythesun.Thisistheonlyexplanatorydetailreferring
tothiswordtobefoundintheQur'an.
Thewordisquotedin otherverses.InsomeofthemitisdiftL.
culttodistinguishwhichheavenlybodies aremeant(sura6,
verse
76;sura82,verses1-2).
Inoneversehowever,whenseenin thelightofmodernscience,
itwouldseem verymuchthatthesecanonlybe theheavenly
bodies
thatweknowtobeplanets. Insura37,verse6,weseethe
following:
"Wehaveindeedadorned thelowestheaven withanornament,
theplanets."
IsitpossiblethattheexpressionintheQur'an'lowestheaven'
means
the'solarsystem'?Itisknownthatamongthecelestial
elements
nearesttous,therearenootherpermanentelements
apartfromtheplanets:theSunistheonlystarinthesystem
thatbearsitsname.Itisdifficulttoseewhatotherheavenly
bodiescouldbe
meantifnottheplanets.The translationgiven
would
thereforeseemto becorrectandtheQur'antoreferto
theexistenceoftheplanetsasdefinedinmoderntimes.

176. THE BrEr.E, TIIE QIrn'AN AND SCIENGD
TlnLow*Ealoelr-
The Qur'an mmtions the lowest heaven seversl times along
with the heavenly bodies of which it is eomposed. fire first among
these would seem to be the planeh, eg we havb just seen. slha
however the Qur'en associst€s material notions intciligiHe to
us, enlightened as we are todsy by modern science, with *ate-
ments of a purely spiritual nature, their meaning beeomcl
obscure.
Ttrus the verse quoted could easily be undergtood, except thst
the following verse (?) of the same Eura B? spealrs of a
'guerd
against every rebellious evil spirit',
'guard'
agnin being referued
to in sura 21, verse 82 and sura 41, verse 12, eo thst we are
confronted by statements of quite a different kind.
what meaning can one attach moreover to the
'projectiles
for
the stoning of demong' that aceorrlin s tfr verse 6, gura 6? arc
situated in the lowest heaven ? Do the
'luminaries'
referred to in
the same verse have something to do with tlre shooting rtars
mentioned above ?tr
All these observations seem to lie outside the subject of thir
study. firey have been mentioned here for the sske of complete-
ness. At the present stage however, it would seem thst rcientific
dats are unable to cast any light on a subject thst gioes beyond
humsn understanding.
C, CELESTIAf, ONGANIZATIOIV.
fire infomation the Qur'an provides on this subject mainly
deals with the solar system. Reference$ are however made to
phenomena that go beyond the solar system itself: they have
been discovered in recent times.
firere are two very important verses on the orbits of the Sun
and Moon:
-rsurg 21, verse $3:
" (God is) the One Who created the night, the day, thc gun
and the moon. Each one is travelling in an ortit with itr
own motion.o'
1. It ir known thet when s met€orite arrivel et thc [pp€r lryerr of th
etmorphere, it may produee the lumlnour phanoaenon ol r
.rbmfing
rtor'.
158 TIlEBIBLE,TIlEQtnrANANDSCIENCE
TheLowed BetmefL
TheQur'anmentionsthelowestheavenseveraltimesalong
withtheheavenlybodies
ofwhichitiscomposed.Thefirstamonl'
thesewouldseem
tobetheplanets,aswehavejustseen.WheD.
howevertheQur'anassociatesmaterialnotionsintelligible to
us,enlightenedaswearetodaybymodernscience,withstate­
mentsofapurelyspiritualnature,
theirmeaningbecomes
obscure.
Thustheversequotedcouldeasily
beunderstood,except that
thefollowingverse(7) ofthesamesura37speaksofa'guard
againsteveryrebelliousevilspirit','guard'againbeing referred
toinsura21,verse32and sura41,verse12, 80thatweare
confrontedbystatements ofquiteadifferentkind.
Whatmeaningcanoneattachmoreover
tothe'projectilesfor
thestoningofdemons'thataccordingtoverse5,sura67are
situatedinthelowestheaven? Dothe'luminaries'referredtoin
thesameversehavesomethingto
dowiththeshootingstars
mentionedabove?t
Alltheseobservationsseem
tolieoutsidethesubjectofthis
study.Theyhavebeenmentionedhere
forthesakeofcomplete­
ness.
Atthepresentstagehowever, itwouldseem thatscientific
dataareunabletocastanylightonasubject thatgoesbeyond
humanunderstanding.
C.CELESTIALORGANIZATION.
Theinformation theQur'anprovidesonthissubjectmainly
dealswiththesolarsystem.References
arehowevermade to
phenomenathatgobeyondthesolarsystemitself:the7have
beendiscoveredinrecenttimes.
There
aretwoveryimportantverseson theorbitsoftheSUD
andMoon:
-sura21~verse33:
"(Godis)theOneWhocreatedthenight, theday,theSUD
andthemoon.Eachoneistravellingin anorbitwithita
ownmotion."
1.Itisknownthatwhenameteorite arrivesattheupperlayersofthe
atmosphere,itmayprodueetheluminousphenomenon of•'moottna
star'.

177. At'gronotw*nt roodnn 1tr0
--€urr 8O verse 40:
"The sun mutt not catch up the moon, nor does the night
outstrip the day. Eaeh one is travelling in an orbit with i|g
own motion."
Here an essential fact is clearly stated: the existence of the
Sun's and Moon's orbits, plus a reference is made to the travel'
ling of these bodies in space with their own motlon.
A negntive fact also emerges from a fesding of, these vsrses 3
It is shown thet the Sun moves in an orbit, but no indication is
glven as to whst this orbit misht be in relation to the Earth. At
thc time of the Qut'enic Revelstion, it was tlrought that the Sun
moved while the Earth stood still. This w88 the Eyst€m of
geocentrism thtt hsd held Eway since the time of Ptolemn Sec'
ond century 8.C., and was to continue to do so until CopemicU
In thc Sixtcenth century A.D. Although people supported thil
concept at the time of Muhammad, it does not appear anywhere
in thc Qur'an, either here or elsewhere.
Tfu Er*stcncc of t laffiorln't andtlp $nrr'l OrDftt
The Arabic word filIf,,h has here been translated by the word
'orbit';
many Frcnch translators of the Qur'an attach to it the
ncening of a
'sphere'.
firis is indeed its initial E€nge. Hamidullah
tranrlates it by ttre word
'orbit'.
Thc word caused consern to older translators of the Qurtsn
rho werc unsble to imagine the circu}rr course of the Moon snd
thc Sun end thercfore retained images of their course through
rprcc thrt wcre cither more or less correct, or hopelessly wnongl'
Si Hrmn Boubekeur in his translation of the Qut'an citea the
divcnity of intcrpretations glven to it: "A sort of axle, like an
hu ro4 tnrt r mill turns around; a celestial sphere, orbit' sigtr
of the zodilc, speed, wav€ . . .", but he edds the following obser'
vrtion made by Tabari, the famous Tenth century commentator:
"ft ic our duty to keep silent when we do not know." (XVII, 16).
This shot's just how incapable men were of understanding thir
concept of the Sun's and Moon's orbit. It is obvious that lf the
word had expressed an astronomical concept common in Muham-
nrd's dsy, it would not have been so difficult to inter?ret thege
ycruG!. A new concept therefore existed in the Qur'an that wae
not to bc explrincd until centuries later.
159
--sura86,verse40:
"Thesunmustnotcatchupthemoon,nordoesthenight
outstriptheday.Eachoneistravellingin anorbitwithits
ownmotion."
Hereanessentialfactisclearlystated:theexistenceofthe
Sun'sandMoon'sorbits,plusareferenceismade tothetravel­
ling
ofthesebodiesinspacewith theirownmotion.
Anegative
factalsoemergesfromareading oftheseverses:
itisshownthattheSunmovesin anorbit,butnoindicationis
givenastowhatthisorbitmightbeinrelationtotheEarth.At
thetimeoftheQur'anieRevelation, itwasthoughtthattheSun
movedwhile theEarthstoodstill.Thiswas thesystemof
I'eoeentrismthathadheldswaysincethetime ofPtolemy,See­
ondcenturyB.C.,
andwastocontinue todosountilCopernicus
in
theSixteenthcenturyA.D.Althoughpeoplesupported this
conceptatthetimeofMuhammad,itdoesnot appearanywhere
in
theQur'an,eitherhereorelsewhere.
TileEmteraceoftheMoon',madfileSun',Or""'.
TheArabieword falakhasherebeen translatedbytheword
'orbit';manyFrenchtranslators oftheQur'an attachtoitthe
meaningofa'sphere'.Thisisindeeditsinitialsense.Hamidullah
translatesitbytheword'orbit'.
Thewordcausedconcern
tooldertranslators oftheQur'an
whowereunable
toimaginethecircularcourse oftheMoonand
theSunandthereforeretainedimagesof theircoursethrough
lP&Cethatwereeithermore orlesscorrect,orhopelesslywrong.
8iHamzaBoubekeurinhistranslation oftheQur'ancites the
diversityofinterpretationsgivento it:IIAsortofaxle,like an
irollrod,thatamillturnsaround;acelestialsphere,orbit,sign
ofthezodiac,speed,wave ..!',butheaddsthefollowingobser­
vationmadebyTabari,thefamousTenthcenturycommentator:
"Itisourdutytokeepsilentwhenwedonotknow."(XVII, 15).
Thisshows justhowincapablemenwere ofunderstandingthis
conceptoftheSun'sandMoon'sorbit. Itisobviousthatifthe
wordhadexpressed
anastronomicalconceptcommoninMuham­
mad'sday,
itwouldnothavebeensodifficultto interpretthese
verses.AnewconceptthereforeexistedintheQur'an
thatwas
nottobeexplaineduntilcenturieslater.

178. rHE BrBLF., TrrE QItR'AIrt AND SSTENCE
l. TrlpUlaonltoltblt.
Todan the concept is widely spread that the Moon is a satellit€
of the Earth around which it revolves in periods of twenty-nine
days. A correction must however be made to the absotutely cir-
culer fonn of its orbib gince modern astronomy ascribeE s certain
eccentricity to this, so that the distsnce between the Earth and
the.Moon (240,000 miles) is only the average distance.
We have seen above how the Qur'an underlined the usefulnesg
of obsereing the Moon's movements in calculating time (sura
10, verse 5, quoted at the beginning of this chapter.)
fitis systcrn has often been criticized for being aretraic, im-
practieal and unscientific in eomparison to our system based on
the Earth's rotation around the Sun, expr€ssed today in the
Julian calendar.
Thig criticism calls for the following two remarks:
e) Nearly fourteen centuries ago, the Qucsn was direct€d et the
inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula who were used to the lunar
cslculation of time. It was advissble to address them in the only
language they could understand and not to upset the habits they
had of locating spatial end temporal referenee-marks which were
nevertheless quite efficient It is lrnown how well-versed men liv-
ing in the desert are in the obsorvation of the sky; they navigated
according to the stars and told the time aecordins to the phases
of the Moon. firose were the simplest and most reliable meang
availrble to them.
b) Apart from the speeislists in this field, most people are una-
warg of the perfect correletion between the Julian and the lunar
calendar: %95 lunar months correspond exactly to 19 Julien years
of 868/a days. Then leneth of our year of SGE days is not pedect
because it has to be rectified every four years (with a leap year).
with the lunar calendar, the same phenomen& occur every lg
yesrs (Julian). This is the Metonic cycle, named after the Greek
astronomer Meton, who discovered this exact correlation between
soler and lunar time in the Fifth century B.C.
2. TlESrpr.
It is more difficult to conceive of the Sun's orbit because we
are so used to seeing our solar system organized around it. To
180 THEBIBLE, THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
1.The'Moon'.Orbit.
Today,theconceptiswidelyspread thattheMoonisasatellite
oftheEartharoundwhich itrevolvesinperiods oftwenty-nine
days.Acorrection
musthoweverbemadetotheabsolutelycir­
cularformofitsorbit,since modemastronomyascribesa certain
eccentricitytothis,so thatthedistancebetween theEarthand
the.Moon(240,000miles)isonlytheaveragedistance.
Wehaveseenabovehow
theQur'anunderlined theusefulness
ofobservingtheMoon'smovementsincalculatingtime (sura
10,verse5,quoted atthebeginningofthischapter.)
Thissystem
hasoftenbeencriticized forbeingarehaic,im­
practicalandunscientificincomparison
tooursystembasedon
theEarth'srotationaroundtheSun,expressedt()dayin the
JuUancalendar.
Thiscriticismcalls
forthefollowingtwo remarks:
a)Nearlyfourteencenturiesago, theQur'anwasdirectedatthe
inhabitantsoftheArabianPeninsulawhowereused tothelunar
calculationoftime.Itwasadvisabletoaddressthem intheonly
languagetheycouldunderstand
andnottoupsetthehabitsthey
hadoflocatingspatialandtemporalreference-markswhichwere
neverthelessquiteefficient.
Itisknownhowwell-versedmenliv­
inginthedesertareintheobservationofthesky;theynavigated
accordingtothe
starsandtoldthetimeaecordingtothephases
oftheMoon.Thosewere thesimplestandmostreliablemeans
availabletothem.
b)Apartfromthespecialistsinthisfield,mostpeople areuna­
wareoftheperfectcorrelationbetween theJulianandthelunar
calendar:235 lunarmonthscorrespondexactly to19Julianyears
of365JA,days.Thenlengthof ouryearof865daysisnotperfect
because
ithasto berectifiedevery fouryears(withaleap year).
Withthelunarcalendar,thesamephenomenaoccurevery19
years
(Julian).Thisis theMetoniccycle,named aftertheGreek
astronomerMeton,whodiscoveredthisexactcorrelationbetween
solarand
lunartimeinthe FifthcenturyB.C.
2.T1aeSun.
ItismoredifficulttoconceiveoftheSun'sorbitbecausewe
aresousedtoseeing oursolarsystemorganizedaroundit.To

179. lulaolmrlrry er fit Qrdal
t0l
understand the verse from the Qur'an, the position of the Sun
in our galaxy must be considered, and we must tJrerefore eall
on modern seientific ideas.
Our gAlaxy includes I very large number of stars spaced so
as to form a disc that is denser at the centre than at the rim. fire
Sun occupies a position in it which is far removed from the
centre of the disc. The gala:ry revolves on its own axis whieh is
its centre with the result that the Sun revolves around the same
centre in a circular orbit. Modern astronomy has worked out the
details of this. In 191?, Shaptey estimated the distance between
the Sun and the centre of our galaxy at 10 kiloparsecs i.e., in
miles, circa the figure 2 followed by 1? zeros. To complete one
revolution on its own axis, the galaxy and Sun tske roughly 880
million yeers. The Sun travels at roughly 150 miles per second
in the completion of this.
The above is the orbital movement of the Sun that was already
referred to by the Qur'an fourteen centuries ago. The demon-
stration of the existcnce and details of this is one of the achieve-
ments of modern astronomy.
Refercrce tatlw Mooenulntof tlwMoonatdtlw Suln
in Spe Wlth Tlwh Own Motion
This concept does not appear in those translations of the
Qurtan that have been made by men of letters. Since the latter
know nothing about astronomy, they have translat€d the Arabic
word that expresses this movement by one of the meanings the
word has:
'to
swim'. They have done this in both the French
translations and the, otherwise remarkable, English translation
by Yusuf Ali.'
The Arabic word referring to a movement with s self-propellcd
motion is the verb tabaftn (yasbaft,il.na in the text of the two
verses). All the senses of the verb imply I movement that is
associated with a motion that comes from the body in question.
If the movement takes place in water, it is
'to
swim'; it is
'to
move by the action of one's own legs' if it takes place on land.
For a movement that occurs in spaee, it is difficult to s€e how el8e
this meaning implied in the word could be rendered other than
l. Pub. Sh. Muhammad A,shraf, Lahorc (Pakistau)
181
understandtheversefromtheQur'an,theposition oftheSUD
inourgalaxymustbeconsidered,andwemustthereforecalI
on
modemscientificideas.
Ourgalaxyincludesaverylarge numberofstarsspacedso
astofonnadiscthatisdenseratthecentrethanattherim.The
Sunoccupiesapositionin itwhichis farremovedfrom the
centreofthedisc.Thegalaxyrevolveson itsownaxiswhich is
itscentrewiththeresultthattheSunrevolvesaroundthe same
centreinacircularorbit.Modernastronomyhasworked outthe
detailsofthis.In1917,Shapleyestimated thedistancebetween
theSunandthecentreofourgalaxyat10kiloparsecsLe.,in
miles,circa
thefigure2followedby17zeros.Tocompleteone
revolutionon
itsownaxis,thegalaxyandSuntakeroughly250
millionyears.TheSun travelsatroughly150miles persecond
inthecompletionofthis.
Theaboveis theorbitalmovement oftheSunthatwasalready
referredtobytheQur'anfourteencenturiesago. Thedemon­
strationoftheexistenceanddetailsof thisisoneoftheachieve­
ments
ofmodernastronomy.
ReferencetotheMooement oftheMoon andtheSun
inSpaceWithTheirOwnMotion.
Thisconceptdoes notappearinthosetranslationsofthe
Qur'anthathavebeenmadebymen ofletters.Since thelatter
knownothingaboutastronomy,theyhave translatedtheArabic
word
thatexpressesthismovementbyone ofthemeaningsthe
wordhas:'toswim'.Theyhavedone thisinboththeFrench
translationsandthe,otherwiseremarkable,Englishtranslation
byYusufAli.
1
TheArabicword referringtoamovement withaself-propelled.
motionis
theverb8abaluz,(ya8ba1}unainthetextofthetwo
verses).Allthesensesoftheverbimplyamovement thatis
associatedwithamotion
thatcomesfromthebodyinquestion.
Ifthemovementtakesplace inwater,itis'toswim';itis'to
movebytheactionofone'sownlegs' ifittakesplaceonland.
Foramovementthatoccursinspace, itisdifficulttoseehowelse
thismeaningimplied inthewordcould berenderedotherthan
1.Pub.Sh.Muhammad Ashraf.Lahore(Pakistan)

180. TGI fHE SIDI.4 TEE QI'N'AN AND SCTENCE
by employing its original sense. firus there ssems to have be€n
no mietmnolation, for the following reasons:
-The Moon completes its rotsting motion on its own axis at the
same time ag it revolves around the Earth, i.e. zg+h days (ap
prox.), go that it always has the same side facing uE.
-fi1s sun tslces roughly zE days to revolve on its own axiE.
There are certain difterences in its rotation at its equator and
poles, (we shall not go into them here) but as a whole, the sun
is animat€d by a rotating motion.
rt appears therefore thst a verbal nuance in the eur'an nefers
to the Sun snd Moon's own motion. These motions of the two
celestial bodies are confirmed by the data of modern science,
and it is inconceivable that a man living in the Seventh century
A.D.-however knowledgeable he might have been in his day
(and this was certainly not true in 1lruhammad's cgse)--could
hsve imagined them,
This view is sometimes contested by examples from great
thinkers of antiquity who indisputably predicted certain data
that modern seienee has verified. They could hardly have relied
on scientific deduetion however; their method of procedure was
more one of philosophical reasoning. Thus the case of the
pyths-
goreans is often advanced. In the sixth century 8.c., they de-
fended the theory of the rotation of the Earth on its own aris
snd the movement of the planets around the Sun. This theory
was to be confirmed by modern science. By comparing it with
the case of the Pythagoreans, it is easy to put for-lrrard the
hlryothesis of Muhammad as being a brilliant thinker, who was
supposed to have imagined all on his ov,'n what modern science
was to discover centuries later. In so doing however, people
quite simply forget to mention the other aspeet of what these
geniuses of philosophical reasoning produeed, i.e. the colossal
blunders that litter their work. It must be remembered for
example, that the Pythagoreans also defended the theory whereby
the Sun was fixed in spaee; they made it the centre of the world
and only conceived of a celestial order that was centered on it.
rt is quite eommon in the works of the great philosophers of
antiquity to find a mixture of valid and invalid ideas about the
Universe. The brilliance of these human works comes from the
advanced ideas they contain, but they should not make us over-
18J tHEBIBLE,THEQUIrANANDSCIENCE
byemployingitsoriginalsense.Thusthereseemstohave been
nomistranslation,forthefollowingreasons:
-TheMooncompletesitsrotatingmotionon itsownaxisatthe
sametimeas itrevolvesaround theEarth,i.e.29~days(ap­
prox.),so
thatitalwayshasthesamesidefacingus.
-TheSuntakesroughly25days torevolveonitsownaxis.
There
arecertaindifferencesin itsrotationat,itsequatorand
poles,(weshallnot
gointothemhere) butasawhole, theSun
isanimatedbyarotatingmotion.
Itappearstherefore thataverbalnuanceintheQur'anrefers
totheSunandMoon'sownmotion.Thesemotions ofthetwo
celestialbodies
areconfirmedbythedata ofmodernscience,
anditisinconceivablethatamanlivingintheSeventhcentury
A.D.-howeverknowledgeablehemighthavebeeninhisday
(andthiswascertainlynottrueinMuhammad'scase)--could
haveimaginedthem.
Thisviewissometimescontestedbyexamplesfrom
great
thinkersofantiquitywhoindisputablypredictedcertain data
thatmodernsciencehasverified.Theycouldhardlyhaverelied
onscientificdeductionhowever;theirmethod ofprocedurewas
moreoneofphilosophicalreasoning.ThusthecaseofthePytha­
goreansisoftenadvanced.IntheSixthcenturyB.C.,theyde­
fendedthetheoryoftherotation
oftheEarthonitsownaxis
andthemovementoftheplanetsaroundtheSun.This
theory
wasto beconfirmedbymodemscience.Bycomparing itwith
thecaseofthePythagoreans,
itiseasyto putforwardthe
hypothesis
ofMuhammadasbeingabrilliantthinker,whowas
supposed
tohaveimaginedall onhisownwhatmodernscience
wastodiscovercenturieslater.
Insodoinghowever,people
quitesimplyforgettomentiontheotheraspectofwhatthese
geniuses
ofphilosophicalreasoningproduced, Le.thecolossal
blunders
thatlittertheirwork. Itmustberememberedfor
example,
thatthePythagoreansalsodefendedthetheorywhereby
theSunwas
fixedinspace;theymade itthecentreoftheworld
andonlyconceivedofacelestialorder
thatwascenteredon it.
Itisquitecommonintheworksofthe greatphilosophersof
antiquityto findamixtureofvalidandinvalidideasaboutthe
Universe.Thebrillianceofthesehumanworkscomesfromthe
advancedideastheycontain,buttheyshouldnotmakeusover-

181. efionong h.tlp @at
t6:l
look the mistaken concepts which have also been left to us. Fronr
a strictly scientifie point of view, this is what distinguished thenr
from the Qut'an. In the latter, many subjects are referred to
that have a bearing on modern knowledge without one of then
containing a statement that contradicts what has been esbblishcd
by present-day science.
Tlu Seqwrce of Dav arlldiligl*.
At a time when it was held that the Earth was the centre of
the world and that the Sun moved in relation to it, how could
any one have failed to refer to the Sun's movement when talking
of the sequence of night and day ? This is not however referred
to in the Qur'an and the subject is dealt with as follows:
-sura 7, verse 54:
" (God) covers the day with the night which is in haste to
followit..."
-sura 36, verse 37:
"And a sign for them (human beingp) is the nisht. We strip
it of the day and they are in darkness."
-sura 31, verse 29:
"Hast thou not seen how God merges the night into thc dey
and merges the day into the night."
-gura 39, verse 6:
". . . He coils the night upon the day and He eoils the dey
upon the night."
The first verse cited requires no comment. The sceond simply
provides an image.
It is mainly the third and fourth verses quoted above thrt
provide interesting material on the process of interpcnetratior
and especially of winding the niett upon the day rnd thc dly
upon the night. (sura 39, vense 6)
'To
coil' or
'to
wind' seems, as in the French translation by
R. BlachEre, to be the best way of translating the Arabic vetf
lcawzuara. The original meaning of the verb is to
'coil'
a turter
around the head; the notion of coiling is preserved in all thr
other senses of the word.
What actually happens horvever in space? Amerir:an astroneuts
hrve seen and photographed what happens from thrlir speccship$'
163
lookthemistakenconceptswhichhavealsobeen lefttous.From
astrictlyscientificpoint ofview,thisis whatdistinguishedthem.
fromtheQur'an.
Inthelatter,manysubjects arereferredto
thathaveabearingonmodernknowledgewithoutone ofthem
containinga
statementthatcontradictswhathasbeenestablisMd
bypresent-dayscience.
TheSequenceofDayandNight.
Atatimewhen itwasheld thattheEarthwasthecentreof
theworldandthattheSunmovedinrelation toit,howcould
anyonehavefailedto refertotheSun'smovementwhentalkin«
ofthesequenceofnightandday?Thisisnothoweverreferred
tointheQur'anandthesubjectisdealtwithasfollows:
-sura7,verse54:
U(God)covers thedaywiththenightwhichisinhaste te
followit..."
-sura36,verse37:
"Andasignforthem(humanbeings)is thenight.We stri,
itofthedayandtheyareindarkness."
-sura31,verse29:
"Hastthounotseenhow Godmergesthenightintothe day
andmergesthedayintothenight."
-sura39,verse5:
H•••Hecoilsthenightupon thedayandHecoils theday
uponthenight."
Thefirst versecitedrequiresnocomment.Thesecondsimply
provides
animage.
Itismainlythe thirdandfourthversesquotedabove that
provideinterestingmaterialontheprocessofinterpenetratiMl
andespecially
ofwindingthenightuponthedayandtheday
uponthenight. (sura39,verse5)
'Tocoil'or'towind'seems,asinthe Frenchtranslationby
R.Blachere,to bethebestwayof translatingtheArabicven
kawwara.Theoriginalmeaningoftheverbisto'coil'a turbaa
aroundthehead;thenotionofcoilingispreservedinall the
othersensesoftheword.
Whatactuallyhappenshoweverinspace?Ameriean astronauts
haveseen andphotographedwhathappensfrom theirspaceahips,

182. 164 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
especially at a great distance from Earth, e.g. from the Moon.
They saw how the Sun permanently lights up (except in the case
of an eclipse) the half of the Earth's surface that is facing it,
while the other half of the globe is in darkness. The Earth turns
on its own axis and the lighting remains the same, so that an
area in the form of a half-sphere makes one revolution around
the Earth in twenty-four hours while the other half-sphere, that
has remained in darkness, makes the same revolution in the same
time. This perpetual rotation of nisht and day is quite clearly
described in the Qur'an. It is easy for the human understanding
to grasp this notion nowadays because we have the idea of the
Sun's (relative) immobility and the Earth's rotation. This proc-
ess of perpetual coiling, including the interpenetration of one
sector by another is expressed in the eur'an
just as if the con-
cept of the Earth's roundness had already been eonceived at the
time-which was obviously not the case.
Further to the above reflections on the sequence of day and
night, one must also mention, with a quotation of some verses
from the Qur'an, the idea that ther.e is mor.e than one orient
and one Occident. This is of purely descriptive interest because
these phenomena rell' on the most commonplace observations.
The idea is mentioned here with the aim of reproducing as faith-
fully as possible all that the Qur'an has to say on this subject.
The following are examples:
-In sura 70 verse 40, the expression
'Lord
of orients and
Occidents'.
-In sura 55, verse 17, the expr.ession
'Lord
of the two orients
and the two Occidents'.
-In sura 43, verse 88, a reference to the
'distance
between the
two orietrts', an image intended to expre$s the immense size of
the distance separating the trvo lroints.
Anyone who carefully watches the sunrise aud sunset knows
that the Sun rises at different point of the orient and sets at
different points of the occident, according to season. Bearings
taken on each of the horizons define the extreme limits that mark
the two orie:nts and occidents, and between these there are
points marke,l off throughout the yeal.. The phenomenon de-
scribed here is rather commonplace, but rvhat mainly deserves
attention in this chapter ar.e the other. topics dealt with, where
164 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
especiallyatagreatdistancefrom Earth,e.g.fromtheMoon.
TheysawhowtheSunpermanentlylightsup(exceptin thecase
ofaneclipse)the halfoftheEarth'ssurfacethatisfacingit,
whilethe
otherhalfoftheglobeisindarkness.The Earthturns
onitsownaxisandthelightingremainsthesame,so thatan
areaintheformofahalf·spheremakesonerevolution around
theEarthintwenty-fourhourswhilethe otherhalf-sphere,that
hasremainedindarkness,makesthesamerevolutionin thesame
time.Thisperpetual
rotationofnightanddayisquiteclearly
describedin
theQur'an.Itiseasyforthehumanunderstanding
tograspthisnotionnowadaysbecausewehavetheidea ofthe
Sun's(relative)immobility andtheEarth'srotation.Thisproc­
ess
ofperpetualcoiling, includ~ng theinterpenetrationofone
sectorby
anotherisexpressedin theQur'anjustasifthecon­
cept
oftheEarth'sroundnesshadalreadybeenconceived atthe
time-whichwasobviouslynotthecase.
Furthertotheabovereflectionsonthesequence ofdayand
night,one mustalsomention. withaquotationofsomeverses
fromtheQur'an,theideathatthereismorethanoneOrient
andoneOccident.Thisis ofpurelydescriptive interestbecause
thesephenomenarely
onthemostcommonplaceobservations.
Theideaismentioned herewiththeaimofreproducingasfaith­
fully
aspossibleaUthattheQur'anhastosayonthissubject.
Thefollowingareexamples:
-Insura70verse40, theexpression'Lord ofOrientsand
accidents'.
-Insura55,verse17, theexpression'Lord ofthetwoOrients
andthetwoOccidents'.
-Insura43,verse38,areference tothe'distancebetween the
twoOrients',animageintended toexpresstheimmensesize of
thedistanceseparatingthetwopoints.
Anyonewhocarefullywatchesthe
sunriseandsunsetknows
thattheSunrisesatdifferentpoint oftheOrientandsetsat
differentpointsof theOccident,accordingtoseason. Bearings
takenoneachofthehorizonsdefine theextremelimits thatmark
thetwoOrientsandaccidents,andbetweenthese thereare
pointsmarkedoffthroughouttheyear.Thephenomenonde­
scribed
hereisrathercommonplace,butwhatmainlydeserves
attentioninthischapteraretheothertopicsdealtwith,where

183. 4attorwrrlg in tlp Qt/ aa 165
the description of astronomical phenomena referred to in the
Qur'an is in keeping with modern data.
D. ErOLATION OF THE I|EAVENS.
Having called modern concepts on the formation of the Uni-
verse to mind, reference was made to the evolution that took
plaee, starting with primary nebula through to the formation
of galaxies, stars and (for the solar systern) the appearance
of planets beginning rvith the Sun at a certain stage of its
evolution. Modern data lead us to believe that in the solar system,
and more gpnerally in the Universe itself, this evolution is still
continuing.
How can anybody rvho is arvare of these ideas fail to make a
comparison with certain statements found in the Qur'an in which
the manifestations of divine Omnipotence are referred to.
The Qur'an reminds us several times that: "(God) subjected
the sun and the moon: each one l'uns its course to an appointed
term.tt
This sentence is to be found in sura 13, verse 2; sura 31, verse
29; sura 35, verse 13 and sura 39, verse 5.
In addition to this, the idea of a settled place is associated
with the concept of a destination lrlace in sura 36, verse 38: "The
Sun runs its course to a settled place. This is the decree of the
All Mighty, the Full of Knowledge."
'settled
place' is the translation of the rvord mustaqarr and
there can be no doubt that the idea of an exact place is attached
to it.
How do these statements fare rvhen compared with data
esteblished by modern science?
The Qur'an gives an encl to the Sun for its evolution and a
destination place. It also pt'ovides the Moon rvith a settled place.
To understand the possible meanings of these statements, we
must remember what modern knowledge has to say about the
evolution of the stars in general and the Sun in particular, and
(by extension) the celestial bodies that automatically followed
its movement through space, among them the Moon.
The Sun is a star that is roughly 4t/s bifiion yeax's old, accord-
ing to experts in astrophysics. It is possible to clistinguish a
AmonomyintheQut'Gn 165
thedescriptionofastronomicalphenomenareferredtointhe
Qur'anisinkeepingwithmoderndata.
D.EVOLUTIONOFTHEHEAVENS.
Havingcalledmodernconceptson theformationoftheUni­
versetomind,referencewasmadetotheevolutionthattook
place,
startingwithprimarynebulathroughtotheformation
ofgalaxies,starsand(forthesolarsystem)theappearance
ofplanetsbeginningwiththeSunatacertainstageofits
evolution.Modern dataleadustobelievethatinthesolarsystem,
andmoregenerallyintheUniverseitself,thisevolutionisstill
continuing.
Howcananybodywhois awareoftheseideasfailtomakea
comparison
withcertainstatementsfoundintheQur'aninwhich
themanifestationsofdivineOmnipotence arereferredto.
TheQur'anremindsusseveraltimesthat:"(God)subjected
thesunandthemoon:eachone runsitscoursetoanappointed
term."
Thissentenceistobefound insura13,verse2;sura31,verse
29;sura35,verse13andsura39,verse5.
Inadditiontothis,theideaofasettledplaceisassociated
withtheconceptofadestinationplacein sura36,verse38:"The
Sunrunsitscoursetoasettledplace.Thisisthedecreeofthe
AllMighty,theFullofKnowledge."
'Settledplace'is thetranslationoftheword1nustaqarrand
therecanbenodoubtthattheideaofanexactplaceisattached
toit.
Howdothese statementsfarewhencomparedwithdata
estabIlshedby modernscience?
TheQur'angivesanendtotheSunforitsevolutionanda
destinationplace.Italsoprovides theMoonwithasettledplace.
Tounderstandthepossiblemeaningsofthesestatements,we
mustrememberwhatmodernknowledgehastosayaboutthe
evolutionofthestarsingeneralandtheSuninparticular,and
(byextension)thecelestialbodies thatautomaticallyfollowed
itsmovementthroughspace,amongthemtheMoon.
TheSunisastal'thatisroughly4lj2billionyearsold,accord­
ingtoexpertsinastrophysics.Itispossibleto distinguisha

184. 106 THE BIBLE, THE QUXTAN AND SCIENCE
stage in its evolution, as one can for all the stars. At prercnt
the Sun is at an early stage, characterized by the transformation
of hydrogen atoms into helium atoms. Theoretically, this present
stage should last another 512 billion years aecording to calcula-
tions that allow a total of 10 billion years for the duration of
the primary stage in a star of this kind. It has atready been
shown, in the case of these other stars, that this stage gives way
to a second period characterized by the eompletion of the trans-
formation of hydrogen into helium, with the resulting expansion
of its external layers and the cooling of the Sun. In the final
stage, its light is greatly diminished and density eonsiderably
inereased; this is to be observed in the type of star known as
a
'white
dwarf'.
The above dates are only of interest in as far as they give
a rough estimate of the time faetor involved, what is worth
remembering and is really the main point of the above, is the
notion of an evolution. Modern data ellorv us to prediet that, in
e few billion years, the conditions prevailing in the solar systcm
will not be the same as they are today. Like other stars rvhose
transformations have been recorded until they reached their
final stage, it is possible to prediet an end to the Sun.
The second verse quoted above (sura 86, verse Bg) referred
to the sun running its course towards a place of its own.
Modern astronomy has been able to locate it exacily and has
even given it a name, the Solar Apex: the solar. system is indeed
evolving in space torvards a point situated in the Constellation
of Hercules (alpha lurae) whose exact location is firmly esteb-
lished; it is moving at a speed already ascertained at sonrcthing
in the region of 12 miles per. second.
All these astronomical data deserve to be mentioned in relation
to the two verses from the Qur'an, since it is possible to state
that they appeal'to agree perfecily rvith modern scientific data.
Tfu E*pnsion of ttw (Jnioerce.
The expansion of the Universe is ttre most imposing discover.y
of modern science. Today it is a lirmly establislred concept and
the only debate centles around the wny this is taking place.
It rvas first suggested by the general ilreor.y of relativity and
is backed up hy physics in the examinatiorr of ilre galactic spec-
166 THEBIBLE, THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
stageinitsevolution,asonecanforallthestars.Atpresent,
theSunisatanearlystage,characterizedbythetransformation
ofhydrogenatomsintoheliumatoms.Theoretically, thispresent
stageshouldlastanother5
1hbillionyearsaccordingtocalcula­
tions
thatallowa totalof10billionyearsforthedurationof
theprimarystageinastarofthiskind.Ithasalreadybeen
shown,
inthecaseoftheseotherstars,thatthisstagegivesway
toasecondperiodcharacterizedby thecompletionofthetrans­
formationofhydrogenintohelium, withtheresultingexpansion
ofitsexternallayersandthecoolingoftheSun.Inthefinal
stage,
itslightisgreatlydiminishedanddensityconsiderably
increased;thisistobeobserved inthetypeofstarknownas
a'whitedwarf'.
Theabovedates areonlyofinterestinasfarastheygive
a
roughestimateofthetimefactorinvolved,whatisworth
rememberingandisreallythe mainpointoftheabove,isthe
notionofanevolution.Modern dataallowus topredictthat,in
afewbillionyears,theconditionsprevailingin thesolarsystem
will
notbethesameastheyaretoday.Like otherstarswhose
transformationshavebeenrecordeduntil theyreachedtheir
finalstage,itispossibletopredictanendtotheSun.
Thesecondversequotedabove (sura36,verse38) referred
totheSunrunningitscoursetowardsaplaceofitsown.
Modern
astronomyhasbeenable tolocateitexactlyandhas
evengiven itaname,theSolarApex:thesolarsystemisindeed
evolvinginspace
towardsapointsituatedintheConstellation
ofHercules(alphalyrae)whoseexactlocationisfirmlyestab­
lished;
itismovingataspeedalreadyascertainedatsomething
in
theregionof12milespersecond.
Alltheseastronomical datadeserveto bementionedinrelation
tothetwoverses
fromtheQur'an,sinceitispossibleto state
thattheyappeal'to agreeperfectlywithmodernscientific data.
TiteEXptlMORoftheUniverse.
TheexpansionoftheUniverseisthemostimposingdiscovery
ofmodernscience.Today itisafirmlyestablishedconcept and
theonlydebatecentres aroundthewaythisis takingplace.
Itwasfirstsuggestedbythegeneraltheory ofrelativityand
isbackedup byphysicsin theexaminationofthegalacticspec-

185. lltlrmrrlrg lntla Qalan
lfif
trum; the regular movement towards the red section of their
spectrum may be explained by the distancing of one galaxy from
another. Thus the size of the Universe is probably constantly
increasing and this increase rvill become bigger the further away
the galaxies are from us. The speeds at rvhich these celestial
bodies are moving may, in the course of this perpetual expan-
sion, go from fractions of the speed of light io speeds faster
than this.
The following verse of the Qur'an
(sura 51, verse 47) where
God is speaking, ffiay perhaps be eompared with modern ideas:
"The heaven, We have built it rvith power. Verily. We are ex-
panding it."
'Heaven'
is the translation of the word sunt6" and this is
exactly the extra-terrestrial world that is meant'
'We
aYe expanding it' is the translation of the plural present
participl e musi,'fr,na of the verb ausa'1, meaning
'to
make wider,
more spacious, to extend, to expand'.
Some translators who lvere unable to grasp the meaning of
the latter provide translations that appear to me to be mistaken,
e.g, "we give generously" (R. Blachdre). Others sense the mean-
ing, but are afraid to commit themselves: Hamidullah in his
translation of the Qur'an tallis of the rvidening of the heavens
and space, but he includes a question mark. Finally, there are
those who arm themselves rvith authorized scientific opinion in
their commentaries and give the meaning stated here. This is
true in the case of the Mzmtafuab, a book of commentaries edited
by the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, Cairo. It refers to
the expansion of the Universe in totally unambiguotls terms.
E. THE CONQUEST Or SPACE.
F rom this point of vierr', thre'e verses of the Qur'an shoUld
command our full attention. One expresses' without any trace
of ambiguity, rvhat man should and will achieve in this field.
In the other tl.o, God refels for the sake of the unbelievers
in Makka to the surprise they would have if they were able to
raise themselves up to the Heavens; He alludes to a hypothesis
which will not be realized for the latter.
~, itatheQur'Q" 187
trum;theregularmovementtowardstheredsectionoftheir
spectrummaybeexplainedby thedistancingofonegalaxyfrom
another.ThusthesizeoftheUniverseisprobably constantly
increasingandthisincreasewillbecome biggerthefurtheraway
thegalaxiesarefromus.Thespeedsatwhichthesecelestial
bodies
aremovingmay,in thecourseofthisperpetualexpan­
sion,go
fromfractionsofthespeedoflighttospeedsfaster
thanthis.
ThefollowingverseoftheQur'an(sura51,verse47)where
Godisspeaking,
mayperhapsbecompared withmodernideas:
"Theheaven,We havebuiltitwithpower.Verily.We areex­
pandingit."
'Heaven'isthetranslationofthewordsama,'andthisis
exactly
theextra-terrestrialworldthatismeant.
'Wea'l'eexpandingit'isthetranslationofthepluralpresent
participlemusi'unaoftheverbausa'ameaning'tomakewider,
morespacious,
toextend,toexpand'.
Some
translatorswhowereunableto graspthemeaningof
thelatterprovidetranslationsthatappeartometobemistaken,
e.g.
"wegivegenerously"(R. Blachere).Otherssensethemean­
ing,
butareafraidtocommitthemselves: Hamidullahinhis
translationoftheQur'antalksofthewideningoftheheavens
andspace,butheincludesaquestion mark.Finally,thereare
thosewho armthemselveswithauthorizedscientificopinionin
theircommentariesandgivethemeaningstatedhere.Thisis
trueinthecase oftheMunta]sab,abookofcommentariesedited
by
theSupremeCouncilforIslamicAffairs,Cairo. Itrefersto
theexpansionoftheUniverseintotallyunambiguous terms.
E.THECONQUEST OFSPACE.
Fromthispointofview,thre·everses oftheQur'anshould
command
ourfullattention.Oneexpresses, withoutanytrace
ofambiguity,whatmanshouldandwillachievein thisfield.
Intheothertwo,God refersforthesakeoftheunbelievers
inM:akkato
thesurprisetheywouldhave iftheywereable to
raisethemselvesupto theHeavens;Healludestoahypothesis
whichwill
notberealizedforthelatter.

186. 108 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
1) The first of these verses is sura bE, verse BB: "o assembly of
Jinns and Men, if you can penetrate regions of the heavens and
the earth, then penetrate them ! You n'ill not penetr.ate them save
with a Power."
The translation given here needs some explanatory comment:
a) The word
'if'expresses
in English a conclition that is depend-
ant upon a possibility and either an achievable or an unachiev-
able hypothesis. Arabie is a language rvhich is able to intr.otluee
a nuance into the eondition which is much mol'e explicit. Thele is
one word to express the possibilitv
Udd), another for the achiev-
able hypothesis (in
) and a thitd for the unachievable hypothesis
expressed by the word (Iutt). The verse in question has it as an
achievable hypothesis expressed by the rvorcl (in.). The eur''an
therefore stlggests the material possibility of a concr.ete r.ealiza-
tion. This subtle linguistic distinction folmally rules out the pur.ely
mystic interpretation that some people have (quite rvrongly) put
on this verse.
b) God is addressing the spirits (jinrt) and human beings (ins),
and not essentially allegorieal figures.
c)
'To
penetl'ate' is the translation of the verb nafad,a followed
by the preposition min. According to Kazimirski's dictionar.y, the
phrase means
'to
pass right through and conre out on the other
side of a body' (e.s. an alrow that comes out on the other. sirte).
It therefore suggests a deep penetration and emergence at the
other end into the r.egions in question.
d) The Pon'er (sultiur) these men rvill have to achieve this enter-
pt'ise would seem to come from the All-Mighty.'
There cau be no doubt that this verse indicates the possibility
men rvill one day achieve r.vhat rve today call (perharrs r.ather
improperly)
'the
conquest of space'. one must note that the text
of the Qur'an predicts not only penetration thlough the regions
of the lleavens, but also the Ear.th, i.e. the exploration of its
depths.
1. This verse is followed by
forms the subject of the
Beneficent'.
an invitation to recognize God's blessings. It
whole of the sura that bears the title
,The
168 THEBIBLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
1)Thefirstoftheseversesis sura55,verse33:"0assemblyof
JinnsandMen,ifyoucan penetrateregionsoftheheavensand
theearth,thenpenetratethem!Youwill notpenetratethemsave
withaPower."
Thetranslationgivenhereneedssome explanatorycomment:
a)Theword'if'expressesinEnglishacondition thatisdepend­
antuponapossibility andeitheranachievableoranunachiev­
ablehypothesis.
Arabicisalanguage\vhichisabletointroduce
anuanceinto
theconditionwhichis muchmoreexplicit.Thereis
oneword
toexpressthepossibility(idJi), anotherfortheachiev­
ablehypothesis
(in)andathirdfortheunachievablehypothesis
expressedby
theword(la'll).Theverseinquestion hasitasan
achievablehypothesisexpressedby theword(in).TheQUl"an
thereforesuggeststhematerialpossibilityofaconcreterealiza­
tion.
Thissubtlelinguisticdistinctionformallyrules outthepurely
mystic
interpretationthatsomepeoplehave(quitewrongly) put
onthisverse.
b)Godis
addressingthespirits(1'inl1)andhumanbeings(ins),
andnotessentiallyallegoricalfigures.
c)'To
penetrate'isthetranslationoftheverbnafag,afollowed
bythepreposition
min.Accordingto Kazimirski'sdictionary,the
phrasemeans'topassrightthroughandcomeoutontheother
sideofabody'(e.g. anarrowthatcomesoutontheotherside).
Itthereforesuggestsadeep penetrationandemergenceatthe
otherendintotheregionsinquestion.
d)The
Power(sultan)thesemenwillhavetoachieve thisenter­
prisewouldseemtocome fromtheAll-Mighty.!
Therecanbenodoubt thatthisverseindicates thepossibility
menwillonedayachieve
whatwetodaycall (perhapsrather
improperly)'theconquestofspace'.One mustno:ethatthetext
oftheQur'anpredictsnotonlypenetrationthroughtheregions
oftheHeavens,butalsotheEarth,i.e.theexploration ofits
depths.
1.ThisverseisfollowedbyaninvitationtorecognizeGod'sblessings.It
formsthesubjectofthewholeofthe surathatbearsthetitle'The
Beneficent'.

187. Asttonomy in tlw Qulan
169
Z') The other two verses are taken from Sura 15, (verses 14 and
lF). God is speaking of the unbelievers in lVlakka, as thtr context
of this passage in the sura shows:
"Even if We opened unto them a gate to Heaven and they were
to continue ascending therein, they would say: our sight is con-
fused as in drunkenness. Nay, we are people bervitched."
The above expresses astonishment at a remarkable spectacle,
different from anything man could imagine.
The conditional sentence is introduced here by the word lau
which expresses a hypothesis that eould never be realized as far
as it concerned the people mentioned in these verses.
When talking of the conquest of space therefore, we have two
passages in the text of the Qur'an: one of them refers to what
rvill one day beeome a reality thanks to the powers of intelligence
and ingenuity God will give to man, and the other describes an
event that the unbelievers in Makka will never witness, hence its
character of a condition never to be realized. The event will how-
ever be seen by others, as intimated in the first verse quoted
above. It dpscribes the human reactions to the unexpected spec-
tacle that travellers in space rvill see: their confused sight, as in
rlrunkenness, the feeling of being bewitched . ' .
This is exactly how astronauts have experienced this remark-
able adventure since the first human spaceflight around the world
in L961. It is known in actual fact how once one is above the
Earth's atmosphere, the Heavens no longer have the azure ap-
pearance we see from Earth, which results from phenomena of
absorption of the Sun's tight into the layers of the atmosphere.
The human observer in space above the Earth's atmosphere sees
a black sky and the Earth seems to be surrounded by a halo of
bluish colour due to the same phenomena of absorption of light
by the Earth's atmosphere. The Moon has no atmosphere, how-
*u.r, and therefore appears in its true colors against the black
background of the sky. It is a completely ne$'spectacle therefore
that presents itself to men in space' and the photographs of this
spectacle are well known to present-day man'
Here again, it is difficult not to be impressed, when comparing
thetextoftheQur'antothedataofmodernscience,bystate-
ments that .simply cannot be ascribed to the thought of a man
who lived more than fourteen centuries ago.
Astronomyin theQuian 169
2)Theothertwoversesaretakenfromsura15,(verses14 and
15).Godis speakingoftheunbelieversinIHakka, asthecontext
ofthispassagein thesurashows:
"EvenifWeopenedunto themagatetoHeavenandtheywere
tocontinueascending therein,theywouldsay:oursightiscon­
fused
asindrunkenness.Nay,we arepeoplebewitched."
Theaboveexpresses
astonishmentataremarkablespectacle,
different
fromanythingmancouldimagine.
Theconditionalsentenceisintroduced herebythewordlau
whichexpressesahypothesis thatcouldneverberealizedasfar
asitconcernedthepeoplementioned intheseverses.
When
talkingoftheconquestofspacetherefore,wehave two
passagesin thetextoftheQur'an:oneofthemreferstowhat
willonedaybecomea realitythankstothepowersofintelligence
andingenuityGodwillgivetoman, andtheotherdescribesan
eventthattheunbelieversinMakkawillneverwitness,hence its
characterofaconditionnevertoberealized.Theeventwillhow­
everbeseenbyothers,
asintimatedinthefirstversequoted
above.
Itdpscribesthehumanreactionsto theunexpectedspec­
tacle
thattravellersinspacewillsee: theirconfusedsight, asin
drunkenness,
thefeelingofbeingbewitched ...
Thisisexactlyhow astronautshaveexperienced thisremark­
ableadventuresincethefirsthumanspaceflightaroundtheworld
in1961.
Itisknowninactual facthowonceoneisabove the
Earth'satmosphere,theHeavensno longerhavetheazureap­
pearanceweseefromEarth,whichresultsfromphenomena of
absorptionoftheSun'slightintothelayersoftheatmosphere.
Thehumanobserverinspaceabove theEarth'satmospheresees
ablack
skyandtheEarthseemstobe surroundedbyahalo of
bluishcolourduetothe samephenomenaofabsorptionoflight
bytheEarth'satmosphere.TheMoonhasnoatmosphere,how­
ever,
andthereforeappearsinitstruecolorsagainsttheblack
backgroundofthesky.
Itisacompletelynewspectacle therefore
thatpresentsitselftomeninspace, andthephotographsofthis
spectaclearewellknowntopresent-day man.
Hereagain,itisdifficultnottobeimpressed,whencomparing
thetextoftheQur'antothedataofmodernscience,by state­
mentsthat.simplycannotbeascribedtothe thoughtofaman
wholivedmore thanfourteencenturiesago.

188. The farth
As in the case of the subjects already examined, the verses of
the Qur'an dealing with the Earth are dispersed throughout the
Book. It is difficult to classify them, and the scheme adopted here
is a personal one.
To explain them more clearly, one might begin by singling out
a certain number of verses that deal with more than one subject
st a time. These verses are largely general in their application
and constitute an invitation extended to men to reflect on divine
Beneficence by pondering on the examples provided.
other groups of verses may be singled out which deal with
rnore specifie subjects, as follows:
-the water cycle and the seas.
-the Earth's relief.
-the Earth's atmosphere.
A. VERSES CONTAINING GENENAL STATEMENTS
Although these verses provide arguments intended to lead man
to meditate on the Benefieenee of God towards His creatures,
here and there they contain statements that are interesting from
the point of view of modern science. They are perhaps especially
revealing by virtue of the fact that they do not express the varied
beliefs concerning natural phenomena that were current at the
time of the Qur'anic Revelation. These beliefs were later to be
shorvn by scientific knowledge to be mistaken,
on the one hand, these verses express simple ideas readily un-
derstood by to those people to rvhom, for geographical reasons,
the Qur'an was first directed: the inhabitants of Makka and Ma-
r70
Tht;Earth
Asinthecase ofthesubjectsalreadyexamined,theversesof
theQur'andealingwiththe
Eartharedispersedthroughoutthe
Book.
Itisdifficulttoclassifythem,andtheschemeadoptedhere
isapersonalone.
Toexplainthemmoreclearly,onemightbeginbysingling
out
acertainnumber ofversesthatdealwithmore thanonesubject
atatime.Theseverses arelargelygeneralin theirapplication
andconstituteaninvitationextendedtomentoreflectondivine
Beneficencebyponderingontheexamplesprovided.
Othergroups
ofversesmaybesingled outwhichdealwith
morespecificsubjects,
asfoIIows:
-thewatercycleandtheseas.
-theEarth'srelief.
-theEarth'satmosphere.
A.VERSES CONTAINING GENERAL STATEMENTS
Althoughtheseversesprovideargumentsintendedtoleadman
tomeditateontheBeneficenceofGodtowardsHiscreatures,
here
andtheretheycontainstatements thatareinteresting from
thepointofviewofmodernscience.They
areperhapsespecially
revealingbyvirtue
ofthefactthattheydonotexpressthevaried
beliefsconcerning
naturalphenomenathatwerecurrentatthe
timeoftheQur'anicRevelation.Thesebeliefswere
latertobe
shownbyscientificknowledgetobemistaken.
Ontheonehand,theseversesexpresssimpleideasreadilyun­
derstoodbytothosepeopletowhom,forgeographicalreasons,
theQur'anwasfirstdirected:theinhabitantsofMakkaandMa-
170

189. Tho Eap?I)
dina, the Bedouins of the Arabian Peninsula. On the other hand,
they contain reflections of a general nature from which a more
cultivated public of any time and place may learn something in-
structive, once it starts to think about them: this is a mark of
the Qur'an's universality.
As there is apparently no classification of such verses in the
Qur'an, they ere presented here in the numerical order of the
Suras:
-sura 2, vetse 22:
" (God) is the One who made the earth a couch for you and the
heavens an edifice, and sent down water from the sky. He brought
forttr therewith fruits for your sustenance. Do not join equals
with God when you know."
-gura 2, verse 164:
"Behold ! In the creation of the heavens and the earth,
In the disparity of night and day,
In the ship which runs upon the sea for the profit
of mankind,
In the water which God sent down from the sky thereby
reviving the earth after its death,
In the beasts of all kinds He scatters therein,
In the change of the winds and the subiected clouds
between the sky and earth,
Here are Signs for people who are wise."
-.sura 18, verse 3:
"(God) is the One who spread out the earth and set therein
mountains standing firm and rivers. For every fruit He placed
two of a pair. He covers the day with the night. Verily in this
there are Signs for people who reflect."
-sura 16, verses 19 to 21. God is speaking:
"The earth, We spread it out and set thereon mountains stand-
ing firm. We eaused all kind of things to grow therein in due bal-
ance. Therein We have provided you and those you do not supply
s'ith mesns of subsistence and there is not a thing but its stores
are with Us. We do not send it down save in appointed measure."
-sura 20, verses 53 and 54:
" ( God is) the One Who has made for you the earth like a cradle
and inserted roads into it for you. He sent water down from the
l7l
TIteEtIf'Ih 171
dina,theBedouinsoftheArabianPeninsula. Ontheotherhand,
theycontainreflectionsofageneral
naturefromwhichamore
cultivatedpublicof
anytimeandplace maylearnsomethingin­
structive,once
itstartstothinkaboutthem:thisisamarkof
theQur'an'suniversality.
As
thereisapparentlynoclassification ofsuchversesinthe
Qur'an,they
arepresentedhereinthenumericalorderofthe
suras:
-sura2,verse22:
"(God)istheOnewhomadethe earthacouchforyouandthe
heavens
anedifice,andsentdown waterfromthesky.Hebrought
forththerewithfruitsforyoursustenance. Donotjoinequals
withGodwhenyouknow."
-sura2,verse164:
"Behold!
Inthecreationoftheheavensandtheearth,
Inthedisparityofnight andday,
Intheshipwhich runsuponthesea fortheprofit
ofmankind,
InthewaterwhichGodsentdownfromtheskythereby
revivingthe
earthafteritsdeath,
InthebeastsofallkindsHescatterstherein,
Inthechangeofthewindsandthesubjectedclouds
between
theskyandearth,
Here
areSignsforpeoplewho arewise."
--sura13,verse3:
"(God)istheOnewhospreadoutthe earthandsettherein
mountainsstandingfirmandrivers.
ForeveryfruitHeplaced
two
ofapair.Hecoversthedaywiththenight.Verilyin this
thereareSignsforpeoplewhoreflect!'
--sura15,verses19to21.Godisspeaking:
"Theearth,Wespread itoutandsetthereonmountainsstand­
ingfirm.Wecausedallkindofthingstogrowthereininduebal­
ance.Therein
Wehaveprovidedyouandthoseyou donotsupply
withmeans
ofsubsistenceandthereisnota thingbutitsstores
arewithUs.We donotsenditdownsaveinappointedmeasure!'
-sura20,verses53and54:
"
(G<>dis)theOneWhohasmade foryoutheearthlikeacradle
andinsertedroadsinto
itforyou.Hesent waterdownfromthe

190. 172 THE BIBLE, THE QUN AN AND SCIENCE
sky and thereby We brought forth pairs of plants, eaeh sepante
from the other. Eat ! Pasture your cattle ! Verily in this are Signs
for people endued with intelligence."
-sura 27, verse 6L:
"He Who made the earth an abode and set rivers in its inter-
stices and mountains standing firm. He placed a barrier between
the two seas. Is there any divinity besides God? Nay, but most
people do not know."
Here a reference is made to the general stability of the Earth's
crust. It is known that at the early stages of the Earth's existenee
before its crust cooled dorvn, the latter lvas unstable. The stabil-
itf of the Earth's crust is not however strictly uniform, sinee
therp are zones where earthquakes intermittently occur. As to
the barrier between the two seas, it is an image which signifies
that the rvaters of the great rivers and the waters of the sea do
not mix at the level of certain large estuaries.
-sura 67, verse 15:
" (God is) the One Who made the earth docile to you. So walk
upon its shoulders ! Eat of His sustenance ! Unto Him will be the
Resurrection."
+sura ?9, verses 30-33:
"After that (God) spread the earth out. Therefrom He drtw
out i'ts water and its pasture. And the mountains He has firmly
fixed. Goods for you and for your cattle."
In many such verses, emphasis is laid upon the importanee
of water and the practical consequences of its presence in the
earth's soil, i.e. the fertility of the soil. There can be no doubt
that in desert countries, n'ater is the most important element gov-
erning man's survival. The reference in the Qur'an horvever goes
beyond this geographical detail. According to scientific knorvledge
the character the Earth has of a planet that is rich in water is
unique to the solar system, and this is exactly what is highlighted
in the Qur'an. Without water, the Earth would be a dead planet
like the Moon. The Qur'an gives first place to water among the
natural phenomena of the Earth that it refers to. The water cycle
is described with remarkable accuracy in the Qur'an.
172 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
skyandtherebyWebroughtforthpairsofplants,each sepamte
fromtheother.Eat!Pastureyourcattle!Verilyin thisareSigns
forpeopleenduedwithintelligoence."
-sura27,verse61:
"HeWhomadethe earthanabodeandsetriversinitsinter­
stices
andmountainsstandingfirm.Heplaceda barrierbetween
thetwoseas.Isthere anydivinitybesidesGod?Nay, butmost
people
donotknow."
Hereareferenceismadeto
thegeneralstability oftheEarth's
crust.Itisknownthatattheearlystages oftheEarth'sexistence
before
itscrustcooleddown,the latterwasunstable.Thestabil­
ityoftheEarth'scrustisnothowever strictlyuniform,since
tnel'tarezoneswhereearthquakesintermittentlyoccur.As to
thebarrierbetweenthetwoseas, itisanimagewhichsignifies
thatthewatersofthe greatriversandthewatersoftheseado
notmix
atthelevelofcertainlargeestuaries.
-sura67,verse15:
.11(Godis) theOneWhomadethe earthdociletoyou.Sowalk
uponitsshoulders!
EatofHissustenance!UntoHimwill bethe
Resurrection."
-'-sura79,verses30-33:
"Afterthat(God)spreadthe earthout.TherefromHedrew
outits
wateranditspasture.AndthemountainsHe hasfirmly
fixed.Goods
foryouandforyourcattle."
Inmanysuchverses,emphasisislaidupon theimportance
of
waterandthepracticalconsequencesof itspresenceinthe
earth'ssoil,Le.thefertilityofthesoil.Therecanbenodoubt
thatindesertcountries, wateristhemostimportantelementgov­
erningman'ssurvival.ThereferenceintheQur'anhowevergoes
beyondthisgeographicaldetail.According
toscientificknowledge
the
charactertheEarthhasofaplanetthatisrichin wateris
uniquetothesolarsystem,andthisisexactly
whatishighlighted
intheQur'an.Withoutwater,the
Earthwouldbeadeadplanet
liketheMoon.TheQur'angivesfirstplaceto
wateramongthe
naturalphenomenaoftheEarththatitrefersto.Thewatercycle
isdescribedwithremarkableaccuracyintheQttr'an.

191. Tllc Earth
B, THE WATEN CYCLE AND THE SEAS.
When the verses of the Qur'an concerning the role of water in
man's existence are read in suceession today, they all appear to
us to express ideas that are quite obvious. The reason for this is
simple: in our day and ag:e, we all, to a lesser or gfeater extent,
know about the rvater cycle in natut'e.
If however, we consider the various concepts the ancients had
on this subject, it becomes clear that the data in the Qur'an do not
embody the mythical eoncepts current at the time of the Revela-
tion which had been developed more according to philosophical
speculation than observed phenomena. Although it was empiri-
cally possible to acquire on a modest scale, the useful practical
knowledge necessary for the improvement of the irrigation, the
concepts held on the rvater cycle in general would hardly be ac-
ceptable today.
Thus it rvould have been easy to imagine that underground
water could have come from the infiltration of precipitations in
the soil. In ancient times hon'ever, this idea, held by Vitruvius
Polio Marcus in Rome, lst century R.C., was cited as an excep-
tion. For many centuries thelefore (and the Qur'anic Revelation
is situated during this period) man held totally inaccurate viervs
on the water cycle.
Two specialists on this subject, G. Gastany and B. Blavoux, in
their entry in the Universalis Encyclopedia (Enc.yelopedia Uni-
aersalisl under the heading Hgdrogeology (Hydrog6ologie),
give an edifying history of this problem.
"In the Seventh centut'y 8.C., Thales of l\{iletus held the theory
whereby the watet's of the oceans, under the effect of winds, wel'e
thrust torvards the interior of the continents; so the rvater fell
upon the earth and penetrated into the soil. Plato shared these
views and thought that the retut'n of the waters to the oceans was
via a great abyss, the'Tartarus'. This theoly had many suppot't-
els until the Eighteenth century, one of whom was Descartes.
Aristotle imagined that the rvatel vapoul'flom the soil condensed
in cool mountain cavel'lls and formed underground lakes that fetl
springs. He rvas follorved by Seneca (lst Century A.D.) and many
others, until L877, among them O. Volger . . . The first clear
folmulation of the u'ater cycle must be attributed to Bernard
u3
TheEarth
B.THEWATEHCYCLEANDTHESEAS.
173
WhentheversesoftheQur'anconcerningtheroleofwaterin
man'sexistencearereadinsuccessiontoday,theyall appearto
ustoexpressideas thatarequiteobvious.Thereason forthisis
simple:
inourdayandage,weall,toalesser orgreaterextent,
know
aboutthewatercycleinnature.
Ifhowever,weconsider thevariousconcepts theancientshad
onthissubject,itbecomesclear thatthedataintheQur'andonot
embody
themythicalconcepts currentatthetimeoftheRevela­
tionwhich
hadbeendevelopedmoreaccordingtophilosophical
speculation
thanobservedphenomena.Although itwasempiri­
callypossibletoacquireonamodestscale,theusefulpractical
knowledgenecessary
fortheimprovement oftheirrigation,the
conceptsheldon thewatercycleingeneralwould hardlybeac­
ceptabletoday.
Thusitwouldhavebeeneasytoimagine thatunderground
watercouldhavecome fromtheinfiltrationofprecipitationsin
thesoil.Inancienttimeshowever, thisidea,heldbyVitruvius
Polio
MarcusinRome,1stcenturyB.C.,wascitedasanexcep·
tion.
Formanycenturiestherefore(andtheQur'anicRevelation
is
situatedduringthisperiod)manheldtotallyinaccurateviews
on
thewatercycle.
Twospecialistson
thissubject.G.GastanyandB.Blavoux,in
theirentryintheUniversalisEncyclopedia (EncyclopediaU11,i­
vm'salis)undertheheadingHyd1'ogeology(Hydrogeologie),
give
anedifyinghistory ofthisproblenl.
HIntheSeventhcenturyB.C.,Thalesof:Miletusheld thetheory
wherebythe
watersoftheoceans,undertheeffectofwinds,were
thrusttowardstheinteriorofthecontinents;so thewaterfell
upon
theearthandpenetratedinto thesoil.Plato sharedthese
views
andthoughtthatthereturnofthewaterstotheoceans was
viaagreatabyss,the'Tartarus'.Thistheoryhad manysupport­
ersuntilthe Eighteenthcentury,one ofwhomwasDescartes.
Aristotleimagined
thatthewatervapoUJ'fromthesoilcondensed
incool
mountaincavernsandformedundergroundlakes thatfed
springs.Hewasfollowed
bySeneca(1stCenturyA.D.)andmany
others,until1877.among
themO.Volgel'. . .Thefirstclear
formulation
ofthewatercyclemustbeattributedtoBernard

192. t74 THE BIBT.E, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
Palissy in 1580: he claimed that underground water eame from
rainwater infiltrating into the soil. This theory was confirmed by
E. Mariotte and P. Perrault in the Seventeenth century.
In the following passages from the Qur'an, there is no trace
of the mistaken ideas that were current at the time of Muhammad :
-sura 50, verses I to 11:
"'We' sent down from the sky blessed water whereby We caused
to grow gardens, grains for harvestn tall palm-trees with their
spathes, piled one above the other*sustenance for (our) ser-
vants. Therewith We gave (new) Iife to a dead land. So will be
the emergence (from the tombs)."
-sura 23, verses 18 and 19:
"we sent down water from the sky in measure and lodged it in
the ground. And We certainly are able to withdraw it. Therewith
for you We gave rise to gardens of palm-trees and vineyards
where for you are abundant fruits and of them you eat."
-sura L5, verse 22:
"We sent forth the winds that fecundate. we cause the water
to descend from the sky. We provide you with the water-you
(could) not be the guardians of its reserves."
There are two possible interpretations of this last verse. The
fecundating winds may be taken to be the fertilizers of plants
because they carry pollen. This rr18y, however, be a figurative ex-
pression referring by analogy to the role the wind plays in the
process whereby a non-raincarrying cloud is turned into one that
produces a shower of rain. This role is often referred to, as in the
following verses:
-sura 35, verse 9:
"God is the One Who sends forth the winds whieh raised up
the clouds. We drive them to a dead land. Therewith we revive
the ground after its death. So will be the Resurrection."
rt should be noted how the style is descriptive in the first part
of the verse, then passes without transition to a declaration from
God. Such sudden changes in the form of the narration are very
frequent in the Qur'an.
1. Whenever the pmnoun
'We'
appearg in the verses of the t€xt quoted
here, it refers to God.
174 THEBIBLE,THEQUlfANANDSCmNCE
Palissyin1580:heclaimed thatundergroundwatercamefrom
rainwaterinfiltratingintothesoil.Thistheorywasconfirmedby
E.MariotteandP.
PerraultintheSeventeenthcentury.
InthefollowingpassagesfromtheQur'an, thereisnotrace
ofthemistakenideas thatwerecurrentatthetimeofMuhammad:
-sura50,verses9to 11:
"Wetsentdownfromtheskyblessed waterwherebyWecaused
togrowgardens,
grainsforharvest,tallpalm-trees withtheir
spathes,piledoneabove theother-sustenancefor(Our)ser­
vants.Therewith
Wegave(new)lifetoadeadland. Sowillbe
theemergence(fromthetombs)."
-sura23,verses18 and19:
"Wesentdown
waterfromtheskyinmeasure andlodgeditin
theground.AndWecertainly areableto withdrawit.Therewith
foryouWegaverisetogardens ofpalm-treesandvineyards
where
foryouareabundantfruitsandofthemyoueat."
-sura15,verse22:
"Wesent
forththewindsthatfecundate.Wecause thewater
todescendfromthesky. Weprovideyou withthewater-you
(could)notbetheguardiansof itsreserves."
There
aretwopossibleinterpretations ofthislastverse.The
fecundatingwindsmaybetakentobe
thefertilizersofplants
becausethey
carrypollen.Thismay,however,beafigurativeex­
pression
referringbyanalogytotherole thewindplays inthe
processwherebyanon-raincarryingcloudisturnedintoone that
producesashowerofrain.Thisroleisoften referredto,asinthe
followingverses:
-sura35,verse9:
"GodistheOneWhosends
forththewindswhichraisedup
theclouds.Wedrivethemtoadeadland.TherewithWerevive
theground
afteritsdeath.SowillbetheResurrection."
Itshouldbenotedhow thestyleisdescriptivein thefirstpart
oftheverse,thenpasseswithouttransitiontoadeclarationfrom
God.Suchsuddenchangesintheformofthe
narrationarevery
frequentintheQur'an.
1.Whenever thepronoun'We'appearsintheversesof thetextquoted
here,
itreferstoGod.

193. Trw Eailh
-sura 80, verse 48:
"God is the One TVho sends forth the winds which raised up
the clouds, He spreads them in the sky as He wills and breaks
them into fragments. Then thou seest raindrops issuing from
within them. He makes them reach such of His senrants as He
wills. And they are rejoicing."
----surg 7, verse 5?:
" (God) is the One Who sends forth the winds like heralds of
His Mercy. When they have carried the heavyJaden clouds, We
drive them to a dead land. Then We cause water to descend and
thereby bring forth fruits of every kind. Thus We will bring forth
the dead. Maybe you will remem'ber,"
-sura 25, verses 48 and 49:
" (God) is the One Who sends forth the winds like heralds of
His Mercy. We Gause pure water to descend in order to revive
a dead land with it and to supply with drink the multitude of
cattle and human beings We have created."
-sura 45, verse 6:
". . . In the provision that God sends down from the sky and
thereby He revives the ground after its death and in the change
(of direction) of winds, there are Signs for people who are wise."
The provision made in this last verse is in the form of the water
sent down from the sky, as the context shows. The accent is on
the change of the winds that modify the rain cycle.
-sure 13, verse 17:
" (God) sends water down from the sky so that the rivers flow
according to their measure. The torrent bears a sy an increaSing
foam.tt
---sura 6?, verse 80, God cornmands the Prophet:
"Say: Do you see if your water were to be lost in the ground,
who then can supply you urith Sushing water?"
-sura 89, verse 21:
"flast thou not seen that God sent water down from the sky
and led it through sources into the ground ? Then He caused sown
fields of difierent colors to gTow."
-sura 86, verse 84:
"Therein We plaeed gardens of palm-trees and vineyerds and
IlVe caused water springs to gttsh forth."
175
TIaeEarda 175
-suraSO,verse48:
"God
istheOneWhosends forththewindswhichraisedup
theclouds.Hespreadsthemin theskyasHewillsandbreaks
themintofragments.Thenthouseestraindropsissuing
from
withinthem.Hemakesthemreachsuch ofHisservantsasHe
wills.Andthey
arerejoicing."
-sura7,verse57:
U(God)is theOneWhosends forththewindslikeheralds of
HisMercy.Whentheyhave carriedtheheavy-lad·enclouds,We
drive
themtoadeadland.ThenWecause watertodescendand
therebybringforthfruitsofeverykind. ThusWewillbringforth
thedead.Maybeyouwillremember."
-sura25,verses48 and49:
"(God)is theOneWhosends forththewindslikeheraldsof
HisMercy.Wecause
purewatertodescendin ordertorevive
adeadland
withitandtosupplywith drinkthemultitudeof
cattleandhumanbeingsWehavecreated."
-sura45,verse5:
"...IntheprovisionthatGodsendsdownfrom the~kyand
therebyHerevivesthegroundafteritsdeathandinthechange
(ofdirection)ofwinds,there areSignsforpeoplewho arewise."
Theprovisionmade inthislastverseis intheformofthewater
sentdownfromthesky,asthecontextshows. Theaccentison
thechangeofthewindsthatmodifytheraincycle.
---sure13,verse
17:
cc(God)sends waterdownfrom theskysothattheriversflow
accordingto theirmeasure.The torrentbearsawayanincreasing
foam."
-sura67,verse30,Godcommands theProphet:
"Say:Doyousee ifyourwaterweretobelostintheground,
whothencansupplyyouwithgushing
water!"
-sura39,verse21:
"HastthounotseenthatGodsentwaterdownfromthesky
andleditthroughsourcesinto theground?ThenHecausedsown
fields
ofdifferentcolors togrow."
-sura36,verse34:
"ThereinWeplacedgardens ofpalm-treesandvineyardsand
Wecausedwaterspringstogushforth."

194. I78 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
The irnportance of springs and the rvay they are fed by rain-
rvater conducted into them is stressed in the last three verses.
It is worth pausing to examine this fact and call to mind the
predominanee in the Middle Age-s of viervs such as those held by
Aristotle, according to whom springs wele fed by underground
lakes. In his entry on Hydtology (Hydrologie) in the Univer-
salis Encyclopedia (EncycloTted,ia (Jniuersatis)
M.R. Rdmeni€ras,
a teaeher at the French National School of Agronomy ( Ecole
nationale du Gdnie rural, des Eaux et For6ts), describes the main
stages of hydrology and refers to the magnificent irrigation
rvorks of the aneients, particularly in the Middle East. He notes
however that an empirical ouilook ruled over everything, since
the ideas of the time proceeded from mistaken concepts. He con-
tinues as follows:
"It was not until the Renaissance (between circa 1400 and
1600) that purely philosophical coileepts gave way to research
based on the objective observation of hydrologic phenomena.
Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) rebelled aglinst Aristoile's state-
ments. Bernard Palissy, in his wonderful d,iscourse on the nature
of waters and, fou.ntains both nahn.nl nnd, urtifieial (Discours
admirable de Ia nature des eaux et fontaines tant naturelles
qu'artificielles (Paris, 15?0) ) gives a correct interpretation of
the rvater cycle and especially of the way springs are fed by
rainwater."
This last statement is surely exacfly what is mentioned in verse
2L, sura 39 describing the way rainwater is conducted into
sources in the ground.
The subject of verse 48, sura 24 is rain and hail:
"Hast thou not seen that God makes the elouds move genily,
then joins them together, then makes them a heap. And thou
seest raindrops issuing from within it, He sends down from the
sky mountains of hail, He strikes therewith whom He wills and
He turns it away from whom He wills. The flashing of its light-
ning almost snatches away the sight."
The follou'ing passage requires some comment:
-sura 56, verses 68-70:
"Have you observed the water you drink ? Do you bring it
down from the rainclouds ? or do we ? If it were our will, lye
could make it salty. Then why are you not thankful ?"
176 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Theimportance ofspringsandtheway theyarefedby rain~
waterconductedintothemisstressedinthe lastthreeverses.
I
tisworthpausingtoexaminethis factandcalltomind the
predominancein theMiddleAges ofviewssuchasthoseheld by
Aristotle,accordingtowhomspringswerefedbyunderground
lakes.
InhisentryonHyd1°ology(Hydrologie)intheUniver.
salisEncyclopedia
(EncyclopediaUniversalis) M.R.Remenieras,
ateacher
attheFrenchNationalSchool ofAgronomy(Ecole
nationaleduGenie
rural,desEauxetForets),describesthemain
stages
ofhydrologyandreferstothemagnificentirrigation
worksoftheancients,particularlyintheMiddle East.Henotes
however
thatanempiricaloutlookruledovereverything,since
theideasof
thetimeproceeded flOommistakenconcepts.Hecon·
tinuesasfollows:
"Itwasnotuntil theRenaissance(betweencirca1400and
1600)
thatpurelyphilosophicalconceptsgavewaytoresearch
based
ontheobjectiveobservation ofhydrologicphenomena.
LeonardodaVinci
(1452-1519)rebelledagainstAristotle'sstate·
ments.BernardPalissy,inhis WOl1de1'juldiscourseonthe nature
ofwatersandfountainsbothnatuTalandartificial(Discours
admirabledela naturedeseaux etfontainestantnaturelles
qu'artificielles
(Paris,1570»givesacorrect interpretationof
thewatercycleandespecially oftheway springsarefedby
rainwater."
Thislaststatementissurelyexactly whatismentionedinverse
21,sura39describingthe wayrainwaterisconductedinto
sourcesintheground.
Thesubject
ofverse43, sura24israinandhail:
"Hastthounotseen thatGodmakesthecloudsmovegently,
thenjoinsthemtogether,thenmakesthemaheap.Andthou
seestraindropsissuingfromwithinit.Hesendsdownfrom
the
skymountains ofhail,Hestrikestherewithwhom Hewillsand
He
turnsitawayfromwhomHewills.Theflashingof itslight·
ningalmostsnatches awaythesight."
Thefollowingpassagerequiressomecomment:
-sura56,verses68·70:
"Haveyouobservedthe wateryoudrink?Doyou bringit
downfromtherainclouds?OrdoWe? IfitwereOurwill,We
couldmake
itsalty.Thenwhy areyounot thankful?"

195. The Earth 177
This reference to the fact that God could have made fresh
rvater salty is a rvay of expressing divine Omnipotence. Another
means of reminding us of the same Omnipotence is the challenge
to man to make rain fall from the clouds. In modern times horv-
ever, technology has surely made it possible to create rain arti-
ficially. Can one therefore oppose the statement in the Qur'an to
man's ability to produce precipitations ?
The answer is no, because it seems clear that one must take
account of man's limitations in this field. M.A. Facy, an expert at
the French Meteorological Office, wrote the following in the
Universalis Encyclopedia (Eneyclopedia Uniuusalis) under the
heading Precipitations (Prdcipitations) : "It will never be pos-
sible to make rain fall from a cloud that does not have the
suitable characteristics of a raincloud or one that has not yet
leached the appropriate stage of evolution (maturity) ". Man can
never therefore hasten the precipitation process by technical
means when the natural conrlitions for it are not presettt. If this
were not the case, droughts would never occur in plactice-rvhich
they obviously do. To have control over rain and fine rveather
still remains a dt'eam therefore.
l\{an cannot tvilfulty break the established cycle that maintains
the circulation of rvater in natUre. This cycle may be outlined as
follorvs, according to modern ideas on hydrology:
The calories obtained from the Sun's rays cause the sea and
those parts of the Earth's surface that are covet'ed or soaked
in rvater to evaporate. The water vapour that is given off rises
into the atmosphere and, by condensation, forms into clottds. The
rvinds then intervene and move the clottds thus fot'med over
varying distances. The clouds can then either dispelse rvithout
producing rain, or combine their mass rvith others to create even
greater condensation, or they can fragment and ltroduce rain
at some stages in their evolution. Wherl rain t'eaches the sea
(70% of the Earth's surface is covered by seas), the cycle is
soon repeated. When rain falls on the land, it may be absorbed by
vegetation and thus aid the latter's grorl'th; the vegetation in its
tut'n gives off rvater and thus returns some rvatet' to the atmo-
sphere. The rest, to a lesser or greater extent, infiltrates into the
soil, rvhence it is either conducted through channels into the sea,
TheEarth 177
ThisreferencetothefactthatGodcouldhave madefresh
watersaltyisawayofexpressingdivineOmnipotence. Another
meansofremindingusofthesameOmnipotenceis thechallenge
to
mantomakerainfallfromtheclouds.Inmoderntimeshow­
ever,technology
hassurelymadeitpossibleto createrainarti­
ficially.Canone thereforeopposethestatementintheQur'anto
man'sabilitytoproduceprecipitations?
Theanswerisno,because itseemsclearthatonemusttake
accountofman'slimitationsin thisfield.M.A.Facy, anexpertat
theFrenchMeteorologicalOffice, wrotethefollowinginthe
UniversalisEncyclopedia (EncyclopediaUnit'('rsalis) underthe
headingPrecipitations(Precipitations):"Itwillneverbepos­
sibleto
makerainfallfromacloudthatdoesnothavethe
suitablecharacteristicsofaraincloudoronethathasnotyet
reachedtheappropriatestageofevolution(maturity)".Mancan
never
thereforehastentheprecipitationprocess bytechnical
meanswhen
thenaturalconditionsforitarenotpresent.Ifthis
werenotthecase,droughtswouldneveroccurin practice-which
theyobviouslydo.Tohavecontrolover rainandfineweather
stillremainsadreamtherefore.
l\lancannotwilfullybreaktheestablishedcycle thatmaintains
thecirculationofwaterinnature.Thiscyclemaybeoutlinedas
follows,according tomodernideasonhydrology:
Thecaloriesobtained
fromtheSun'srayscausetheseaand
thosepartsoftheEarth'ssurfacethatarecoveredorsoaked
in
watertoevaporate.The watervapourthatisgivenoffrises
into
theatmosphereand,bycondensation, formsintoclouds.The
winds
theninterveneandmovethecloudsthusformedover
varyingdistances.Thecloudscan theneitherdispersewithout
producing
rain,orcombinetheirmasswithotherstocreateeven
greatercondensation,ortheycanfragmentandproduce rain
atsomestagesintheirevolution.vVhenrainreachesthesea
(70%
oftheEarth'ssurfaceiscoveredbyseas),thecycleis
soonrepeated.\Vhen
rainfallson theland,itmaybeabsorbedby
vegetationand
thusaidthelatter'sgrowth;thevegetationin its
turngivesoff waterandthusreturnssomewatertotheatmo­
sphere.Therest,toalesser
orgreaterextent,infiltratesinto the
soil,whence itiseitherconductedthroughchannelsinto thesea,

196. l78 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
or comes back to the Earth's surface network through springs
or resurgences.
when one compares the modern data of hydrology to what is
contained in the numerous verses of the eur'an quoted in this
paragraph, one has to admit that there is a remarkable degree
of agreement betrveen them.
The Sear,,
whereas the above verses from the eur'an have provided ma-
terial for comparison between modern knowledge about the water
cycle in nature, this is not the case for the seas. There is not a
single statement in the Qur'an dealing with the seas which could
be used for comparison with scientific data per. se. This does not
diminish the necessity of pointing out however that none of the
statements in the Qur'an on the seas refers to the beliefs, myths
or superstitions prevalent at the time of its Revelation.
A celtain number of verses deal with the seas and navigation.
As subjects for reflection, they provide indications of divine
omnipotenee that arise from the facts of common observation.
The follorving verses are examples of this:
-sura 14, verse 32:
"(God) has made the ship subject to you, so that it runs upon
the sea at IIis Command."
-Sul.a 16, verse 14:
" (God) is the one who subjected the sea, so that you eat fresh
meat from it and you extract from it ornaments which you wear.
Thou seest the ships plowing the waves, so that you seek of His
Bounty. Maybe, you will be thankful."
-srlra 31, verse 3l:
"Hast thou seen that the ship runs upon the sea by the Grace
of God, in order to show you FIis signs. verily in this are Signs
for all u'ho are persevering and grateful."
_srrl.a bb, verse 24:
"His .re the ships erected upon the sea like tokens."
-sura 36, verse 4l-44:
"A sign for them is that we bore their offspring in the loaded
Ark.
'we
have created for them similar (vessels) on which they
ride. If we rvill, we drown them and there is no help and they
178 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
orcomesback totheEarth'ssurfacenetworkthroughsprings
orresurgences.
Whenonecomparesthe
moderndataofhydrologytowhatis
containedin thenumerousversesoftheQur'anquotedin this
paragraph,onehastoadmitthatthereisaremarkabledegree
ofagreementbetweenthem.
TheSeas.
Whereastheaboveverses fromtheQur'anhaveprovidedma­
terialforcomparisonbetween modernknowledgeaboutthewater
cyclein nature,thisisnotthecasefortheseas.Thereisnota
single
statementintheQur'andealingwiththeseaswhichcould
beused
forcomparisonwithscientificdataperse.Thisdoes not
diminishthenecessityofpointingouthoweverthatnoneofthe
statementsintheQur'anontheseas referstothebeliefs,myths
orsuperstitionsprevalentatthetimeofitsRevelation.
A
certainnumberofversesdeal withtheseasandnavigation.
Assubjects
forreflection,theyprovideindications ofdivine
Omnipotence
thatarisefromthefactsofcommonobservation.
Thefollowingverses areexamplesofthis:
-sura14,verse32:
H(God)hasmadetheshipsubjecttoyou,so thatitrunsupon
theseaatHisCommand."
-sura16,verse14:
"(God)istheOneWhosubjected thesea,so thatyoueatfresh
meatfromitandyouextractfromitornamentswhichyouwear.
Thouseesttheshipsplowing
thewaves,so thatyouseek ofHis
Bounty.Maybe,youwillbe thankfuL"
-sura31,verse31:
"Hastthouseen thattheshiprunsupontheseaby theGrace
ofGod,in ordertoshowyouHissigns.Verilyin thisareSigns
forallwho areperseveringandgratefu1."
-sura55,verse24:
"Hisaretheshipserectedupon thesealiketokens."
-sura36,verse41-44:
"AsignforthemisthatWeboretheiroffspringin theloaded
Ark.Wehavecreated forthemsimilar(vessels)onwhich they
ride.IfWewiIJ,Wedrownthem andthereisnohelp andthey

197. TI'' Eno'ih l7s
will not be saved unless by Mercy from Us and as a gratification
for a time."
fire reference here is quite clearly to'the vessel bearing man
upon the sea, just as, long ago, Noah and the other occupants of
the vessel were carried in the Ark that enabled them to reach dry
land.
Another obsenred fact concerning the sea stands out, because
of its unusual nsture, from the verses of the Qur'an devoted to
it: three verses refer to certain characteristics shared by great
rivers when they flow out into the ocean.
The phenomenon is wetl known and often seen whereby the
immediste mixing of salty seawster and fresh riverwater does
not occur. The Qurtan refers to this in the case of what is thought
to be the estuary of the Tigris and Euphrates where they unite
to fotur what one might call a
'sea'
over 100 miles long, the Shatt
Al Arab. At the inner parts of the gulf, the efrect of the tides is
to produee the welcome phenomenon of the reflux of fresh water
to the interior of the dry land, thus ensuring adequate irrigation.
To understand the text correctly, one has to know that the En-
glish word
'sea'
conveys the general meaning of the Arabic word
baft,r which designates a large m&ss of water and is equally used
tor Uottr the sea and the great rivers: the Nile, Tigris antl Eu-
phrates for example.
The following are the three verses that describe this phenom-
enon:
-sura 26, verse 63:
" (God) is the One Who has let free the two seas' one is agree-
able and sweet, ttre other selty and bitter. He placed a barrier
between them, I partition that it is forbidden to pass."
---sura 36, verse 12:
"The two seas are not alike. The water of one is agreeable,
sweet, pleasant to drink. The other salty and bitter. You eat fresh
meat from it and you extract from it ornaments which you wear'"
--,sura 56, verses 19, 20 and 22:
"He has loosed the two seas. They meet together. Between them
there is a barrier which they do not transg:ress' out of them
eome pearls and coral."
In sddition to the description of the main fact, these verses
refer to what msy be obtained from fresh water and seawater:
TheEarOa 179
willnot besavedunlessbyMercyfromUsand asagratification
foratime."
Thereferencehereisquiteclearly
to'thevesselbearingman
upon
thesea,justas,longago,Noahandtheotheroccupantsof
thevesselwerecarriedinthe
Arkthatenabledthem toreachdry
land.
Anotherobservedfactconcerningtheseastandsout,because
ofitsunusualnature,fromtheversesoftheQur'andevotedto
it:threeverses
refertocertaincharacteristicssharedby great
riverswhenthey flowoutintotheocean.
Thephenomenoniswellknownandoftenseenwherebythe
immediatemixingofsaltyseawaterandfreshriverwaterdoes
notoccur.TheQur'anreferstothisinthecaseofwhatisthought
tobetheestuaryoftheTigrisandEuphrateswheretheyunite
toformwhatonemightcalla'sea'over 100mileslong,the Shatt
AlArab.Atthe innerpartsofthegulf,theeffectofthetidesis
toproducethewelcomephenomenonof therefluxoffreshwater
totheinteriorofthedryland,thusensuringadequateirrigation.
Tounderstand
thetextcorrectly,onehastoknow thattheEn­
glishword'sea'conveysthegeneralmeaningoftheArabicword
ba~rwhichdesignatesalargemassofwaterandisequallyused
forboththeseaandthe
greatrivers:theNile,TigrisandEu­
phratesforexample.
Thefollowing
arethethreeverses thatdescribethisphenom­
enon:
-sura25,verse53:
U(God)istheOneWho hasletfreethetwoseas,oneisagree­
able
andsweet,theothersaltyandbitter.Heplaceda barrier
betweenthem,apartition thatitisforbiddentopass."
--sura35,verse12:
"Thetwoseas arenotalike.The waterofoneisagreeable,
sweet,pleasant
todrink.Theothersaltyandbitter. Youeatfresh
meatfrom
itandyouextractfrom itornamentswhichyouwear."
--sura55,verses19, 20and22:
"Hehasloosedthetwoseas.Theymeettogether.Betweenthem
thereisa
barrierwhichthey donottransgress.Outofthem
comepearlsandcoral."
Inadditiontothedescriptionofthemainfact,theseverses
refertowhatmay beobtainedfromfreshwaterandseawater:

198. I8O TIIE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
fish, personal adornment, i.e. coral and pearls. with regard to the
phenomenon whereby the river water does not mix with seawater
at the estuary, one must understand that this is not peculiar to
the Tigris and Euphrates; they are not mentioned by lrame in the
text, but it is thought to refer to them. Rivers with a very large
outflorv, such as the Mississippi and the yangtze,
have the same
peculiarity: the mixing of their fr.esh water with the salty water
of the sea does not often oceur until very far out at sea.
C. THE EANTH'S RELIEF.
The constitution of the Earth is highly complex. Today, it is
possible to imagine it very roughly as being formed of a deep
layer, at very high temperature, and especially of a central area
where rocks are still in fusion, and of a surface layer, the Earth's
erust which is solid and cold. The crust is very thin; its thickness
is estimated in units of miles or units of ten miles at the most.
The Earth's radius is however slishfly over B,?80 miles, so that
its crust does not'epresent (on average) one hnndredth of the
of the sphere's radius. It is upon this skin, as it were, that all
geological phenomena have taken place. At the origin of these
phenomena are folds that were to form the mountain ranges;
their formation is called
'orogenesis'
in geology: the process is
of considerable importance because with the development of a
relief that was to constitute a mountain, the Earth's crust was
driven in proportionately far down: this process ensures a foun-
dation in the layer that underlies it.
The history of the distribution of flre sea and land on the sur-
face of the globe has only recently been establisherl and is still
vely incomplete, even for the most recent and best knorvn periods,
It is likely that the oceans appeared and fo'med the hydrisphere
circa half a billion years ago. The continents were proba-bly a
single mass at the end of the primary era, then subsequenily
broke apart. some continents or parts of continents hav* rnor*-
over emerged through the formation of mountains in maritime
zones (e.g. the North Atlantic continent and paft of Europe).
According to modern ideas, the dominating factor in the for-
mation of the Iand that emerged was the development of moun-
tain ranges. The evolution of the land, from the primary to the
180 Tl!EBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
fish,personaladornment, Le.coralandpearls.With regardtothe
phenomenonwhereby
theriverwaterdoesnotmixwith seawater
attheestuary,one mustunderstandthatthisisnotpeculiar to
theTigrisandEuphrates;theyarenotmentionedbynamein the
text,butitisthoughtto refertothem.Riverswithavery large
outflow,suchastheMississippiandtheYangtze,havethesame
peculiarity:themixingof
theirfreshwaterwiththesalty water
oftheseadoesnotoftenoccuruntilvery faroutatsea.
c.THEEARTH'SRELIEF.
TheconstitutionoftheEarthishighlycomplex.Today, itis
possibletoimagine
itveryroughly asbeingformed ofadeep
layer,
atveryhightemperature,andespeciallyofacentral area
whererocks arestillinfusion,and ofasurfacelayer,the Earth's
crustwhichissolidandcold.The crustisverythin;itsthickness
isestimatedinunits
ofmilesorunitsoftenmilesatthemost.
The
Earth'sradiusishoweverslightlyover3,750miles,so that
itscrustdoesnotrepresent(onaverage)one hundredthofthe
ofthesphere'sradius. Itisuponthisskin,asitwere,thatall
geologicalphenomenahavetakenplace.
Attheoriginofthese
phenomena
arefoldsthatweretoformthemountain ranges;
theirformationiscalled'orogenesis'ingeology: theprocessis
ofconsiderableimportancebecausewiththedevelopment ofa
relief
thatwastoconstituteamountain, theEarth'scrustwas
driveninproportionately
fardown:thisprocessensuresafoun­
dationin
thelayerthatunderliesit.
Thehistory
ofthedistributionoftheseaandlandonthesur­
faceoftheglobehasonlyrecentlybeenestablished
andisstill
veryincomplete,even
forthemostrecentandbestknownperiods.
Itislikelythattheoceansappearedandformedthehydrosphere
circa
halfabillionyearsago.Thecontinentswereprobablya
singlemass
attheend oftheprimaryera,thensubsequently
broke
apart.Somecontinents orpartsofcontinentshavemore­
overemergedthroughtheformation
ofmountainsinmaritime
zones(e.g.the NorthAtlanticcontinentand partofEurope).
Accordingtomodernideas,thedominating factorinthefor­
mation
ofthelandthatemergedwas thedevelopmentofmoun­
tainranges.Theevolution
oftheland,fromthe primarytothe

199. r8r
The Earth
quaternsry era, is classed according to'orogenic phases'that are
themselves grouped into
'cycles'
of the same name since the for-
mation of all mountains reliefs had repercussions on the balance
between the sea and the continents. It made some parts of the
land disappear and others emerge' and for hundreds of millions
of years it tt"r altered the surface distribution of the continents
rni o.."ns: the former at present only occupying three tenths
of the surface of this Planet.
In this way it is possible to give a very rough outline of the
transformations that have taken place over the last hundreds of
millions of years.
When referring to the Ea|th's relief, the Qur"an only desct'ibes'
as it were, the formation of the mountains. Seen flom the present
point of view, there is indeed little one can say about the verses
itt"t only expyess Gocl's Beneficence to man rvith legard to the
Earth's fot'mation, as in the follorving verses:
-sura ?1, verses 19 and 20:
,,For
you God made the earth a carpet so that yott tt'avel along
its loads and the paths of valleys."
-sura 51, verse 48:
"The earth, We have sltread it out. Holv excellently We did
that,"
The carpet which has been splead out is the Earth's crust, a
solidified shell on which we can live, since the globe's sub-strata
are very hot, fluid and hostile to any form of life.
The statements in the Qut"an refen'ing to the mottntains and
the references to their stability sttbsequent to the phenomenon
of the folds are very imPortant.
-sura 88, verses 19 & 20. The context invites unbelievet's to
consider certain natural phenomena' among them:
,,.
. . the mountains, horv they have been pitched (like a tent) '
The Earth how it was made even"'
The follc rving verses give details about the way in which the
mountains were anchore<l in the groutttl:
-sura 78, verses 6 & 7:
,,Have
lVe not made the ea|th au expanse antl the mottntains
stakes."
TheEarth 181
quaternaryera,isclassedaccording to'orogenicphases' thatare
themselvesgroupedinto'cycles' ofthesamenamesincethefor­
mation
ofallmountainsreliefs hadrepercussionson thebalance
between
theseaandthecontinents.Itmadesome partsofthe
landdisappear andothersemerge, andforhundredsofmillions
ofyearsithasalteredthesurfacedistributionof thecontinents
andoceans:theformeratpresentonlyoccupying threetenths
ofthesurfaceofthisplanet.
Inthiswayitispossibletogiveaveryroughoutline ofthe
transformationsthathavetakenplaceoverthe lasthundredsof
millionsofyears.
When
referringtotheEarth'srelief,theQUl"anonlydescribes,
asitwere,theformationofthemountains.Seenfrom thepresent
pointofview,thereisindeedlittleonecansayabout theverses
thatonlyexpressGod'sBeneficenceto man''lithregardtothe
Earth'sformation,asinthefollowingverses:
-sura71,verses19 and20:
"ForyouGodmade theearthacarpetsothatyoutravelalong
itsroadsandthepathsofvalleys."
-sura51,verse48:
"Theearth,\Vehavespread itout.Howexcellently Wedid
that."
Thecarpetwhichhasbeenspreadoutisthe Earth'scrust,a
solidifiedshellonwhich
wecanlive,since theglobe'ssub-strata
areveryhot,fluid andhostiletoanyformoflife.
The
statementsintheQur'anreferringtothemountainsand
thereferencesto theirstabilitysubsequentto thephenomenon
ofthefoldsareveryimportant.
-sura88,verses19 &20.Thecontextinvitesunbelieversto
considercertain
naturalphenomena,among them:
u...themountains,howtheyhavebeenpitched(likea tent).
TheEarthhowitwasmadeeven."
Thefollcwingversesgivedetailsaboutthewayinwhichthe
mountainswereanchoredinthe
ground:
-sura78,verses6&7 :
uHave\Venotmadethe earthanexpanseandthemountains
stakes."

200. r82 THE BIBLE, THE QUITAN AND SCIENCE
The stakes referred to are the ones used to anchor a tent in the
ground (autffi,, plural of watad,).
Modern geologists deseribe the folds in the Earth as giving
foundations to the mountains, and their dimensions go roughly
one mile to roughly to miles. The stability of the Earth's crust
results from the phenomenon of these folds.
So it is not surprising to find refleetions on the mountains in
certain passages of the eur'an, sueh as the following:
-sura
?9, verse SZ:
"And the mountains (God) has fixed them firmly."
-sura 81, verse l0:
" (God) has cast into the ground (mountains) standing firm,
so that it does not shake with you."
The same phrase is repeated in sura 16, verse lE; and the same
idea is expressed with hardly any change in sura 21, verse Bl:
._
"we have placed in the ground (mountains) standing firm so
that it does not shake with them."
These verses express the idea that the way the mountains are
laid out ensures stability and is in complete agreement with geo-
logical data.
D. THE EANTH'S ATMOSPHENE.
In addition to certain statements specifically relating to the
sky, examined in the preceding chapter, tt * eur,an contains sev_
eral passages dealing with the phenomena that occur in the at-
mosphere. As fo1 the comparison between them and the data of
modern science, it is to be noted here, as elsewhere, that there is
absolutely no contradiction between today's modern scientiflc
knowledge and the phenomena descrihed.
Altitud,e.
A familiar feeling of discomfort experienced at high altitude,
which increases the higher one climns, is **pr**r*d in vers e rz5,
sura 6:
"Those whom God wills to guide, He opens their breast to
Islam. Those whom He wills l,ose their w^"y, He makes their
182 THEBIBLE, THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Thestakesreferredtoaretheonesusedtoanchora tentinthe
ground(autid,pluralofwatad).
Moderngeologistsdescribe thefoldsintheEarthasgiving
foundations
tothemountains,andtheirdimensionsgoroughly
onemiletoroughly10miles.Thestability
oftheEarth'scrust
resultsfromthephenomenonofthesefolds.
So
itisnotsurprisingtofindreflectionson themountainsin
certainpassagesof theQur'an,such asthefollowing:
-sura79,verse32:
"Andthemountains(God)hasfixedthemfirmly."
-sura31,verse10:
"(God)hascastintotheground(mountains) standingfirm,
so
thatitdoesnotshakewithyou."
Thesame
phraseisrepeatedinsura16,verse15;andthesame
ideaisexpressedwithhardly
anychangein sura21,verse31:
"Wehaveplaced
intheground(mountains) standingfirmso
thatitdoesnotshakewiththem."
Theseversesexpress
theideathatthewaythemountains are
laidoutensuresstability andisincompleteagreementwithgeo­
logicaldata.
D.THEEARTH'SATMOSPHERE.
Inadditiontocertainstatementsspecificallyrelatingto
the
sky,examinedintheprecedingchapter,theQur'ancontainssev­
eralpassagesdealingwiththephenomena
thatoccurin theat­
mosphere.As forthecomparisonbetweenthem andthedataof
modernscience, itistobenotedhere,aselsewhere,
thatthereis
absolutelynocontradi.ctionbetweentoday'smodernscientific
knowledge
andthephenomenadescribed.
Altitude.
Afamiliarfeeling ofdiscomfortexperienced athighaltitude,
whichincreases
thehigheroneclimbs,isexpressedinverse
125,
sura6:
"Thosewhom Godwinstoguide,Heopens theirbreastto
Islam.ThosewhomHewillslose
theirway,Hemakes their

201. Tlw Eatth
f 83
breast narrow and constricted, as if they were climbing in the
sky.'
Some commentators have claimed that the notion of discomfort
at high altitude was unknown to the Arabs of Muhammad's time.
It appears that this was not true at all: the existence on the
^lrauian Peninsula of peaks rising over two miles hish makes it
extremely implausible that they should not have known of the
difficulty-of breathing at hlg:h altitude.' others have seen in this
verse a prediction of the conquest of space, an opinion that ap-
pears to require categorical denial, at least for this Bassage.
Etec/riaitg in the AtmotPherc,
Electrieity in the atmosphere and the consequences of this, i'e'
lightning and hail, are referred to in the following verses:
-sura 13, verses 12-13:
" (God) is the One Who shows you the lightning, with fear and
covetousness. He raised up the heavy clouds. The thunder glori-
fies His Praise and so do the angels for awe. He sends the
thunder-bolt and strikes with them who He wills while they are
disputing about God. He is All Mighty in His Power."
-sura 24, verse 48 (already quoted in this chapter):
"Hast thou not seen that God makes the clouds move gently,
then joins them together, then makes them a heap. And thou
seest raindrops issuing from within it. He sends down from the
sky mountains of hail, He strikes therewith rvhom He wills and
He turns it away from whom He wills. The flashing of its light-
ning almost snatches away the sight."
In these two verses there is the expression of an obvious coue-
lation between the formation of heavy rainclouds or clouds con-
taining hail and the occurrence of lightning: the former, the
subject of covetousness on aecount of the benefit it represents
and the latter, the subject of fear, because when it falls, it is
at the will of the All-Mighty. The connection between the two
phenomena is verified by present-day knowledge of electricity
in the atmosphere.
l. l. The citY of Sanaa,
hammad's time. It lies
level.
the capital of the Yemen, was inhabited in Mu-
at an altitude of nearly 7,900 feet above sea
TheEtU11a 183
breastnarrowandconstricted,asiftheywereclimbing inthe
sky."
Somecommentatorshaveclaimed thatthenotionofdiscomfort
athighaltitudewasunknownto theArabsofMuhammad'stime.
Itappearsthatthiswasnottrueatall:theexistenceon the
ArabianPeninsulaofpeaksrisingovertwomiles highmakesit
extremelyimplausible thattheyshould nothaveknown ofthe
difficultyofbreathingathighaltitude.!Othershaveseen inthis
verseapredictionof
theconquestofspace,anopinionthatap­
pearstorequirecategoricaldenial, atleastforthispassage.
ElectricityintheAtmosphere.
Electricityintheatmosphereandtheconsequencesofthis,Le.
lightningandhail,arereferredtointhefollowingverses:
-sura13,verses12-13:
"(God)is theOneWhoshowsyou thelightning,withfearand
covetousness.Heraisedup
theheavyclouds.The thunderglori­
fiesHis
Praiseandsodotheangelsforawe.Hesends the
thunder-boltandstrikes withthemwhoHewillswhilethey are
disputingabout God.HeisAllMightyinHisPower."
-sura24,verse43(alreadyquoted inthischapter):
"HastthounotseenthatGodmakes thecloudsmovegently,
thenjoinsthemtogether,
thenmakesthemaheap.Andthou
seestraindropsissuingfromwithinit.Hesendsdownfromthe
skymountainsofhail,HestrikestherewithwhomHewillsand
He
turnsitawayfromwhomHewills.Theflashing ofitslight­
ningalmostsnatchesawaythesight."
Inthesetwoversesthereis theexpressionofanobviouscorre­
lationbetweentheformation
ofheavyrainclouds orcloudscon­
taininghailandtheoccurrenceof lightning:theformer, the
subjectofcovetousnessonaccount ofthebenefititrepresents
andthelatter,thesubjectoffear,becausewhen
itfalls,itis
atthewilloftheAll-Mighty.Theconnectionbetween thetwo
phenomenaisverified
bypresent-dayknowledgeofelectricity
in
theatmosphere.
1.1.ThecityofSanaa,thecapitaloftheYemen,wasinhabitedinMu­
hammad'stime.Itliesatanaltitudeofnearly7,900feetabovesea
level.

202. rE4 THE BIBLE, THE QUn'AN AND SCTENCE
Shadowa.
The phenomenon of shadows and the fact that they move is
very simply explained today. It forms the subject of the follow-
ing observations:
-sura 16, verse 8l:
"Out of the things He created, God has given you shade . . .,,
-sura L6, verse 48:
"Have (the unbelievers) not observed that for all the things
God created, how their shadow shifts right and left, prostating
themselves to God while they are full of humility."
-sura 26, verses 4b and 46:
"Hast thou not seen how thy Lord has spread the shade. If He
willed, He could have made it stationary. Moreover we made the
sun its guide and we withdraw it towards us easily.',
Apart from the phrases dealing with the humitity betore God
of all the things He created, including their shadow, and the fact
that God can take back all manifestations of His power,
as He
wills, the text of the eur'an refers to the relationship between
the sun and the shadows. one must bear in mind at itris point
the fact that, in Muhammad's day, it was believed that the way a
shadow moved was g:overned by the movement of the sun from
east to west. This principre was applied in the case of the sundial
to rneasure the time between sunrise and sunset. In this instance,
the Qur'an speaks of the phenomenon without referring to the
explanation current at the time of the Revelation. It *outd have
been readily accepted for many centuries by those who came after
Muhammad. In the end however, it would have been shown to be
inaecurate. The Qur'an only talks moreover of the function the
sun has as an indicato* of shadow. Evidenily there is no contra-
diction between the way the eur'an describls shadow and what
rve know of this phenomenon in modern times.
184 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Shadows.
Thephenomenonofshadowsandthefactthattheymove is
verysimplyexplainedtoday. Itformsthesubjectofthefollow­
ingobservations:
--sura16,verse81:
"OutofthethingsHecreated,God hasgivenyoushade ..."
-sura16,verse48:
"Have(theUnbelievers)notobserved thatforallthethings
Godcreated,howtheirshadowshiftsrightandleft,prostating
themselvestoGodwhilethey arefullofhumility."
--sura25,verses45 and46:
ICHastthounotseenhow thyLordhasspreadtheshade.IfHe
willed,Hecouldhavemade itstationary.MoreoverWemade the
sunitsguideandWewithdrawittowardsUseasily."
ApartfromthephrasesdealingwiththehumilitybeforeGod
ofaUthethingsHecreated,including theirshadow,andthefact
thatGodcan takebackallmanifestations ofHisPower,asHe
wills,
thetextoftheQur'anreferstotherelationshipbetween
theSunandtheshadows.One mustbearinmindatthispoint
thefactthat,inMuhammad'sday, itwasbelievedthatthewaya
shadowmovedwasgoverned
bythemovementofthe sunfrom
easttowest.Thisprinciplewasapplied
inthecaseofthesundial
tomeasure
thetimebetweensunrise andsunset.Inthisinstance,
theQur'anspeaksofthephenomenonwithout referringtothe
explanationcurrentatthetimeoftheRevelation.Itwouldhave
beenreadilyaccepted
formanycenturiesbythosewhocame after
Muhammad.Intheendhowever,itwouldhavebeenshowntobe
inaccurate.The
Qur'anonlytalksmoreoverofthefunction
the
sunhasasanindicatorofshadow.Evidently thereisnocontra­
dictionbetween
thewaytheQur'andescribesshadow andwhat
weknow ofthisphenomenoninmoderntimes.

203. YT
The Aninral and
Yegetable Kingdorrr$
Numerous verses describing the origins of life have been
assembled in this ehapter, along with certain aspects of the vege:
table kingdom and general or specific topics relating to the ani-
mal kingdo*. The grouping of verses scattered throughout the
Book affords a general view of the data the Qur'an containS on
these subjects.
In the case of the subiect of this and the following chapter'
the examination of the Qur'anic text has sometimes been partieu-
larly delicate on account of certain difficulties inherent in the
uo."bul"ry. These have only been overcome through the fact that
scientific data which have a bearing on the subject have been
taken into consideration. It is particularly so in the case of living
heings, i.e. animal, vegetable and human, where a eonfrontation
with the teachings of science is shown to be indispensable in the
search for the meaning of certain statements on these topics
contained in the Qur'an.
It will become clear that numerous translations of these pass-
ages in the Qur'an, made by men of letters, must be deemed in-
accurate by the scientist. The same holds true for commentaries
made by those who do not possess the scientific knowledge neces-
sary for an understanding of the text.
A, THE ORIGINS OF LIFE.
Thisquestionhasalwayspreoccupiedman'bothforhimself
and for the living things around him. It will be examined here
r85
VI
Th~4nlIDaiand
V~g~labl~ KinldoDl~
Numerousversesdescribing theoriginsoflifehavebeen
assembled
inthischapter,along withcertainaspects of-theveg~
tablekingdom andgeneralorspecifictopicsrelating totheani­
malkingdom.Thegrouping
ofversesscatteredthroughout the
Bookaffordsageneralview ofthedatatheQur'ancontainson
thesesubjects.
Inthecaseofthesubjectofthisandthefollowingchapter,
theexaminationoftheQur'anictexthassometimesbeenparticu­
larlydelicateonaccount
ofcertaindifficulties inherentinthe
vocabulary.Thesehaveonlybeenovercomethroughthe factthat
scientificdatawhichhaveabearingon thesubjecthavebeen
takenintoconsideration.
Itisparticularlysoin thecaseofliving
beings,i.e.animal,vegetable
andhuman,whereaconfrontation
withtheteachingsofscienceisshowntobeindispensable
inthe
searchforthemeaning ofcertainstatementsonthesetopics
containedintheQur'an.
Itwillbecomeclear thatnumeroustranslationsofthesepass­
agesin
theQur'an,madebymenofletters, mustbedeemedin­
accurateby
thescientist.Thesameholds trueforcommentaries
madebythosewho
donotpossessthescientificknowledgeneces­
saryforanunderstandingof thetext.
A.THEORIGINSOFLIFE.
Thisquestionhasalwayspreoccupiedman,bothforhimself
andforthelivingthingsaroundhim.
Itwillbeexamined here
185

204. 186 TIIE BTBLE, TIIE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
from a g:eneral point of view. The ease of man, whose eppearsnce
on Earth and reproduction processes are the subject of lengthy
exposds, will be dealt with in the next chapter.
when the Qur'an describes the origins of rife on a very broad
basis, it is extremely concise. It does so in a verse that also men-
tions the
.process
of the formation of the Universe, already
quoted and commented on:
-sura 21, verse 30:
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth
were joined together, then we clove them asunder and we got
every living thing out of the water. will they then not believe ?"
The notion of
'getting
something out of something' does not
give rise to any doubts. The phrase can equally mean that every
living thing was made of water (as its essential eomponent) or
that every living thing originated in water. The two possible
meanings are strictly in accordanee with scientific data. Life
is in fact of aquatic origin and water is the major component of
all living cells. Without water, life is not possible. When the
possibility of life on another planet is tliscussed, the first question
is always: does it contain a sufficient quantity of water to sup-
port life?
lvfodern data lead us to think that the oldest living being must
have belonged to the vegetable kingdom: algae have been found
that date from the pre-cambrian period, i.e. the time of the oldest
known lands. organisms belonging to the animal kingdom prob-
ably appeared slightly later: they too came from the sea.
What has been translated here by
,water'
is the word nrd'
which means both water in the sky and water in the sea, plus
any kind of liquid. In the first meaning, water is the element
necessary to all vegetable life:
-gura 20, verse FB.
" (God is the one who) sent water down from the sky and
thereby we brousht forth pairs of plants each separate rrom ttre
other."
This is the first reference to the notion of a pair in the veg.e-
table kingdom. We shali return to this later.
rn the second meaning, a liquid without any further indication
of what kind, the word is used in its indeterminate form to
designate what is at the basis of the formation of all animal life:
186 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
fromageneralpoint ofview.Thecase ofman,whoseappearance
on
Earthandreproductionprocesses arethesubjectoflengthy
exposes,willbedealt
withinthenextchapter.
When
theQur'andescribestheoriginsoflifeonaverybroad
basis,
itisextremelyconcise. Itdoesso inaversethatalsomen­
tionstheprocess
oftheformationoftheUniverse,already
quoted
andcommentedon:
--sura21,verse30:
"Donot
theUnbelieverssee thattheheavensandthe earth
werejoinedtogether,thenWeclovethem asunderandWegot
everyliving
thingoutofthewater.Willtheythennotbelieve?"
Thenotion
of'gettingsomethingoutofsomething'does not
giverisetoanydoubts.Thephrasecanequallymean thatevery
livingtiringwasmade
ofwater(asitsessentialcomponent) or
thateveryliving thingoriginatedinwater.Thetwopossible
meanings
arestrictlyinaccordancewithscientificdata.Life
is
infactofaquaticoriginandwateristhemajorcomponentof
alllivingcells.Withoutwater,lifeisnotpossible.When the
possibilityoflifeonanotherplanetisdiscussed, thefirstquestion
isalways:does itcontainasufficientquantity ofwatertosup­
portlife?
Modern
dataleadusto thinkthattheoldestlivingbeingmust
havebelonged
tothevegetablekingdom:algae havebeenfound
thatdatefrom thepre-Cambrianperiod, Le.thetimeof theoldest
knownlands.Organismsbelonging
totheanimalkingdomprob­
ablyappearedslightly
later:theytoocamefrom thesea.
Whathasbeentranslatedhereby 'water'istheword mO.'
whichmeansboth waterintheskyandwaterinthesea,plus
anykindofliquid.Inthefirstmeaning, wateristheelement
necessarytoallvegetablelife:
--sura20,verse53.
"(GodistheOneWho) sentwaterdownfromtheskyand
therebyWebrought
forthpairsofplantseach separatefromthe
other."
Thisisthefirstreferencetothenotionofa
pairinthevege­
tablekingdom.Weshall
returntothislater.
Inthesecondmeaning,aliquidwithoutany furtherindication
ofwhatkind,thewordisused initsindeterminateform to
designatewhatisatthebasisoftheformationofaUanimallife:

205. -sura 24, verse 45:
"God created every animal ft'om water."
We shall see further on how this rvord may also be applied to
seminal fluid'.
Whether it deals therefore with the oligins of life in general,
or the element that gives birth to plants in the soil, or the seed
of animals, all the statements contained in the Qur"an on the
origin of life are strietly in accordanee t'ith modern scientific
data. None of the myths on the origins of life that abounded at
the time the Qur'an appeared are mentioned in the text.
B, THE VEGETABLE KINGDO]If.
It is not possible to quote in their entirety all the numerous
passages in the Qur'an in which divine Beneficence is referred
to concerning the salutary effect of the rain which makes vege-
tation grow. Here are iust thlee verses on this subject:
-sura 16, verses 10 and 11 :
"(Crod) is the One Who sends water dott'n fyom the sky. For
you this is a drink and out of it (grow) shrubs in whieh you let
(cattle) graze freely. Therewith for you He makes sown fields,
olives, palm-trees, Yineyards and all kinds of fluit gl'ow."
-sura 6, veree 99:
" (God) is the One lVho sent water dorvtt fyonr the sk5. There-
with We brought forth plants of all kinds anrl ft'om them the
verdure and We brought forth ft'om it the clu'steled glains, and
frnm the palm-tree its spathes with bttnches of flates (hanging)
low, the gardens of grapes, olives and pomegranates similal and
different. Look at their ft'uit, when they beat' it, and their t'ipen-
ing. Verily, in that there ale signs for' peollle rvho l-relieve."
-sura 50, vgrses 9-11:
"We sent down from the sky blessed rvatel whet'eby trVe eattsed
to grOw gardens, grains for harvest, tall lralm-tt'ees
rvith their
spathes, piled one ahve the other-sustenance for (Our) ser-
vants. Therewith lve give (nerv) life to a deacl land. so rvill be
the emergence (from the tombs)."
1. lt is secreted by the reproductive glands aud contains spermatozoons'
TlaeAnimaloradVegetDbleKingdorm 187
-sura24,verse45:
"God
createdeveryanimal fromwater."
Weshallsee furtheronhow thiswordmayalsobeappliedto
seminalfluid!.
Whetheritdealsthereforewiththeoriginsoflifeingeneral,
ortheelementthatgivesbirthtoplantsinthesoil,ortheseed
ofanimals,all thestatementscontainedintheQUl"anon the
originoflifearestrictlyinaccordancewithmodernscientific
data.Noneofthemythsontheoriginsoflifethatabounderlat
thetimetheQur'anappearedarementionedin thetext.
B.THEVEGETABLE KINGDOAf.
Itisnotpossibletoquoteintheirentiretyallthenumerous
passagesintheQur'aninwhichdivineBeneficenceis referred
toconcerningthesalutaryeffectoftherainwhichmakesvege­
tationgrow.Herearejustthreeverseson thissubject:
-sura16,verses10 and11:
"(God)istheOneWhosends waterdownfromthesky. For
youthisisadrinkandoutofit(grow)shrubsinwhichyou let
(cattle)grazefreely.=rrherewith foryouHemakessownfields,
olives,palm-trees,vineyards
andallkindsof fruitgrow."
-sura6,verse99:
"(God)istheOne'Vho sentwaterdownfromthesky.There­
withWebroughtforthplantsofallkindsandfrom themthe
verdureand\Vebroughtforthfromittheclusteredg-rains, and
fromthepalm-treeitsspatheswithbunchesofdates (hanging)
low,thegardensofgrapes,olives andpomegranatessimilarand
different.Look attheirfruit,whenthey bearit,anrltheirripen­
ing.Verily,in
thattherearesignsforpeoplewhobelieve."
-sura50,verses9-11:
"Wesentdownfrom theskyblessedwater'whereby\Vecaused
togrowgardens,grainsforharvest,tallpalm-treeswith their
spathes,piledoneabove theother-sustenancefor(Our)ser­
vants.Therewith\Vegive(new)lifetoadeanland. Sowillbe
theemergence(fromthetombs)."
1.Itissecretedbythereproductiveg-landsandcontainsspermatozoons.

206. IE8 THEBIBLE, THE QUR AN AND SCIENCE
general data others ttrat refer to
The Qur'an adds to these
more specialized subjects :
Balance in the Vegetable Kingdom
---sura 15, verse lg:
"The earth . . . we caused all kinds of things to grow therein
in due balance."
The Different
Qualitics of Vafiow Foods
-sura 13, verse 4:
"On the earth are adjaeent parts; vineyards, sown fields,
palm-trees, similar and not similar, watered with the same water.
we make some of them more excellent than others to eat and
verily in this are signs for wise people."
It is interesting to note the existence of these verses because
they show the sober quality of the terms used, and the absence
of bny description that might highlig:ht the beliefs of the times,
tbther than fundamental truths. what particularly attracts our
attention however, are the statements in the eur'an eoncerning
reproduction in the vegetable kingdom.
Reproduction in the Vegetabl.e Kingd,om
one must bear in mind that there are two methods of repro-
duction in the vegetabtre kingdom: one sexual, the ot*rer asexual.
It is only the first which in fact deserves the term
,rEproduc-
tion', because this defines a biological process whose purpose is
the appearance of a new individual identical to the one ttrat gave
it birth.
Asexual reproduction is quite simply multiplication. It is the
result of the fragmentation of an organism which has separated
from the main plant and developed in such a way as to resemble
the plant from which it came. It is considered by Guilliermond
and Mangenot to be a
'special
case of growth'. A very simple
example of this is the eutting: a cutting taken from a plant is
plaeed in suitably watered soil and regenerated by the grlwth of
new roots. Some plants have organs speeially designed for this,
while others give off spores that behave like seeds, as it were,
188 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
TheQur'anaddstothesegeneral dataothersthatreferto
morespecializedsubjects:
BalanceintheVegetableKingdom
--sura15,verse19:
"Theearth...Wecausedall kindsofthingstogrowtherein
induebalance."
TheDifferentQualitiesofVariousFoods
-sura13,verse4:
"Ontheearthareadjacentparts;vineyards,sownfields,
palm-trees,
similarandnotsimilar,wateredwiththesamewater.
Wemakesome
ofthemmoreexcellent thanotherstoeatand
verilyin thisaresignsforwisepeople."
Itisinterestingtonotetheexistenceoftheseversesbecause
theyshow
thesoberquality ofthetermsused,andtheabsence
oflnydescriptionthatmighthighlightthebeliefsof thetimes,
'tAther
thanfundamentaltruths.Whatparticularlyattractsour
attentionhowever, arethestatementsintheQur'anconcerning
reproductionin
thevegetablekingdom.
ReproductionintheVegetableKingdom
Onemustbearinmindthattherearetwomethods ofrepro·
ductionin thevegetablekingdom:onesexual, theotherasexual.
Itisonlythefirstwhich infactdeservestheterm'r~produc­
tion',because thisdefinesabiologicalprocesswhosepurposeis
theappearanceofanewindividualidentical totheonethatgave
itbirth.
Asexualreproductionisquitesimplymultiplication. Itisthe
resultofthefragmentationofanorganismwhichhasseparated
fromthemainplantanddevelopedinsuchawayastoresemble
theplantfromwhichitcame.ItisconsideredbyGuilliermond
andMangenottobea'specialcase
ofgrowth'.Averysimple
example
ofthisisthecutting:acuttingtakenfromaplantis
placedinsuitably wateredsoilandregenerated bythegrowthof
newroots.Someplantshave organsspeciallydesigned forthis,
while
othersgiveoffspores thatbehavelikeseeds, asitwere,

207. ThG ArttnalatdYeeet&bKingdoms f89
(it should be remembered that seeds are the results of a process
of sexual reproduction) .
Sexual reproduction in the vegetable kingdom is carried out
by the coupling of the male and female parts of the generic for-
mations united on & same plant or located on separate plants.
This is the only form tha# is mentioned in the Qur'an.
-sura 20, verse 63:
.,
(God is the one who) sent water down from the sky and
thereby We brought forth pairs of plants each separate from the
other."
'One
of a pair' is the translation of zaui (plural azut6,i) whose
original meaning is:
'that
which, in the company of another,
forms a pair'; the word is used just as readily for a married
couple as for a pair of shoes.
-sura 22, verse 5:
"Thou seest the grounds lifeless. When We send down water
thereon it shakes and grows and puts forth every magnificent
pair (of plants)."
-sura 31, verse 10:
*We
caused to grow (on the earth) every noble pair (of
plants)."
--sura 13, verse 8:
"Of all fruits (God) placed (on the earth) two of a pair"'
We know that fruit is the end-product of the reproduction
process of superior plants which have the most highly developed
and complex organization. The stage preceding fruit is the flower,
which has male and female organs (stamens and ovules). The
latter, once pollen has been carried to them, bear fruit which
in turn matures and frees it seeds. All fruit therefore implies
the existence of male and female organs. This is the meaning
of the verse in the Qur'an'
It must be noted that for certain species, fruit can come from
non-fertilized flowers (parthenocarpic fruit), €.8. bananas' cer-
tain types of pineapple, fig, orange, and vine. They can neverthe-
less also come from plants that have definite sexual character-
istics.
The culmination of the reproductive process comes with the
germination of the seed once its outside casing is opened (some-
ti-". it is compacted into a fruit-stone). This opening allows
T1aeAnimaltmdVegettJbleKingdoma 189
(itshouldberemembered thatseedsaretheresultsofaprocess
ofsexualreproduction).
Sexualreproductionin
thevegetablekingdomis carriedout
..
bythecouplingofthemaleandfemalepartsofthegenericfor-
mationsunitedonasame
plantorlocatedon separateplants.
Thisis
theonlyformthat-ismentionedin theQur'an.
-sura20,verse53:
"(Godis theOneWho) sentwaterdownfrom theskyand
therebyWebroughtforthpairsofplantseach separatefromthe
other."
'One
ofapair'isthetranslationofzauj(pluralazwaj)whose
originalmeaning
is:'thatwhich,inthecompanyofanother,
formsa
pair';thewordisused justasreadilyforamarried
coupleasforapairofshoes.
-sura22,verse5 :
"Thouseest
thegroundslifeless.WhenWesenddown water
thereonitshakesandgrowsandputsfortheverymagnificent
pair(ofplants)."
-sura31,verse10:
"Wecausedtogrow(on theearth)everynoble pair(of
plants)."
--sura13,verse3:
"Ofallfruits(God)placed(onthe earth)twoofa pair."
Weknow thatfruitistheend-productof thereproduction
process
ofsuperiorplantswhichhavethemosthighlydeveloped
andcomplexorganization.The stageprecedingfruitistheflower,
which
hasmaleandfemaleorgans(stamensandovules).The
latter,oncepollen
hasbeencarriedtothem,bearfruitwhich
inturnmaturesandfreesitseeds.All fruitthereforeimplies
theexistenceofmaleandfemaleorgans.Thisis themeaning
oftheverseintheQur'an.
Itmustbenotedthatforcertainspecies,fruitcancomefrom
non-fertilizedflowers(parthenocarpic
fruit),e.g.bananas,cer­
taintypesofpineapple,fig,orange,andvine. 11heycanneverthe­
lessalsocome
fromplantsthathavedefinitesexualcharacter­
istics.
Theculmination
ofthereproductiveprocesscomeswith the
germinationoftheseedonce itsoutsidecasingisopened(some­
times
itiscompactedintoafruit-stone).Thisopeningallows

208. r90 THE BTBLE, THE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
roots to emerge which draw from the soil all that is neeessary
for the plant's slowed-down life as a seed while it grows and
produces a new plant.
A verse in the Qur'an refers to this process of germination:
-sura 6, verse g5l
"Verily, God splits the grain and the fruit-stone."
The Qur'an often restates the existence of these components of
a pair in the vegetable kingdom and brings the notion of a
couple into a more general context, without set limits:
-sura 36, verse 36:
"Glory be to Him who created the components of eouples of
every kind: of what the ground caused to grow, of themselves
(human beings) and of rvhat you do not know."
one could form many hypotheses concerning the meaning of
the
'things
men did not know' in Muhammad's day. Today we
ean distinguish structures or coupled functions for them, going
from the infinitesimally small to the infinitely large, in the liv-
ing as well as the non-living world. The point is to remember,
these clearly expressed ideas and note, once again, that they
are in perfect agreement with modern science.
C. THE AI,{IMAL KTNCDOM
There are several questions in the eur'an concerning the ani-
mal kingdom which are the subjeet of comments that call for a
eonfrontation with modern scientific knowledge. Here again,
however, one would gain an incomplete view of all that the
Qur'an contains on this subject if one were to leave out a passage
such as the extract which follows. In this passage, the creation
of certain elements in the animal kingdom is described with the
purpose of making man reflect upon the divine Beneficence ex-
tended to him. It is quoted basically to provide an example of
lle
w?y_in which the Qur'an describes the harmonious adapta-
tion of creation to man's needs; it relates in particular the case
of those people who live in a rurar setting, since there is nothing
that could be examined from a different point of view.
-sura 16, verses 5 to 8:
" (God) created cattle for you and (you find) in them rvarmth,
useful services and food, sense of beauty when you bring them
190 THEBffiLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
rootstoemergewhich drawfromthesoilallthatisnecessary
fortheplant'sslowed-downlife asaseedwhile itgrowsand
producesanewplant.
Averse
intheQur'anreferstothisprocessofgermination:
-sura6,verse95:
"Verily,Godsplits thegrainandthefruit-stone."
TheQur'anoftenrestatestheexistenceofthesecomponents of
apairinthevegetablekingdom andbringsthenotionofa
coupleintoamoregeneralcontext,
withoutsetlimits:
-sura36,verse36:
"Glorybeto HimWhocreated thecomponentsofconplesof
everykind:ofwhatthegroundcausedtogrow,ofthemselves
(humanbeings)andofwhatyoudo notknow."
Onecould
fonnmanyhypothesesconcerning themeaningof
the'thingsmendid notknow'inMuhammad'sday.Todaywe
candistinguish
structuresorcoupledfunctions forthem,going
from
theinfinit~simally smalltotheinfinitelylarge, intheliv­
ingaswellasthenon-livingworld. Thepointistoremember'
theseclearlyexpressedideas
andnote,onceagain, thatthey
areinperfectagreementwithmodernscience.
C.THEANIMALKINCDOM
Thereareseveralquestions intheQur'anconcerningtheani­
malkingdomwhich
arethesubjectofcommentsthatcallfora
confrontation
withmodernscientificknowledge. Hereagain,
however,onewould gainanincompleteview ofallthatthe
Qur'ancontainson thissubjectifoneweretoleave outapassage
such
astheextractwhichfollows. Inthispassage,thecreation
ofcertainelementsintheanimalkingdom isdescribedwith the
purposeofmakingmanreflectupon thedivineBeneficenceex­
tended
tohim.Itisquotedbasically toprovideanexampleof
thewayinwhichtheQur'andescribestheharmoniousadapta­
tionofCreationto man'sneeds;itrelatesinparticularthecase
ofthosepeoplewholive inaruralsetting,sincethereisnothing
thatcouldbeexamined fromadifferentpoint ofview.
-sura16,verses5to 8:
U(God)createdcattleforyouand(youfind)inthem warmth,
usefulservices andfood,sense ofbeautywhenyou bringthem

209. Tllc Animal ardVegffib Khryrilorlra l9l
home and when you take them to pasture. They bear your heary
loads to lands you could not reach exeept with great personal
efrort. Verily, your Lord is Compassionate arrd Merciful; (He
created) horses, mules and donkeys for you to ride and for orna-
ment. And He created what you do not know."
Alongside these general remarks, the Qur'an sets out certain
data on highly diversified subiects:
-reproduction in the animal kingdom.
-referenees to the existence of animal communities'
-statements concerning bees, spiders and birds.
-remarks on the source of constituents of animal milk.
7. frepro&rction in the Aninul Ringilom.
This is very summarily dealt with in verses 45 and 46' sura
6$:
*
(God) fashioned the two of a pair, the male and the female,
from a small quantity of liquid when it is poured out."
fire
'pairr
is the same expression that we have already en-
countered in the verses which deal with reproduction in the
vegptable kingdom. Here, the sexes sre given. The detail which
is absolutely remarkable is the precision with which it is stated
that a small quantity of liquid is required for reproduction. The
word itself signifying
'sperm'
is used. The relevance of this re-
mark will be commented upon in the next chapter.
2. freferrrlnel to tlw Erbtenr,e of Anfunnl0ommunitbt.
-sura 6, Verse 38
"There is no animal on earth, no bird which flies on wings, that
(does not belong to) communities like you. We have not neglected
anything in the Book (of Decrees). Then to their Lord they will
be gathered."
There ang several points in this verse which require comment.
Firstly, it would seem that there is a description of what happens
to animals after their death: Islam does not apparently, have any
doctrine on this point. Then there is predestination in general'
l. Tye saw in the Introduction to the third part of this book what one was
expected to believe about predestination in its application to man
himself.
TheAnimDlandVegetGbleKingtloma 191
homeandwhenyoutakethem topasture.They bearyourheavy
loads
tolandsyoucouldnotreachexceptwith greatpersonal
effort.Verily,yourLordisCompassionateandMerciful;
(He
created)horses,mulesanddonkeys foryoutorideand fororna­
ment.AndHecreated
whatyoudonotknow."
Alongsidethesegeneralremarks,
theQur'atrsets outcertain
dataonhighlydiversifiedsubjects:
-reproductionintheanimalkingdom.
-referencestotheexistenceofanimalcommunities.
-statementsconcerningbees,spiders andbirds.
-remarksonthesourceofconstituentsofanimalmilk.
1.ReproductionintheAnimalKingdom.
Thisisverysummarilydealtwith
inverses45and46, sura
58:
"(God)fashioned thetwoofapair,themaleandthefemale,
fromasmallquantity
ofliquidwhen itispouredout."
The'pair'isthesameexpression thatwehavealreadyen­
counteredin
theverseswhichdealwithreproduction in-the
vegetablekingdom.Here,
thesexesaregiven.Thedetailwhich
isabsolutelyremarkable
istheprecisionwithwhich itisstated
thatasmallquantityofliquid isrequiredforreproduction.The
worditselfsignifying'sperm'isused.Therelevanceofthisre­
markwillbecommentedupon inthenextchapter.
2.ReferencestotheExiatenceofAnimalCommunities.
-sura6,Verse38
"Thereisnoanimalon earth,nobirdwhichfliesonwings, that
(doesnotbelongto)communitieslikeyou.Wehavenotneglected
anythingin
theBook(ofDecrees).Thento theirLordtheywill
begathered."
Thereareseveralpoints inthisversewhichrequirecomment.
Firstly,
itwouldseem thatthereisadescriptionof whathappens
toanimalsaftertheirdeath:Islamdoes notapparently,haveany
doctrineon
thispoint.Thenthereispredestinationingeneral
l
1.WesawintheIntroductiontothethirdpartofthisbookwhatonewas
expectedtobelieveaboutpredestinationinitsapplicationtoman
himself.

210. r02 THE BrBLF,' mIE QURAN AND SCTENCE
which would seem to be mentioned here. It could be conceived es
absolute predestination or relativg i.e. timited to structures and
a functional organization that condition modes of behaviour:
the animal acts upon various exterior impulses in terms of a par-
ticular conditioning.
BlachBre stat€s that an older commentator, such as Razi,
thought that this verse only refened to instinctive actions
whereby animals worship God. Sheik Si Boubakeur Hamza, in
the commentary to his translation of the Koran, speaks of
,,the
instinct which, aecording to Divine Wisdom, pushes all beings to
group together, so that they demand that the work of each mem-
ber serve the whole group."
Animal behaviour has been closely investigated in recent de-
cades, with the result that genuine animal communities havc
been shown to exist. of course, for a long time now the results of
8 group or community's work have been examined and this has
led to the aeceptance of a cornmunity organization. It has only
been recently however, thst the mechanisms which preside over
this kind of organization have been discovered for certain species.
The most studied and best known case is undoubtedly that of b*r,
to whose behaviour the name von Frisch is linked. von Frisch,
Lorenz and Tinbergen received the 1g?g Nobel prize
for their
work in this field.
3. Statcmenh C otrcenring Bee4 Spiilrrre end Bbds.
When specialists on the nervous system wish to provide strik-
ing examples of the prodigious organization directing animsl
behaviour, possibly the animals referred to most frequenily are
bees, spiders and birds (especially migratory birds). wtt"t*u*"
the case, there is no doubt that these three groups constitute s
model of highly evolved organization.
The fact that the text of the Qur'an refers to this exemplary
trio in the animal kingdom is in absolute keeping with the excep-
tionally interesting character that eaeh of these animals has from
a scientific point of view.
Bees
In the Qur'an, bees are the subject of the longest commentary:
192 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
whichwouldseemtobementionedhere. Itcouldbeconceived as
absolutepredestination orrelative,i.e.limitedtostructuresand
afunctionalorganization
thatconditionmodes ofbehaviour:
theanimalactsuponvariousexteriorimpulsesinterms ofapar­
ticularconditioning.
Blach~re statesthatanoldercommentator,suchasRazi,
thought
thatthisverseonlyreferredtoinstinctiveactions
wherebyanimalsworship
God.SheikSiBoubakeurHamza,in
thecommentarytohistranslationof theKoran,speaks of"the
instinctwhich,accordingtoDivineWisdom,pushesallbeingsto
grouptogether,so
thattheydemand thattheworkofeachmem­
berservethewholegroup."
Animalbehaviourhasbeencloselyinvestigated
inrecentde­
cades,
withtheresultthatgenuineanimalcommunitieshave
beenshowntoexist.Ofcourse,
foralongtimenowtheresults of
agrouporcommunity'sworkhavebeenexaminedandthis has
ledtotheacceptanceofacommunityorganization. Ithasonly
beenrecentlyhowever,
thatthemechanismswhichpresideover
thiskindoforganizationhavebeendiscovered forcertainsfecies.
Themoststudiedandbestknowncaseisundoubtedly
thatofbees,
to
whosebehaviourthenamevon Frischislinked.VonFrisch,
Lorenz
andTinbergenreceivedthe1978NobelPrize fortheir
workinthisfield.
3.StatementsConcemingBee., Spidero.andBi,.dB.
Whenspecialistson thenervoussystemwish toprovidestrik­
ingexamplesoftheprodigiousorganizationdirectinganimal
behaviour,possibly
theanimalsreferredtomostfrequently are
bees,spidersandbirds(especiallymigratory birds).Whatever
thecase,thereisnodoubt thatthesethreegroupsconstitutea
model
ofhighlyevolvedorganization.
Thefact
thatthetextoftheQur'anreferstothisexemplary
triointheanimalkingdomisinabsolutekeepingwith theexcep­
tionallyinterestingcharacter
thateachoftheseanimalshasfrom
ascientificpoint
ofview.
Bees
IntheQur'an,bees arethesubjectofthelongestcommentary:

211. Tho Artmal atdVegetfrle Kingilomt 193
-Surs 16, verses 68 and 69:'
"Thy Lord inspired the bees: Choose your dwelling in the hills'
in the trees and in what (man) built. Eat of all fruit and follow
the ways of your Lord in humility. From within their bodies
comes a liquor of difrerent colours where is a remedy for men."
It is difficult to know what exactly is meant by the order to
follow the ways of the Lord in humility, unless it is to be seen
in general terms. All that may be said, with regard to the knowl-
edge that has been gained of their behaviour, is that here-as in
each of the three animal cases mentioned as examples in the
Qur'an-there is a remarkable nervous organization supporting
their behaviour, ft is known that the pattern of a bee's dance is
& means of communication to other bees; in this wBY, bees are
able to convey to their own species the direction and distance of
flowers from which nectar is to be gathered. The famous experi-
ment performed hy von Frisch has shown the meaning of this
insect's movement which is intented to transmit information be-
tween worker b@s.
Spdibrs
Spiders are mentioned in the Qur'an to stress the flimsiness of
their dwelling which is the most fragile of all. They have a
refuge that is as preearious, according to the Qur'an, as the
dwelling of those who have chosen masters other than God.
--sura 29, verse 41:
"Those who ehoose masters other then God are like the spider
when it takes for itself a dwelling. Verily, the flimsiest dwelling
is the dwelling of the spider. If they but knew."
A spider's web is indeed constituted of silken threads secreted
by the animafs glands and their calibre is infinitely fine. Its frs-
Sility cannot be imitated by man. Naturalists are intrigued by
the exhaordinary pattern of work recorded by the animal's ner-
vous cells, which allows it to produce a geometrically perfect web.
1. One might note in paesing, that this last verse is the only one in the
Qur'an
that refers to the pogsibility of a remedy for m&n- Honey cen
inaeea be useful for certain diseases. Nowhere else in the Qur'an is *
reference made to any remedial arts, contrary to what may hsve b€en
reid rbout thir rubject.
TheAnimalandVegetable Kingdoma 193
-Sura16,verses68 and69:
1
"ThyLordinspiredthebees:Choose yourdwellinginthehills,
inthetreesandinwhat(man)built.Eatofallfruitandfollow
thewaysofyourLordinhumility.Fromwithintheirbodies
comesaliquor
ofdifferentcolours whereisaremedyformen."
Itisdifficulttoknowwhatexactlyis meantbytheorderto
followthewaysoftheLordinhumility,unless itistobeseen
ingeneralterms.Allthatmaybesaid,withregardtotheknowl­
edge
thathasbeengained oftheirbehaviour,is thathere-asin
eachofthethreeanimalcasesmentioned asexamplesinthe
Qur'an-thereisaremarkablenervo~s organizationsupporting
theirbehaviour.Itisknownthatthepatternofabee'sdance is
ameansofcommunicationtootherbees;inthisway,bees are
abletoconvey totheirownspecies thedirectionanddistanceof
flowersfromwhichnectaristobegathered.Thefamousexperi­
mentperformedbyvonFrischhasshownthemeaningofthis
insect'smovementwhich isintentedtotransmitinformationbe­
tweenworkerbees.
Spidel'.
SpidersarementionedintheQur'antostresstheflimsinessof
theirdwellingwhich isthemostfragileofall.Theyhavea
refugethatisasprecarious,accordingto theQur'an,asthe
dwellingofthosewhohavechosen mastersotherthanGod.
-sura29,verse41:
"Thosewhochoose
mastersotherthanGodarelikethespider
whenittakesforitselfadwelling.Verily, theflimsiestdwelling
isthedwellingofthespider.Iftheybutknew."
A
spider'swebisindeedconstituted ofsilkenthreadssecreted
bytheanimal'sglandsandtheircalibreisinfinitelyfine. Itsfra­
gilitycannotbe imitatedbyman.Naturalistsareintriguedby
theextraordinarypatternofworkrecordedby theanimal'sner­
vouscells,whichallows
ittoproduceageometrically perfectweb.
1.Onemightnoteinpassing,thatthislastverseistheonlyone inthe
Qur'anthatreferstothepossibilityofaremedyforman.Honeycan
indeedbeusefulforcertaindiseases.Nowhereelsein theQur'anisa
referencemadetoanyremedialarts,contrarytowhatmayhavebeen
saidaboutthissubject.

212. I94 TTIE BIBLE, TIIE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
Bbds
Birds are frequently mentioned in the Qurran. They appear in
episodes in the life of Abraham, Joseph, David, solomon and
Jesus. These references do not however have any bearing on the
subject in hand.
The verse concerning the existence of animal communities on
the ground and bird communities in the sky has been noted
above:
-sura 6 verse 38:
"There is no animal on the earth, no bird which flies on wings,
that (does not belong to) communities like you. We have not
neglected anything in the Book (of Decrees). lfhen to their Lord
they will be gathered."
Two other verses highlight the birds' strict submission to God's
Power:
-sura 16, verse 79:
"Do they not look at the birds subjected in the atmosphere of
the sky? None can hold them up (in His
power)
except God."
-sura 67, verse 19:
"Have they not looked at the birds above them spreading their.
wings out and folding them? None can hold them up iin ti,
Porver) except the Beneficent."
The translation of one single word in each of these verses is a
very delicate matter. The translation given here expresses the
idea that God holds the birds up in His power.
The Arabic verb
in question is a,ntsaka, whose original meaning is
,to
put one's
hand on, seize, hold, hold someone back'.
An illuminating eomparison can be made between these verses,
which stress the extremely close dependence of the birds' be-
havior on divine order, to morlern data showing the degree of
perfection attained by certain species of bird with regard to the
pl'ogramming of their movements. It is only the existence of a
migratory progl'amme in the genetic code of birds that can ac-
count for the extremely long and complicated journeys which
very young birds, rvithout any prior experience and without any
guide, are able to accomplish. This is in addition to their ability
to return to their departure point on a prescribed date. professor
Hamburger in his book, Power and Fragilitu (La puissance
et la
194 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Birds
Birdsarefrequentlymentioned intheQur'an.They appearin
episodesinthelifeofAbraham,Joseph,David,Solomon and
Jesus.Thesereferencesdo nothoweverhave anybearingonthe
subjectinhand.
Theverseconcerning
theexistenceofanimalcommunitieson
thegroundandbil'dcommunities intheskyhasbeennoted
above:
-sura6verse38:
"Thereisnoanimalon theearth,nobirdwhichfliesonwings,
that(doesnotbelongto)communitieslikeyou.Wehave not
neglectedanythingintheBook(ofDecrees).rrhento theirLord
theywillbe
gathered." .
Two
otherverseshighlight thebirds'strictsubmissiontoGod's
Power:
-sura16,verse79:
unotheynotlookatthebirdssubjectedintheatmosphereof
thesky?None canholdthemup (inHisPower)exceptGod."
-sura67,verse19:
"Havetheynotlookedatthebirdsabovethem spreadingtheir
wingsoutandfolding them?Nonecanhold themup(inhis
Power)except
theBeneficent."
Thetranslationofonesinglewordineachoftheseversesisa
verydelicate
matter.Thetranslationgivenhereexpressesthe
ideathatGodholdsthebirdsupinHisPower.TheArabicverb
inquestionis
amsaka,whoseoriginalmeaningis'to putone's
handon,seize,hold,holdsomeoneback'.
Anilluminatingcomparisoncan
bemadebetweentheseverses,
which
stresstheextremelyclosedependence ofthebirds'be­
haviorondivineorder,
tomoderndatashowingthedegreeof
perfection
attainedbycertainspeciesofbirdwithregardtothe
programmingoftheirmovements.Itisonlytheexistenceofa
migratoryprogrammeinthegeneticcode ofbirdsthatcanac­
count
fortheextremelylong andcomplicatedjourneyswhich
veryyoungbirds,without anypriorexperienceandwithoutany
guide,
areabletoaccomplish. Thisisinadditiontotheirability
toreturntotheirdeparturepointonaprescribeddate. Professor
Hamburgerinhisbook, PowerandFragility (LaPuissanceetla

213. Thc Arfinol d V eedrth lfjwilomr 195
Fragilitd)', gives as an example the well-knou'n case of the
'mutton-bird'
that lives in the Paeific, with its journey of over
15,500 miles in the shape oI the figure 8'. It must be acknowl-
edged that the highly complicated instructions for a journey of
this kind simply have to be contained in the bird's nervous
cells. They are most definitely programmed, but rvho is the
programmer?
4. The Sowce af the Constituents of AnimalMilk.
This is defined in the Qur'an in striet accordance with the data
of modern knorvledge (sura 16, verse 66). The translation and in-
terpretation of this verse given here is my own because even
modern translations habitually give it a meaning whieh is, in my
opinion, hardly acceptable. Here are two examples:
-R. Blachbre's translation :3
"Verily, in your cattle there is a lesson for you ! We give you a
pure milk to drink, excellent for its drinkers; (it comes) from
what, in their bellies, is between digested food and blood."
-Profcssor Hamidullah's translation:'
"Verily, there is food for thought in your cattle. From what is
in their bellies, among their excrement and blood, We make you
drink pure milk, easy for drinkers to imbibe."
If these texts were shown to a physiologist, he would reply that
they were extremely obscure, the reason being that there hardly
appears to be much agreement between them and modern notions,
even on a very elementary level. These translations are the work
of highly eminent Arabists. It is a well known fact however, that
a translator, even an expert, is liable to make mistakes in the
translation of scientific statements, unless he happens to be a
specialist in the discipline in question.
The most valid translation seems to me to be the follorving:
"Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for you. We give you to
drink of what is inside their bodies, coming from a conjunction
1. Pub. Flammarion, 1972, Paris.
2. It makes this journey over a period of six months, and comes back to
its departure point with a maximum delay of one week.
3. Pub. G. P. Maisonneuve et Larose, 1966, Paris,
4. Pub. Club Frangais du Livre, 19?1, Paris.
195
FragiIite)1,gives asanexample thewell-knowncase ofthe
'mutton-bird'thatlivesinthePacific,withitsjourney ofover
15,500miles
intheshapeof thefigure8
2
•
Itmustbeacknowl­
edged
thatthehighlycomplicatedinstructions forajourneyof
thiskindsimplyhave tobecontainedinthe bird'snervous
cells.They
aremostdefinitelyprogrammed, butwhoisthe
programmer?
4.TheSOUTceoftheConstituentsofAnimalMilk.
ThisisdefinedintheQur'aninstrictaccordancewiththe data
ofmodernknowledge (sura16,verse66).Thetranslation andin­
terpretationofthisversegiven hereismyownbecauseeven
moderntranslationshabituallygive
itameaningwhichis, inmy
opinion,
hardlyacceptable.Here aretwoexamples:
-R.Blachere'stranslation :3
"Verily,inyourcattlethereisalessonforyou!Wegiveyoua
puremilktodrink,excellent foritsdrinkers;(itcomes)from
what,
intheirbellies,isbetweendigestedfoodandblood."
-ProfessorHamidullah'stranslation:·
"Verily,
thereisfoodforthoughtinyourcattle.Fromwhatis
intheirbellies,among theirexcrementandblood,Wemakeyou
drinkpuremilk,easy fordrinkerstoimbibe."
Ifthesetextswereshowntoaphysiologist,hewouldreply that
theywereextremelyobscure, thereasonbeing thattherehardly
appearstobemuchagreementbetweenthem
andmodernnotions,
evenonaveryelementarylevel.Thesetranslations
arethework
ofhighlyeminentArabists.
Itisawellknown facthowever,that
atranslator,even anexpert,isliabletomakemistakesin the
translationofscientificstatements,unlesshehappenstobea
specialistin
thedisciplineinquestion.
Themostvalidtranslationseemstometobethefollowing:
"Verily,
incattlethereisalesson foryou.Wegiveyouto
drinkofwhatisinsidetheirbodies,comingfromaconjunction
1.Pub.Flammarion,1972,Paris.
2.Itmakesthisjourneyoveraperiodofsixmonths,andcomesbackto
itsdeparturepointwithamaximumdelayofoneweek.
3.
Pub.G.P.MaisonneuveetLarose,1966,Paris,
4.Pub.ClubFran~ais duLivre,1971,Paris.

214. 196 THE BIBT.E, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
between the contents of the intestine and the blood, a milk pure
and pleasant for those who drink it." (sura 16, verse 66)
This interpretation is very close to the one given in the Muw
takgb, 1973, edited by the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs,
Cairo, which relies for its support on modern physiology.
From the point of view of its vocaburary, the proposed trans-
lation may be justified
as follows:
I have translated
'inside
their bodies' and not, as R. BlachEre
and Professor Hamidullah have done,
,inside
their bellies'. This
is because the word baln also means
,middle', ,interior
of some-
thing', as well as
'belly'.
The word does not here have a meaning
that is anatomically precise.
'Inside
their bodies' seems to eoneur
perfeetly with the context.
The notion of a
'primary
origin' of the constituents of milk is
expressed by the word mi,n (in English
,from')
and the idea of a
conjunction by the word bainL The latter not only signifies
'among"
but also
'between'
in the other translations quotra- lt i,
however also used to express the idea that two things or two
people are brought together.
From a scientifie point of view, physiological notions must be
called upon to grasp the meaning of this verse.
The substances that ensure the general nutrition of the body
come from chemical transformations which' occur along the
length of the digestive tract. These substances come from the
contents of the intestine. on arrivar in the intestine at the ap-
propriate stage of chemical transformation, they pass through
its wall and towards the systemic circulation. This passage is
effected in two ways: either direcfly, by what are called the
,lym-
phatic vessels', or indirectly, by the portal circulation. This con-
ducts them first to the liver, where they undergo alterations, and
from here they then emerge to join the systemic circulation. In
this way everything passes through the bloodstream.
The constituents of milk are secreted by the mammary glands.
These are nourished, as it were, by the product of food digestion
brought to them via the bloodstream. Brood therefore plays the
role of collector and conductor of what has been extracted from
food, and it brings nutrition to the mammary glands, the pro-
ducers of milk, as it does to any other organ.
196 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
betweenthecontents oftheintestineandtheblood,amilk pure
andpleasantforthosewho drinkit."(sura16,verse66)
This
interpretationisveryclosetotheonegiven intheMun­
tak!!b,1973,edited bytheSupremeCouncil forIslamicAffairs,
Cairo,whichrelies
foritssupportonmodernphysiology.
Fromthepointofviewofitsvocabulary,theproposedtrans­
lationmaybejustifiedasfollows:
Ihave
translated'insidetheirbodies'andnot,asR.Blachere
andProfessorHamidullahhavedone,'inside theirbellies'.This
isbecause
thewordba~nalsomeans'middle', 'interiorofsome­
thing',
aswellas'belly'.Theworddoes notherehaveameaning
thatisanatomicallyprecise.'Inside theirbodies'seemstoconcur
perfectly
withthecontext.
Thenotion
ofa'primaryorigin'oftheconstituentsofmilkis
expressed
bythewordmin(inEnglish'from')andtheideaofa
conjunction
bythewordbaini.Thelatternotonlysignifies
'among'
butalso'between'intheothertranslationsquoted.Itis
howeveralsousedtoexpress
theideathattwothingsortwo
people
arebroughttogether.
Fromascientificpointofview,physiologicalnotions mustbe
calledupon
tograspthemeaningofthisverse.
Thesubstancesthatensurethegeneralnutritionofthebody
come
fromchemicaltransformationswhich'occuralong the
lengthofthedigestivetract.Thesesubstancescome fromthe
contentsoftheintestine.On arrivalintheintestineattheap­
propriatestageofchemIcaltransformation,theypassthrough
itswalland towardsthesystemiccirculation.Thispassageis
effected
intwoways:eitherdirectly,bywhatarecalledthe'lym­
phaticvessels',
orindirectly,by theportalcirculation. Thiscon­
ductsthemfirst
totheliver,wheretheyundergoalterations, and
fromhere theythenemergeto jointhesystemiccirculation. In
thisway everythingpassesthroughthebloodstream.
Theconstituentsofmilkaresecretedby themammaryglands.
These
arenourished,asitwere,by theproductoffooddigestion
broughttothE~mviathebloodstream.Bloodthereforeplays the
roleofcollectorandconductorofwhathasbeenextractedfrom
food,
anditbringsnutritiontothemammaryglands,thepro­
ducers
ofmilk,asitdoesto anyotherorgan.

215. TIrc At$tnol atdVe$etrtlr Xhlgdotn lgz
Here the initial proeess which sets everything else in motion
is the bringing togpther of the contents of the intestine and blood
et the level of the intestinal wall itseH. This very precise concept
is the result of the discoveries msde in the chemistry and physiol-
ogy of the disestive system. It was totally unknown at the time
of the Prophet Muhammad snd hss been understood only in re-
cent timcs. The discovery of the circulation of the blood, was
made by Harvey roughly ten centuries after the Qur'anic Revela-
tion.
I consider that the existence in the Qur'an of the verse refer-
ring to these concepts can have no human explanation on account
of the period in which they were formulated.
rlwAniftlGltmdVegelGbleK;ngdoma 197
Heretheinitialprocesswhichsetseverythingelseinmotion
isthebringingtogetherof
thecontentsoftheintestineandblood
atthelevelof theintestinalwallitself.Thisverypreciseconcept
istheresultofthediscoveriesmadeinthechemistryandphysiol­
ogyofthedigestivesystem. Itwastotallyunknown atthetime
oftheProphetMuhammadand hasbeenunderstoodonlyinre­
centtimes.Thediscoveryofthecirculationoftheblood,was
madebyHarveyroughlytencenturies
aftertheQur'anicRevela­
tion.
Iconsider
thattheexistenceintheQur'anoftheverserefer­
ringtotheseconceptscanhavenohumanexplanationonaccount
oftheperiodinwhichtheywereformulated.

216. vrr
Hrrrnarr R*productirrrr
From the moment ancient human writings enter into detail
(honiever slight) on the subject of reproduction, they inevi-
tably mske statements that are inaceurate. In the Middte Ages-
and even in more recent time--reproduction was surrounded by
all sorts of myths and superstitions. How could it have been
otherwise, considering the fact that to understand its complex
mechanisms, man first had to possess a knowledge of anatomy,
the discovery of the microseope had to be made, and the so-cslled
basic sciences hsd to be founded which were to nurture physi-
ology, embryology, obstetrics, etc.
The situation is quite different in the eur'an. The Book
mentions precise mechanisms in many places and describes
clearly-defined stages in reproduetion, without providing a single
statement marred by insccuracy. Everything in the eur'an is
explained in simple terms which are easily understandeble to
man and in strict aecordance with what was to be discovered
much later on,
Human reproduction is referred to in several dozen verses of
the Qur'an, in various contexts. rt is explained through stete-
ments which deal with one or more specific points. They must
be assembled to give a gbneral idea of the verses as a whole, and
here, as for the other subjeets already examined, the commentary
is in this way made easier.
REMIIVDER OF CENTAIN BASIC CONCEJPTS.
It is imperative to recall certain basic concepts which were un-
known at the time of the Qur'anic Revelation and the centuries
that followed.
r98
VII
HumanRep..odu£lion
Fromthemomentancienthumanwritings enterintodetail
(howeverslight)on
thesubjectofreproduction,theyinevi­
tablymakestatements
thatareinaccurate.IntheMiddleAges­
andeven inmorerecent time-reproductionwassurroundedby
allsortsofmythsandsuperstitions.Howcould
ithavebeen
otherwise,considering
thefactthattounderstanditscomplex
mechanisms,manfirsthadtopossessaknowledgeofanatomy,
thediscovery
ofthemicroscopehadto bemade,andtheso-called
basicsciences
hadtobefoundedwhichwereto nurturephysi­
ology,embryology,obstetrics,ete.
Thesituationisquitedifferent
intheQur'an.TheBook
mentionsprecisemechanisms
inmanyplacesanddescribes
clearly-definedstagesinreproduction,withoutprovidingasingle
statementmarredbyinaccuracy.EverythingintheQur'anis
explainedinsimpletermswhich
areeasilyunderstandableto
manandin
strictaccordancewithwhatwas tobediscovered
much
lateron.
Humanreproductionisreferred
toinseveraldozenversesof
theQur'an,invariouscontexts.
Itisexplainedthroughstate­
mentswhichdealwithoneormorespecificpoints.Theymust
beassembledtogiveageneralideaoftheversesasawhole,and
here,asfortheothersubjectsalreadyexamined,thecommentary
isinthiswaymadeeasier.
REMINDEROFCERTAINBASICCONCEPTS.
Itisimperativetorecallcertainbasicconceptswhichwereun­
known
atthetimeoftheQur'anicRevelationandthecenturies
thatfollowed.
198

217. Human Reryoiluction 199
Human reproduction is effected by a selies of processes which
we share in common with mammals. The starting point is the
fertilization of an ovule which has detached itself from the ovary.
It takes place in the Fallopian tubes half-way through the men-
strual ci-cle. The fertilizing agent is the male sperm, or more
exactly, the spermatozoon, a single fertilizing cell being all that
is needed. To ensure fertilization therefore, an infinitely small
quantity of spermatic liquid containing a large number of
spermatozoons (tens of millions at a time) is required. This
Iiquid is produced by the testicles and temporarily stored in a
system of reservoirs and canals that finally lead into the urinary
tract; other glands are situated along the latter rvhich contribute
their own additional secretions to the sperm itself.
The implantation of the egg fertilized by this process takes
place at a precise spot in the female reproductive system: it
descends into the uterus via a Fallopian tube and lodges in the
body of the uterus where it soon literally implants itself by in-
sertion into the thickness of the mucosa and of the muscie, once
the placenta has been formed and with the aid of the latter. If
the implantation of the fertilized egg takes place, for example,
in the Fallopian tubes instead of in the uterus, pregnancy will
be interrupted.
Once the embryo begins to be obses'able to the naked eye, it
looks like a small mass of flesh at the centt'e of rvhich the appear-
ance of a human being is at first indistinguishable. It grows
there in progressive stages which are very well known today;
they lead to the bone structure, the muscles, the nervous sy$-
tem, the circulation, and the viscerae, etc.
These notions will serve as the terms of leference against
which the statements in the Qur'an on reproduction ale to be
compared.
HAMAN nEPRODUCTTOII rN THE QUn'AN.
It is not easy to gain an idea of what the Qur"an contains ou
this subject. The first difficulty arises from the fact already men-
tioned, i.e. that the statements dealing with this subject are
scattered throughout the Book. This is not however a major dif-
HumanReproduction 199
Humanreproductioniseffectedbyaseries ofprocesseswhich
we
shareincommonwithmammals.The startingpointis the
fertilizationofanovulewhich hasdetacheditselffrom theovary.
IttakesplaceintheFallopiantubeshalf-waythroughthemen­
strualcycle.Thefertilizingagentisthemalesperm, ormore
exactly,
thespermatozoon,asinglefertilizingcellbeingall that
isneeded.To ensurefertilizationtherefore, aninfinitelysmall
quantityofspermaticliquidcontaininga largenumberof
spermatozoons(tensofmillionsatatime)isrequired.This
liquidisproducedbythetesticles
andtemporarilystoredina
system
ofreservoirsandcanalsthatfinallyleadinto theurinary
tract;otherglandsaresituatedalongthelatterwhichcontribute
theirownadditionalsecretionsto thespermitself.
Theimplantationoftheeggfertil~zed bythisprocesstakes
place
ataprecisespotinthefemalereproductive system:it
descendsinto theuterusviaaFallopiantubeandlodgesinthe
bodyoftheuteruswhereitsoonliterallyimplantsitselfbyin­
sertionintothethicknessofthemucosaandofthemuscie,once
theplacentahasbeenformed andwiththeaidof thelatter.If
theimplantationofthefertilizedegg takesplace,forexample,
in
theFallopiantubes insteadofintheuterus,pregnancywill
beinterrupted.
Oncetheembryobeginstobeobservableto thenakedeye, it
lookslikeasmallmass offleshatthecentreofwhichtheappear­
ance
ofahumanbeingisatfirstindistinguishable.Itgrows
thereinprogressivestageswhichareverywellknown today;
theyleadto thebonestructure,themuscles,thenervoussys­
tem,
thecirculation,andtheviscerae,etc.
Thesenotionswillserve
asthetermsofreferenceagainst
whichthe statementsintheQur'anonreproductionaretobe
compared.
HUMANREPRODUCTION INTHEQUR'AN.
Itisnoteasyto gainanideaofwhattheQur'ancontainson
thissubject.Thefirstdifficulty arisesfromthe factalreadymen­
tioned,
Le.thatthestatementsdealingwith thissubjectare
scatteredthroughouttheBook.Thisisnothowevera majordif-

218. EN THE XIII,E, THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
ficulty. What is more likely to mislead the inquiring reader is,
once again, the problem of vocabulary.
rn fact there are still many translations and commentaries in
circulation today that can give a completcly false idea of the
Qur'anic Revelation on this subject to the scientist who reads
them. The majority of translations describe, for example, man's
formation from a
'blood
clot' or an
,adhesion'.
A statement of
this kind is totally unaeceptable to scientists specializing in this
field. In the paragraph dealing with the implantation of the egg
in the maternal uterus, wG shall see the reasons why distin-
guished Arabists who lack a scientific background have made
such blunders.
This observation implies how great the importance of an asso-
ciation between linguistic and scientific knowledge is when it
comes to grasping the meaning of eur'anic statements on repro-
duction.
the successive transforma-
reaching its destination in
the maternal uterus.
-sura 82, verses G to 8:
"O Man ! Who deceives you
created you and fashioned you
any form He willed."
-sura ?1, verse 14:
"(God) fashioned you in (different) stages."
Along with this very general observation, the text of the
Qur'an draws attention to several points concerning reproduc-
tion which might be listed as follows:
1) fertilization is performed by only a very small volume of
liquid.
The Qur'an sets out by stressing
tions the embryo undergoes before
about your Lord the Noble, Who
in due proportion and gave you
2I
3)
4)
the constituents of the fertilizing liquid.
the implantation of the fertilized egg.
the evolution of the embryo.
7. Fefiilirntion b Pefiotmedbg Onlg aVery Small
Volume of Liquid.
The Qur'an repeats this concept eleven times using the follow-
ing expression:
THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
ficulty.Whatismorelikely tomisleadtheinquiring readeris,
onceagain,
theproblemofvocabulary.
Infacttherearestillmanytranslationsandcommentaries in
circulationtoday thatcangiveacompletelyfalseidea ofthe
Qur'anicRevelationon thissubjectto thescientistwhoreads
them.The
majorityoftranslationsdescribe, forexample,man's
formationfroma'bloodclot'
oran'adhesion'.A statementof
thiskindistotallyunacceptable toscientistsspecializing inthis
field.Intheparagraphdealingwith theimplantationoftheegg
inthematernaluterus,weshallseethereasonswhydistin­
guishedArabistswholackascientificbackgroundhavemade
suchblunders.
Thisobservationimplieshow
greattheimportanceofanasso­
ciationbetweenlinguisticandscientificknowledge
iswhenit
comesto graspingthemeaning ofQur'anicstatementsonrepro­
duction.
TheQur'ansetsoutbystressing
thesuccessivetransforma­
tionstheembryoundergoesbeforereaching itsdestinationin
thematernaluterus.
-sura82,verses6to8:
"0Man!WhodeceivesyouaboutyourLordtheNoble,Who
createdyou
andfashionedyouindueproportionandgaveyou
anyformHewilled."
-sura71,verse14:
"(God)fashionedyouin(different)stages."
Alongwiththisverygeneralobserv·ation,the
textofthe
Qur'andrawsattention toseveralpointsconcerningreproduc­
tionwhichmightbelisted
asfollows:
1)fertilizationisperformedbyonlyaverysmallvolumeof
liquid.
2)theconstituents
ofthefertilizingliquid.
3)theimplantationofthefertilizedegg.
4)theevolutionoftheembryo.
1.FertilizationisPerformedbyOnlya VefYSmall
VolumeofLiquid.
TheQur'anrepeatsthisconcepteleventimesusingthefollow­
ingexpression:

219. Human Reproduction
g0l
-sura 16, verse 4:
" (God) fashioned man from a small quantity (of sperm)
"'
The Arabic word rw[fa has been translated by the words
'small
quantity (of sperm)' because we do not have the terms
that are strietly appropriate. This word comes from a verb signi-
fying
'to
dribble, to trickle'; it is used to describe what remains
at the bottom of a bucket that has been emptied out. It therefore
indicates a very small quantity of liguid. Here it is sperm be-
cause the word is associated in another verse with the word
sperm.
-Sura 75, verSe 37:
"Was (man) not a small quantity of sperm which has been
poured out?"
-
Here the Arabic word mani signifies sperm.
Another verse indicates that the small quantity in question is
put in a
'firmly
established lodging' (qayd,t'J which obviously
means the genital organs.
-sura 23, verse 13. God is sPeaking:
,,Then
we placed (man) as a small quantity (of sperm) in a
safe lodging firmly established."
It must he added that the adjective which in this text refers to
the
'firmly
established lodging' matiin is, I think, hardly trans-
latable. It expresses the idea of a firmly established and respected
place. However this may be, it refers to the spot where man
grows in the maternal organism. It is important to stress the
concept of a very small quantity of liquid needed in the fertiliza-
tion process, which is strictly in agreement with what we know
on this subject today.
2, The Constituents of the FertilizingLiquiil.
The Qur'an describes the liquid enabling fertilization to take
place in terms which it is interesting to examine:
a)
'sperm',
as has been stated precisely (sura 75, verse 3?)
b)
'a
liquid poured out' : "Man was fashioned from a liquid
poured out" (sura 86, verse 6)
c)
,a
despised liquid' (sura 32, verse 8 and sura 77, verse 20)
The adjective
'despised'
(mahfn) would' it seems' be inter-
preted not so much on account of the nature of the liquid itself,
H"manReproduction 201
-sura16,verse4 :
"(God)fashionedmanfromasmallquantity(ofsperm)."
TheArabicwordnutfahasbeentranslatedbythewords
tsmallquantity(ofsperm)'becausewedo nothavetheterms
thatarestrictlyappropriate.Thiswordcomesfromaverbsigni­
fying'todribble,totrickle';itisusedtodescribewhatremains
atthebottomofabucketthathasbeenemptiedout. Ittherefore
indicatesaverysmall quantityofliquid.Hereitisspermbe­
causethewordisassociated inanotherversewiththeword
sperm.
-sura75,verse37:
"Was(man)notasmallquantityofspermwhichhasbeen
poured
out?"
HeretheArabicwordmanisignifiessperm.
Anotherverseindicates thatthesmallquantityinquestionis
putina'firmlyestablishedlodging' (qarii1')whichobviously
meansthegenitalorgans.
-sura23,verse13.Godis speaking:
"ThenWeplaced (man)asasmallquantity(ofsperm)ina
safelodgingfirmlyestablished."
Itmustbeaddedthattheadjectivewhich inthistextrefersto
the'firmlyestablishedlodging' makTnis,Ithink, hardlytrans­
latable.Itexpressestheideaofafirmlyestablished andrespected
place.However
thismaybe, itreferstothespotwhereman
growsinthematernalorganism.Itisimportanttostressthe
conceptofaverysmallquantityofliquidneeded inthefertiliza­
tionprocess,whichis
strictlyinagreementwithwhatweknow
on
thissubjecttoday.
2.TheConstituentsoftheFertilizingLiquid.
TheQur'andescribestheliquidenablingfertilizationto take
placeintermswhichitisinterestingtoexamine:
a)'sperm',ashasbeenstatedprecisely(sura75,verse37)
b)'aliquidpoured out':"Manwasfashionedfromaliquid
poured
out"(sura86,verse6)
c)
'adespisedliquid' (sura32,verse8 andsura77,verse20)
Theadjective'despised' (mahin)would,itseems,be inter­
pretednotsomuchonaccountof thenatureoftheliquiditself,

220. qt$
THE BIBI.q THE QUN'AN AND SCIENCE
as more the fact that it is emitted through the ouflet of the
urinary tract, using the channels that are employed for pas.sing
urine.
d)
'Mixtures'
or
'mingled
liquids' (am#ail: "verily, w€ fash-
ioned man from a small quantity of mingled liquids" (sura
76, verse 2)
Many commentators, Iike professor Hamidullah, consider these
liquids to be the male and female agents. The same view was
shared by older commentators, who eould not have had any idea
of the physiolory of fertilization, especially its biological condi-
tions in the case of the woman. They thousht that the word
simply meant the unification of the two elements.
Modern authors however, like the commentator of the Munta-
lcb edited by the Supreme Council for Islamie Affairs, cairo,
have conected this view and note here that the
.small
quantity
of speru' is made up of various component parts. The commen-
tator in the Mu4talnb does not go into detail, but in my opinion
it ie a very judicious
observation.
What are the components parts of sperm ?
Spermatic liquid is formed by various seeretions which come
from the following glands:
a) the testicles: the secretion of the male genital gland contains
spermatozoons, which are elongated cells with a long flagel-
lurn; they are bathed in a sero-fluid liquid.
b) the seminal vesicles: these organs are reservoirs of sperma-
tozoons and are placed near the prostate gland; they
"l*o
,*-
crete their own liquid but it does not contain any fertilizing
agents.
c) the prostate gland: this seeretes a liquid which gives the
sperm its creamy texture and characteristic odour.
d) the glands annexed to the urinary tract: cooper's or M6ry's
glands secrete a stringy liquid and Littr6's glands give off
mucous.
These are the origins of the
,mingled
liquids' which the eur'an
would appear to refer to.
There is, however, more to be said on this subjcct. when the
Qur'an talks of a fertilizing liquid composec of different com-
THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
asmorethefactthatifisemittedthrough theoutletofthe
urinarytract,usingthechannelsthatareemployedforpassing
urine.
d)'Mixtures'or'mingledliquids' (amJaj):"Verily,wefash­
ioned
manfromasmall quantityofmingledliquids" (sura
76,verse2)
Manycommentators,likeprofessorHamidullah,considerthese
liquidstobe
themaleandfemaleagents.Thesameviewwas
sharedbyoldercommentators,whocouldnothavehad
anyidea
ofthephysiologyoffertilization,especially itsbiologicalcondi­
tions
inthecaseofthewoman.They.tho.ught thattheword
simplymeant
theunificationofthetwoelements.
Modernauthorshowever,like
thecommentatorof theMunta­
lfabeditedby theSupremeCouncil forIslamicAffairs,Cairo,
havecorrected
thisviewandnotehere thatthe'smallquantity
ofsperm'ismadeup ofvariouscomponentparts.Thecommen­
tatorintheMUff,tafpabdoesnotgointodetail, butinmyopinion
itisaveryjudiciousobservation.
Whatarethecomponents partsofsperm?
Spermaticliquidisformedbyvarioussecretionswhichcome
fromthefollowing
glands:
a)thetesticles:thesecretion ofthemalegenitalglandcontains
spermatozoons,which
areelongatedcellswithalongflagel­
lum;they
arebathedinasero-fluidliquid.
b)theseminalvesicles:theseorgans arereservoirsofsperma­
tozoons
andareplacedneartheprostategland;theyalsose­
crete
theirownliquidbutitdoesnotcontainanyfertilizing
agents.
c)theprostategland:thissecretesaliquidwhichgivesthe
sperm
itscreamytextureandcharacteristicodour.
d)theglandsannexed totheurinarytract:Cooper'sorMery's
glandssecretea-stringyliquid
andLittre'sglandsgiveoff
mucous.
These
aretheoriginsofthe'mingledliquids'whichtheQur'an
would
appeartoreferto.
Thereis,however,moreto besaidonthissubject.Whenthe
Qur'antalksofafertilizingliquidcomposecofdifferentcom-

221. Ilulnan Reprodwtion 20S
ponents, it also informs us that man's progeny will be main-
tained by something which m&y be extracted from this liquid.
firis is the meaning of verse 8, sura 82:
" (God) msde his progeny from the quintessence of a despised
liquid."
The Arabic word, translated here by the rvord
'quintessetlce',
is ffitl^ It signifies
'something
which is extracted, the issue of
something else, the best psrt of a thing'. In whatever way it is
translated, it refers to a part of a whole.
Fertilization of the egg and reproduction are produced by a
cell that is very elongated: its dimensions are measured in ten-
thousandths of a millimetre. In normal conditions', only one
single cell among several tens of millions produced by a man will
actually penetrate the ovule; a large number of them are left
behind and never complete the journey which leads from the
vagina to the ovule, passing through the uterus and Fallopian
tubes. It is therefore an infinitesimally small part of the extract
from a liquid whose composition is highly complex which actu-
ally fulfills its function.
In consequence, it is difficult not to be struck by the agreement
between the text of the Glur'an and the scientific knowledge we
possess today of these phenomena.
3. Tru lmplantatlon of tllr- Eg,g,in the Femol,e Genital0tgatw'
Once the egg hes been fertilized in the Fallopian tube it de-
scends to lodge inside the uterus; this is called the
'implantation
of the eEd. The Qut'an names the lodging of the fertilized egg
wornb:
-sura 22, versc 6:
"We sBuEE whom We' will to rest in the womb for an appointed
term."
It is estimatcd that in one cubic centimetre of sperm there are ?5 million
rpermatozoons with, under normal conditionr, au ejaeulation of s€veral
eubic centimetres.
God is speaking
HufIUJRReproduction 203
ponents,italsoinformsus thatman'sprogenywill bemain­
tained
bysomethingwhichmay beextractedfromthisliquid.
Thisis
themeaningofverse8,sura32:
II(God)madehisprogenyfromthequintessence ofadespised
liquid."
TheArabicword,translated
herebytheword'quintessence',
isauliila.Itsignifies'somethingwhichisextracted,theissueof
somethingelse,
thebestpartofathing'.Inwhateverway itis
translated,
itreferstoapartofawhole.
Fertilization
oftheegg andreproductionareproducedbya
cellthatisveryelongated: itsdimensionsaremeasuredinten­
thousandths
ofamillimetre.Innormalconditions I ,onlyone
singlecellamongseveraltens
ofmillionsproducedbyamanwill
actuallypenetratetheovule;alargenumberofthem
areleft
behind
andnevercompletethejourneywhichleadsfromthe
vagina
totheovule,passing throughtheuterusandFallopian
tubes.
Itisthereforeaninfinitesimallysmall partoftheextract
fromaliquidwhosecompositionishighlycomplexwhichactu­
allyfulfills
itsfunction.
Inconsequence,itisdifficultnot tobestruckbytheagreement
betweenthe
textoftheQur'anandthescientificknowledgewe
possesstoday
ofthesephenomena.
3.TheImplantation oftheEggintheFemaleGenital Organs.
OncetheegghasbeenfertilizedintheFallopiantube itde­
scendstolodgeinside theuterus;thisiscalledthe'implantation
oftheeg~.TheQur'annamesthelodging ofthefertilizedegg
womb:
-sura22,verse5 :
"We
causewhomWe
2
willtorestinthewombfor anappointed
term."
1.Itisestimatedthatinonecubiccentimetreofspermthereare25million
spermatozoonswith,
undernormalconditions,s.nejaculationofseveral
cubiccentimetres.
2.Godisspeaking

222. 2O4 TIIE BIBI,E, THE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
The implantation of the egg in the uterus (womb) is the re-
sult of the development of villosities, veritable elongrtions of the
egg, which, Iike roots in the soil, draw nourishment from the
thickness of the uterus necessary to the egg's growilr. These for-
mations make the egg literally cling to the uterus. This is r dig-
covery of modern times.
The act of clinging is described five difrerent times in the
Qur'an. Firstly in verses I and 2 of sura gG:
"Bead, in the narne of thy Iord Who fashioned,
Who fashioned msn from something which clings."
'something
which clings' is the transration of the word
,ah,q.
rt
is the original meaning of the word. A meaning derived from it,
'blood
clot', often figures in translation; it is a mistake against
which one should guard : man has never passed through the-stsge
of being a
'blood
clot'. The same is true for another trsnEletion
of this tenn,
'adhesion'
which is equally inappropriate. The orig_
inal sense of
'something
which clings' corresponds exacfly to
today's firmly established reality.
This eoncept is recalled in four other verses which describe
successive transformations from the small guantity of Epenn
through to the end:
-sure 22, verse 5:
"We have fashioned you from somethins which clings."
-sura 28, verse 14:
"we have fashioned the small quantity (of sperm) into EomF
thing which clings.r'
--sura 40, verse 67:
"(God) fashioned you from a small quantity (of sperm), finom
something which clings."
-sur.a ?5, VerSe 37-38:
"was (man) not a small quantity of sperm which has been
poured out ? After that he was something which clings ; then God
fashioned him in due proportion."
The organ which harbours the pregnancy is qudified in the
Qur'an by a word which, as we have seen, is still used in Arabic
to signify the uterus. In some suras, it is called a
.lodging
firmly
204 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Theimplantationoftheeggintheuterus(womb)isthere­
sultofthedevelopmentofvillosities,veritableelongations ofthe
egg,which,likeroots inthesoil,drawnourishmentfromthe
thicknessoftheuterusnecessarytotheegg'sgrowth.Thesefor­
mationsmake
theeggliterallycling totheuterus.This is•dis­
cove1'Yofmoderntimes.
Theactofclingingisdescribedfivedifferenttimes inthe
Qur'an.Firstlyinverses1and2ofsura96:
"Read,in
thenameofthyLordWhofashioned,
Whofashioned
manfromsomethingwhichclings."
'Somethingwhichclings'
isthetranslationoftheword'alaq.It
istheoriginalmeaning oftheword.Ameaningderived fromit,
'bloodclot',oftenfigures
intranslation;itisamistake against
which'oneshould guard:manhasneverpassed throughthestage
ofbeinga'bloodclot'. Thesameis truef~ranothertranslation
ofthisterm,'adhesion'whichisequallyinappropriate. Theorig­
inalsense of'somethingwhichclings'correspondsexactly to
today'sfirmlyestablishedreality.
Thisconceptisrecalled infourotherverseswhichdescribe
successive
transformationsfromthesmallquantityofspenn
throughtotheend:
-sura22,verse5 :
"Wehavefashionedyoufrom ...somethingwhichclings."
-sura23,verse14:
"Wehavefashionedthesmallquantity(ofsperm)intosome­
thingwhichclings. t'
-sura40,verse67:
"(God)fashionedyoufromasmall quantity(ofsperm),from
somethingwhichclings."
-sura75,verse37-38:
"Was(man)notasmallquantityofspermwhichhasbeen
poured
out?Afterthathewassomethingwhichclings; thenGod
fashioned
himindueproportion."
The
organwhichharboursthepregnancyisqualifiedinthe
Qur'anbyawordwhich, aswehaveseen,isstillused inArabic
tosignify
theuterus.Insomesuras, itiscalleda'lodging firmly

223. Hllzwnneprcfucful 2OE
estrblished'. (sure 23, verse 13, quotcd above and sura ??, verse
21)'.
1, Eoffionof tlre Embryoksiire fllcUtzlnlr,.
Tlre Qur'anic description of certain stages in the development
of the mbryo corresponds exsctly to whgt we today know about
it, and the Qur'an does not eontain a single statement thet is open
to criticism from modern science.
After
'the
thing which clings' (an expression s'hich is well-
founded, ts we have seen) the Qur'sn informs us thst the embryo
pass€s through the stage of
'chewed
flesh', then osssous tissue
appeam end is clad in flesh (defined by a difrerent word finm the
prueding which signifies
'intact
flesh').
-+ure L9, verse 14:
"Tl'G fashioned the thing which clings'into a chewed ltmrp of
flesh end lVe fashioned the chewed flesh into bones and We
clothed the bones with intaet flesh.'
'Clrewed
flesh' is the translation of the wor d mu$Ao"
'intact
fleh' is bfun. This distinction needs to be stressed. The embryo
is initielly-a emall masg. At a certein stage in its development' it
looks to the naked eye like chewed flesh. The bone structurt de-
velopc inside this mass in what is called the mesenchyma. The
1. fn enother Yerse (sure 6, Yerse 98) a place of rojourn is mention€d' It
lr crpremed in a term very similar to thi preceding one and would alco
sGcn- to signify the maternal uterus. Perronally, r beffieve thfu to be
thc ncrning of the verse, but a detailed interpretation would involve
mucb len6[iet explanation which is beyond the seope of thTr boolL
Another verse which requires extremely delicgto intcrpretetion lr tfte
following:
---tEtt 80, veree 6:
..(H)
feshions you inside the bodies of your mothers, lormetlon
rftar forrnetion, in three (veils of) darkne*." (4tl,lumdtl
lfodcrn intrepreters of the Qur'an ree in this verle the three enrto-
mtcrt lryctr thlt protcet the infrnt during gertation: thc rbdoninel
wrll, thr uterur itrelf, end thc nrrroundinp of thc foctur (plrccatr'
embr?onlc mcmbnner, rmniotic fuid).
I rrn obltsld to quotc thir verrc lor thc rr|re of conplctenere; the
terpretrtion given herc docr not rccn to nc to bc dilputeble from an
anitomicsl point of vierr but ir thir vhet the tert of the Qur'an really
means?
205
established'·(sura28,verse18,quotedabove andsura77,verse
21)1.
4.EooIudonof,heEmbryoinsidetheUteru.·
TheQur'anicdescription ofcertainstages inthedevelopment
oftheembryocorrespondsexactly towhatwetodayknowabout
it,
andtheQur'andoesnotcontainasingle statementthatisopen
tocriticismtrommodernscience.
After'thethingwhichclings' (anexpressionwhichiswell­
founded,
aswehaveseen) theQur'aninformsus thattheembryo
passesthroughthestageof'chewedflesh', thenosseoustissue
appearsandiscladinflesh(definedbyadifferentword fromthe
precedingwhichsignifies 'intactflesh').
--aura28,verse14:
"Wefashionedthethingwhichclings-intoachewedlump of
fleshandWefashionedthechewedfleshintobones andWe
clothed
theboneswithintactflesh."
'Chewedflesh'
isthetranslationof thewordmuq,ga,;'intact
flesh'islGfm.Thisdistinctionneeds tobestressed.Theembryo
isinitiallyasmallmass.
Atacertainstage initsdevelopment,it
lookstothenakedeyelikechewedflesh.Thebone structurede­
velopsinside
thismassinwhatiscalledthemesenchyma. The
1.Inanotherverse(sura6,verse98)aplace ofsojoumismentioned.It
i.expressedinatermverysimilartotheprecedingone andwouldalso
seemtosignifythematemaluterus.Personally,Ibelieve thistobe
themeaningoftheverse,butadetailedinterpretationwouldinvolve
muehlengthierexplanationwhichisbeyondthescopeofth'isbook.
Anotherversewhichrequiresextremelydelicate interpretationisthe
following:
~ra89,verse6:
"(God)fashionsyouinside thebodiesofyourmothers,formation
afterformation,inthree(veilsof)darkness."(plunuit)
ModernintrepretersoftheQur'anseeinthisversethethreeanato­
mieallayersthatproteettheinfantduringgestation:theabdominal
wall,theuterulitself,andthesurroundingsofthefoetua(plaeenta,
embryoniemembranes,amniotiefluid).
I
amoblipdtoquotethisverseforthesakeofeompleteness;the
terpretationgivenheredoesnotHemtometobedisputablefroman
anatomicalpointofviewbutisthiswhatthetextoftheQur'anreally
means?

224. 206 TIIE BIBr.n, THE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
bones that are formed ale covered in muscle; the word Inhm ap-
plies to them.
It is known how certain parts appear to be eompletely out of
proportion during embryonic development with rvhat is later to
beeome the individual, while others remain in proportion.
Tlris is surely the meaning of the word mttftaltaq which signi-
fies
'shaped
in ploportion' as used in verse E, sura zz to describe
this phenomenon.
"w'e fashioned . . . into something which clings ., . into a lump
of flesh in proportion and out of proportion."
The Qur"an also describes the appearance of the senses and the
viscerae:
-sura 32, verse g:
"(God) appointecl for you thesense of hearing, sight and the
viscet'ae."
It lefer.s tothe folmation of the sexual organs:
-sula 53, verses 4E-46:
" (God) fashioned the trvo of a pair, the male and the female,
ft'om a small quantity (of sperm) when it is poured out."
The formation of the sexuar organs is described in two sura
of the Qur.'an:
-sura 35, verse 11 :
"God created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then He
made you pairs (the male and female)."
-sura 75, verse 89:
"And, (God) made of him a pair, the male and female."
As has already been noted, alt statements in the eur'an must
be compared with today's firmly established concepts: the ag:ree_
ment between them is very clear. It is however very important
to compare them with the general beliefs on this subjeet that
were held at the time of the eur'anic Revelation in order to
realize just how far people were in those days from having
views on these problems similar to those expressed here in the
Qur'an. There can be no doubt that they would have been unable
to interpret the Revelation in the way we can today because we
are helped by the data modern knowledge affords us. It was, in
fact, only during the Nineteenth century that people had a slight-
ly clearer view of this question.
206 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
bonesthatarefOI'medarecoveredinmuscle; theword14hmap­
pliestothem.
Itisknownhow certainpartsappeartobecompletely outof
proportionduringembryonicdevelopmentwith
whatislaterto
become
theindividual,while othersremaininproportion.
Thisissurelythemeaning
ofthewordmuliallaqwhichsigni­
fies'shapedinproportion'
asusedinverse 5,sura22todescribe
thisphenomenon.
"Wefashioned
...intosomethingwhichclings ...intoalump
offleshinproportionandout ofproportion."
The
Qur'analsodescribesthe appearance ofthesensesandthe
viscerae:
-sura32,verse9:
"(God)appointedforyouthesenseofhearing, sightandthe
viscerae."
Itreferstotheformationofthesexualorgans:
-sura53,verses45-46:
"(God)fashionedthetwoofa
pair,themaleand thefemale,
fromasmall
quantity(ofsperm)when itispouredout."
Theformationofthesexual
organsisdescribedintwo sura
oftheQur'an:
-sura35,verse11:
"Godcreatedyoufromdust,thenfromasperm-drop,then
He
madeyou pairs(themaleandfemale)."
-sura75,verse39:
"And,(God)madeofhimapair,themale
andfemale."
As
hasalreadybeennoted,allstatementsinthe Qur'anmust
becomparedwithtoday'sfirmlyestablishedconcepts:theagree­
mentbetweenthemisveryclear. Itishoweververy important
tocomparethemwiththegeneralbeliefsonthissubject that
wereheld atthetimeoftheQur'anicRevelationin orderto
realizejusthowfarpeoplewere inthosedaysfromhaving
viewsontheseproblemssimilartothoseexpressed
hereinthe
Qur'an.Therecanbe nodoubtthattheywouldhavebeenunable
to
interprettheRevelationin thewaywecantodaybecausewe
arehelpedby thedatamodernknowledgeaffordsus. Itwas,in
fact,only
duringtheNineteenthcenturythatpeoplehadaslight­
lyclearerview
ofthisquestion.

225. Human Reproduction 207
Throughout the Middle Ages, the most diversified doetrines
originated in unfounded myths and speculations: they persisted
for several centuries after this period. The most fundamental
stage in the history of embryology was Harvey's statement
(1651) that "all life initially comes from an eg:g". At this time
however, when nascent science had nevertheless benefited greatly
(for the subject in hand) from the invention of the microscope'
people were still talking about the respective roles of the egg
and the spermatozoon. Buffon, the great naturalist, was one of
those in favor of the egg theory, but Bonnet supported the theory
of the seeds being
'packed
together': the ovaries of Eve, the
mother of the human race, were supposed to have contained the
seeds of all human beings, packed together one inside the other.
This hypothesis came into favor in the Eighteenth century.
More than a thousand years before our time, at a period when
whimsical doctrines still prevailed, men had a knowledge of the
Qur'an. The statements it contains express in simple terms truths
of primordial importance which man has taken centuries to
discover.
THE QUR'AN AND SEX EDUCATION.
Our epoch believes that it has made manifold discoveries in all
possible fields. It is thousht that great innovations have been
made in the field of sex education, and the knowledge of the facts
of life which has been opened up to young people is regarded as
an aehievement of the modern world. Previous centuries were
noted for their deliberate obscurity on this point and many people
say that religion-without stating which religion-is the cause
of it.
The information set out above is proof however that fourteen
centuries.ago theoretical questions (as it were) on human repro-
duction were brought to man's attention. This was done as far as
was possible, taking into account the fact that the anatomical
and physiological data needed for further explanations were
lacking. One should also remember that, to be understood, it was
necessary to use simple langu.age suited to the level of compre-
hension of those who listened to the Preaching.
HumanReproduction 207
ThroughouttheMiddleAges, themostdiversifieddoctrines
originatedinunfoundedmythsandspeculations:theypersisted
forseveralcenturiesafterthisperiod.Themostfundamental
stageinthehistoryofembryologywasHarvey'sstatement
(1651)that"alllifeinitiallycomes fromanegg".Atthistime
however,when nascentsciencehadneverthelessbenefited greatly
(forthesubjectinhand)fromtheinventionofthemicroscope,
people
werestilltalkingabouttherespectiveroles oftheegg
andthespermatozoon.Butron, thegreatnaturalist,wasoneof
thoseinfavoroftheeggtheory,butBonnetsupportedthetheory
oftheseedsbeing'packedtogether':theovariesofEve,the
motherofthehumanrace,weresupposedtohavecontainedthe
seedsofallhumanbeings,packed togetheroneinsidetheother.
Thishypothesiscame intofavorintheEighteenthcentury.
More
thanathousandyearsbeforeourtime,ataperiodwhen
whimsicaldoctrinesstillprevailed,men
hadaknowledgeofthe
Qur'an.Thestatementsitcontainsexpressinsimpletermstruths
ofprimordialimportancewhichmanhastakencenturiesto
discover.
THEQUR'ANANDSEXEDUCATION.
Ourepoch believesthatithasmademanifolddiscoveries inall
possiblefields.
Itisthoughtthatgreatinnovationshavebeen
madeinthefieldofsexeducation,andtheknowledgeofthefacts
oflifewhichhasbeenopened uptoyoungpeopleis regardedas
anachievementofthemodernworld.Previouscenturieswere
notedfortheirdeliberateobscurityon thispointandmanypeople
saythatreligion-withoutstatingwhichreligion-isthecause
ofit.
Theinformationsetoutaboveis proofhoweverthatfourteen
centuries·agotheoreticalquestions (asitwere)onhumanrepro­
ductionwerebroughttoman'sattention.Thiswasdoneasfaras
waspossible,takingintoaccountthefactthattheanatomical
andphysiologicaldataneededforfurtherexplanationswere
lacking.Oneshouldalso rememberthat,tobeunderstood,itwas
necessarytousesimple languagesuitedtothelevelofcompre­
hension
ofthosewholistened tothePreaching.

226. gO8
THE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
Practical considerations have not been silently ignored. There
are many details in the Qur'an on the practical side of life in
general, and the way man should behave in the many situations
of his existence. His sex life is no exeeption.
Two verses in the Qur'an deal with sexual relations them-
selves. They are described in terms which unite the need for
precision with that of decency. When translations and explana-
tory commentaries are consulted however, one is struck by the
divergences between them. I have pondered for a long time on
the translation of such verses, and am indebted to Doctor A. K.
Giraud, Former Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Beirut, for
the following:
-sura 86, verse 6 and ?:
" (Man) was fashioned from a liquid poured out. It issued (as
a result) of the conjunction of the sexual area of the man and
the sexual area of the woman."
The sexual area of the man is indicated in the text of the
Qur'an by the world ser/b (singular). The sexual areas of the
woman are designated in the Qur'an by the word tard,,ib
(plural).
This is the translation which appears to be most satisfactory.
It is different frorn the one that is often given hy English and
French translators, i.e. "(Man) has been created by a liquid
poured out which issues from between the vertebral column and
the bones of the breast." This would seem more to be an inter-
pretation than a translation. It is hardly comprehensible.
The behavior of a man in his intimate relationships with his
wife is stated explicitly.
There is the order concerning the menstruation period con-
tained in verses 222 and ZZB, sura Z; God gives the following
command to the Prophet:
-sura 2, verses 222 and 223:
"They (the Believers) question thee concerning menstruation.
Say: This is an evil. Keep away from women during menstrua-
tion and do not approach them until they are clean. when they
have purified themselves, go to them, as God ordered it to you.
"verily, God loves the repentants and loves those who purified
themselves.
208 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Practicalconsiderationshavenotbeensilentlyignored. There
aremanydetailsintheQur'anonthepracticalside oflifein
general,andthewaymanshouldbehave inthemanysituations
ofhisexistence.Hissexlifeisnoexception.
Twoverses
intheQur'andealwithsexualrelationsthem­
selves.
Theyaredescribedintermswhichunitetheneedfor
precisionwiththatofdecency.Whentranslationsandexplana­
torycommentariesareconsultedhowever,oneis struckbythe
divergencesbetweenthem.I haveponderedforalongtimeon
thetranslationofsuchverses, andamindebtedtoDoctorA.K.
Giraud,
FormerProfessorattheFacultyofMedicine,Beirut,for
thefollowing:
-sura86,verse6and7 :
"(Man)wasfashionedfromaliquidpouredout. Itissued(as
aresult)oftheconjunctionofthesexualareaofthemanand
thesexualareaofthewoman."
Thesexualareaofthemanisindicatedinthetextofthe
Qur'anbytheworld~ulb(singular).Thesexualareasofthe
womanaredesignatedintheQur'anbythewordtaril'ib
(plural).
Thisisthetranslationwhichappearstobemostsatisfactory.
ItisdifferentfromtheonethatisoftengivenbyEnglishand
Frenchtranslators,Le."(Man)hasbeencreatedbyaliquid
pouredoutwhichissues frombetweenthevertebralcolumnand
thebonesofthebreast."Thiswouldseem moretobeaninter­
pretationthanatranslation.Itishardlycomprehensible.
Thebehaviorofamaninhisintimaterelationshipswithhis
wifeisstatedexplicitly.
Thereistheorderconcerningthemenstruationperiodcon­
tainedinverses222and223,sura2;Godgives thefollowing
command
totheProphet:
-sura2,verses222 and223 :
"They(theBelievers)question theeconcerningmenstruation.
Say:Thisisanevil.Keep awayfromwomenduringmenstrua­
tionanddonotapproachthemuntiltheyareclean.When they
havepurifiedthemselves,gotothem, asGodorderedittoyou.
"Verily,Godloves
therepentantsandlovesthosewhopurified
themselves.

227. HwruanReproiluction 209
"Your wives are a tilth. Go to your tilth as you will. Do (some
good act) for your souls beforehand."
The beginning of this passage is very clear in meaning: it
formally forbids a man to have sexual contact with a woman who
has her period. The second part describes the process of tilling
which the sower performs before sowing the seed which is to
germinate and produce a new plant. Through this image there-
fore, stress is indirectly laicl on the importance of bearing in
mind the final purpose of sexual contact, i.e. reproduction. The
translation of the final phrase is by R. Blach0re: it contains an
orcler which seems to refer to the preliminalies before sexual
contact.
The orders given here are of a very general kind. The prob-
lem of contraception has been raised with regard to these verses:
neither here, nor anywhere else, is reference made to this subject.
Nor is provoked ahortion referred to. The numerous passages
quoted above on the successive transformations of the embryo
make it quite clear, however, that man is considered to be con-
stituted as of the stage described by the existence of
'something
which clings'. This being so, the absolute respect of the indi-
vidual human being, which is referred to so often in the Qur'an,
brings with it a total condemnation of provoked abortion. This
attitude is today shared by all monotheistic religions.
Sexual relations are permitted at night during the Fast in the
month of Ramadan. The verse concerning Ramadan is as follows:
-Sura 2, verse 187:
"Permitted to you, on the nisht of the fast, is to break chastity
with your wives. They are a garment for you and you are a gar-
ment for them. So hold intercourse with them and seek what God
has ordained for you."
In contrast to this, no exception to the rule is made for pil-
grims in Makka during the celebration days of the Pilgrimage.
-sura 2, verse 197:
"For whom undertakes (the duty of) the Pilgrimage in its
time, no wooing and no license."
This prohibition is formal, as is the fact that other activities
are forbidden, e.g. hunting, fighting, etc.
Menstruation is again mentioned in the Qur'an in connection
with divorce. The Book contains the following verse:
HumanReproduction 209
"Yourwivesareatilth.Gotoyourtilthasyouwill.Do(some
good
act)foryoursoulsbeforehand."
Thebeginningofthispassageisveryclearinmeaning:it
formallyforbidsa mantohavesexualcontact withawomanwho
hasherperiod.Thesecondpartdescribestheprocessoftilling
whichthesowerperformsbeforesowing theseedwhichis to
germinateandproduceanewplant. Throughthisimagethere­
fore,stressisindirectlylaidon theimportanceofbearingin
mindthefinalpurposeofsexualcontact, Le.reproduction.The
translationofthefinalphraseisbyR.Blachere:itcontainsan
orderwhichseemsto refertothepreliminariesbeforesexual
contact.
Theordersgivenhereareofaverygeneralkind.Theprob­
lem
ofcontraceptionhasbeenraised withregardtotheseverses:
neitherhere,noranywhereelse,isreference madetothissubject.
Norisprovokedabortionreferredto.Thenumerouspassages
quotedaboveon thesuccessivetransformationsoftheembryo
makeitquiteclear,however, thatmanisconsideredtobecon­
stitutedasofthestagedescribedby theexistenceof'something
whichclings'. Thisbeingso, theabsoluterespect oftheindi­
vidual
humanbeing,whichis referredtosooftenintheQur'an,
bringswithitatotalcondemnationofprovokedabortion. This
attitudeistodaysharedbyallmonotheisticreligions.
Sexualrelations
arepermittedatnightduringtheFastinthe
monthofRamadan.Theverseconcerning Ramadanisasfollows:
-sura2,verse187:
"Permittedtoyou,on thenightofthefast,istobreakchastity
withyourwives.They areagarmentforyouandyouareagar­
mentforthem.Sohold intercoursewiththemandseekwhatGod
hasordainedforyou."
Incontrasttothis,noexceptionto theruleismade forpil­
grimsinMakkaduringthecelebrationdays ofthePilgrimage.
-sura2,verse197:
"Forwhomundertakes(thedutyof)thePilgrimageinits
time,nowooing andnolicense."
Thisprohibitionisformal, asisthefactthatotheractivities
areforbidden,e.g. hunting,fighting,etc.
MenstruationisagainmentionedintheQur'aninconnection
withdivorce.TheBookcontainsthefollowingverse:

228. 210 THE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
-sura 65, verse 4:
"For your wives who despair of menstruation, if you doubt
about them, their period of waiting will be three months. For
those who never have their monthly periods and those who are
pregnant their period will be until they lay down their burden."
The waiting period referred to here is the time between the
announcement of the divoree and the time it comes into effect.
Those women of whom it is said
'they
despair of menstruation'
have reached the menopause. A precautionary period of three
months is envisaged for them. once this period is eompleted,
divorced women who have reached the menopause may remarry.
For those who have not yet menstruated, the pregnancy period
has to be awaited. For pregnant women, divorce only comes into
effect once the child is born.
All these laws are in perfect agreement with physiological
data. one can, furthermore, find in the Qur'an the same judicious
legal provision in the texts dealing with widowhood.
Thus, the theoretical statements dealing with reproduetion,
and the practical instructions on the sex life of couples, do not
contradict and cannot be placed in opposition to the data we have
from modern knowledg:e, nor with anything that ean be logically
derived from it.
210 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
-sura65,verse4 :
"Foryourwiveswho despairofmenstruation,ifyoudoubt
aboutthem,theirperiodofwaitingwillbe threemonths.For
thosewho neverhavetheirmonthlyperiods andthosewho are
pregnanttheirperiodwillbeuntil theylaydowntheirburden."
Thewaitingperiodreferredtohereisthetimebetweenthe
announcementofthedivorceandthetimeitcomesintoeffect.
Thosewomen
ofwhomitissaid'theydespairofmenstruation'
havereached themenopause.A precautionaryperiodofthree
monthsisenvisagedforthem.Once thisperiodiscompleted,
divorcedwomenwhohavereached
themenopausemayremarry.
Forthosewhohave notyetmenstruated,thepregnancyperiod
hastobeawaited. Forpregnantwomen,divorceonlycomes into
effectonce thechildisborn.
Alltheselaws areinperfectagreementwithphysiological
data.Onecan,
furthermore,findintheQur'anthesamejudicious
legalprovisionin
thetextsdealingwithwidowhood.
Thus,
thetheoreticalstatementsdealingwithreproduction,
andthepracticalinstructionsonthesexlifeofcouples,do not
contradictandcannotbeplacedinoppositionto thedatawehave
frommodernknowledge, norwithanythingthatcanbelogically
derived
fromit.

229. I
Qur'anic and
Bihlical
Narratiorrs
General Outlines
A large number of subjects dealt with in the Bible are also
found itt tft* Qur'an. Firstly, there are narrations referring to
the Prophets; Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Elias, Jonah, Job and
Moses; [tt. Kings of Israel; Saul, David, Solomon-to name just
some of the *"it narrations they share in common. There then
follow more specific accounts of great events in the course of
which the supernatural has intervened, e.g. the Creation of the
Earth and Heavens, the Creation of Man, the Flood, the Exodus'
Finally, there is all that has to do with Jesus and His mother
Mary as far as it concerns the New Testament'
What reflections do the subiects dealt with in the two Scrip-
tures provoke when viewed in the lisht of our modern knowl-
edge of them from extra-scriptural sources?
P arallnl : Qur' an I G osp el and M o der n l(noul'e dge'
With regard to the parallel of Qur'an/Gospels,
one must first
note that none of the subjects referred to in the Gospels, which
gll
I
Qu..'an.1:and
l3.blil:aI
~a....ation~
GEnE..alOullinEs
Alargenumberofsubjectsdealtwithin theBiblearealso
found
intheQur'an.Firstly,therearenarrationsreferringto
theProphets;Noah,Abraham,Joseph,Elias,Jonah,Job and
Moses;theKingsof Israel;Saul,David, Solomon-tonamejust
someofthemainnarrationstheyshareincommon.There then
followmorespecificaccounts ofgreateventsinthecourseof
whichthesupernaturalhasintervened,e.g. theCreationof the
EarthandHeavens,theCreationofMan,theFlood,theExodus.
Finally,
thereisallthathastodowithJesusandHismother
MaryasfarasitconcernstheNewTestament.
Whatreflectionsdo thesubjectsdealtwith inthetwoScrip­
turesprovokewhenviewedinthe lightofourmodernknowl­
edge
ofthemfromextra-Scripturalsources?
Parallel:Qur'an/GospelandModernKnowledge.
WithregardtotheparallelofQur'an/Gospels,one mustfirst
note
thatnoneofthesubjectsreferredtointheGospels,which
211

230. 2I2 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
were criticized from a seientific point of view (see par.t
Two of
this book), is quoted in the eur'an.
Jesus is refer.ed to many times in the eur'an, e.g. Mary's
annunciation of the nativity to his father, the annunciation of the
miraculous nativity to Mary, Jesus's stature as a
prophet
of the
highest older, His lole as a Messiah, the Revelation He directs
to Man which confirms and modifies the Torah, His preachings,
IIis disciples and apostles, the miracles, His Ascen*io, to God,
His role in the Last Judgment, etc.
suras 3 and 19 of the eur'an (the second of which bears
Maly's name) de'ote long passages to Jesus's family. They de-
scribe His mother Mary's nativity, her youth and the annuncia-
tion of her miraculous motherhood. Jesus is always called
,son
of Mary'. His ancestry is exclusively given with regard to His
mother's side, which is quite logical since Jesus had no biological
father. Flere the Qur'an differs from Matthew's and Luke's Gos-
pels: as we have already seen, they give the paternal genealogies
of Jesus which are, moreover, different from each other.
In the Qur'an, Jesus is placed according to His maternal gene-
alogy in the line of Noah, Abraham, and Mary's father ( Imran
in the Qur'an):
-sura 3, verses BB and 84:
"God chose Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham and the fam_
ily of imrdn above all His creatures, as descendants one from an-
other."
so Jesus is descended from Noah and Abraham on His mother
Mary's side, and from her father imrdn. The errors made in the
naming of the
'ancestors
of Jesus' found in the Gospels are not
present in the Qur'an, nor are the impossibilities in ihe genealo-
gies contained in the old Testament of Abraham's ancestry, both
of whieh were examined in the first and second parts or tni*
book.
once again, this fact must be noted if one is to be objective,
and yet again its great importance appears very clearly in the
face of the unfounded statements which are made claiming that
Muhammad, the author of the eur'an, largely copied the
-niute.
one wonders in that case who or what reason compelled him to
avoid copying the passages the Bible contains on Jesus's ances-
try, and to insert at this point in the eur'an the corrections that
212 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
werecriticizedfromascientificpointofview(see PartTwoof
thisbook),isquotedintheQur'an.
JesusisreferredtomanytimesintheQur'an,e.g.Mary's
annunciationofthenativitytohisfather,theannunciationofthe
miraculousnativitytoMary,Jesus~sstatureasaProphetofthe
highestorder,HisroleasaMessiah,theRevelationHedirects
toManwhichconfirms andmodifiestheTorah,Hispreachings,
Hisdisciplesandapostles,themiracles,HisAscensiontoGod,
HisroleintheLastJudgment,etc.
Suras3and19oftheQur'an(thesecondofwhichbears
Mary'sname)devotelong passagestoJesus'sfamily.Theyde­
scribeHismotherMary'snativity,heryouthandtheannuncia­
tionofhermiraculousmotherhood.Jesusisalwayscalled'Son
ofMary'.HisancestryisexclusivelygivenwithregardtoHis
mother'sside,whichisquitelogicalsinceJesushadnobiological
father.HeretheQur'andiffersfromMatthew'sandLuke'sGos­
pels:aswehavealreadyseen,theygivethepaternalgenealogies
ofJesuswhichare,moreover,differentfromeachother.
IntheQur'an,JesusisplacedaccordingtoHismaternalgene­
alogyinthelineofNoah,Abraham,andMary'sfather(Imran
intheQur'an):
-sura3,verses33and34:
"GodchoseAdam,Noah,thefamilyofAbrahamandthefam­
ilyofimranaboveall Hiscreatures,asdescendantsonefroman­
other."
SoJesusisdescendedfromNoahandAbrahamonHismother
Mary'sside,andfromherfatherImnin.Theerrorsmadeinthe
namingofthe'ancestorsofJesus'foundintheGospelsarenot
presentintheQur'an,noraretheimpossibilitiesinthegenealo­
giescontainedintheOldTestamentofAbraham'sancestry,both
ofwhichwereexaminedinthefirstandsecondpartsofthis
book.
Once
again,thisfactmustbenotedifoneistobeobjective,
andyetagainitsgreatimpol·tanceappearsveryclearlyinthe
faceoftheunfoundedstatementswhicharemadeclaimingthat
Muhammad,theauthoroftheQur'an,largelycopiedtheBible.
Onewondersinthatcasewho orwhatreasoncompelledhimto
avoidcopyingthepassagestheBiblecontainsonJesus'sances­
try,andtoinsertatthispointintheQur'anthecorrectionsthat

231. Quf anic ard Biblical N anatiottn
put his text above any criticism from modern knowledge. The
bospels and Old Testament texts are quite the opposite; from this
point of view they are totally unaceeptable.
Parullel: Qur'an I OliI Tectament and Moilpm Knoulcilge,
In the case of the old Testament, certain aspects of this paral-
Iel have already been dealt with. The Creation of the world, for
example, was the subjeet of a critical study made in the Old
Testament section of this book. The same subject was examined
with regard to the Qur'anic Revelation. comparisons were made
and there is no need to cover this ground again'
It seems that historical knowledge is too vagtre and archaeo-
logical data too scarce for parallels to be established in the light
of modern knowledge on problems concerning the Kings of
fsrael, who form the subject of narrations in both the Qur'an and
the Bible.
Whether or not one ean taekle the problem of the Prophets in
the light of modern data depends on the extent to which the
events described have left traces which may or may not have
come down to us.
There are however two subjects dealt with in both the Qur'an
and the Bible which should command our attention and which
need to be examined in the light of modern knowledge. They are
as follows:
-the Flood,
-the Exodus.
-The first because it has not left traces in the history of
civilization which support the Biblical narration, whereas mod-
ern data do not permit us to criticize the narration contained in
the Qur'an.
-The second because the Biblical and Qur'anie narrations evi-
dently complement eaeh other in their broad outlines, and modern
data seem to provide both of them with remarkable historical
support.
gl3
Qu;anicandBiblicalNarrationB 213
puthistextaboveanycriticismfrommodernknowledge.The
Gospels
andOldTestamenttexts arequitetheopposite;fromthis
pointofviewthey
aretotallyunacceptable.
Parallel:Qur'an/OldTestamentand ModemKnowledge.
InthecaseoftheOldTestament,certainaspectsofthisparal­
lelhavealreadybeendealtwith. TheCreationof theworld,for
example,wasthesubjectofacriticalstudymadeintheOld
Testamentsectionofthisbook.Thesame subjectwasexamined
withregardtotheQur'anicRevelation.Comparisonsweremade
andthereisnoneedtocover thisgroundagain.
Itseemsthathistoricalknowledgeistoovague andarchaeo­
logical
datatooscarceforparallelstobeestablished inthelight
ofmodernknowledgeonproblemsconcerning theKingsof
Israel,whoform thesubjectof narrationsinboththeQur'anand
theBible.
Whetherornotonecantackle theproblemof theProphetsin
thelightofmoderndatadependson theextenttowhichthe
eventsdescribedhavelefttra.ceswhich mayormaynothave
comedowntous.
Therearehowevertwosubjectsdealt withinboththeQur'an
andtheBiblewhichshouldcommand ourattentionandwhich
needtobeexaminedin
thelightofmodernknowledge.They are
asfollows:
-theFlood,
-theExodus.
-Thefirstbecause ithasnotlefttracesin thehistoryof
civilizationwhich
supporttheBiblicalnarration,whereasmod­
erndatadonotpermitustocriticizethenarrationcontainedin
theQur'an.
-Thesecondbecause theBiblicalandQur'anicnarrationsevi­
dentlycomplementeach
otherintheirbroadoutlines, andmodern
dataseemtoprovidebothofthem withremarkablehistorical
support.

232. ll
The flood
The Biblbal Natration of the Flood and the cfiticiutm
Leoeled at It - A Remind,et
The examination of the Old Testament description of the Flood
in the first part of this book led to the follo*irg observations:
There is not just one description of the Flood, uut two, written
at different tirnes;
-the Yahvist version which dates from the Ninth century B.c.
-the
sacerdotal version dating from the sixth century 8.c., so
called because it was the work of priests of the time.
These two narrations are not juxtaposed,
but interwoven so
that part of one is fitted inbetween parts of the other, i.e. para-
graphs from one source arternate with passage from the other.
The commentary to the translation of Genesis by Father de Vaux,
a professor at the Biblieal school of Jerusalem, .ho** very clearly
how the paragraphs are distributed between the two sources. The
narration begins and ends with a
yahvist
passage. There are
ten Yahvist paragraphs altogether and between each one a Sacer-
dotal passage has been inserted (there are a total of nine Saeer-
dotal paragraphs). This mosaic of texts is only coherent when
read from a point of view which takes the succession of episodes
into account, since there are blatant contradictions between the
two sources. Father de vaux describes them as
..two
accounts of
the Flood, in which the cataclysm is caused by different agents
and lasts different lengths of time, and where Noah rmeives into
the Ark a different number of animals."
when seen in the light of modern knowledge, the Biblical de-
scription of the Flood as a whore is unacceptable for the follow-
ing reasons:
2t4
II
ThEFlood
TheBiblicalNarration oftheFloodandtheCriticism
Leveledat
It-ARemindeT.
TheexaminationoftheOldTestamentdescriptionoftheFlood
inthefirstpartofthisbook ledto thefollowingobservations:
ThereisnotjustonedescriptionoftheFlood,buttwo,written
atdifferenttimes;
-theYahvistversionwhichdates fromtheNinthcenturyB.C.
-theSacerdotalversion datingfromtheSixthcenturyB.C.,so
calledbecause
itwastheworkofpriestsofthetime.
Thesetwo
narrationsarenotjuxtaposed,butinterwovenso
thatpartofoneisfittedinbetween partsoftheother,Le.para­
graphsfromonesourcealternatewithpassagefromtheother.
Thecommentaryto thetranslationofGenesisby FatherdeVaux,
aprofessor
attheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalem,showsveryclearly
how
theparagraphsaredistributedbetweenthetwosources. The
narrationbeginsandendswithaYahvistpassage.Thereare
tenYahvistparagraphsaltogetherandbetweeneachoneaSacer­
dotal
passagehasbeeninserted(thereareatotalofnineSacer­
dotalparagraphs).Thismosaicoftextsisonlycoherentwhen
readfroma
pointofviewwhichtakes thesuccessionofepisodes
intoaccount,since
thereareblatantcontradictionsbetween the
twosources.FatherdeVauxdescribes themas"twoaccountsof
theFlood,inwhich thecataclysmiscausedbydifferent
agents
andlastsdifferentlengths oftime,andwhereNoahreceives into
theArkadifferentnumberofanimals."
Whenseen
inthelightofmodernknowledge, theBiblicalde­
scription
oftheFloodasawholeisunacceptable forthefollow­
ingreasons:
214

233. The Flood 215
a) The Old Testament ascribes to it the character of a universal
cataclysm.
b) Whereas the paragraphs from the Yahvist text do not date
the Flood, the Sacerdotal text situates it at a point in time
where a cataclysm of this kind could not have occurred.
The following are arguments supporting this opinion:
The Sacerdotal narration states quite precisely that the Flood
took place when Noah was 600 years old. According to the genea-
logies in ehapter 5 of Genesis (also taken from the Sacerdotal
text and quoted in the first part of this book), rve know that Noah
is said to have been born 1,056 years after Adam. Consequently,
the Flood would have taken place 1,655 years after the creation
of Adam. The genealogical table of Abraham moreover, taken
from the same text and given in Genesis (11, 10-32), allows us
to estimate that Abraham was born 292 years after the Flood. As
we know that (according to the Bible) Abraham was alive in
roughly 1850 8.C., the Flood would therefore be situated in the
Twenty-first or Twenty-second century B.C. This ealculation is
in strict keeping rvith the information in old editions of the
Bible which figures prominently at the head of the Biblical text.
This was at a time when the lack of human knowledge on the
subject was such that the chronologieal data contained in the
Bible were accepted without question by its readers-for want
of any arguments to the contrary.l
How is it possible to coneeive today of a universal cataclysm
in the Twenty-first or Twenty-second century B.C. which de-
stroyed life on al| the earth's surface (except for the people and
animals in the Ark) ? By this time, civilizations had flourished in
several parts of the globe, and their vestiges have now come
down to posterity. In Egypt at this time, for example, the Inter-
mediate Period follou'ed the end of the OId Kingdom and pre-
ceded the beginning of the Middle Kingdom. In view of our
l. Now that certain notions concerning the chronology of ancient times
have been established, and the imaginary dates given by the authors of
the Sacerdotal text of the Old Testament are no longer credible, those
dates have quickly been suppressed in Bibles. In the case of those gene-
alogies that have been preserved, modern commentators of books in-
tended for mass publication fail to draw the readers' attention to the
errors they contain.
TheFlood 215
a)TheOldTestamentascribestoitthecharacterofauniversal
cataclysm.
b)WhereastheparagraphsfromtheYahvisttextdonotdate
theFlood,theSacerdotaltextsituatesitatapointintime
whereacataclysmofthiskindcouldnothaveoccurred.
Thefollowingareargumentssupportingthisopinion:
TheSacerdotalnarrationstatesquitepreciselythattheFlood
tookplacewhen
Noahwas600 yearsold.According tothegenea­
logies
inchapter5ofGenesis(also takenfromtheSacerdotal
textandquotedinthefirstpartofthisbook),weknowthatNoah
issaidtohavebeenborn1,056yearsafterAdam.Consequently,
theFloodwould havetakenplace1,655 yearsafterthecreation
ofAdam.ThegenealogicaltableofAbrahammoreover,taken
fromthesametextandgiveninGenesis(11,10-32),allowsus
toestimatethatAbrahamwasborn292yearsaftertheFlood.As
weknow
that(accordingtotheBible)Abrahamwasalivein
roughly1850B.C., theFloodwould thereforebesituatedinthe
Twenty-firstorTwenty-secondcenturyB.C.Thiscalculationis
instrictkeepingwiththeinformationinoldeditionsofthe
Biblewhichfigures prominentlyattheheadoftheBiblicaltext.
Thiswasatatimewhenthelackofhumanknowledgeon the
subjectwassuch thatthechronologicaldatacontainedinthe
Biblewereacceptedwithoutquestionby itsreaders-forwant
ofanyargumentstothecontrary.1
Howisitpossibletoconceivetoday ofauniversalcataclysm
intheTwenty-firstorTwenty-secondcenturyB.C.whichde­
stroyedlifeonalltheearth'ssurface(exceptforthepeopleand
animalsintheArk)?Bythistime,civilizationshadflourishedin
severalpartsoftheglobe,andtheirvestigeshavenowcome
down
toposterity.InEgyptatthistime,forexample,theInter­
mediatePeriodfollowed theendoftheOldKingdom andpre­
ceded
thebeginningoftheMiddleKingdom. Inviewofour
1.Nowthatcertainnotionsconcerningthechronologyofancienttimes
havebeenestablished,andtheimaginarydatesgivenbytheauthorsof
theSacerdotaltextoftheOldTestamentarenolongercredible,those
dateshavequicklybeensuppressedinBibles.Inthecaseofthosegene­
alogiesthathavebeenpresel'ved,moderncommentatorsofbooksin­
tendedformasspublicationfailtodrawthereaders'attentiontothe
errorstheycontain.

234. 216 THE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
knowledge of the history of this period, it would be absurd to
maintain that the Flood had destroyed all civilization at this
time.
Thus it may be affirmed from a historical point of view that
the narration of the Flood as it is presented in the Bible is in
evident contradiction with modern knowledge. The formal proof
of man's manipulation of the Scriptures is the existence of the
two texts.
The Nanation of the FloodContaineil in tlle Qur'an,
The Qur'an gives a general version which is different from that
contained in the Bible and does not give rise to any criticisms
from a historical point of view.
It does not provide a continuous narration of the Flood. Nu-
merous suras talk of the punishment inflicted upon Noah's
people. The most complete account of this is in sura 11, verses
25 to 49. Sura 71, which bears Noah's name, describes above all
Noah's preachings, as do verses 105 to 115, sura 86. Before going
into the actual course taken by events, we must eonsider the
Flood as described in the Qur'an by relating it to the general
context of the punishment God inflicted on communities suilty
of gravely infringing His Commandments.
Whereas the Bible describes a universal Flood intended to pun-
ish ungodly humanity as a whole, the eur'an, in contrast, men-
tions several punishments inflicted on certain specifically de-
fined communities.
This may be seen in verses 35 to 3g, sura ZE:
"we gave Moses the scripture and appointed his brother
Aaron with him as vizier. we said: Go to the people who have
denied our signs. we destroyed them completely. when the
people of Noah denied the Messengers, we drowned them and
we made of them a sign for mankind. (We destroyed the tribes)
of h'd and Tamfrd, the companions of Rass and many generations
between them. We warned each of them by examples and We
annihilated them completely."
Sura 7, verses 59 to 93 contains a reminder of the punishments
brought upon Noah's people, the hd, the famrid, Lot (Sodom)
and Madi6n respectively.
216 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
knowledgeofthehistoryofthisperiod,itwouldbe absurdto
maintainthattheFloodhaddestroyedallcivilization atthis
time.
Thusitmaybeaffirmedfromahistoricalpointofviewthat
thenarrationoftheFloodasitispresentedintheBibleis in
evidentcontradiction withmodernknowledge. Theformalproof
ofman'smanipulationoftheScripturesistheexistenceof the
twotexts.
TheNafTationoftheFloodContainedinthe Qu,'an.
TheQur'angivesa generalversionwhichisdifferent fromthat
containedintheBibleanddoesnotgiveriseto anycriticisms
fromahistoricalpointofview.
Itdoesnotprovideacontinuous narrationoftheFlood.Nu­
merous
surastalkofthepunishmentinflicteduponNoah's
people.
Themostcompleteaccount ofthisisinsura11,verses
25to49.
Sura71,which bearsNoah'sname,describesaboveall
Noah'spreachings,
asdoverses105to115, sura26.Beforegoing
intotheactualcourse takenbyevents,we mustconsiderthe
Floodasdescribedin theQur'anbyrelatingittothegeneral
contextofthepunishmentGodinflictedoncommunities guilty
ofgravelyinfringingHisCommandments.
Whereas
theBibledescribesauniversalFloodintended topun­
ishungodly
humanityasawhole,theQur'an,incontrast,men­
tionsseveralpunishmentsinflictedon
certainspecificallyde­
finedcommunities.
Thismaybeseeninverses35to39, sura25:
"WegaveMoses theScriptureandappointedhis brother
Aaronwithhimasvizier.We said:Gotothepeoplewhohave
denied
Oursigns.Wedestroyedthemcompletely.When the
peopleofNoahdenied theMessengers,Wedrowned themand
Wemade ofthema signformankind.(Wedestroyedthe tribes)
ofAdand!amud,thecompanionsofRassandmanygenerations
betweenthem.We
warnedeachofthembyexamplesandWe
annihilated
themcompletely."
Sura7,verses59to93containsa reminderofthepunishments
broughtuponNoah'speople,the ~d,theTamiid,Lot(Sodom)
andMadianrespectively.

235. TrvFld 2L7
Thus the Qur'an
presents the cataclysm of the Flood as a pun-
ishment specifically intended for Noah's people: this is the first
basic difrerence between the two narrations.
The second fundamental difrerence is that the Qur'an, in con-
trast to the Bible, does not date the Flood in time and gives no
indication as to the duration of the cataclysm itself.
The causes of the flooding are roughly the same in both n&rra-
tions. The Sacerdotal description in the Bible (Genesis 7, 11)
cites two causes which occurred simultaneously: "On that day
all the fountains of the great decp burst forth, and the windows
of the heavens were opened." The Qur'an records the following
in verses 11 and 12, sura 54:
"We opened the Gates of Heaven with pouring water. And We
caused the ground to gush forth springs, so the waters met ac-
eording to the decree which has be€n ordained."
The Qur'an is very precise about the contents of the Ark.'The
order God gave to Noah was faithfully executed and it was to do
the following:
-sura 11, verse 40:
"(fn the Ark) Ioad a pair of every kind, thy family, save this
one against whom the word has already gone forth, and those
who believe. But only a few had believed with him."
The person excluded from the family is an outcast son of Noah.
We learn (sura 11, verses 45 and 46) how Noah's supplications
on this person's behalf to God were unable to make Him alter
His decision. Apart from Noah's family (minus the outcast son),
the Qur'an refers to the few other passengers on board the Ark
who had believed in God.
The Bible does not mention the latter among the oceupants of
the Ark. In fact, it provides us with three different versions of
the Ark's contents:
-according to the Yahvist version, a distinction is made be-
tween
'pure'
animals and birds, and
'impure'
animals (sevenl
pairs, i.e. seven males and seven females, of each
'pure'
species,
was taken into the Ark and only one pair of each
'impure'
species).
l. Surely
'seven'
here indicates
'many',
as it often does in the Semitic lan-
guages of the time.
TheFlood 217
ThustheQur'anpresentsthecataclysmoftheFloodasapun­
ishmentspecificallyintended
forNoah'speople: thisisthefirst
basicdifferencebetween
thetwonarrations.
Thesecondfundamentaldifference
isthattheQur'an,incon­
trasttotheBible,does notdatetheFloodintimeandgivesno
indicationas
tothedurationofthecataclysmitself.
Thecauses
ofthefloodingareroughlythesameinboth narra­
tions.TheSacerdotaldescriptionintheBible(Genesis 7,11)
citestwocauseswhichoccurredsimultaneously:"On
thatday
all
thefountainsofthegreatdeepburstforth,andthewindows
oftheheavenswereopened."The Qur'anrecordsthefollowing
inverses
11and12,sura54:
"WeopenedtheGates
ofHeavenwithpouringwater.AndWe
causedthegroundtogush
forthsprings,sothewaters metac­
cordingtothedecreewhich
hasbeenordained."
TheQur'anisverypreciseabout
thecontentsof theArk..The
orderGodgavetoNoahwasfaithfullyexecuted anditwasto do
thefollowing:
-sura11,verse40:
"(IntheArk)loada pairofeverykind, thyfamily,save this
oneagainstwhomtheword hasalreadygoneforth, andthose
whobelieve.
Butonlyafewhadbelievedwithhim."
Thepersonexcludedfromthefamilyis
anoutcastsonofNoah.
Welearn
(sura11,verses45and46)howNoah'ssupplications
onthisperson'sbehalftoGodwereunabletomakeHimalter
Hisdecision.
ApartfromNoah'sfamily(minustheoutcastson),
theQur'anreferstothefewotherpassengersonboardthe
Ark
whohadbelievedin God.
TheBibledoesnotmentionthe latteramongtheoccupants of
theArk.Infact,itprovidesuswith threedifferentversions of
theArk'scontents:
-accordingtotheYahvistversion,adistinctionismadebe­
tween'pure'animalsandbirds,and'impure'animals(seven
t
pairs,Le.sevenmalesandsevenfemales,ofeach 'pure'species,
wastakenintothe
Arkandonlyone pairofeach'impure'
species).
1.Surely'seven'hereindicates'many',asitoftendoesintheSemiticlan­
guagesofthetime.

236. gl8
THE BIBI.E, THE QUHAN AND SCIENCE
-according to a modified Yahvist verse (Genesis T, 8) there was
only one pair of each species, whether
'pure'
or
'impure'.
-aceording to the Saeerdotal version, there was Noah, his family
(with no exceptions) and a pair taken from each species.
The narration in the Qur'an of the flooding itself is contained
in sura 11, verses 25 to 49 and in sura 23, verses zB to 80. The
Biblical narrative does not present any important differences.
In the Bible, the place where the Ark comes to rest is in the
Ararat Mountains (Genesis 8, 4) and for the eur'an it is the
Jfrdt (sura 11, verse 44.) This mountain is said to be the highest
of the Ararat range in Armenia, but nothing proves that the
names were not changed by man to tally with the two namatives.
This is confirmed by R. BlaehBre: according to him there is a
peak in Arabia named Judi. The' agreement of names may well
be artificial.
rn conelusion, it is possible to state categorically what major
differences exist here between the Biblieal and eur'anic narra-
tions. Some of them escape eritical examination because objec-
tive data are lacking. When, however, it is possible to check the
statements in the scriptures in the risht of the established data,
the incompatibility between the Biblical narration-i.e. the in-
formation given on its place in time and geoEraphical extent-
and the discoveries that have contributed to modern knowledge
is all too clear. In contrast to this, the narration contained in the
Qur'an is free from anything which might give rise to objective
criticism. one might ask if it is possible that, between the time
of the Biblieal narration and the one contained in the eur'an,
man could have acquired knowled ge that shed light on this event.
The answer is no, because from the time of the old Testament to
the Qur'an, the only document man possessed on this ancient
story was the Bible itself. If human factors are unable to account
for the changes in the narrations which affeeted their meaning
with regard to modern knowledge, another explanation has to be
accepted, i.e. a Revelation which came after the one contained
in the Bible.
218 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCffiNCE
-accordingtoamodifiedYahvistverse(Genesis 7,8)therewas
onlyone
pairofeachspecies,whether'pure'or'impure'.
-accordingtotheSacerdotalversion, therewasNoah,hisfamily
(withnoexceptions)andapairtakenfromeachspecies.
The
narrationintheQur'anofthefloodingitselfiscontained
insura11,verses25to49andinsura23,verses23to30.The
Biblical
narrativedoesnotpresent anyimportantdifferences.
IntheBible,theplacewhere theArkcomesto restisinthe
AraratMountains(Genesis 8,4)andfortheQur'anitisthe
Judt(sura11,verse44.)Thismountainissaidtobe thehighest
oftheAraratrangeinArmenia,butnothingproves thatthe
nameswere notchangedby mantotallywiththetwonarratives.
Thisisconfirmedby
R.Blachere:accordingtohim thereisa
peakin
ArabianamedJUdl.The'agreement ofnamesmaywell
beartificial.
Inconclusion,itispossibleto statecategoricallywhatmajor
differencesexistherebetweentheBiblical andQur'anicnarra­
tions.Some ofthemescapecriticalexaminationbecauseobjec­
tive
dataarelacking.When,however, itispossibletocheckthe
statements
intheScripturesinthelightoftheestablisheddata,
theincompatibilitybetween theBiblicalnarration-Leothein­
formationgivenon
itsplaceintimeandgeographicalextent­
andthediscoveries thathavecontributedtomodernknowledge
isalltooclear.
Incontrasttothis,thenarrationcontainedinthe
Qur'anisfreefrom
anythingwhichmightgiverisetoobjective
criticism.Onemightask
ifitispossiblethat,betweenthetime
oftheBiblical
narrationandtheonecontainedintheQur'an,
mancouldhaveacquiredknowledge
thatshedlighton thisevent.
The
answerisno,becausefrom thetimeoftheOldTestamentto
theQur'an,theonlydocumentmanpossessedonthisancient
storywastheBibleitself. Ifhumanfactors areunabletoaccount
forthechangesinthe narrationswhichaffected theirmeaning
with
regardtomodernknowledge,anotherexplanationhastobe
accepted,i.e.aRevelationwhichcame
aftertheonecontained
intheBihIe.

237. il
The Exodus
With the Exodus from Egypt of Moses and his followers, (the
first stage of their move to Canaan), we come to an event of
great importance. It is an established historical event which ap-
pears in a known context, in spite of occasional allegations one
finds which tend to attribute to it a largely legendary character.
In the OId Testament, the Exodus forms the second book of
the Pentateuch or Torah, along with a narration of the journey
through the wilderness and the alliance (covenant) concluded
with God on Mount Sinai. It is natural for the Qur'an to devote a
great deal of space to it too: an account of the dealings Moses and
his brother Aaron had with the Pharaoh and of the exit from
Egypt is found in more than ten suras containing long descrip-
tions, e.g. suras, ?, 10, 20 and 26, along with more abridged
versions and even simple reminders. The name of Pharaoh, the
main character on the Esyptian side, is repeated (to the best of
my knowledge) seventy-four times in the Qur'an in 27 suras.
A study of both the Qur'anic and Biblical narrations is espe-
cially interesting here because, in contrast to what has been
noted in the case of the Flood (for example), in the main, the
two narrations have many points in common. There are certainly
divergences, but the Bihlical naration has considerable histori-
cal value, as we shall see. This is because it helps to identify
the Pharaoh, or rather the two pharaohs in question. This hypo-
thesis, which starts with the Bible, is complemented by the in-
formation contained in the Qur'an. Modern data are added to
these tu'o Scriptural sources and it is thus possible, through a
confrontation between the Bible, the Qur'an and today's knowl-
edge, to situate this episode from the Holy Scriptures in a his-
torical context.
gt9
III
ThEExodus
WiththeExodusfromEgyptofMosesandhisfollowers,(the
firststageoftheirmovetoCanaan),wecometo aneventof
greatimportance.Itisanestablishedhistoricaleventwhichap­
pearsinaknowncontext, inspiteofoccasionalallegationsone
findswhich
tendtoattributetoitalargelylegendarycharacter.
IntheOldTestament, theExodusformsthesecondbook of
thePentateuchorTorah,along withanarrationofthejourney
throughthewildernessandthealliance(covenant)concluded
withGodonMountSinai. ItisnaturalfortheQur'antodevotea
greatdealofspaceto ittoo:anaccountofthedealingsMoses and
hisbrotherAaronhadwiththePharaohandoftheexitfrom
Egyptisfoundinmorethantensurascontaininglongdescrip­
tions,e.g.
suras,7,10,20 and26,along withmoreabridged
versionsandevensimplereminders. ThenameofPharaoh,the
maincharacterontheEgyptianSIde,isrepeated(tothebestof
myknowledge)seventy-fourtimes intheQur'anin27suras.
A
studyofboththeQur'anicandBiblicalnarrationsisespe­
cially
interestingherebecause,incontrasttowhathasbeen
noted
inthecaseoftheFlood(forexample),inthemain,the
twonarrationshavemanypointsincommon.Therearecertainly
divergences,
buttheBiblicalnarationhasconsiderablehistori­
calvalue,
asweshallsee.Thisisbecause ithelpsto identify
thePharaoh,orratherthetwopharaohsinquestion.Thishypo­
thesis,which
startswiththeBible,iscomplementedby thein­
formationcontainedintheQur'an.Moderndataareaddedto
thesetwo
Scripturalsourcesanditisthuspossible.througha
confrontationbetweentheBible,theQur'anandtoday'sknowl­
edge,to
situatethisepisodefromtheHolyScripturesinahis­
toricalcontext.
219

238. THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
THE EXODUS ACCORDItrG TO THE BIBLE
The Biblical narration begins with a reminder of the Jews'
entry into Egypt with Jacob, who joined Joseph there. Later on,
according to Exodus l, 8:
"Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know
Joseph."
The period of oppression followed; the pharaoh
ordered the
Jews to build the cities of Pithom and Ramesses (to use the
names given to them in the Bible) (Exodus I, L1). To avoid a
population explosion among the Hebrews, pharaoh
ordered each
new-born son to be thrown into the river. Moses was nevertheless
preserved by his mother for the first three months of his life
before she finally decided to put him in a rush basket on the
river's edge. The Pharaoh's daughter discovered him, rescued
him and gave him to a nurse, none other than his own mother.
This was because Moses's sister had watched to see who would
find the baby, had pretended not to recognize him and then
recommended to the Frineess a nurse who was really the child's
mother. He was treated as one of the
pharaoh's
sons and given
the name'Moses'.
As a young man, Moses left for a country ealled Midian where
he married and lived for a long time. We read an important de-
tail in Exodus 2,23:.
"rn the course of those many days the king of Egypt died."
God ordered Moses to go and find the pharaoh
and lead his
brothers out of Esypt (the description of this order is given
in the episode of the Burning Bush). Aaron, Moses's brother,
helped him in this task. This is why Moses, once he had returned
to Egypt, went with his brother to visit the
pharaoh
who was
the suceessor of the king under whose reign he had long ago
been born.
The Pharaoh refused to allow the Jews in Moses's group to
leave Egypt. God revealed Himself to Moses once again and or-
dered him to repeat his request to
pharaoh.
According to the
Bible, Moses was eighty years old at this time. Through magic,
Moses showed the Pharaoh that he had supernatural powers.
This was not enough however. God sent the famous plagues
down upon Egypt. The rivers were changed into blood, there
220 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
THEEXODUSACCORDING TO THEBIBLE
TheBiblicalnarrationbeginswithareminderoftheJews'
entryintoEgyptwithJacob,who joinedJosephthere.Lateron,
according
toExodus1, 8:
"NowtherearoseanewkingoverEgypt,whodid notknow
Joseph."
Theperiodofoppressionfollowed; thePharaohorderedthe
JewstobuildthecitiesofPithomandRamesses(tousethe
namesgivento themintheBible)(ExodusI,11).Toavoida
populationexplosion
amongtheHebrews,Pharaohorderedeach
new-bornson
tobethrownintotheriver.Moseswasnevertheless
preserved
byhismotherforthefirstthreemonthsofhislife
before
shefinallydecidedto puthiminarushbasketonthe
river'sedge.ThePharaoh'sdaughterdiscoveredhim,rescued
him
andgavehimtoanurse,none otherthanhisownmother.
ThiswasbecauseMoses's sisterhadwatchedtoseewhowould
find
thebaby,hadpretendednottorecognizehim andthen
recommendedto thePrincessanursewhowasreallythechild's
mother.
HewastreatedasoneofthePharaoh'ssonsandgiven
thename'Moses'.
Asayoungman,Moses
leftforacountrycalledMidian where
hemarriedandlivedforalongtime.We readanimportantde­
tail
inExodus2,23:
HInthecourseofthosemanydaysthekingofEgyptdied."
God
orderedMosestogo andfindthePharaohandleadhis
brothersoutofEgypt(thedescriptionofthisorderisgiven
intheepisodeoftheBurningBush).Aaron,Moses'sbrother,
helpedhiminthistask.ThisiswhyMoses,oncehe hadreturned
toEgypt,wentwithhisbrothertovisitthePharaohwhowas
thesuccessorofthekingunderwhosereignhehadlongago
beenborn.
ThePharaohrefusedtoallowtheJewsinMoses'sgroupto
leave
Egypt.Godrevealed HimselftoMosesonce againandor­
dered
himtorepeathisrequesttoPharaoh.Accordingtothe
Bible,Moseswas eightyyearsoldatthistime.Throughmagic,
Mosesshowed
thePharaohthathehad supernaturalpowers.
Thiswasnotenoughhowever.God sentthefamousplagues
downupon
Egypt.Theriverswerechangedintoblood,there

239. Tlw Ero&n 22t
were invasions of frogs, gnats and swarms of flies, the cattle
died, boils appeared on men and animals, there was hail and
plagues of locusts, darkness and the death of the first-born.
Nevertheless, the Pharaoh still did not allow the Hebrews to
leave.
They therefore broke out of the city of Rameses, 600,000 of
them' "besides women and children" (Exodus 12, 3?). At this
point Pharaoh "made ready his chariot and took his army ryith
him, and took six hundred picked charioteers and all the other
chariots of Egypt with officers over all of them . Pharaoh,
king of Egypt, pursued the people of Israel as they went forth
defianfly.,' (Exodus 14, 6 and 8) . The Egyptians caught up with
Moses's party beside the sea. Moses raised his staff, the sea
parted before him and his followers walked across it without
wetting their feet. "The Egyptians pursued and rvent in after
them into the midst of the sea, all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots,
and his horsemen." (Exodus 14, 28) "The waters returned and
covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of Pha-
raoh that had followed them into the sea; not so much as one of
them remained. But the people of Israel walked on dry ground
through the sea, the waters being a wall to them on their right
hand and on their left." (Exodus L4, 28'29').
The text of Exodus is quite clear: Pharaoh was at the head
of the pursuers. He perished because the text of Exodus notes
that "not so much as one of them remained." The Bible repeats
this detail moreover in the Psalms: Psalm 106, verse 11 and
Psalm 186 verses 13 and 15 which are an act of thanks to God
"Who divided the sea of Rushes' in sunder . . . and made Israel
pass through the midst of it . . . but overthrew Pharaoh and his
host in the sea of Rushes." There can be no doubt therefore, that
aecording to the Bible, the Pharaoh of the Exodus perished in
the sea. The Bible does not record what became of his body.
THE EXODUS ACqORDING TO THE QUIfAN
In its broad outlines, the narration of the Exodus contained in
the Qur'an is similar to that of the Bibfe. It has to be reconsti-
\Me shall later see that the figure has been grossly exaggerated.
1.
2.In Hebrew'yam souf'.
TheExodus 221
wereinvasionsoffrogs,gnatsandswarmsofflies,the cattle
died,boils appearedonmen andanimals,therewashailand
plaguesoflocusts,darknessandthedeathofthefirst-born.
Nevertheless,
thePharaohstilldid notallowtheHebrewsto
leave.
TheythereforebrokeoutofthecityofRameses,600,000 of
them!"besideswomen andchildren"(Exodus12,37).Atthis
pointPharaoh"madereadyhischariotandtookhis armywith
him,andtooksixhundredpickedcharioteersandallthe~ther
chariotsofEgyptwithofficersoverall ofthem...Pharaoh,
kingofEgypt,pursuedthepeopleofIsraelastheywentforth
defiantly."(Exodus14,6and8).TheEgyptianscaughtupwith
Moses'spartybesidethesea.Moses raisedhisstaff,thesea
partedbeforehimandhisfollowerswalkedacross itwithout
wettingtheirfeet."TheEgyptianspursuedandwentinafter
themintothemidstofthesea,allPharaoh'shorses,hischariots,
andhishorsemen." (Exodus14,23) "Thewatersreturnedand
coveredthechariotsandthehorsemenandallthehostofPha­
raohthathadfollowedthemintothesea;notsomuchasoneof
themremained.ButthepeopleofIsraelwalkedondryground
throughthesea,thewatersbeingawalltothemon theirright
handandontheirleft."(Exodus14,28-29).
ThetextofExodusis quiteclear:Pharaohwasatthehead
ofthepursuers.Heperishedbecause thetextofExodusnotes
that"notsomuchasoneofthemremained."TheBiblerepeats
thisdetailmoreoverin thePsalms:Psalm106,verse 11and
Psalm136verses13 and15whichareanactofthankstoGod
"WhodividedtheseaofRushes
2
insunder...andmadeIsrael
passthroughthemidstofit...butoverthrewPharaohandhis
hostintheseaofRushes."Therecanbenodoubt therefore,that
accordingtotheBible,thePharaohoftheExodusperished in
thesea.TheBibledoes notrecordwhatbecameofhisbody.
THEEXODUSACGORDING TOTHEQUR'AN
Initsbroadoutlines,thenarrationoftheExoduscontainedin
theQur'anissimilartothatoftheBil1fe.Ithastobereconsti-
1.Weshalllaterseethatthefigurehasbeengrosslyexaggerated.
2.InHebrew'yamsouf'.

240. 222 TI{E BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
tuted, however, because it is made up of passages dispersed
throughout the Book.
The Qur'an does not provide a name which enables us to iden-
tify who the reigning Pharaoh was at the time of Exodus, any
more than the Bible does. AII that is known is that one of his
counsellors was called Hd,md,n. He is referred to six times in the
Qur'an (sura 28, verses 6, 8 and 38, sura zg, verse Bg and sura
40, verses 24 and 36).
The Pharaoh is the Jews' oppressor:
-sura 14, verse 6:
"when Moses said to his people: Remember the favor of God
to you when He delivered you from pharaoh's
folk who imposed
upon you a dreadful torment, slaughtered your sons and spared
your women.t'
The oppression is recalled in the same terms in verse 141,
sura 7. The Qur'an does not however mention the names of the
cities built by the Jews in subjection, as does the Bible.
The episode where Moses is left by the riverside is recorded in
sura 20 verses 39-40 and sura zg, verses ? to 18. In the version
contained in the Qur'an, Moses is taken in by pharaoh's
family.
We find this in verses g
and g,
sura 2g:
"The family of Pharaoh took him up. (It was intended) that
(Moses) should be to them an adversary and a cause of sorrow.
Pharaoh, H6mdn and their hosts were sinners. pharaoh's
wife
said: (He will be) a joy to the eye for me and you. Don't kill
him. He may be of use to us or \ile may take him as a son. They
did not sense (what was to come)."
Muslim tradition has it that it was
pharaoh's
wife Asiya who
took care of Moses. In the eur'an, it was not the
pharaoh's
wife
who found him, but members of his household.
Moses's youth, his stay in Midian and marriage are described
in sura 28, verses 13 to ZB.
In particular, the episode of the Burning Bush is foirnd in
the flrst part of sura 20, and in sura zg, verses B0 to Bb.
'The
Qur'an does not describe the ten plagues sent down upon
Esypt as a divine chastisement (unlike the long description in
the Bible), but simply mentions five plagues very briefly (sura
7, verse 133) : flooding, Iocusts, Iice, frogs, and blood.
222 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
tuted,however,because itismadeup ofpassagesdispersed
throughouttheBook.
TheQur'andoesnotprovidea namewhichenablesustoiden­
tifywhothereigningPharaohwasatthetimeofExodus,any
morethantheBibledoes. Anthatisknownis thatoneofhis
counsellors
wascalledHaman.Heisreferredtosixtimesinthe
Qur'an(sura28,verses6,8and38,sura29,verse39 andsura
40,verses24 and36).
ThePharaohistheJews'oppressor:
-sura14,verse6 :
"WhenMosessaidtohispeople:Remember thefavorofGod
toyouwhen
Hedeliveredyou fromPharaoh'sfolkwhoimposed
uponyouadreadfultorment,slaughtered
yoursonsandspared
yourwomen."
Theoppressionisrecalled
inthesametermsinverse141,
sura7.TheQur'andoesnothowevermention thenamesofthe
citiesbuiltby theJewsinsubjection,asdoestheBible.
TheepisodewhereMosesis
leftbytheriversideisrecordedin
sura20verses39-40 andsura28,verses7to13. Intheversion
contained
intheQur'an,Mosesis takeninbyPharaoh'sfamily.
Wefind
thisinverses8 and9,sura28:
"ThefamilyofPharaohtookhimup. (Itwasintended) that
(Moses)shouldbetothem anadversaryandacauseofsorrow.
Pharaoh,Hamanandtheirhostsweresinners. Pharaoh'swife
said:(Hewillbe)a joytotheeyeformeandyou.Don'tkill
him.He
maybeofusetous orwemaytakehimasason.They
did
notsense(whatwasto come)."
MuslimtraditionhasitthatitwasPharaoh'swifeAsiyawho
took
careofMoses.IntheQur'an,itwasnotthePharaoh'swife
whofoundhim,
butmembersofhishousehold.
Moses'syouth,his
stayinMidianandmarriagearedescribed
insura28,verses13to28.
Inparticular,theepisode oftheBurningBushisfoundin
thefirstpartofsura20,andinsura28,verses30 to35.
"'The
Qur'andoesnotdescribethetenplaguessentdownupon
Egyptasadivinechastisement(unlike thelongdescription in
theBible),butsimplymentionsfiveplagues verybriefly(sura
7,verse133):flooding,locusts,lice,frogs, andblood.

241. Tlp Exodur 2|23
The flight from Esypt is deseribed in the Qur'an, but without
any of the geographical data given in the Bible, nor the incred-
ible numbers of people mentioned in the latter. It is difficult to
imagine how 600,000 men plus their families could have stayed
in the desert for a long time, as the Bible rrrrculd have us believe.
This is how the death of Pharaoh pursuing the Hebrews is
descriH:
--sura 20, verse 78:
"Pharaoh pursued them with his hosts and the sea covered
them.tt
The Jews escaped. Pharaoh perished, but his body was found:
I very important detail not mentioned in the Biblical narration.
-sura 10, verses 90 to 92. God is speaking:
"We took the Children of Israel across the sea. Pharaoh with
his hosts pursued them in rebellion and hostility till, when the
fact of his drowning overtook him, he said: I believe there is no
God except the God in whom the Children of Israel believe. I am
of those who submit themselves to Him.
"God said:'What? Now! Thou has rebelled and caused deprav-
ity: This day We save thee in thy body so that thou mayest be a
sign for those who corne after thee.' But verily, many among
mankind are heedless of Our sigtrs."
This passage requires two points to be explained:
a) The spirit of rebellion and hostility referred to is to be under-
stood in tems of Moses's attempt to persuade the Pharaoh.
b) The reseue of the Pharaoh refers to his iorpse beeause it is
stated quite clearly in verse 98, sura 11, that Pharaoh and his
followers have been condemned to damnation:
-sura 11, verse 98
"Phsraoh will go before his people on the Day of Resurrection
and will lead them to the fire."
For those facts which can be ehecked with historical, geo-
graphical and archaeslogical data therefore, it should be noted
that the Qur'*nic and Biblical narrations difrer on the following
points:
-the absence in the Qur'an of place names, both of the cities
built by the Hebrews in Moses's group, and on the route taken
by the Exodns.
223
TheflightfromEgyptisdescribedintheQur'an,butwithout
anyofthegeographicaldatagivenintheBible,northeincred­
iblenumbers
ofpeoplementioned inthelatter.Itisdifficultto
imaginehow 600,000menplus theirfamiliescould havestayed
inthedesertforalongtime, astheBiblewouldhaveusbelieve.
ThisishowthedeathofPharaohpursuingtheHebrewsis
described:
--sura20,verse78:
"Pharaohpursuedthemwithhishostsandtheseacovered
them."
TheJewsescaped.Pharaohperished,buthisbodywasfound:
a
veryimportantdetailnotmentionedintheBiblicalnarration.
-sura10,verses90to92.Godisspeaking:
"WetooktheChildrenofIsraelacrossthesea.Pharaohwith
hishostspursued theminrebellionandhostilitytill,when the
factofhisdrowningovertookhim, hesaid:Ibelievethereisno
Godexcept
theGodinwhomtheChildrenofIsraelbelieve.I am
ofthosewho submitthemselvestoHim.
"God
said:'What?Now!Thou hasrebelledandcauseddeprav­
ity:
ThisdayWesavethee inthybodyso thatthoumayestbea
signforthosewhocome afterthee.'Butverily,manyamong
mankind
areheedlessofOursigns."
Thispassagerequires twopointstobeexplained:
a)Thespiritofrebellionandhostilityreferredtoistobeunder­
stood
intermsofMoses'sattempttopersuadethePharaoh.
b)TherescueofthePharaohreferstohiscorpsebecause itis
statedquiteclearly inverse98,sura11,thatPharaohandhis
followershavebeencondemned
todamnation:
--sura11,verse98
"Pharaohwillgobefore hispeopleon theDayofResurrection
andwillleadthemto thefire."
Forthosefactswhichcanbecheckedwithhistorical,geo­
graphical
andarchaeologicaldatatherefore,itshouldbenoted
thattheQur'anicandBiblicalnarrationsdifferon thefollowing
points:
-theabsenceintheQur'anofplacenames,both ofthecities
built
bytheHebrewsinMoses'sgroup, andontheroutetaken
by
theExodus.

242. 224 THE BIBT.E, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
.-the absence of any reference to the death of a Pharaoh during
Moses's stay in Midian.
-the absence in the Qur'an of details concerning Moses's age
when he addressed his request to the Pharaoh.
-the absence in the Qur'an of the numbering of Moges's follow-
ers. These figures a,re openly exaggerated in the Bible to inered-
ible proportions (said to have been 600,000 men plus their
families forming a community of more than two million in-
habitants.)
-the absenee of any mention in the Bible of the rescue of the
Pharaoh's body after his death.
For our present purposes, the points to be noted because they
are shared by both narrations are as follows:
-the confirmation contained in the Qur'an of
pharaoh's
oppres-
sion of the Jews in Moses's group.
-the absence from both narrations of any mention of the King
of Egypt's name.
*the eonfirmation contained in the Qur'an of the
pharaoh's
death during the Exodus.
COIVFNONTATION BETWEEN SCNIPTANAL DATA
AIVD MODNNN KNOWLED{GE
The narrations contained in the Bible and the eur'an on the
time spent by the sons of rsrael in Egypt, and the way they left,
give rise to data whieh may constitute matter for a confrontation
udth modern knowledge. In faet, the balance is very uneven be-
cause some data pose many problems while others hardly pro-
vide subject for discussion.
l, Exnmhcr,tion of Cefinin Details Contained, in tlw Nanatiom
Tlw Hebreut in Eggpt
It is, apparently, quite possible to say (and without running
mueh risk of being wrong) that the Hebrews remained in Egypt
for 400 or 430 years, according to the Bible (Genesis lb, 18 and
Exodus L2,40). In spite of this discrepancy between Genesis and
Exodus, which is of minor importance, the period may be said to
224 THEBIBLE,THEQUR' ANANDSCIENCE
-theabsenceofanyreferenceto thedeathofa Pharaohduring
Moses's
stayinMidian.
-theabsenceintheQur'anofdetailsconcerningMoses'sage
whenheaddressedhisrequestto
thePharaoh.
-theabsenceintheQur'anofthenumbering ofMoses'sfollow­
ers.Thesefigures
areopenlyexaggerated intheBibletoincred­
ibleproportions(saidtohavebeen600,000menplus
their
familiesformingacommunity ofmorethantwomillionin­
habitants.)
-theabsenceofanymentionintheBibleoftherescueof the
Pharaoh'sbodyafterhisdeath.
Forourpresentpurposes,thepointstobenotedbecausethey
aresharedbyboth narrationsareasfollows:
-theconfirmationcontained intheQur'anofPharaoh'soppres­
sion
oftheJewsinMoses'sgroup.
-theabsencefromboth narrationsofanymention oftheKing
ofEgypt'sname.
-theconfirmationcontained intheQur'anofthePharaoh's
deathduringtheExodus.
CONFRONTATION BETWEEN SCRIPTURALDATA
ANDMODERNKNOWLEDGE
Thenarrationscontainedin theBibleandtheQur'anonthe
timespentby thesonsofIsraelinEgypt, andthewaytheyleft,
giveriseto
datawhichmayconstitute matterforaconfrontation
withmodernknowledge.
Infact,thebalanceisveryuneven be­
causesome dataposemanyproblemswhileothershardlypro­
videsubject
fordiscussion.
1.ExaminationofCerlainDetailsContained intheNan'atWna
TheHebrewsinEgypt
Itis,apparently,quitepossibletosay(andwithout running
muchriskofbeingwrong) thattheHebrewsremained inEgypt
for400or430years, accordingto theBible(Genesis15,13and
Exodus12,
40).InspiteofthisdiscrepancybetweenGenesisand
Exodus,whichis
ofminorimportance,theperiod maybesaidto

243. Tlw Exodrrp 225
heve begun long after Abraham, when Joseph, son of Jacob,
moved with his brothers to Egypt. With the exception of the
Bible, which gives the data just quoted, and the Qur'an which
refers to the move to Egypt, but does not give any indication as
to the dates involved, we do not possess any other document
which is able to illuminate us on this point.
Present*day commentators, ranging from P. Montet to Daniel-
Rops, think that, in all probability, the arrival of Joseph and his
brothers coincided with the movement of the Hyksos towards
Egypt in the Seventeenf,h century B.C. and that a Hyksos sov-
ereign probably received them hospitably at Avaris in the Nile
Delta.
There can be no doubt that this guess is in obvious contradic-
tion to what is contained in the Bible (Kings I, 6, 1) which puts
the Exodus from Eeypt at 480 years before the construction of
Solomon's Temple (circa 971 B.C.) . This estimation would there-
fore put the Exodus at roughly 1450 B.C. and would consequently
situate the entry into Egypt at circa 1880-1850 B.C. This is pre-
cisely the time, however, that Abraham is supposed to have lived,
and other data containeC in the Bible tell us that there were 250
years separating him from Joseph. This passage from Kings I
in the Bible is therefore unacceptable from a chronological point
of view.' We shall see how the theory put forward here has only
this objection, taken from Kings f, to be levelled against it. The
very obvious inaccuracy of these chronological data effectively
deprives this objeetion of any value.
Aside from the Holy Scriptures, the traees left by the Hebrews
of their stay in Egypt are very faint. There are however several
hieroglyphic documents which refer to the existence in Egypt of
a eategory of workers called the
'Api,ru,
Hapiru or Habiru, who
have been identified (rightly or wrongly) with the Hebrews. In
this eategory were construction workers, agricultural labourers,
harvesters, etc. But where did they come from? It is very diffieult
to find an answer to this. Father de Vaux has written the follo'*-
ing about them:
1. We shall return to this subject later, when we call upon Father de
Vaux's help in examining this referenee in Kings I.
TheExodUl 225
havebegunlongafterAbraham,whenJoseph,son ofJacob,
moved
withhisbrotherstoEgypt.Withtheexceptionofthe
Bible,whichgives thedatajustquoted,andtheQur'anwhich
referstothemoveto Egypt,butdoesnotgiveanyindicationas
tothedatesinvolved,wedo notpossessanyotherdocument
whichisable
toilluminateusonthispoint.
Present-daycommentators,rangingfromP.MontettoDaniel­
Rops,
thinkthat,inallprobability,thearrivalofJosephandhis
brotherscoincidedwiththemovementoftheHyksostowards
EgyptintheSeventeenthcenturyB.C.andthataHyksossov­
ereignprobablyreceivedthemhospitably atAvarisintheNile
Delta.
Therecanbenodoubtthatthisguessis inobviouscontradic­
tion
towhatiscontainedintheBible(KingsI,6,1)whichputs
theExodusfromEgyptat480yearsbeforetheconstructionof
Solomon'sTemple (circa971B.C.).Thisestimationwouldthere­
foreputtheExodusatroughly1450B.C. andwouldconsequently
situatetheentryintoEgyptatcirca1880-1850B.C.Thisispre­
cisely
thetime,however, thatAbrahamissupposedtohavelived,
andotherdatacontainedintheBibletellus thattherewere250
yearsseparatinghimfromJoseph.ThispassagefromKingsI
in
theBibleis thereforeunacceptablefromachronologicalpoint
ofview.
1
Weshallseehow thetheoryputforwardherehasonly
thisobjection,takenfromKingsI, tobelevelledagainstit.The
veryobviousinaccuracy ofthesechronological dataeffectively
deprives
thisobjectionofanyvalue.
Aside
fromtheHolyScriptures,thetracesleftbytheHebrews
oftheirstayinEgyptareveryfaint. Therearehoweverseveral
hieroglyphicdocumentswhich
refertotheexistencein Egyptof
acategoryofworkerscalledthe'Apiru,HapiruorHabiru,who
havebeenidentified(rightlyorwrongly)with theHebrews.In
thiscategorywereconstructionworkers, agriculturallabourers,
harvesters,etc.Butwheredidtheycomefrom?Itisverydifficult
tofind
ananswertothis.FatherdeVauxhaswrittenthefollow­
ingaboutthem:
1.Weshallreturntothissubjectlater,whenwecalluponFatherde
Vaux'shelpinexaminingthisreferenceinKingsI.

244. 228 THE BTBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
"They are not members of the local population, they do not
identify themselves with a class in society, they do not all share
the same occupation or status."
Under Tuthmosis III, they are referred to in a papyrus &s
'workers
in the stables'. It is known how Amenophis II, in the Fif-
teenth century 8.c., brought in 3,600 of these people as prisoners
from Canaan, because, as Father de Vaux notes, they consti-
tuted a considerable percentage of the Syrio-Palestinian popu-
lation. Under Sethos f, in circa 1300 8.C., the
'Api.rz
created
considerable disturbances in the Beth-Shean region of Canaan,
and under Ramesses II some of them were employed in the
quarries or for transporting piles used in the works of the
Pharaoh (e.g. the Great Pylon of Ramesses Miamon). we know
from the Bible that the Hebrews, under Ramesses II, were to
build the northern capital, the city of Ramesses. In Egyptian
writings the
'Api,ru
a.re mentioned once again in the Twelfth
century B.C. and for the last time under Ramesses III.
The
'Apiru
are not just mentioned in Egypt however, so did
the term therefore apply solely to the Hebrews? It is perhaps
wise to recall that the word could initially have been used to
signify
'forced
labourers', without regard to their origins, and
that it subsequently became an adjective indicating a person's
profession. we might perhaps draw an analosy with the word
'suisse'
(Swiss) which has several different meanings in French.
It can mean an inhabitant of Switzerland, a mercenary soldier
of the old French monarchy who was of Swiss extraction, a
Vatican guard, or an employee of a Christian church . . .
However, this may be, under Ramesses II, the Hebrews (ac-
cording to the Bible) or the
'Apiru
(according to the hieroglyphic
texts) took part in the great works ordered by the Pharaoh, which
were indeed
'forced
labour'. There can be no doubt that Ramesses
II was the Jews' oppressor: the cities of Rarnesses and Pithom,
mentioned in Exodus, are situated at the eastern part of the Nile
Delta. Today's Tanis and Qantir, which are roughly lE miles
apart, are in the same region as these two cities. The northern
capital constructed by Ramesses II was situated there. Ramesses
II is the Pharaoh of the oppression.
Moses was to be born in this environment. The circumstances
pertaining to his rescue from the waters of the river have al-
226 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
"Theyarenotmembersofthelocalpopulation, theydonot
identifythemselveswithaclassinsociety,theydonotallshare
thesameoccupationorstatus."
UnderTuthmosisIII,theyarereferredtoinapapyrusas
'workersinthestables'.ItisknownhowAmenophisII, intheFif­
teenthcenturyB.C.,broughtin3,600ofthesepeople asprisoners
fromCanaan,because,asFatherdeVauxnotes,theyconsti­
tutedaconsiderablepercentageoftheSyrio-Palestinianpopu­
lation.
UnderSethosI, incirca1300B.C., the'Apirucreated
considerabledisturbancesintheBeth-SheanregionofCanaan,
andunderRarnessesIIsomeofthemwereemployedinthe
quarriesorfortransportingpilesused intheworksofthe
Pharaoh(e.g.theGreatPylonofRamessesMiamon).Weknow
fromtheBiblethattheHebrews,underRamessesII,wereto
build
thenortherncapital,theCityofRarnesses.InEgyptian
writingsthe'Apiruarementionedonce againintheTwelfth
centuryB.C.andforthelasttimeunderRamessesIII.
The'ApiruarenotjustmentionedinEgypthowever,sodid
thetermthereforeapplysolelytotheHebrews?Itisperhaps
wisetorecall thatthewordcouldinitiallyhavebeenused to
signify'forcedlabourers', withoutregardtotheirorigins,and
thatitsubsequentlybecame anadjectiveindicatingaperson's
profession.We mightperhapsdrawananalogywiththeword
'suisse'
(Swiss)whichhasseveraldifferent meaningsinFrench.
ItcanmeananinhabitantofSwitzerland,a mercenarysoldier
oftheoldFrenchmonarchywhowasofSwissextraction,a
Vaticanguard,oranemployeeofaChristianchurch...
However,thismaybe,underRamessesII, theHebrews(ac­
cordingtotheBible)orthe'Apiru(accordingtothehieroglyphic
texts)tookpartinthegreatworksorderedbythePharaoh,which
wereindeed'forcedlabour'.
Therecanbenodoubt thatRamesses
IIwastheJews'oppressor:thecitiesofRamesses andPithom,
mentionedinExodus,aresituatedattheeasternpartoftheNile
Delta.
Today'sTanisandQantir,whichareroughly15miles
apart,areinthesameregionasthesetwocities. Thenorthern
capitalconstructedbyRamessesIIwassituatedthere.Ramesses
IIisthePharaohoftheoppression.
Moses
wastobeborninthisenvironment.Thecircumstances
pertainingtohisrescuefromthewatersoftheriverhaveal-

245. The Emduc
ready been outlined above. He has an Egyptian name: P. Montet
has clearly shown in his book EgApt and the Eible (L'Egypte et
la Bible)' that the names Mesw or Mesy are on the list of per-
sonal names in the dietionary of the hieroglyphic language by
Ranke. MEBA is the transliteration used in the Qur'an.
The Plagns of Eggpt
Under this title the Bible refers to ten punishments inflicted by
God, and provides many details concerning each of these
'plagues'.
Many have supernatural dimensions or characteristics.
The Qur'an only lists five plagues, which, for the most part, are
merely an exaggeration of natural phenomena: flooding, locusts,
lice, frogs and blood.
The rapid multiplication of locusts and frogs is described in
the Bible. It speaks of river water changed to blood which floods
all the land (sic)
; the Qur'an refers to blood, but without giving
any complementary details. It is possible to invent all kinds of
hypotheses on the subject of this reference to blood.
The other plagues described in the Bible (gnats, swarms of
flies, boils, hail, darkness, death of the first-born and of cattle)
have various origins, as was the case of the Flood, and are
constituted by the juxtaposition of passages from many differ-
ent sourees.
The Route TakenbV tlr.e Exodaa
No indication of this is given in the Qur'an, whereas the Bible
refers to it in great detail. Father de Vaux and P. Montet have
both reopened studies into it. The starting-point was probably
the Tanis-Qantir region, but no traces have been found of the
rest of the route taken which could confirm the Biblical narra-
tion; nor is it possible to say at exactly what point the waters
parted to allow the passage of Moses and his followers.
Tlw lfibrculorn Partilng of tlw Wate;t
Some commentators have imagined a tide-rsce, due perhaps to
sstronomic causes or seismic conditions connected to the distant
1. Pub. Delachaux and Niestl6, Neufchatel, 1959.
TheExodua 227
readybeenoutlinedabove. HehasanEgyptianname:P.Montet
hasclearlyshown inhisbookEgyptandtheBible (L'Egypteet
laBible)1thatthenamesMesw orMesyareonthelistofper­
sonalnamesin
thedictionaryofthehieroglyphiclanguageby
Ranke.
MUsaisthetransliterationusedintheQur'an.
ThePlaguesofEgypt
Underthistitle theBiblereferstotenpunishmentsinflictedby
God,
andprovidesmanydetailsconcerningeach ofthese
'plagues'.Manyhave
supernaturaldimensionsorcharacteristics.
The
Qur'anonlylistsfiveplagues,which,forthemost part,are
merelyanexaggerationofnaturalphenomena:flooding,locusts,
lice,
frogsandblood.
Therapidmultiplicationoflocusts
andfrogsisdescribedin
theBible.Itspeaksofriverwaterchangedtobloodwhichfloods
all
theland(sic);the Qur'anreferstoblood,butwithoutgiving
anycomplementarydetails. Itispossibletoinventallkindsof
hypotheseson
thesubjectof thisreferencetoblood.
The
otherplaguesdescribed intheBible(gnats,swarmsof
flies,boils,hail,darkness,death
ofthefirst-bornandofcattle)
havevariousorigins,
aswasthecaseoftheFlood,andare
constitutedby thejuxtapositionofpassagesfrommanydiffer­
entsources.
TheRouteTaken bytheExodus
Noindicationofthisisgiven intheQur'an,whereastheBible
referstoitingreatdetail.FatherdeVauxandP.Montethave
bothreopenedstudiesintoit.Thestarting-pointwasprobably
theTanis-Qantirregion, butnotraceshavebeenfoundof the
restoftheroutetakenwhichcouldconfirm theBiblicalnarra­
tion;norisitpossibletosayatexactlywhatpointthewaters
partedtoallowthepassageofMosesandhisfollowers.
TheMiraculousParting oftheWater,
Somecommentatorshaveimaginedatide-race,due perhapsto
astronomiccauses orseismicconditionsconnectedto thedistant
1.Pub.DelachauxandNiestIe,Neufchatel,1959.

246. 228 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
eruption of a volcano. The Hebrews could have taken advantage
of the receding sea, and the Egyptians, following in hot pursuit,
could have been wiped out by the returning tide. All this is pure
hypothesis however.
2. Thc Point Occupiedhg the Erodus in the History
of the Plwraohs
It is possible to arrive at much more positive evidence in the
case of the point the Exodus oceupies in time.
For a very long time Merneptah, the su('essor to Ramesses II,
was held to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Maspero, the famous
Egyptologist of the beginning of this century did, after all, write
in his Visitor's Guide to the Cairo Museu,m (Guide du visiteur du
Mus6e du Caire), L900, that Merneptah "was probably, accord-
ing to the Alexandrian tradition, the Pharaoh of the Exodus who
is said to have perished in the Red Sea." I have been unable to
find the documents on which Maspero based this assertion, but
the eminence of this commentator requires us to attach the great-
est importanee to what he claims.
Apart fro:n P. Montet, there are very few Egyptologists or
specialists in Biblical exegesis who have researched into the
arguments for or against this hypothesis. In the last few decades
however, there has been a spate of different hypotheses whieh
seem to have as their sole purpose the justification of an agree-
ment with one single detail in the Scriptural narrations, although
the inventors of these hypotheses do not bother with the other
aspects of the Scriptures. Thus it is possible for a hypothesis to
suddenly appear which seems to agree with one aspect of a nar-
ration, although its inventor has not taken the trouble to com-
pare it with all the other data contained in the Scriptures (and
consequently not just with the Bible), plus all the data provided
by history, arehaeology, etc.
One of the strangest hypotheses yet to come to light is by J.
de Miceli (1960) who claims to have pinpointed the date of the
Exodus to within one day, i.e. the
gth
of April, 14gb B.C. He
relies for his information entirely on calculations made from
calendars and claims that Tuthmosis II was reigning in Egypt at
that time, and was therefore the Pharaoh of the Exodus. The
228 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
eruption ofavolcano.TheHebrewscouldhave takenadvantage
oftherecedingsea,
andtheEgyptians,followingin hotpursuit,
couldhavebeenwiped
outbythereturningtide.All thisispure
hypothesishowever.
2.ThePointOccupied bytheExodusintheHistory
ofthePharaohs
Itispossibleto arriveatmuchmorepositiveevidence inthe
caseof thepointtheExodusoccupiesintime.
ForaverylongtimeMerneptah, thesU("'essortoRamessesII,
washeldtobe
thePharaohoftheExodus.Maspero, thefamous
Egyptologist
ofthebeginningof thiscenturydid,afterall,write
inhisVisitor'sGuidetotheCairo Museum(Guidedu visiteurdu
Museedu
Caire),1900,thatMerneptah"wasprobably,accord­
ingtotheAlexandriantradition, thePharaohoftheExoduswho
issaid
tohaveperished intheRedSea."Ihavebeenunable to
findthedocumentsonwhichMasperobasedthisassertion, but
theeminenceofthiscommentatorrequiresusto attachthegreat­
estimportanceto whatheclaims.
Apartfro:nP.Montet, thereareveryfewEgyptologists or
specialistsinBiblicalexegesiswhohaveresearchedinto the
argumentsfororagainstthishypothesis.Inthelastfewdecades
however,
therehasbeena spateofdifferenthypotheseswhich
seem
tohaveastheirsolepurpose thejustificationof anagree­
mentwithonesingledetailin theScripturalnarrations,although
theinventorsofthesehypothesesdonotbother withtheother
aspectsoftheScriptures.Thusitispossibleforahypothesisto
suddenlyappearwhichseems toagreewithoneaspectofanar­
ration,although itsinventorhasnottakenthetroubletocom­
pareitwithall theotherdatacontainedin theScriptures(and
consequentlynotjustwiththeBible),plusall thedataprovided
byhistory,archaeology,etc.
Oneof
thestrangesthypothesesyettocometo lightisbyJ.
deMiceli(1960)whoclaims tohavepinpointed thedateofthe
Exodustowithinoneday, Le.the9thofApril,1495B.C.He
relies
forhisinformationentirelyoncalculationsmadefrom
calendars
andclaimsthatTuthmosisIIwasreigninginEgyptat
thattime,andwastherefore thePharaohoftheExodus.The

247. Tlp Ero&n 2l2g
confirmation of the hypothesis is supposed to reside in the fact
that lesions of the skin are to be observed on the mummy of
Tuthmosis II. This eommentator informs us (without explaining
why) that they are due to leprosy, and that one of the plagues
of Eeffpt described in the Bible eonsisted in skin boils. This
staggering construction takes no account of the other facts con-
tained in the Biblical narration, especially the Bible's mention of
the City of Ramesses which rules out any hypothesis dating the
Exodus before a
'Ramesses'
had reigned.
As to the skin lesions of Tuthmosis II, these do not swing
the argument in favour of the theory which designates this King
of Egypt as the Pharaoh of the Exodus. This is beeause his son,
Tuthmosis III, and his grandson Amenophis II also show signs
of skin tumorsr, so that some commentators have suggested the
hypothesis of a disease which ran in the family. The Tuthmosis
II theory is not therefore tenable.
The same is true for Daniel-Rops's theory in his book. The
People of the Bible (Le Peuple de la Bible)
2:
He ascribes the role
of the Pharaoh of the Exodus to Amenophis II. It does not seem
to be any better-founded than the preceding hypothesis. Using
the pretext that Amenophis II's father (Tuthmosis III) was very
nationalistic, Daniel-Rops proclaims Amenophis II the persecutor
of the Hebrews, while his step-mother, the famous Queen Hat-
shepsut, is east in the role of the person who took Moses in (al-
though we never discover why).
Father de Vaux's theory, that it was Ramesses II, rests on
sliehtly more solid foundations. He expands on them in his book,
Th,e Ansi.ent History of Israel (Histoire ancienne d'Isra€l)'.
Even if his theory does not agree with the Biblieal narration on
every point, at least it has the advantage of putting forrvard one
very important piece of evidence: the construction of the cities
of Ramesses and Pithom built under Ramesses II referred to in
the Biblical text. It is not possible thelefore to maintain that
the Exodus took place before the accession of Ramesses II. This
is situated in the year 1301 8.C., according to Drioton and Van-
1. The skin lesions are clearly visible on the mummies of these Pharaohs
preserved in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo.
2. Pub. Desclde de Brouwer, l9?0, Paris.
3. Pub. J. Gabalda and Co., 1971, Paris.
TheE:rodflll 229
confirmationofthehypothesisissupposedtoreside inthefact
thatlesionsoftheskinaretobeobservedon themummyof
TuthmosisII.Thiscommentatorinformsus(withoutexplaining
why)
thattheyareduetoleprosy,andthatoneoftheplagues
ofEgyptdescribedintheBibleconsisted inskinboils.This
staggeringconstructiontakesnoaccountoftheotherfactscon­
tained
intheBiblicalnarration,especiallytheBible'smentionof
theCityofRamesseswhichrulesout anyhypothesisdatingthe
Exodusbeforea'Ramesses' hadreigned.
Asto
theskinlesions ofTuthmosisII,these donotswing
theargumentinfavourofthetheorywhichdesignatesthisKing
of
EgyptasthePharaohoftheExodus.Thisisbecausehisson,
Tuthmosis
III,andhisgrandsonAmenophis IIalsoshowsigns
ofskintumorsI,sothatsomecommentatorshavesuggested the
hypothesisofadiseasewhich raninthefamily.TheTuthmosis
IItheoryisnotthereforetenable.
Thesameis
trueforDaniel-Rops'stheoryinhisbook. The
People
oftheBible(LePeuplede laBible)2:Heascribestherole
ofthePharaohoftheExodustoAmenophisII. Itdoesnotseem
to
beanybetter-foundedthantheprecedinghypothesis.Using
thepretextthatAmenophisII'sfather(TuthmosisIII)wasvery
nationalistic,Daniel-RopsproclaimsAmenophis
IIthepersecutor
oftheHebrews,whilehisstep-mother, thefamousQueen Hat­
shepsut,is castintheroleofthepersonwhotookMoses in(al­
thoughweneverdiscoverwhy).
FatherdeVaux'stheory, thatitwasRamessesII,restson
slightlymoresolidfoundations.Heexpandsontheminhisbook,
TheAncientHistoryofIsrael(Histoireancienned'Israel)3.
Even
ifhistheorydoes notagreewiththeBiblical narrationon
everypoint,
atleastithastheadvantageofputtingforwardone
very
importantpieceofevidence:theconstruction ofthecities
ofRamessesandPithombuiltunderRamesses IIreferredtoin
theBiblicaltext. Itisnotpossiblethereforetomaintainthat
theExodustookplace be/m'etheaccessionofRamessesII.This
is
situatedintheyear1301B.C.,accordingtoDrioton andVan-
1.Theskinlesionsareclearlyvisibleon themummiesofthesePharaohs
preservedintheEgyptianMuseum,Cairo.
2.Pub.Descleede Brouwer,1970,Paris.
3.Pub.J.GabaldaandCo.,1971,Paris.

248. t:m mIE DBLq TIrE QITRAT{ AND SCIENCE
dier's ehrronology, and in 1290 B.c. according to Rowton's. Ttre
two other hypotheses outlined above are untenable becsuse of
the following imperetive fact: Ramess€s II is the pharaoh
of
the oppresgion refercd to in the Bible.
Father de Vaux considers the Exodus to have taken place dur-
ing the ffrEt half or towards the middle of Ramesses II's reign.
Thus his drting of this event is imprecise: he suggests this
p€riod to allow l}Ioses and his followers time, as it were, to setfle
in Cana^an, and Ramesses rl's suceessor, Phsraoh Mernapteh who
is Bsid to hsve pacified the frontiers after his father's death, to
bring the Children of Israel into line, as depicted on a stele of
the Fifth year of his reign.
Two arguments may be levelled st this theory:
a) The Bible shows (Exodus 2, zgl that the King of Egypt died
during the period when Moses was in Midian. This King of Egvpt
is described in the Book of Exodus as the King who made the He-
brewg build the cities of Ramesscs and Pithom by forced labour.
This King was Bamesses II. The Exodus could only have taken
place under the lstter's successor. Father de Vaux claims how-
ever to doubt the Biblical sources of verse zg, chapter 2 of
Exodue.
b) what is more astounding is that Father de vaux, as director
of the Biblical School of Jerusalem, does not refer in his theory
of the Exodug to two essential passsges in the Bible, both of
whidr bear witness to the fact that the King died during the
pursuit of the fleeing llebrews. This detsit makes it impossible
for the Exodus to have taken place at any other time than at the
end of e reign.
rt must be repeated that there csn be titile doubt that the
Pheraoh lost his life as a result of lt. Chapters lB and 14 of
Exodus are quite specific on this point: "so he made ready his
chariot and took his army with him . . ." (Exodus 14,6). (pharaoh
king of Egypt) "pursued the people of Israel as they went forth
defiantly" (Exodus 14,8) . . . "The waters returned and covered
the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of Pharaoh thst
had followed them into the sea; not so much a,s one of them
remained." (Exodus 14,28 snd 29). In addition to these verses,
Psslm 188 confirms Pharaoh's death and refers to Yahweh who
TIlEBULE.THEQUB'ANANDSCIENCE
dier'schronology, andin1290B.C.according toRowton's.The
two
otherhypothesesoutlinedabove areuntenablebecause of
thefollowingimperative fact:RamessesIIisthePharaohof
theoppressionreferredtointheBible.
FatherdeVauxconsiders theExodustohavetakenplacedur­
ingthefirsthalfortowardsthemiddleofRamessesIrsreign.
Thushis
datingofthisevent isimprecise:hesuggests this
periodtoallowMosesandhisfollowerstime, asitwere,tosettle
inCanaan,
andRamessesII'ssuccessor,PharaohMemaptahwho
issaidtohavepacified thefrontiersafterhisfather'sdeath,to
bring
theChildrenofIsraelintoline,asdepictedonasteleof
theFifthyearofhisreign.
Twoargumentsmaybelevelledatthistheory:
a)TheBibleshows(Exodus 2,23)thattheKingof Egyptdied
duringtheperiodwhenMoses wasinMidian.ThisKing ofEgypt
isdescribedin theBookofExodusastheKingwhomadetheHe­
brewsbuild
thecitiesofRamessesandPithombyforcedlabour.
ThisKingwasRamessesII.TheExoduscouldonlyhavetaken
placeunder
thelatter'ssuccessor.FatherdeVauxclaimshow­
ever
todoubttheBiblicalsources ofverse23,chapter2of
Exodus.
b)Whatismoreastounding isthatFatherdeVaux,asdirector
oftheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalem,doesnot referinhistheory
oftheExodus totwoessentialpassagesin theBible,both of
whichbearwitness tothefactthattheKingdiedduring the
pursuitofthefleeingHebrews.Thisdetailmakes itimpossible
fortheExodustohavetakenplace atanyothertime thanatthe
end
ofareign.
Itmustberepeatedthattherecan belittledoubt thatthe
Pharaohlosthislifeasaresult ofit.Chapters13and14of
Exodus
arequitespecificonthispoint: uSohemadereadyhis
chariotandtookhis
armywithhim..."(Exodus14,6).(Pharaoh
king
ofEgypt)upursuedthepeople ofIsraelastheywent forth
defiantly"(Exodus14,8) ...uThewatersreturnedandcovered
thechariotsandthehorsemenandallthehostofPharaoh
that
hadfollowedthemintothesea;not somuchasoneofthem
remained."(Exodus14,28and
29).Inadditiontotheseverses,
Psalm136confirmsPharaoh'sdeathandrefers
toYahwehwho

249. Tlntu
ttl
"overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the $ea of Rusheg" (Psslms
196,16).
Thue, d,uring Moae{s l,ifetime, onn Plwro,oh died when Moscs
wds in Midien dnd, anntlwr dntri,ng tlue Erod'us. There were not
one, but two Pharaohs at the time of Moses: one during the
oppression and the other during the Exodus from Egypt. The
ttreory of e single Pheraoh (Ramesses II) put forward by Father
de Vaux is unsstisfactory because it does not account for every-
thing, The following obsemations are further srguments against
his theory.
3, RatmesetllrPlrulraoh of t .e Opptelrrfon
MeneptahrPlurrch of tllm E*oihlr
P. Montet has very discerningly resumed the originel Alexen-
drisnl tradition mentioned by Mespero. It is found much later
in the Islamic tradition ss well as in the clsssic Christien tra-
dition.z This theory is set out in Montet's book EgUpt and, the
Bible (L'Egmte et le Bible)
!
and is supported by additional
arguments, based in particulsr on the narrative contained in the
Qur'an, to which the famous archaeologist did not refer. Before
examining them however, \ilI€ shall first return to the Bible.
The Book of Exodus contsins a reference to the word
'Rameg'
ses' although the Pharaoh'g name is not mentioned. In the Bible
'Bamesses'
is the name of one of the cities built by the foreed
labour of the lfebrews. Todsy we know that these cities form
part of the Tanis-Qantir region, in the eastern Nile Delta. In the
area where Ramesses II built his northern capital, there were
other constructions prior to his, but it was Ramesses II who
made it into an important site, as the archeological excsvations
undertaken in the last few decades have amply shown' To build
it, he used the lsbour of the enslaved Hebrews.
There can be no doubt that in the Golden Age of the Ptolemies, his-
torical documents on Antiquity were preserved at Alexandria, only to
be destroyed at the time of the Roman conquest; a loss which is keenly
felt today.
In the Holy Ilistories of the early 20th century' as in the Hiatory by
Abbe H. Lesetre, intended for religious instruction, the Exodus is men-
tioned as havin8 taken place during Merneptah's reign in EgypL
1.
2.
3. Pub. Delachaux and Niertl€, Neuchat€l' 1969'
131
"overthrewPharaohandhishostin theSeaofRushes"(Psalms
136,15)•
Thus,duringMoses'slifetime,one Phara,01f,diedwhenMoses
W4BinMid:ia,na.nda.notherduringtheE~od'U8. Therewerenot
one,
buttwoPharaohs atthetime ofMoses:oneduringthe
oppressionandtheotherduringtheExodusfromEgypt.The
theoryofasinglePharaoh(Ramesses
II)putforwardby Father
deVauxisunsatisfactorybecause itdoesnotaccountforevery­
thing.Thefollowingobservations
arefurtherargumentsagainst
histheory.
3.RatneseB",Phaf'aohoftheOppreaion
Memeptah,
Phaf'tJOhoftheExodua
P.MontethasverydiscerninglyresumedtheoriginalAlexan­
drian
t
traditionmentionedbyMaspero. Itisfoundmuch later
intheIslamictradition aswellasintheclassicChristian tra­
dition.
2
Thistheoryissetout inMontet'sbook Egyptandthe
Bible
(L'EgypteetIeBible)aandissupportedbyadditional
arguments,basedinparticularonthenarrativecontainedinthe
Qur'an,
towhichthefamousarchaeologistdidnotrefer.Before
examiningthemhowever,weshallfirst
returntotheBible.
TheBookofExoduscontainsareferencetotheword'Rames"
ses'althoughthePharaoh'snameisnotmentioned.
IntheBible
'Ramesses'isthenameofoneofthecities
buBtbytheforced
labouroftheHebrews.Today
weknowthatthesecitiesform
partoftheTanis-Qantirregion,intheeasternNileDelta. Inthe
areawhereRamesses
IIbuilthisnortherncapital,therewere
otherconstructionspriortohis,but
itwasRamesses IIwho
made
itintoanimportantsite,asthearcheologicalexcavations
undertakeninthelastfewdecadeshaveamplyshown.Tobuild
it,heusedthelabouroftheenslavedHebrews.
1.TherecanbenodoubtthatintheGoldenAge ofthePtolemies,his­
toricaldocumentsonAntiquitywerepreservedatAlexandria,onlyto
bedestroyedatthetimeoftheRomanconquest;alosswhichiskeenly
felttoday.
2.IntheHolyHistoriesoftheearly20thcentury,asintheHistoryby
AbbeH.Lesetre,intendedforreligiousinstruction,theExodusismen­
tionedashavingtakenplaceduringMerneptah'sreigninEgypt.
3.Pub.DelachauxandNiestIe,Neuchatel,1959.

250. 2 2 THE BIBLE, THE QUITAN AND SCIENCE
when one resds the word
'Ramesges'
in the Bible today, one is
not particularly struck by it: the word has become very common
to us since champollion discovered the key to hieroglyphics
160 years ago, by examining the characters that expressed this
very word. We are therefore used to reading and pronouncing it
today and know what it means. one has to remember however
that the meaning of hieroglyphics had been lost in circa the
Third century B.c. and that Ramesses' name had hardly been
pnesen'ed anywhere except in the Bible and a few books written
in Greek and Latin which had deformed it to a lesser or greater
extent. It is for this rea$on that Tacitus in his Annals tattcs of
'Rhamsis'.
The Bible had however preserved the name intact: it
is referred to four times in the
pentateuch
or Torah (Genesis
47,11; Exodus 1,11 and lZ,gT; Numbers BB,B and 88,6).
Ttre Hebrew word for
'Ramesses'
is written in two ways in the
Bible:
'R6.
(e) mss' or
'Rfie6mss'r.
rn the Greek version of the
Bible' ealled the septuagint, it is
'R0mess€'.
In the Latin version
(vulgate) it is written
'Ramesses'.
rn the clementine version of
the Bible in Freneh (lst edition, 162l) the word is the s&me,
'Rarnesse'q'.
The French edition was in circulation at the time of
Champollion's work in this field. In his Summary of the Hibro-
gl'aphie system of the Aneient Egyptians (pr0cis'du systdme
hidroslyphique des anciens Egyptiens) (znd edition, lgzi, page
276), champollion alludes to the Biblical spelling of the word.
Thus the Bible had miraculously preserved R"*e.**s,s name
in its Hebrew, Greek and Latin versions.z
The preceding data alone are enough to establish the following:
a) There can be no question of the Exodus bef.lre a
,Ramesses'
had eome to the throne in Egypt (11 Kings of Egypt had this
name).
b) Moses was born during the reign of the pharaoh
who built
the cities of Ramesses and Pithom, i.e. Ramesses II.
The letter
'e'
ffgrres as the ayin in Hebrew.
rt ie strange to note moreover, that in old editions of the Bible, com-
mentatorr did not understand the meaning of the word at all. In the
French edition of the clementine Bibre, l62l, for example, an interpre-
tetion of the word'Ramesses'is given which makes total nonsens€:
'Thunder
of Vermin' (sic).
1.
2.
232 THEBmLE,THEQUR'AN ANDSCIENCE
Whenonereads theword'Rarnesses'intheBibletoday,oneis
notparticularlystruckbyit:thewordhasbecomeverycommon
toussinceChampolliondiscoveredthekeytohieroglyphics
150yearsago,byexaminingthecharacters
thatexpressedthis
veryword.We
arethereforeusedtoreadingandpronouncing it
todayandknowwhat itmeans.Onehastorememberhowever
thatthemeaningofhieroglyphicshadbeenlostincirca the
ThirdcenturyB.C. andthatRarnesses'name hadhardlybeen
preservedanywhereexceptintheBibleandafewbooks
written
inGreekandLatinwhichhaddeformed ittoalesserorgreater
extent.Itisforthisreason thatTacitusinhisAnnalstalks of
'Rhamsis'.TheBible hadhoweverpreservedthename intact:it
isreferredtofourtimesin thePentateuchorTorah(Genesis
47,11;Exodus1,11and12,37;Numbers33,3and33,5).
TheHebrewword
for'Rarnesses'is writtenintwowaysin the
Bible:'Ra(e)mss'or'Raeamss'l.IntheGreekversionofthe
Bible,called
theSeptuagint,itis'Rarnesse'.IntheLatinversion
(Vulgate)
itiswritten'Ramesses'. IntheClementineversionof
theBibleinFrench(1stedition,1621)thewordisthesame,
'Ramesses'.TheFrencheditionwasincirculation
atthetimeof
Champollion'sworkinthisfield.
InhisSummaryoftheHiero­
glyphicSystemoftheAncientEgyptians(Precisdusysteme
hieroglyphiquedesanciensEgyptiens)(2ndedition,
1828,page
276),ChampollionaHudestotheBiblicalspellingoftheword.
Thus
theBiblehadmiraculouslypreservedRarnesses'sname
initsHebrew,GreekandLatinversions.
2
Theprecedingdataaloneareenoughtoestablishthefollowing:
a)TherecanbenoquestionoftheExodusbefflrea'Rarnesses'
hadcometothethronein
Egypt(11KingsofEgypthadthis
name).
b)Moseswasborn duringthereignofthe Pharaohwhobuilt
thecitiesofRamessesandPithorn, I.e.RarnessesII.
1.Theletter'e'figuresastheayininHebrew.
2.
Itisstrangetonotemoreover, thatinoldeditions oftheBible,com­
mentatorsdidnotunderstandthemeaningofthewordatall.Inthe
FrencheditionoftheClementineBible,1621, forexample,aninterpre­
tationoftheword'Ramesses'isgivenwhich makestotalnonsense:
'ThunderofVermin'(sic).

251. Ttu Eroihn
fltil
c) When Moses was in Midian, the reigning Pharaoh (i'e'
Bamesses II) died. The continuation of Moses's story took plece
during the reign of Ramesses II's successor, Merneptah.
What is more, the Bible adds other highly important dsta
which help to situate the Exodus in the history of the Pharaohs.
It is the statement that Moses was eighty years old when, under
God's orders, he tried to persuade Pharaoh to free his brothers:
"Now Moses was eighty years old, and Aaron eighty-three years
years old, when they spoke to Pharaoh." (Exodus 7,71. Else-
where however, the Bible tells us (Exodus 2,23) that the Pharaoh
reigning at the time of the birth of Moses died when the latter
ruas in Midian, although the Biblical narration continues without
mentioning any change in the sovereign's name. These two pas-
sages in the Bible imply that the total number of years spanning
the reigns of the two Pharaohs ruling at the time when Moses
was livins in Egypt must have been eighty years at least.
It is knorvn that Ramesses II reigned for 6? years (1801-1235
B.C. according to Drioton and Vandier's chronology, 1290-L224
B.C. according to Rowton). For Merneptah, his successor, the
Egyptologists are unable, however, to provide the exact dates of
his reign. Nevertheless, it lasted for at least ten years becauge,
as Father deVaux points out, documents bear witness to the tenth
year of his reign. Drioton and Vandier give two possibilities for
Merneptah: either a ten-year reign, 1234-1224 l,.C., or a twenty-
year reign L224-1204 B.C. Egyptologists have no precise indica-
tions whatsoever on how Merneptah's reign came to an end: all
that can be said is that after his death, Egypt went through a
period of serious internal upheavals lssting nearly 26 years'
Even though the chronological data on these reigns are not
very precise, there was no other period during the New Kingdom
concordant with the Biblical narration when two successive
reigns (apart from Ramesses ll-Merneptah) amounted to or sur-
passed eishty years. The Biblical data concerning Moses's age
when he undertook the liberation of his brothers can only ccme
from a time during the successive reigns of Ramesses II srrd
TheExodua
c)WhenMoseswas inMidian,thereigningPharaoh(Le.
Ramesses
II)died.Thecontinuation ofMoses'sstorytookplace
duringthereignofRamessesII'ssuccessor,Merneptah.
Whatismore,theBibleadds otherhighlyimportantdata
whichhelp tosituatetheExodus inthehistoryofthePharaohs.
ItisthestatementthatMoseswaseightyyearsoldwhen,under
God'sorders,he
triedtopersuadePharaohtofreehis brothers:
"NowMoseswaseighty yearsold,andAaroneighty-three years
yearsold,whentheyspoketo Pharaoh."(Exodus7,7).Else­
wherehowever,
theBibletellsus(Exodus2,23) thatthePharaoh
reigningatthetimeofthebirthofMosesdiedwhenthe latter
wasinMidian,althoughtheBiblical narrationcontinueswithout
mentioninganychange
inthesovereign'sname.These twopas­
sages
intheBibleimply thatthetotalnumberofyearsspanning
thereignsofthetwo PharaohsrulingatthetimewhenMoses
waslivingin
Egyptmusthavebeeneightyyears atleast.
ItisknownthatRamessesIIreignedfor67years(1301-1235
B.C.accordingtoDriotonandVandier'schronology,1290-1224
B.C.accordingtoRowton).
ForMerneptah,hissuccessor, the
Egyptologistsareunable,however,toprovidetheexactdates of
hisreign.Nevertheless, itlastedfor atleasttenyearsbecause,
as
FatherdeVauxpointsout,documents bearwitnessto thetenth
yearofhisreign.DriotonandVandiergivetwopossibilities for
Merneptah:eitheraten-yearreign,1234-1224B.C., oratwenty­
yearreign1224-1204B.C.Egyptologistshavenopreciseindica­
tionswhatsoeveronhowMerneptah'sreigncameto
anend:all
thatcanbesaidis thatafterhisdeath,Egyptwentthrougha
period
ofseriousinternalupheavalslastingnearly25years.
Eventhoughthechronological
dataonthesereigns arenot
veryprecise,therewasnootherperiodduringtheNewKingdom
concordantwith
theBiblicalnarrationwhentwosuccessive
reigns
(apartfromRarnessesII-Merneptah)amountedto orsur­
passedeightyyears.TheBiblical dataconcerningMoses'sage
whenheundertooktheliberationofhis
brotherscanonlycome
fromatime
duringthesuccessivereignsofRamesses IIalld

252. 8II{ TIIE BIBI.q TIIE QUN'AN AND $GIENGE
Merneptahr. All the evidenee points towards the fact that Moses
was born at the beginning of Ramesses II's reign, was living in
Midian when Ba,messes rr died after a sixty-seven year reign,
and subsequently became the spokesman for the cause of the
Hebrews living in Egypt to Merneptah, Ramesses II's son and
suecesson This episode may have happened in the second half of
Merneptah's reign, assuming he reigned twenty years or nearly
twenty years. Rowton believes the supposition to be quite feasible.
Moses would then hsve led the Exodui at the end of Merneptah's
reign. It could hardly have been otherwise because both tne niue
and the Qur'an tell us that pharaoh perished during the pursuit
of the Hebrews leaving the country.
_
firis plan agrees perfecfly with the account contained in the
seriptures of Moses's infancy and of the way he was taken into
the Pharaoh's family. rt is a known faet that Ramesses II was
very old when he died l it is said that he was ninety to a hundred
years old. According to this theory, he would have been twenty_
three to thirty-three years ord at the beginning of his reign which
lssted sixty-seven yegrs. He could havJ been married at that age
and there is nothing to contradict the discovery of Moses by
,a
member of Pharaoh's household' (eccording to the eur'an), or
the fact that Pharaoh's wife asked him if he wouli keep the
newly-born child she had found on the bank of the Nile. ttre-Biute
claims that the ehild was found by phersoh's
daughter. In view of
Ramesses II's age at the beginning of his reign it would have
been perfectly possible for him to have had a daughter old enough
to discover the abandoned child. The eur'anic and Biblical narra-
tions do not contradict each other in eny wsy ou this 1nint.
The theory grven here is in absolute agieemdnt with ttre eurso
and is moreover at odds with only one single statement in the
Bible which occurs (as we have seen) in Kings r 6,1 (N.B. this
book is not included in the Torah). This passage is the subject of
much debate and Father de Vaux rejeets the historicsl data eon-
tained in this part of the Old Testament, which dates the Exodus
1- The period spanning the two reigrrs Sethos f-Ramesses II, which is Baid
to have lasted roughly eighty years, is out of the question: Sethos I's
reig'n-which u'as too short for this*-does not sqnare with the very long
stalr in Midian which llloses made as an adult and which took place dur-
jng the reign of the first of the two pharaohs
he was to know.
THEBIBLE,THE QUIrANANDSCIENCE
Merneptah
l
•
Alltheevidencepointstowardsthefact thatMoses
wasborn
atthebeginningofRarnesses II'sreign,waslivingin
MidianwhenRamesses
IIdiedafterasixty-sevenyearreign,
andsubsequentlybecamethespokesmanforthecauseofthe
Hebrewslivingin
EgypttoMerneptah,Ramesses Irssonand
successor.Thisepisodemayhavehappened
inthesecondhalfof
Merneptah'sreign,assuminghereignedtwentyyears ornearly
twentyyears.Rowtonbelieves
thesuppositiontobequitefeasible.
MoseswouldthenhaveledtheExodus
attheendofMerneptah's
reign.
Itcouldhardlyhavebeenotherwisebecauseboth theBible
andtheQur'antellus
thatPharaohperishedduringthepursuit
oftheHebrewsleaving thecountry.
Thisplanagreesperfectly with
theaccountcontainedinthe
Scriptures
ofMoses'sinfancyandofthewayhewastakeninto
thePharaoh'sfamily. Itisaknownfact thatRamessesIIwas
veryoldwhenhedied:
itissaidthathewasninety toahundred
yearsold.According
tothistheory,hewouldhavebeentwenty­
three
tothirty-threeyearsold atthebeginningofhisreignwhich
lastedsixty-sevenyears.Hecouldhavebeenmarried
atthatage
andthereisnothingtocontradictthediscoveryofMosesby
'a
memberofPharaoh'shousehold'(according totheQur'an),or
thefactthatPharaoh'swifeaskedhim ifhewouldkeepthe
newly-bornchildshehadfoundon
thebankoftheNile.TheBible
claims
thatthechildwasfoundbyPharaoh'sdaughter. Inviewof
Ramesses
II'sageatthebeginningofhisreign itwouldhave
beenperfectlypossibleforhimtohavehadadaughteroldenough
todiscovertheabandonedchild.TheQur'anicandBiblical narra­
tionsdonotcontradicteachotherinanywayODthispoint.
ThetheorygivenhereisinabsoluteagreementwiththeQur'an
andismoreover
atoddswithonlyonesinglestatement inthe
Biblewhichoccurs(aswehaveseen)inKingsI
6,1(N.B.this
bookisnotincludedintheTorah).Thispassageisthesubjectof
muchdebateand
FatherdeVauxrejectsthehistoricaldatacon­
tainedinthis
partoftheOldTestament,whichdatestheExodus
1.TheperiodspanningthetworeignsSethosI-RamessesII,whichissaid
tohavelastedroughlyeightyyears,isoutofthequestion:Sethos1'8
reign-whichwastooshortforthis--doesnotsquarewiththeverylong
stayinMidianwhichMosesmadeasanadultandwhichtookplacedur­
jngthereignofthefirstofthetwoPharaohshewastoknow.

253. T;* E*odw
235
in relatiorr to the construetion of Solomon's temple. The fact that
it is subject to doubt makes it impossible to retain it as a con-
clusive argument against the theory outlined here.
Tlw Problem of thc Stett Dating from the FifthTem of
MenwptuWcReiEfi
In the text of the famous stele dating from the fifth year of
Merneptah's reign critics tirink they have found an objection to
the theory set out here, in which the pursuit of the Jews consti-
tuted the last act of his reign.
The stele is of great interest because it represents the only
known document in hieroglyphics which contains the word
'fsrael'.r
The inscription which dates from the first part of Mer-
neptah's reign was discovered in Thebes in the Pharaoh's Fu-
neral Temple, It refers to a, series of victories he won over
Egypt's neighbouring states, in partieular a victory mentioned
af the end of the document over a "devastated Israel which has
no more seed . . " From this fact it has been held that the exisL
ence of the word
'fsrael'
implied that the Jews must already have
settled in Canaan by the fifth year of Mefneptah's reign, and that
in consequence, the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt had al-
ready taken place.
This objection does not seem tenable because it implies that
there could have been no Jews living in Canaan all the while there
were Jews in Egypt-a proposition it is impossible to aecept.
Father de Vaux however, in spite of the faet that he is a sup-
porter of the theory which makes Ramesses II the Pharaoh of
the Exodus, notesz the following about the settling of the Jews in
Canaan: "fn the South, the time when communities related to
the Israelites settled in the Kadesh region is unclear and dates
from before the Exodus," He therefore allows for the possibility
that eertain groups may have left Egypt at a time different from
that of Moses and his followers. The
'Apiru
or Habi,rzr who have
sometimes been identified with the Israelites were already in
Syria-Palestine long before Ramesses II and the Exodus: we
have documentary evidence which proves that Amenophis II
The word is followed by a generic determinativewhich leaves no doubt
as to the fact that this term signifies a
'human
community or group"
In his book
.The
Ancient History of lvaef (Histoire ancienne d'Israel)
1.
2.
TheExodU8 235
inrelationto theconstructionofSolomon'stemple.The factthat
itissubjecttodoubtmakes itimpossibletoretainitasacon­
clusive
argumentagainstthetheoryoutlinedhere.
TheProblemoftheSteleDatingfrom theFifthYearof
M(mleptah'sReign
Inthetextofthefamousstele datingfromthefifthyearof
Merneptah's
reigncriticsthinktheyhavefound anobjectionto
thetheorysetouthere,inwhichthe pursuitoftheJewsconsti­
tutedthe
lastactofhisreign.
Thesteleis
ofgreatinterestbecauseitrepresentstheonly
knowndocument
inhieroglyphicswhichcontains theword
'Israel'.1Theinscriptionwhichdatesfrom
thefirstpartofMer­
neptah'sreignwasdiscoveredinThebes inthePharaoh'sFu­
neralTemple. Itreferstoaseriesofvictorieshewonover
Egypt'sneighbouringstates, inparticularavictorymentioned
attheendofthedocumentovera"devastated Israelwhichhas
nomoreseed .."Fromthisfactithasbeenheld thattheexist­
ence
oftheword'Israel'implied thattheJews mustalreadyhave
settledinCanaanbythefifth
yearofMerneptah'sreign,and that
inconsequence,theExodusof theHebrewsfrom Egypthadal­
ready
takenplace.
Thisobjectiondoesnotseemtenablebecause
itimpliesthat
therecouldhavebeennoJewslivinginCanaanallthewhile there
wereJewsinEgypt-apropositionitisimpossibletoaccept.
FatherdeVauxhowever,inspite ofthefactthatheisasup­
porterofthetheorywhichmakesRamesses IIthePharaohof
theExodus,notes
2
thefollowingabout thesettlingof theJewsin
Canaan:"IntheSouth,thetimewhencommunitiesrelatedto
theIsraelitessettledintheKadeshregionisunclearanddates
frombeforetheExodus."Hethereforeallows
forthepossibility
thatcertaingroupsmayhave leftEgyptatatimedifferentfrom
thatofMosesandhisfollowers.The 'ApiruorHabiruwhohave
sometimesbeenidentifiedwiththeIsraeliteswerealreadyin
Syria-PalestinelongbeforeRamesses
IIandtheExodus:we
havedocumentaryevidencewhichproves
thatAmenophisII
1.Thewordisfollowedbyagenericdeterminativewhichleavesnodoubt
astothefactthatthistermsignifiesa 'humancommunityorgroup'.
2.Inhisbook'TheAncientHistoryofIsrael'(Histoireancienned'Israel)

254. 936 THE BIBLE, THE QURAN AND SCIENCE
brought baek s,600 prisoners to work as forced labourers in
Eeypt. others were to be found in Canaan under Sethos I where
they caused unrest in the Beth-Shean region: p.
Montet reminds
us of this in his book Egupt and the Eible (L'Esypte et Ia Bible) .
rt is quite plausible to suppgse therefore that Merneptah wes
obliged to deal severely with these rebellious elements on his
borders while inside them were those who were later to rally
around Moses to flee the country. The existence of the stele dating
from the fifth year of Merneptah's reign does not in any way
detract from the present theory.
Moreover, the fact tlnt the asord,Israel
figures i,n the h,istory
of the Jewi.sh people is toto,Ily uncannected, wi,th the notion that
Moees a,nd' his f ollnwers settled in ca,naan. The origin of the word
is ss follows:
According to Genesis (gz,zgl-, rsrael is the second name given
to Jacob, son of Isaac and grandson of Abraham. The commenta-
tors of the Ecwnenieal rra,nsrntion of the Bibte-otd, Testament
(Traduction oecumdnique de la Bible-Ancien Testament) , Lg76,
think that its meaning is probably that
,God
shows Himself in
His strength'. since it has been given to a single man, it is not
surprising that it was given to a community or group of people
in memory of a distinguished ancestor
The name
'Israel',
therefore appeared well before Moses: sev_
eral hundred years before to be exact. rt is not surprising con_
sequently to see it cited in a stele from the reign of itre
ph-araoh
Merneptah' The fact that it is cited does not at all constitute an
arg'ument in favour of a theory which dates the Exodus before
the fifth year of Merneptah's reign.
what it does do is refer to a group which it ealls
.rsrael',
but
Merneptah's stele cannot be alluding to a politically established
collectivity because the inscription dates i"o* the end of the
Thirteenth century B,c. and the Kingdom of Israel was hot
formed until the Tenth century B.c. It must therefore refer to
a human community of more modest proportions.r
1. "Tf;"m"
'rsrael'
(in the stere) is aceompanied by the generic deter-
minstive
'people'
instead of the determinaiive
,country',
as is the case
for the other proper names in the stele" writes Father B. couroyer,
Professor at the Biblical School of Jerusalem, in his commentary to the
translation of the Book of Exodus (pub. Editions du cerf, paris,
196g,
page 12).
236 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
broughtback3,600prisoners
toworkasforcedlabourersin
Egypt.Otherswere
tobefoundinCanaanunderSethosIwhere
theycaused
unrestintheBeth-Sheanregion: P.Montetreminds
us
ofthisinhisbook EgyptandtheBible (L'EgypteetlaBible).
Itisquiteplausibleto sUPPQsethereforethatMerneptahwas
obligedtodealseverelywiththeserebelliouselementsonhis
borderswhileinsidethemwerethosewhowere
latertorally
aroundMosesto
fleethecountry.Theexistenceof thesteledating
from
thefifthyear ofMerneptah'sreigndoesnotin anyway
detractfromthepresenttheory.
Moreover,
thefactthattheword'Israel'figures
inthehistory
oftheJewishpeople istotallyunconnected withthenotionthat
M
08esandhisfollowerssettled inCanaan.Theoriginof theword
is
asfollows:
AccordingtoGenesis(32,29),Israelisthesecondnamegiven
toJacob,son ofIsaacandgrandson ofAbraham.Thecommenta­
torsoftheEcumenicalTranslation oftheBible-OldTestament
(TraductionoecumeniquedelaBible-Ancien
Testament),1975,
thinkthatitsmeaningisprobably that'GodshowsHimselfin
HisStrength'.Since
ithasbeengiventoasingleman, itisnot
surprisingthatitwasgiventoacommunity orgroupofpeople
inmemoryofadistinguishedancestor.
Thename'Israel',thereforeappearedwellbeforeMoses:sev­
eralhundredyearsbeforeto beexact.Itisnotsurprisingcon­
sequentlytosee
itcitedinastelefromthereign ofthePharaoh
Merneptah.Thefact thatitisciteddoesnot atallconstitutean
argumentinfavourofatheorywhichdates
theExodusbefore
thefifth
yearofMerneptah'sreign.
What
itdoesdoisrefertoagroupwhich itcalls'Israel',but
Merneptah'sstelecannotbealludingtoapoliticallyestablished
collectivitybecausetheinscriptiondatesfromtheend
ofthe
ThirteenthcenturyB.C.andtheKingdom
ofIsraelwas'not
formeduntil
theTenthcenturyB.C. Itmusttherefore referto
ahumancommunity
ofmoremodestproportions. 1
1."Thename'Israel'(inthestele)isaccompaniedbythegenericdeter­
minative'people'insteadofthedeterminative'country',asisthecase
fortheotherpropernamesinthestele"writesFatherB.Couroyer,
ProfessorattheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalem,inhiscommentarytothe
translationoftheBookofExodus(Pub.EditionsduCerf,Paris,1968,
page12).

255. Tlre Eroilus 237
Nowadays, we knorv that the entry of
'Israel'
into history was
preceded by a long formatory period of eight or nine centuries.
This period was distinguished by the settling of many semi-
Nomadic g:roups, especially the Amorites and the Arameans all
over the region. In the same period, Patriarchs began to appear
in their communities among whom were Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob-Israel. The second name of this last Patriarch was used to
designate the original group, the nucleus of a future political
entity which was to appear long after Merneptah's reign, since
the Kingdom of Israel lasted from 931 or 930 to 721 B.C.
4, The Description Contained in the IIoIg Sct'iptwes of thc
PharaoVs Death During the Exodus.
This event marks a very important point in the narrations con-
tained in the Bible and the Qur'an. It stands forth very elearly in
the texts. It is referred to in the Bible, not only in the Pentateuch
or Torah, but also in the Psalms: the references have already
been given.
It is very strange to find that Christian eommentators have
completely ignored it. Thus, Father de Vaux maintains the theory
that the Exodus from Egypt took place in the first half or the
middle of Ramesses II's reign. His theory takes no account of the
fact that the Pharaoh perished during the Exodus, a fact which
should make all hypotheses place the event at the end of a reign.
In his Aneient History of Israel (Histoire ancienne d'Isra6l), the
Head of the Biblical School of Jerusalem does not seem to be at all
troubled by the contradiction between the theory he maintains
and the data contained in the two Books of the Bible: the Torah
and Psalms.
In his book, EgUpt und. the llible (L'Egypte et la Bible)' P.
Montet places the Exodus during Merneptah's reign, but says
nothing about the death of the Pharaoh who rvas at the head of
the army following the fleeing Hebrews.
This hiehly surprising attitude contrasts with the Jews' out-
look I Psalm 136, verse 15 gives thanks to God who "overthrew
Pharaoh and his host in the Sea of Rushes" and is often recited
in their liturgy. They know of the agreement between this verse
and the passage in Exodus (14,28-29) : "The waters returned
TheExodu8 237
Nowadays,weknowthattheentryof'Israel'intohistorywas
precededbyalongformatoryperiodofeightorninecenturies.
Thisperiodwasdistinguishedbythesettlingofmanysemi­
Nomadicgroups,especiallytheAmoritesandtheArameansall
overtheregion.Inthesameperiod,Patriarchsbegantoappear
intheircommunitiesamongwhomwereAbraham,Isaacand
Jacob-Israel.ThesecondnameofthislastPatriarchwasusedto
designatetheoriginalgroup,thenucleusofafuturepolitical
entitywhichwastoappearlongafterMerneptah'sreign,since
theKingdomofIsraellastedfrom931or930to721B.C.
4.TheDescriptionContained intheI10lUSCf'ipturesofthe
Pharaoh'sDeathDuringtheExodus.
Thiseventmarksaveryimportantpointinthenarrationscon­
tainedintheBibleandtheQur'an.Itstandsforthveryclearlyin
thetexts.ItisreferredtointheBible,notonlyinthePentateuch
orTorah,butalsointhePsalms:thereferenceshavealready
beengiven.
ItisverystrangetofindthatChristiancommentatorshave
completelyignoredit.Thus,FatherdeVauxmaintainsthetheory
thattheExodusfromEgypttookplace inthefirsthalforthe
middleofRamessesII'sreign.Histheorytakesnoaccountofthe
factthatthePharaohperishedduringtheExodus,afactwhich
shouldmakeallhypothesesplacetheeventattheendofareign.
InhisAncientHistoryofIsrael(Histoireancienned'Israel),the
HeadoftheBiblicalSchool ofJerusalemdoesnotseemtobeatall
troubledbythecontradictionbetweenthetheoryhemaintains
andthedatacontainedinthetwoBooksoftheBible:theTorah
andPsalms.
Inhisbook,EgyptandtheBible (L'Egypteet1aBible),P.
MontetplacestheExodusduringMerneptah'sreign,butsays
nothingaboutthedeathofthePharaohwhowasattheheadof
thearmyfollowingthefleeingHebrews.
ThishighlysurprisingattitudecontrastswiththeJews'out­
look:
Psalm136,verse15givesthankstoGod who"overthrew
PharaohandhishostintheSeaofRushes"andi8oftenrecited
intheirliturgy.Theyknowoftheagreementbetweenthisverse
andthepassageinExodus(14,28-29):"Thewatersreturned

256. 238 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
and covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of
Pharaoh that had followed them into the sea; not so much as one
of them remained." There is no shadow of a doubt for them that
the Pharaoh and his troups were wiped out. These same texts are
present in Christian Bibles.
Christian commentators quite deliberately, and in contradic-
tion to all the evidence, brush aside the Pharaoh's death. What is
more however, some of them mention the reference made to it in
the Qur'an and encourag:e their readers to make very strange
comparisons. In the translation of the Bible directed by the Bibli-
cal Sehool of Jerusalem' we find the following commentary on the
Pharaoh's death by Father Couroyer:
"The Koran refers to this (Pharaoh's death) (sura 10, verses
90-92), and popular tradition has it that the pharaoh
who was
drowned with his army (an event whieh is not mentioned in the
Holy Text'?) lives beneath the ocean where he rules over the men
of the sea, i.e. the seals".
It is obvious that the uninformed reader of the eur'an is bound
to establish a connection between a statement in it which-for the
commentator-contradicts the Biblical text and this absurd
legend which comes from a so-called popurar tradition mentioned
in the commentary after the reference to the eur'an.
The real meaning of the statement in the eur'an on this has
nothing to do with what this commentator suggests: verses g0
to
92, sura 10 inform us that the chirdren of Israel crossed the sea
while the Pharaoh and his troops were pursuing them and that
it was only when the Pharaoh was about to be drowned that he
eried: "I believe there is no God exeept the God in which the
Chilldren of Israel believe. I am of those who submit themselves
to Him." God replied: "what? Now! Thou hast rebelled and
caused depravity. This day We save thee in thy body so that thou
mayest be a sisn for those who will come after thee."
This is all that the sura contains on the pharaoh's
death. There
is no question of the phantasms recorded by the Biblical commen_
tator either here or anywhere else in the eur'an. The text of the
Qur'an merely states very clearly that the
pharaoh,s
body will
be saved: that is the important piece of information.
L'Exode (Exodus), 1968. page ?8, pub.
Les Editions du cerf, paris.
There can be no doubt that this eorrnmentator is referring to the Bible.
1.
2.
238 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
andcoveredthechariotsandthehorsemenandallthehostof
Pharaohthathadfollowedthemintothesea;notsomuchasone
ofthemremained."Thereisnoshadow ofadoubtforthemthat
thePharaohandhistroupswerewipedout.Thesesame textsare
presentinChristianBibles.
Christiancommentatorsquitedeliberately, andincontradic­
tiontoall
theevidence,brushasidethePharaoh'sdeath.Whatis
morehowever,some ofthemmentionthereferencemadeto itin
theQur'anandencouragetheirreaderstomake verystrange
comparisons.InthetranslationoftheBibledirectedby theBibli­
calSchool
ofJerusalem
1
wefindthefollowingcommentaryon the
Pharaoh'sdeathbyFatherCouroyer:
"TheKoranreferstothis(Pharaoh'sdeath)(sura10,verses
90-92),
andpopulartraditionhasitthatthePharaohwhowas
drowned
withhisarmy(aneventwhichisnotmentioned inthe
HolyText
2
)
livesbeneath theoceanwhereherulesoverthemen
ofthesea,Le.theseals".
ItisobviousthattheuninformedreaderoftheQur'anisbound
toestablishaconnectionbetweena
statementinitwhich-forthe
commentator-contradictstheBiblical textandthisabsurd
legendwhichcomes fromaso-calledpopulartraditionmentioned
in
thecommentaryafterthereferenceto theQur'an.
TherealmeaningofthestatementintheQur'anonthishas
nothingtodowithwhatthiscommentatorsuggests:verses90to
92,
sura10informusthattheChildrenofIsraelcrossedthesea
while
thePharaohandhistroopswere pursuingthemandthat
itwasonlywhen thePharaohwasabouttobedrowned thathe
cried:"IbelievethereisnoGodexcept theGodinwhich the
ChilldrenofIsraelbelieve.I amofthosewho submitthemselves
toHim."Godreplied: "What?Now!Thou hastrebelledand
causeddepravity. ThisdayWesavetheein thybodyso thatthou
mayestbeaSignforthosewhowillcome afterthee."
Thisisallthatthesuracontainson thePharaoh'sdeath.There
isnoquestion ofthephantasmsrecordedbytheBiblicalcommen­
tatoreitherhereoranywhereelseintheQur'an.Thetextofthe
Qur'anmerelystatesveryclearly thatthePharaoh'sbodywill
besaved:
thatistheimportantpieceofinformation.
1.L'Exode(Exodus),1968,page73,Pub.LesEditionsduCerf,Paris.
2.TherecanbenodoubtthatthiscommentatorisreferringtotheBible.

257. Tlp Exo6,t,o
l[tg
When the Qur'an was transmitted to man by the Prophet, the
bodies of all the Pharaohs who are today considered (rightly or
wrongly) to have something to do with the Exodus were in their
tomhs of the Necropolis of Thebes, on the opposite side of the
Nile from Luxor. At the time however, absolutely nothing was
known of this fact, and it was not until the end of the Nineteenth
century that they were discovered there. As the Qur'an states, the
body of the Pharaoh of the Exodus was in fact rescued: which-
eVer of the Pharaohs it was, visitors may see him in the Royal
Mummies Room of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo. The truth is
therefore very different from the ludicrous legend that Father
Couroyer has attached to the Qur'an.
5. Plwraoh Merneptah' a MummY
The mummified body of Merneptah, son of R.amesses II and
Pharaoh of the Exodus-all the evidence points to this-was dis-
covered by Loret in 1898 at Thebes in the Kings' Valley whence
it was transported to Cairo. EIIiot Smith removed its wrappings
on the 8th of July, 190?: he gives a detailed description of this
operation and the examination of the body in his book TIt'e Rogal
Mummies (1912). At that time the mummy was in a satisfactory
state of preservation, in spite of deterioration in several parts.
Since then, the mummy has been on show to visitors at the Cairo
Museum, with his head and neck uncovered and the rest of body
concealed under a cloth. It is so well hidden indeed, that until
very recently, the only general photographs of the mummy that
the Museum possessed were those taken by E. Smith in 1912.
In June 1975, the Egyptian high authorities very kindly al'
lowed me to examine the parts of the Pharaoh's body that had
been covered until then. They also allowed me to take photo-
graphs. When the mummy's present state \4'as compared to the
condition it was in over sixty years ago, it rvas abundantly clear
that it had deteriorated and fragments had disappeared. The
mummified tissues had suffered greatly, at the hand of man in
some places and through the passage of time in others.
This natural deterioration is easily explained by the changes in
the conditions of conservation from thc time in the late Nine-
teenth century when it was discovered. Its discovery took place
T1aeExodm 239
WhentheQur'anwastransmittedtomanbytheProphet,the
bodiesofallthePharaohswhoaretodayconsidered (rightlyor
wrongly)tohavesomethingto dowiththeExoduswerein their
tombsoftheNecropolisofThebes,on theoppositeside ofthe
NilefromLuxor.Atthetimehowever,absolutelynothingwas
known
ofthisfact,and itwasnotuntiltheendof theNineteenth
centurythattheywerediscoveredthere.As theQur'anstates,the
bodyofthePharaohoftheExoduswasin factrescued:which­
ever
ofthePharaohsitwas,visitorsmayseehim intheRoyal
MummiesRoomof
theEgyptianMuseum,Cail·o.The truthis
thereforeverydifferentfrom theludicrouslegend thatFather
Couroyerhasattachedto theQur'an.
5.PharaohMemel'tah'sMummy
ThemummifiedbodyofMerneptah,sonofRamesses IIand
PharaohoftheExodus-alltheevidencepointsto this-wasdis­
coveredby
Loretin1898atThebesintheKings'Valleywhence
itwastransportedtoCairo.Elliot Smithremoveditswrappings
on
the8thofJuly,1907:hegivesadetaileddescription ofthis
operationandtheexaminationof thebodyinhisbookTheRoyal
Mummies(1912).Atthattimethemummywasinasatisfactory
stateofpreservation,inspiteofdeteriorationinseveral parts.
Sincethen,themummy hasbeenonshow tovisitorsattheCairo
Museum,
withhisheadandneckuncovered andtherestofbody
concealed
underacloth.Itissowellhiddenindeed, thatuntil
veryrecently,
theonlygeneralphotographsof themummythat
theMuseumpossessedwerethose takenbyE.Smithin1912.
InJune1975,theEgyptianhighauthoritiesverykindlyal­
lowedmetoexamine
thepartsofthePharaoh'sbodythathad
beencovereduntilthen.Theyalsoallowedmeto
takephoto­
graphs.Whenthemummy'spresent
statewascomparedto the
conditionitwasinoversixtyyearsago, itwasabundantlyclear
thatithaddeterioratedandfragmentshaddisappeared.The
mummifiedtissueshadsufferedgreatly,
atthehandofmanin
someplacesand
throughthepassageoftimeinothers.
This
naturaldeteriorationiseasilyexplained bythechangesin
theconditionsofconservation
fromth\:ltimein thelateNine­
teenthcenturywhen itwasdiscovered.Itsdiscoverytookplace

258. 2,LO THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENGE
in the tomb of the Necropolis of Thebes where the mummy had
lain for over three thousand years. Today, the mummy is dis-
played in a simple glass case which does not afrord hermetic in-
lglation
from the outside, nor does it ofrer protection from pol-
lution by micro-organisms. The mummy is exposed to fluetuations
in temperature snd seasonal changes in humidity: it is very far
from the conditions whieh enabled it to remain protected from
any source of deteriorstion for approximately three thousand
yesrs. It has lost the protection afforded by its wrappings and
the advantage of remaining in the closed environ*.nt of tt *
tomb where the temperature was more constant and the air less
humid than it is in cairo at certain times of the year. of course,
while it was in the Necropolis itself, the mummy had to with-
stand the visits of grave plunderers (probably very early on) and
rodents: they caused a certain atnount of damage, bui the eon_
ditions were nevertheless (it seems) much more favourable for
it to stand the test of time than they are today.
At my suggestion, speeiar investigations were made during this
examinstion of the mummy in June rg?8. An excellent
""aio-g_raphic study was made by Doctors El Meligy and Ramsiys, and
the examination of the interior of the thoril, through a-gap in
the thoracic wall, was carried out by Doctor Mustapha Miniala-
wiy in addition to an investigation of the abdomen. This was the
first example of endoscopy being applied to a mummy. This tech_
nique enabled us to see and pho[ograph some very important
details inside the body. professor
ceceardi perfo"rn*a a generar
medico-legal study which will be completea uv *n
"*"*fnationunder the microscope of some small fratments that spontaneously
fell from the mummy's body: this examination will be carried out
by Professor Mignot and Doctor Durigon. I regret to say that de-
finitive pronouncements
cannot be made by the time this book
goes to print.r
what may already be derived from this examination is the dis-
covery of multiple lesions of the bones with broad lacunae, some
of which may have been mortal*although it is not yet possible to
ascertain whether some of them occurred before or after the
Pharaoh's death. He most probably died eifher from drowning,
aecording to the Scriptural narrations, or from very violent
1. N"r"*b-rt 19?6 for the First French edition.
240 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'AN ANDSCIENCE
inthetomb oftheNecropolisofThebeswherethemummyhad
lainforoverthreethousandyears.Today,themummyisdis­
playedinasimpleglasscasewhichdoesnotaffordhermeticin­
sulationfromtheoutside,nordoes
itofferprotectionfrompol­
hitionbymicro-organisms.Themummyisexposedtofluctuations
intemperatureandseasonalchangesinhumidity:
itisveryfar
fromtheconditionswhichenabled
ittoremainprotectedfrom
anysource
ofdeteriorationforapproximatelythreethousand
years.
Ithaslosttheprotectionaffordedbyitswrappingsand
theadvantageofremainingin
theclosedenvironmentofthe
tombwhere
thetemperaturewasmoreconstantandthe
airless
humidthan
itisinCairo atcertaintimes oftheyear.Ofcourse,
while
itwasintheNecropolisitself,themummyhad
towith­
standthevisitsofgraveplunderers(probablyveryearlyon)and
rodents:theycausedacertainamountofdamage,
butthecon­
ditionswerenevertheless
(itseems)muchmorefavourablefor
ittostandthe testoftimethanthey aretoday.
Atmysuggestion,specialinvestigationsweremadeduringthis
examination
ofthemummyin June1975.Anexcellentradio­
graphicstudywasmadebyDoctorsEIMeligyandRamsiys,and
theexamination
oftheinteriorofthethorax,througha gapin
thethoracicwall,wascarriedoutbyDoctorMustaphaManiala·
wiyinadditionto
aninvestigationoftheabdomen.Thiswasthe
firstexample
ofendoscopybeingappliedtoamummy.Thistech­
niqueenabledustoseeandphotographsomeveryimportant
detailsinsidethebody.ProfessorCeccaldiperformedageneral
medico-legalstudywhichwillbecompletedbyanexamination
underthemicroscopeofsomesmallfragments
thatspontaneously
fellfromthemummy'sbody:thisexaminationwill
becarriedout
byProfessorMignotandDoctorDurigon.
Iregrettosaythatde­
finitivepronouncementscannotbemadebythetimethisbook
goestoprint.
1
Whatmayalready bederivedfromthisexaminationisthedis­
covery
ofmultiplelesionsoftheboneswithbroadlacunae,some
ofwhichmayhavebeenmortal....!-although
itisnotyetpossibleto
ascertainwhethersomeofthemoccurredbefore
orafterthe
Pharaoh'sdeath.Hemostprobablydiedeitherfromdrowning,
aecordingtotheScripturalnarrations,orfromveryviolent
1.November,1975 fortheFirstFrenchedition.

259. tft|ptu tal
shoeks preceding the moment when he was drowned'+r both at
ollgE.
The eonnection of these lesions with the deterioration whos€
E{rurces heve been mentioned above renders the correct preserva'
tion of the murnmy of the Pharaoh eomewhst problematieal, un-
less precautionary and restoretive measures are not taken very
stxln, These messures should ensure that the only conerete evi-
dence which we still possess today concerning the death of the
Pharaoh of the Exodus and the rescue of his body, wilted by God'
does not disappear wittt the passage of time.
It is alwrys desirsble for man to spply himself to the preser-
vstion of relics of his history, but here we have something which
gpes beyond that: it is the msterial presenee of the mummified
UoAV of the man who knew Moses, resisted his pless, pursued
him ss he took flight, logt his life in the process. His eerthly re-
msins were saved by the Will of God from destruction to become
a sign to man, as it is written in the Qurran.r
Those who seek smong modern dsts for proof of the veracity
of the Holy Scriptures will find a magnificent illustration of the
venres of the Qurran dealing with the Pharsoh's body by visiting
the Boyal Mummies Room of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo !
f. ft* -g*y of Ranesses II, who was another witness to Moses's story,
her been the cubj€ct of a atudy comperable to the one carried out on the
mummy of Merneptah; tbe same restoration work is required for it.
Ttatnlotort' ffotcl
The rerultr of these medical studies carried out in Gairo, 19?5, were
read by the ruthor before several French learned societies, including
the
,Acadcmie
Nationsle de Mfdecine' (National Academy of Mede-
cine), during the first part of 19?6. The knowledge of these results led
the Eryptian Authorities to take the decision to transport the mummy
of EamesEes U to France. Thus it arrived for treatment in Paris on the
26th Septcmber 1976'
141
shocksprecedingthemomentwhenhewasdrowned-orbothat
once.
Theconnectionoftheselesions withthedeteriorationwhose
sources
havebeenmentionedabove rendersthecorrectpreserva­
tion
ofthemummyofthePharaohsomewhatproblematical, un­
lessprecautionaryandrestorativemeasuresarenottakenvery
soon.These measuresshouldensurethattheonlyconcreteevi­
dencewhichwestillpossesstodayconcerning
thedeathofthe
PharaohoftheExodusandtherescueofhisbody,willedbyGod,
does
notdisapPearwiththepassageoftime.
Itisalwaysdesirable formantoapplyhimself tothepreser­
vationofrelicsofhishistory,butherewehavesomethingwhich
goesbeyond
that:itisthematerialpresenceofthemummified
body
ofthemanwhoknewMoses,resisted hispleas,pursued
himashetookflight,lost hislifeintheprocess.His earthlyre­
mainsweresaved bytheWillofGodfromdestructiontobecome
a
signtoman,asitiswrittenintheQur'an.
1
Thosewhoseekamong moderndataforproofoftheveracity
oftheHolyScriptureswillfindamagnificentillustration ofthe
versesoftheQur'andealingwiththePharaoh'sbodybyvisiting
theRoyalMummiesRoom oftheEgyptianMuseum,Cairo!
1.ThemummyofRamessesII,whowasanotherwitnesstoMoses'sstory,
haabeenthesubjectofastudycomparabletotheonecarriedoutonthe
mummyofMemeptah;thesamerestorationwork isrequiredforit.
T,.CluICltor,'Note:
Theresultsofthesemedicalstudies carriedoutinCairo,1975,were
readbytheauthorbeforeseveralFrenchlearnedsocieties,including
the'AcademieNationaledeMedecine' (NationalAcademyofMede­
cine),duringthefirstpartof1976.Theknowledgeoftheseresultsled
theEgyptianAuthoritiestotakethedecisiontotransportthemummy
ofRamesses11toFrance.ThusitarrivedfortreatmentinParisonthe
26thSeptember1976.

260. The Qur'arD
]ladiths and
Floderrr Scierrce
The Qur'an does not eonstitute the sole source of doctrine and
Iegislation in rslam. During Muhammad's life and after his death,
complementary information of a legislative nature was indeed
sought in the study of the words and deeds of the
prophet.
Although writing was used in the transmission of n"aitn from
the very beginning, a lot of this came also from the oral tradition.
Those who undertook to assemble them in collections made the
kind of enquiries which are always very taxing before recording
accounts of past events. They nevertheless had a great regard for
accuracy in their arduous task of collecting information. This is
illustrated by the fact that for all of the prophet's
sayings, the
most venerable collections always bear the names of those re-
sponsible for the account, going right back to the person who first
collected the information from members of Muhammad's family
or his companions.
A very large number of collections of the
prophet's
words and
deeds thus appeared under the title of Hadiths. The exact mean-
ing of the word is
'utterances',
but it is also customary to use it
to mean the narration of his deeds.
Some of the collections were made public in the decades follow-
ing Muhammad's death. Just over two hundred years were to
pass before some of the most important collections appeared. The
most authentic record of the facts is in the collections of Al Buh-
hari and Muslim, which date from over. two hundred years after
242
ThEQuran,
Hadilhsand
~odE..nSt::iEnt::E
TheQur'andoesnotconstitutethesolesource ofdoctrineand
legislationinIslam.DuringMuhammad~s lifeandafterhisdeath,
complementary
informationofalegislativenaturewasindeed
soughtinthestudyofthewordsanddeedsoftheProphet.
Althoughwritingwasusedin thetransmissionofhadithfrom
theverybeginning,alot ofthiscamealso fromtheoraltradition.
Thosewhoundertook toassemblethemincollectionsmade the
kindofenquirieswhich arealwaysverytaxingbeforerecording
accounts
ofpastevents.Theynevertheless hadagreatregardfor
accuracyin theirarduoustaskofcollectinginformation.This is
illustratedbythefactthatforalloftheProphet'ssayings,the
mostvenerablecollectionsalways bearthenamesofthosere­
sponsiblefortheaccount,goin~rightbackto thepersonwhofirst
collectedthe
informationfrommembersofMuhammad'sfamily
orhiscompanions.
Avery
largenumberofcollectionsoftheProphet'swordsand
deedsthusappearedunderthetitleofHadiths.Theexactmean­
ingofthewordis 'utterances',butitisalsocustomarytouse it
tomeanthenarrationofhisdeeds.
Some
ofthecollectionsweremadepublic inthedecadesfollow­
ingMuhammad'sdeath. Justovertwo hundredyearswereto
passbeforesome
ofthemostimportantcollectionsappeared.The
mostauthenticrecord
ofthefactsisinthecollectionsofAlBu!f­
hariandMuslim,which datefromovertwohundred yearsafter
242

261. Th.e Qufan, Hadith atd, Modern Scietrce 243
Muhammad and which provide a wider trustworthy account. In
recent years, a bilingual Arabic/English edition has been pro-
vided by Doctor Muhammed Muhsin Shan,
of the Islamic Uni-
versity of Madina.' Al Bukhari's work is generally regarded as
the most authentic after the Qur'an and
'was
translated into
Freneh (1903-1914) by Houdas and Marcais under the title Les
Traditi.ons Islamiques (Islamie Traditions). The Hadiths are
therefore accessible to those who do not speak Arabic. One must'
however, be wary of certain translations made by Europeans, in-
cluding the French translation, because they contain inaceuracies
and untruths which are often more of interpretation than of
actual translation. Sometimes, they considerably change the real
meaning of a hadith, to such an extent indeed that they attribute
a sense to it which it does not eontain.
As regards their origins, some of the hadiths and Gospels have
one point in common which is that neither of them was compiled
by an author who was an eyewitness of the events he describes.
Nor were they compiled until sorne time after the events recorded.
The hadiths, like the Gospels, have not all been accepted as au-
thentic. Only a small number of them receive the quasi-unani-
mous approval of specialists in Muslim Tradition so that, except
al-Muwatta, Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Bukhari, one finds in the
same book, hadiths presumed to be authentic side by side with
ones which are either dubious, or should be reiected outright.
In contrast to Canonic Gospels which though questioned by
some modern scholars but which have never been contested by
Christian high authorities, even those hadiths that are most
worthy to be considered as authentic have been the subject of
criticism. Very early in the history of Islam, masters in Islamic
thought exercised a thorough criticism of the hadiths, although
the basic book (The Qur'an) remained the book of reference and
was not to be questioned.
I thought it of interest to delve into the literature of the hadiths
to find out how Muhammad is said to have expressed himself,
outside the context of written Revelation, on subjects that were
to be explained by scientific progress in follorving centuries. Al-
1. Pub. Sethi Straw Board Mills (Conversion) Ltd and Taleem-ul-Qur'an
Trust, Gujranwala, cantt. Pakistrin. 1st edition 1977, for sahih Al
Bukhari.
TheQuran,HadithandModernScience 243
Muhammadandwhichprovidea widertrustworthyaccount.In
recentyears,abilingual Arabic/Englisheditionhasbeenpro­
videdbyDoctorMuhammedMuhsin!):han, oftheIslamicUni­
versityofMadina.
1
AlBu!!hari'sworkisgenerallyregardedas
themostauthenticaftertheQur'anandwastranslatedinto
French(1903-1914)byHoudas andMarcaisunderthetitleLes
TraditionsIslamiques
(IslamicTraditions).TheHadithsare
thereforeaccessibletothosewhodo notspeakArabic.Onemust,
however,be
waryofcertaintranslationsmadeby Europeans,in­
cluding
theFrenchtranslation,becausetheycontaininaccuracies
anduntruthswhichareoftenmoreofinterpretationthanof
actualtranslation.Sometimes,theyconsiderablychangethereal
meaningofahadith,tosuchanextentindeedthattheyattribute
asensetoitwhichitdoesnotcontain.
As
regardstheirorigins,some ofthehadithsandGospelshave
one
pointincommonwhichis thatneitherofthemwascompiled
byanauthorwhowas aneyewitnessoftheeventshedescribes.
Norweretheycompileduntilsome timeaftertheeventsrecorded.
Thehadiths,like theGospels,have notallbeenaccepted asau­
thentic.Onlyasmall
numberofthemreceivethequasi-unani­
mous
approvalofspecialistsinMuslim Traditionsothat,except
al-Muwatta,
SahihMuslimandSahihal-Bukhari,onefindsin the
samebook,hadithspresumedtobeauthenticsidebyside with
oneswhich areeitherdubious,orshouldberejectedoutright.
IncontrasttoCanonicGospelswhichthoughquestionedby
some
modernscholarsbutwhichhaveneverbeencontested by
Christianhighauthorities,eventhose hadithsthataremost
worthytobeconsidered asauthentichavebeen thesubjectof
criticism.VeryearlyinthehistoryofIslam,mastersinIslamic
thoughtexerciseda thoroughcriticismofthehadiths,although
thebasicbook (TheQur'an)remainedthebookofreferenceand
was
nottobequestioned.
I
thoughtitofinteresttodelveinto theliteratureofthehadiths
tofindouthowMuhammadissaidto haveexpressedhimself,
outside
thecontextofwrittenRevelation,onsubjects thatwere
tobeexplainedbyscientific progressinfollowingcenturies. AI-
1.Pub.SethiStrawBoardMills(Conversion)LtdandTaleem-ul-Qur'an
Trust,Gujranwala,Cantt.Pakistan.1stedition1971,forSahihAI
Bukhari.

262. full THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
though Sahih Muslim is also an authentic collection, in this
study I have strictly limited myself to the texts of the hadiths
which are generally considered to be the most authentic, i.e. those
of Al Bulhari. I have always tried to bear in mind the fact that
these texts were eompiled by men according to data received from
a tradition which was partially oral and that they record certain
facts with a greater or lesser degree of accuricy, depending on
the individual errors made by those who transmitted the narra-
tions. These texts are different from other hadiths which were
transmitted by a very large number of people and are unques-
tionably authentic.r
I have compared the findings made during an examination of
the hadiths with those already set out in the section on the eur'an
and modern science. The results of this comparison speak for
themselves. The difference is in fact quite staggering between
the accuracy of the data contained in the eur'an, when compared
with modern scientific knowledge, and the highly questionable
character of certain statements in the hadiths on subjects whose
tenor is essentially scientific. These are the only hadiths to have
been dealt with in this study.
Hadiths which have as their subject the interpretation of cer-
tain verses of the Qur'an sometimes lead to commentaries which
are hardly acceptable today.
we have already seen the great significance of one verse (sura
36, verse 36) dealing with the Sun which
.,runs
its course to a
settled plaee". Here is the interpretation given of it in a hadith:
"At sunset, the sun . . . prostrates itself underneath the Throne,
and takes permission to rise again, and it is permitted and
then (a time will come when) it wilr be about to prostrate itself
. . . it will ask permission to go on its course . . . it will be ordered
to return whenee it has come and so it will rise in the west . . .,,
(sahih Al Bukhari). The original text (The Book of the Begin-
ning of the creation, vol. IV page z8B, part 84, chapter IV, num-
ber 42Ll is obscure and difficult to translate. This passage never-
theless contains an allegory which implies the notion of a course
the Sun runs in relation to the Earth: science has shown the
first by the word Zanni and the second
1, Muslim specialists designate the
by the word Qat'i.
244 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
thoughSahihMuslimisalso anauthenticcollection, inthis
studyIhavestrictlylimitedmyselftothetexts ofthehadiths
which
aregenerallyconsidered tobethemostauthentic, Le.those
ofAlBu15hari.Ihavealways triedtobearinmindthefactthat
thesetextswerecompiledbymenaccording todatareceivedfrom
atraditionwhichwaspartiallyoralandthattheyrecord certain
factswithagreaterorlesserdegree ofaccuracy,dependingon
theindividualerrorsmadebythosewho transmittedthenarra­
tions.Thesetexts aredifferentfromotherhadithswhichwere
transmittedbyaverylarge numberofpeopleandareunques­
tionablyauthentic.!
Ihavecompared
thefindingsmade duringanexaminationof
thehadithswiththosealready setoutinthesectionon theQur'an
andmodernscience. Theresultsofthiscomparisonspeak for
themselves.Thedifferenceisin factquitestaggeringbetween
theaccuracyofthedatacontainedintheQur'an,whencompared
withmodernscientificknowledge, andthehighlyquestionable
characterofcertainstatementsinthehadithsonsubjectswhose
tenorisessentiallyscientific.These aretheonlyhadithstohave
beendealtwith
inthisstudy.
~adiths whichhave astheirsubjecttheinterpretationofcer­
tainversesoftheQur'ansometimesleadtocommentarieswhich
arehardlyacceptabletoday.
Wehavealreadyseenthe
greatsignificanceofoneverse (sura
36,verse36)dealing withtheSunwhich"runsitscoursetoa
settledplace".
Hereistheinterpretationgivenofitinahadith:
"Atsunset,thesun...prostratesitselfunderneaththeThrone,
andtakespermissiontoriseagain,and itispermittedand
then(atimewillcomewhen) itwillbeaboutto prostrateitself
...itwillaskpermissiontogoon itscourse...itwillbeordered
to
returnwhenceithascomeandso itwillriseintheWest..."
(SahihAlBukhari).Theoriginaltext(TheBook oftheBegin­
ningoftheCr~ation, Vol.IVpage283, part54,chapterIV,num­
ber421)isobscureanddifficulttotranslate.Thispassagenever­
thelesscontains
anallegorywhichimplies thenotionofacourse
theSunrunsinrelationto theEarth:sciencehasshownthe
1.Muslimspecialists designatethefirstbythewordZanniandthesecond
bytheword Qafi. •

263. The QndaqFaaitn mdModotn$ctcilcc ,4j
contrsry
E)
be the ca,se. The authenticity of this hadith is doubt-
tul (Qonnil.
Another passage fitm the same work (The Book of the Begin-
ning of the Creation, vol.IV pege 283, part 64, chapter 6, number
4il0) estimates the initial stages in the development of the em-
bryo verT strangely in time: a forty-day period for the grouping
of the elements which are to eonstitute the human being, another
forty days during which the embryo is represented Bs
'Bomething
whieh clings', and s third forty-day period when the embryo is
designated by the term
'ehewed
flesh'. Once the angels have in-
tervened to define what this individual's future is to be, 4 soul is
breathed into him. This description of embryonic evolution does
not agree with modern data,
lVhereas the Qur'an gives absolutely no practical advice on the
remedial arts, except for a single comment (sura 16, verse 69)
on the possibility of using honey as a therapeutic aid (without
indicating the illness involved), the hadiths devote a great deal
of space to these subjects. A whole section of Al BuEhari's collec-
tion (part 76) is concerned with medicine. In the French trans-
lation by Houdas and Marcais it goes from page 62 to 91 of vol-
ume 4, and in Doctor Muhammad Muhsin
Ehan's
bilingual Ara-
bic/Enslish edition from page 395 to 462, of volume VII. There
csn be no doubt that
_these
pages contain some hadiths whieh
are conjectural (Qanni), but they are interesting as a r+'hole be-
csuse they provide an outline of the opinions on various medical
subjects that it was possible to hold at the time. One might add
to them several tradiths inserted in other parts of Al Bubhari's
collection which have a medical tenor.
This is how we eome to find statements in them on the harms
caused by the Evil Eye, witchcraft and the possibility of exor-
cism; although a certain restriction is imposed on the paid use
of the Qur'an for this purpose. There is a hadith which stresses
that certain kinds of date may serve as protection against the ef-
fects of magic, and magic may be used against poisonous snake-
bites.
We should not be surprised however to find that at a time when
there were limited possibilities for the scientific use of drugs,
people were advised to rely on simple practices; natural treat-
ments such as blood-letting, cupping, antl cauterization, head-
contrarytobetheease.Theauthenticityofthisha'dithisdoubt­
ful
(Zanni).
An·otherpassagefrom thesamework(TheBookoftheBegin­
ningoftheCreation,vol.IVpage283, part54,chapter6,number
(30)estimatestheinitialstages inthedevelopmentoftheem­
bryo
verystrangelyintime:aforty-dayperiod forthegrouping
oftheelementswhich aretoconstitutethehumanbeing,another
fortydaysduringwhichtheembryoisrepresented as'something
whichclings',
andathirdforty-dayperiodwhentheembryois
designatedby
theterm'chewedflesh'.Oncetheangelshavein­
tervened
todefinewhatthisindividual'sfutureistobe,asoulis
br.eathedintohim.Thisdescription
ofembryonicevolutiondoes
notagreewithmoderndata.
Whereasthe
Qur'angivesabsolutelynopracticaladviceonthe
remedial
arts,exceptforasinglecomment (sura16,verse69)
on
thepossibilityofusinghoney asatherapeuticaid(without
indicatingtheillnessinvolved),thehadithsdevotea
greatdeal
ofspacetothesesubjects.AwholesectionofAl Bu~hari's collec­
tion
(part76)isconcernedwithmedicine.Inthe Frenchtrans­
lationbyHoudas andMarcaisitgoesfrompage 62to91ofvol­
ume
4,andinDoctorMuhammadMuhsinKhan'sbilingualAra­
bic/Englisheditionfrompage395to452, ~fvolumeVII.There
canbenodoubt
thatthesepagescontainsome hadithswhich
areconjectural(~anni), buttheyareinterestingasawholebe­
causetheyprovide
anoutlineoftheopinionsonvariousmedical
subjects
thatitwaspossibletohold atthetime.Onemightadd
tothemseverall)adithsinsertedin otherpartsofAlBu~hari's
collectionwhichhaveamedicaltenor.
Thisishowwecometofindstatementsinthemonthe
harms
causedby theEvilEye, witchcraftandthepossibilityofexor­
cism;althoughacertainrestrictionisimposedonthepaiduse
oftheQur'anforthispurpose.Thereisahadithwhichstresses
thatcertainkindsofdatemayserve asprotectionagainsttheef­
fects
ofmagic,andmagicmaybeused againstpoisonoussnake­
bites.
Weshouldnotbesurprisedhowevertofind
thatatatimewhen
therewerelimitedpossibilitiesfor thescientificuseofdrugs,
peoplewereadvisedtorelyonsimplepractices;
naturaltreat­
mentssuchasblood-letting,cupping,andcauterization,head-

264. E'46 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
shaving against lice, the use of camel's milk and certain seeds
such as black cumin, and plants such as indian Qust. It was also
recommended to burn a mat made of palm-tree leaves and put the
ash from it into a wound to stop bleeding. In emergencies, all
available means that might genuinely be of use had to be em-
ployed. It does not seem-a priori,-to be a very good idea, how-
ever, to suggest that people drink eamel's urine.
It is diffHcult today to subscribe to eertain explanations of
subjects related to various illnesses. Among them, the following
might be mentioned:
-the origins of a fever: there are four statements bearing wit-
ness to the fact that "fever is from the heat of hell" (Al Bukhari,
The Book of Medicine, vol. VII, chapter 28, page 416)
-the existence of a rernedy for every illness: "No disease God
created, but He created its treatment" (Ibid. chapter l, page
895). This concept is illustrated by the
$adith of the Fly: "rf a
fly falls into the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (into
the vessel) and then throw it away, for in one of its wings there
is a disease and in the other there is healing (antidote for it).
i.e. the treatment for that disease" (Ibid. chapter lb-16, pages
452-463, also The Book of the Beginning of Creation part b4,
chapters 15 & 16.)
-abortion provoked by the sight of a snake (which can also
blind). This is mentioned in The Book of the Beginning of cre-
ation, Vol. IV( chapter 18 and 14, pages BB0 & BB4).
-haemorrhages
between periods. The Book of Menses ( Men-
strual Periods) vol. vI, part G, pages 490 & 4gE contains rwo
hadiths on the cause of haemorrhages between periods (chapters
27 &,28). They refer to two women: in the case of the first, there
is a description (undetailed) of the symptoms, with a statement
that the haemorrhage comes from a blood vessel; in the second,
the woman had experienced haemorrhages between periods for
seven years, and the same vascular origin is stated. One might
suggest hypotheses as to the real causes of the above, but it is not
easy to see what arguments could have been produced at the time
to support this diagnosis. This eould nevertheless have been quite
accurate.
-the statement that diseases are not contagious. Al Bubhari's
collection of hadiths refers in several places (chapters 19, tb, 80,
246 THEBIBLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
shavingagainstlice
Jtheuseofearnersmilk andcertainseeds
such
asblackcumin, andplantssuch asindianQust. Itwasalso
recommendedto
burnamatmadeofpalm-treeleaves andputthe
ashfromitintoawound tostopbleeding. InemergenciesJall
availablemeans
thatmightgenuinelybe ofusehadtobeem­
ployed.
Itdoesnot seem-apriori-tobeaverygoodidea,how­
ever,tosuggest
thatpeopledrinkcamel'surine.
Itisdifficulttoday tosubscribetocertainexplanationsof
subjectsrelatedtovariousillnesses.Amongthem,thefollowing
mightbementioned:
-theoriginsofafever:therearefourstatementsbearingwit­
nessto
thefactthat"feverisfromtheheatofhell"(AIBukhari,
TheBook
ofMedicine
Jvol.VII, chapter28,page416).­
-theexistenceofaremedyforeveryillness: liN0diseaseGod
created
JbutHecreatedits treatment
U
(Ibid.chapter1,page
395).Thisconcept isillustratedby the~adithoftheFly:"Ifa
flyfallsinto
thevesselofanyofyou
Jlethimdipallof it(into
thevessel)andthenthrowitaway,forinoneofitswingsthere
isadiseaseandintheotherthereishealing(antidote forit).
Le.thetreatmentforthatdisease"(Ibid. chapter15-16
Jpages
452-453,alsoTheBook
oftheBeginning ofCreationpart54,
chapters15&16.)
-abortionprovokedbythe sightofasnake(whichcanalso
blind).ThisismentionedinTheBook oftheBeginning ofCre­
ation
JVol.IV(chapter13and14,pages330 &334).
-haemorrhagesbetweenperiods.TheBook ofMenses(Men­
strualPeriods)Vol. VI
Jpart6,pages490 &495containstwo
hadithsonthecauseofhaemorrhagesbetweenperiods (chapters
21&28).They refertotwowomen:in thecaseofthefirst,there
isadescription(undetailed) ofthesymptoms,witha statement
thatthehaemorrhagecomesfromabloodvessel;in thesecond,
thewomanhadexperiencedhaemorrhagesbetweenperiods for
sevenyears, andthesamevascularoriginisstated.One might
suggesthypothesesastotherealcauses oftheabove,butitisnot
easy
toseewhatargumentscouldhavebeenproduced atthetime
to
supportthisdiagnosis.Thiscouldneverthelesshavebeenquite
accurate.
-thestatementthatdiseasesarenotcontagious.AlBu~harPs
collectionofhadithsrefersinseveralplaces (chapters19,25,30,

265. ?J?acftdorl+FafitnollrdModrlrnt$G{ffiot
UiI
81, 68 and 64, Vol. Vfl, Ped ?6, of the Book of Medicine) to
certain special cas{es, e,g. leprosy (page 408), plague (pages 418
& 422'1, camel's scabies (page 447r, and also provides general
statements. The latter sre however placed side by side wittl
glaringly contradietory remarks: it is recommended, for ex-
ample, not to go to areas where there is plagUe, and to stay
awey from lepere.
Consequently, it is possible to conclude that certain [radiths
exist which are scientifrcally unacceptable. There is a doubt sur-
rounding their authenticity. The purpose of reference to them
lies solely in the comparison that they oecasion with the verses
of the Qurtan mentioned above: these do not contain a single in-
accurate statement. This observation clearly has considerable
importance.
One must indeed remember thst at the Prophet's death, the
teachings that were received from this fell into two g1oups:
-firstly, a large number of Believers knew the Qur'an by heart
becsuse, like the Prophet, they hsd recited it many, many times;
transcriptions of the text of the Qur'an already existed moreover,
which were made at the time of the Prophet and even before
the Hegira'.
-secondly, the merilbers of his following who were closest to him
and the Believers who had witnessed his words and deeds had
remembered them and relied on them for support, in addition to
the Qur'an, when defining a nascent doetrine and legislation.
In the year3 that wer€ to follow the Prophet's death, texts
were to be compiled which recorded the two groups of teachings
he had left. The first gathering of hadiths was performed
roughly forty years after the Hegira, but a first collection of
Qur'anic texts had been made beforehand under Caliph Abu
Bakr, and in particular Caliph Uthman, the second of whom
published a definitive text during his Caliphate, i.e. between the
twelfth and twenty-fourth years following Muhammad's death.
What must be heavily stressed is the disparity between these
two groups of texts, both from a literary point of view and as
regards their contents. It would indeed be unthinkable to com-
p* the style of the Qur'an with that of the hadiths. what is
*ot*, when the contents of the two texts are colnpared in the
1. The Hegirs TaE in 622, ten yearr before Mubammad'r death.
31,53and54,Vol.VII, part76,oftheBookofMedicine)to
certainspecial cases,e.g.leprosy(page408),plague (pages418
"
(22),camel'sscabies(page447), andalsoprovidesgeneral
statements.
Thelatterarehoweverplacedsidebyside with
glaringlycontradictory remarks:itisrecommended,forex­
ample,nottogotoareaswhere
thereisplague,and tostay
awayfromlepers.
Consequently,
itispossibletoconcludethatcertainl}.adiths
existwhich
arescientificallyunacceptable.Thereisadoubt sur­
roundingtheirauthenticity.Thepurposeofreferencetothem
liessolely
inthecomparisonthattheyoccasionwiththeverses
oftheQur'anmentionedabove:these donotcontainasinglein­
accuratestatement.Thisobservationclearly
hasconsiderable
importance.
One
mustindeedremember thatattheProphet'sdeath, the
teachingsthatwerereceivedfromthisfellintotwogroups:
-firstly,alargenumberofBelieversknewthe Qur'anbyheart
because,like theProphet,theyhadreciteditmany,many times;
transcriptionsofthetextoftheQur'analreadyexistedmoreover,
whichweremade
atthetime oftheProphetandevenbefore
theHegira
1
•
-secondly,themembersofhisfollowingwhowereclosesttohim
and
theBelieverswho hadwitnessedhiswords anddeedshad
rememberedthemandreliedonthemforsupport,inadditionto
theQur'an,whendefininganascentdoctrineandlegislation.
Intheyearsthatweretofollow theProphet'sdeath,texts
weretobecompiledwhichrecorded
thetwogroupsofteachings
he
hadleft.Thefirstgatheringofhadithswasperformed
roughly
fortyyearsaftertheHegira, butafirstcollectionof
Qur'anictextshadbeenmadebeforehandunderCaliphAbu
Bakr,andinparticularCaliphUthman,thesecondofwhom
publishedadefinitive
textduringhisCaliphate,Le.betweenthe
twelfthandtwenty-fourthyearsfollowingMul,lammad'sdeath.
Whatmustbeheavilystressedisthedisparitybetweenthese
twogroupsoftexts,bothfroma
literarypointofviewand as
regardstheircontents.Itwouldindeed beunthinkabletocom­
parethestyleoftheQur'anwith thatofthehadiths.Whatis
more,whenthecontentsof
thetwotextsarecmnparedinthe
1.TheHegirawasin622,tenyearsbeforeMubammad'sdeath.

266. t4E THE BIBLE, THE QUn'AN AND SCIENCE
light of modern scientific data, one is struck by thp oppositbns
between them. I hope I have succeeded in showing what follows:
--on the one hand, statements in the Qur'an which often appear
to be commonplace, but which conceal data that science was later
to bring to light.
-{n the other hand, certain statements in the hadiths which are
shown to be in absolute agreement with the ideas of their times
but which contain opinions that are deemed scientifically unac-
eeptable today. These occur in an aggregate of statements con-
cerning Islamic doctrine and legislation, whose authenticity is
unquestioni ngly acknowled ged.
Finally, it must be pointed out that Mutrammad's own attitude
was guite different towards the eur'an from what it was towards
his personal sayings. The eur'an was proclaimed by him to be a
divine Revelation. Over a period of twenty years, the prophet
classified its sections with the greatest of care, as we have seen.
The Qur'an represented what had to be written down during his
own lifetime and learned by heart to become part of the liturgy
of prayers. The hadiths are said, in principle, to provide an ac-
count of his deeds and personal reflections, but he left it to others
to find an example in them for their own behaviour and to make
them public however they liked: he did not give any instructions.
In view of the fact that only a limited nu*b*" oi paitts may
be considered to express the prophet's
thoughts with certainty,
the others must contain the thoughts of the men of his time, in
particular with regard to the subjects referred to here. when
these dubious or inauthentic hadiths are compared to the text of
the Qur'an, w€ can measure the extent to which they differ. This
comparison highlishts (as if there were still any need to) the
atriking difference between the writings of this period, which
are riddled with scientific inaccurate statements, and tt * eur'an,
the Book of written Revelation, that is free from enors or tnit
kind.t
1. The truth of the
ladithc, from e religiour point of view, ir beyond que&
tion. when they deal, however, with earthly affairs there is no direr-
ence betneen the Prophet and other humans. one
tradith
givea an ac-
count of an utterence of the prophet: ,,T[henever
r iommand you to do
romething nrlatcd to Retigion do obey, and if I command you romething
according to my own opinion (do remember this) I am a human beingf;.
(Continued on Page 249)
248 THEBIBLE,THEQUa'ANANDSCIENCE
lightofmodernscientificdata,oneisstruckbytheoppositi.ons
betweenthem.IhopeIhavesucceededinshowing
whatfollows:
-ontheonehand,statementsin theQur'anwhichoftenappear
tobecommonplace,butwhichconceal datathatsciencewas later
tobringtolight.
-ontheotherhand,certain statementsinthehadithswhich are
showntobeinabsoluteagreementwiththeideasof theirtimes
butwhichcontainopinions thataredeemedscientificallyunac­
ceptabletoday.Theseoccurinanaggregate
ofstatementscon­
cerningIslamicdoctrine
andlegislation,whoseauthenticityis
unquestioninglyacknowledged.
Finally,
itmustbepointedout thatMu};1ammad'sownattitude
wasquitedifferenttowardstheQur'anfromwhat itwastowards
hispersonalsayings.TheQur'anwasproclaimedbyhim
tobea
divineRevelation.Overaperiod
oftwentyyears,theProphet
classified
itssectionswiththe greatestofcare,aswehaveseen.
TheQur'anrepresented
whathadto bewrittendown duringhis
ownlifetimeandlearnedby
hearttobecomepartoftheliturgy
ofprayers.Thehadiths aresaid,inprinciple,toprovide anac­
countofhisdeeds
andpersonalreflections, butheleftittoothers
tofindanexampleinthem fortheirownbehaviourandtomake
thempublichowevertheyliked:hedidnotgiveanyinstructions.
Inviewofthefactthatonlyalimitednumber ofl}.adithsmay
beconsideredtoexpresstheProphet'sthoughtswithcertainty,
theothersmustcontainthethoughts ofthemenofhistime,in
particularwithregardtothesubjectsreferredtohere.When
thesedubious
orinauthentichadiths arecomparedtothe textof
theQur'an,wecanmeasuretheextenttowhichtheydiffer.This
comparisonhighlights
(asiftherewerestillanyneedto)the
strikingdifferencebetween thewritingsofthisperiod,which
areriddledwithscientificinaccuratestatements,and theQur'an,
theBookofWrittenRevelation, thatisfreefrom errorsofthis
kind.
1
1.Thetruthofthe1)adiths,fromareligiouspointofview,isbeyondques­
tion.When
theydeal,however,with earthlyaffairsthereisnodiffer­
encebetween
theProphetandotherhumans.One\1adithgives anac­
count
ofanutteranceoftheProphet:"WheneverIcommandyou todo
somethingrl!lated
toReligiondoobey,and ifIcommandyousomething
according
tomyownopinion(doremember this)Iamahumanbeing".
(ContinuedonPage 249)

267. Gerreral
Conclusions
At the end of this study, a fact that stands forth very elearly
is that the predominsnt opinion held in the West on the texts of
the Holy Scriptures we possess today is hardly very realistic. We
have se€n the conditions, times snd ways in which the elements
constituting the Old Testament, the Gospels snd the Qut'an
were collected and written down: the circumstances attendant
upon the birth of the Scriptures for tltese three Revelations dif-
ferred widely in each case, a fact whieh had extremely important
consequences concerning the authenticity of the texts and certain
aspects of their contents.
The OId Testament represents s vast number of literary works
written over a period of roughly nine hundred years. It forms a
highly disparate mosaic whose pieces have, in the course of cen-
turies, been changed by man. Some pafts were added to what
already existed, so that todey it is sometimes very difficult in-
deed to identify where they came from originally.
Through an account of Jesus's words and deeds, the Gospels
were intended to make known to men the teschings he wished to
leave them on completion of his earthly mission. Unfortunately,
the authors of the Gospels were not eyewitnesses of the dats
they recorded. They were spokesmen who expressed data that
were quite simply the information that had been preserved by
the various Judeo-Christian communities on Jesus's public life'
passed down by oral traditions or writings which no longer exist
iod"y, and which eonstituted an intermediate stage between the
oral tradition and the definitive tent^s.
(Continued from Page 248)
Al Saraksi in his
'Principles' (Cl Ufrll transmitted thic statement as
follows: "If I bring something to you on your religion, do act according
to it, and if I bring you something related to this world, then you heve
a better knowledge of your own earthly afiairs".
GEnE~al
Cont::lu~ion~
Attheendofthisstudy,a factthatstandsforthveryclearly
is
thatthepredominantopinionheldin theWeston thetextsof
theHolyScriptureswepossesstodayishardlyveryrealistic.We
haveseen
theconditions,timesandways inwhichtheelements
constituting
theOldTestament,theGospels andtheQur'an
werecollectedandwrittendown:
thecircumstancesattendant
uponthebirthoftheScripturesforthesethreeRevelationsdif­
ferredwidelyineachcase,a
factwhichhadextremelyimportant
consequencesconcerning
theauthenticityofthetextsandcertain
aspects
oftheircontents.
TheOldTestamentrepresentsavastnumber
ofliteraryworks
writtenoveraperiod
ofroughlyninehundredyears. Itformsa
highlydisparatemosaicwhosepieceshave,inthecourse
ofcen­
turies,beenchangedbyman.Some
partswereaddedto what
alreadyexisted,so thattodayitissometimesverydifficultin­
deedtoidentifywheretheycamefromoriginally.
Through
anaccountofJesus'swords anddeeds,theGospels
wereintendedtomakeknowntomentheteachingshewishedto
leavethemoncompletionofhisearthlymission.Unfortunately,
theauthorsoftheGospelswerenoteyewitnesses ofthedata
theyrecorded.Theywerespokesmenwhoexpresseddata that
werequitesimply theinformationthathadbeenpreservedby
thevariousJudeo-ChristiancommunitiesonJesus'spubliclife,
passeddownbyoraltraditions
orwritingswhichnolongerexist
today,
andwhichconstituted anintermediatestagebetween the
oraltraditionand thedefinitivetexts.
(ContinuedfromPage248)
AlSaraksT
inhis'Principles'(AlUsUl)transmittedthisstatementas
follows:"IfIbringsomethingtoyouon yourreligion,do actaeeording
toit,andifIbringyousomethingrelatedtothisworld,thenyouhave
abetterknowledgeofyourownearthlyaffairs".
249

268. s50 THE BIBLE, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
This is the light in whieh the Judeo-Christian Scriptures
should be viewed today, and-to be objective-one should aban-
don the classic coneepts held by experts in exegesis.
The inevitable result of the multiplicity of sources is the exist-
ence of contradictions and oppositions: many examples have
been given of these. The authors of the Gospels had (when talk-
ing of Jesus) the same tendency to magnify certain facts as the
poets of French Medieval literature in their narrative poems.
The consequence of this was that events were presented from
each individual narrator's point of view and the authenticity of
the facts reported in many cases proved to be extremely dubious.
In view of this, the few statements contained in the Judeo-Chris-
tian Scriptures which may have something to do with modern
knowledge should always be examined with the circumspection
that the questionable nature of their authenticity demands.
Contradictions, improbabilities and incompatibilities with
modern scientific data may be easily explained in terms of what
has just been said above. Christians are nevertheless very sur-
prised when they realize this, so great have been the continuous
and far-reaching efforts made until now by many official com-
mentators to camouflage the very obvious results of modern
studies, under cunning dialectical acrobatics orchestrated by
apologetic lyricism. A case in point are the genealogies of Jesus
g'iven in Matthew and Luke, which were eontradictory and scien-
tifically unacceptabie. Examples have been provided which reveal
this attitude very clearly. John's Gospel has been given special
attention because there are very important differences between
it and the other three Gospels, especially with regard to the fact
that his Gospel does not describe the institution of the Eucharist:
this is not generally known.
The Qur'anic Revelation has a history which is fundamentally
different from the other two. It spanned a period of some twenty
years and, as soon as it was transmitted to Mul.rammad by Arch-
angel Gabriel, Believers learned it by heart. It was also written
down during Muhammad's life. The last recensions of the eur'an
were efrected under Caliph Uthman starting some twelve years
after the Prophet's death and finishins twenty-four years after
it. They had the advantage of being checked by people who
already knew the text by heart, for they had learned it at the
250 THEBmLE,THEQUR'ANANDSCIENCE
Thisisthe lightinwhich theJudeo-ChristianScriptures
shouldbeviewedtoday, and-tobeobjective-oneshouldaban­
don
theclassicconceptsheldby expertsinexegesis.
Theinevitable
resultofthemultiplicityofsourcesis theexist­
ence
ofcontradictionsandoppositions:manyexampleshave
beengiven
ofthese.The authorsoftheGospelshad(whentalk­
ingofJesus)thesametendencyto magnifycertainfactsasthe
poetsof FrenchMedievalliteratureintheirnarrativepoems.
Theconsequence
ofthiswas thateventswerepresented from
eachindividualnarrator'spointofviewand theauthenticityof
thefactsreportedin manycasesproved tobeextremelydubious.
Inview
ofthis,thefewstatementscontainedintheJudeo-Chris­
tianScriptureswhichmayhavesomethingtodowithmodern
knowledgeshouldalwaysbeexaminedwith
thecircumspection
thatthequestionablenatureoftheirauthenticitydemands.
Contradictions,improbabilities
andincompatibilitieswith
modernscientific
datamaybeeasilyexplained intermsofwhat
hasjustbeensaidabove. Christiansareneverthelessvery sur­
prisedwhen theyrealizethis,so greathavebeen thecontinuous
andfar-reachingeffortsmadeuntilnowbymanyofficialcom­
mentatorstocamouflagetheveryobviousresults ofmodern
studies,
undercunningdialecticalacrobatics orchestratedby
apologeticlyricism.Acaseinpoint
arethegenealogiesofJesus
giveninMatthew
andLuke,whichwerecontradictory andscien­
tificallyunacceptabie.Exampleshavebeenprovidedwhichreveal
thisattitudeveryclearly.John'sGospelhasbeengivenspecial
attentionbecausethereareveryimportantdifferencesbetween
itandtheotherthreeGospels,especiallywith regardtothefact
thathisGospeldoes notdescribetheinstitutionof theEucharist:
thisisnotgenerallyknown.
TheQur'anicRevelation
hasahistorywhichisfundamentally
different
fromtheothertwo.Itspannedaperiodofsome twenty
yearsand,assoonas itwastransmittedtoMul}.ammadbyArch­
angelGabriel,Believerslearned
itbyheart.Itwasalsowritten
downduringMuhammad'slife.Thelastrecensions oftheQur'an
wereeffected underCaliphUthmanstartingsometwelve years
aftertheProphet'sdeathandfinishingtwenty-four yearsafter
it.They hadtheadvantageofbeingcheckedbypeoplewho
alreadyknewthetextbyheart,fortheyhadlearned itatthe

269. tulcorcl*'lon'
gltr
time of the Bevelstion itself snd had subsequently recited it con-
stantly. Since then, we know that the text has been scrupulously
preserved" It does not give rise to any problems of authenticity.
Ttre Qurtan follows on from the two Bevelations that preceded
it and is not only free from contradictions in its narrations, the
sign of the various human manipulstions to be found in the Gos-
pe1s, but provides a quality all of its own for those who examine
it objectively and in the light of science i.e. its complete agree-
ment with modern scientifie dsta. What is more, ststements are
to be found in it (as has been shown) that are connected with
science: and yet it is unthinkable that & man of Mu[rammad's
time could have been the author of them. Modern ecientific
knowledge therefore allows us to understand eertain verses of the
Qur'an which, until now, it has been impossible to interpret.
The comparison of several Biblical and Qur'snic narrations of
the same subject shows the existence of fundamental differences
between statements in the former, which are scientifically un-
acceptable, and declarations in the latter which are in perfect
agreement with modern data: this was the case of the Creation
and the Flood, for example. An extremely important complement
to the Bible was found in the text of the Qur'an on the subiect
of the history of the Exodus, where the two texts 'ere very
much in agreement with archaeological findings, in the dating
of the time of Moses. Besides, there are major differences be-
tween the Qur'an and the Bible on the other subjects: they serve
to disprove all that has been maintained-without a scrap of
evidence+oncerning the allegation that Mu[rammad is supposed
to have copied the Bible to produce the text of the Qur'an.
When a comparative study is made between the statements
connected with science to be found in the collection of hadiths'
which are attributed to Mubammad but are often of dubious
authenticity (although they reflect the beliefs of the period) '
and the data of a similar kind in the Qur'an, the disparity be'
comes so obvious that any notion of I common origin is ruled out.
In view of the level of knowledge in Mu[rammad's day, it is
inconeeivable that many of the statements in the Qur'an which
are connected with science could have been the work of a man.
It is, moreover, perfectly legitimate, not only to regard the
Qur'an ss the expression of s Revelation, but also to award it a
251
timeoftheRevelationitselfandhadsubsequentlyrecited itCOD­
stantly.Sincethen,weknow thatthetexthasbeenscrupulously
preserved.
Itdoesnotgiverisetoanyproblemsofauthenticity.
The
QUl"anfollowsonfromthetwoRevelations thatpreceded
itandisnotonlyfreefromcontradictionsin itsnarrations,the
signofthevarioushumanmanipulationsto
befoundinthe Gos­
pels,butprovidesaqualityall ofitsownforthosewhoexamine
itobjectivelyandinthelight ofsciencei.e. itscompleteagree­
mentwithmodernscientificdata.
Whatismore,statements are
tobefoundin it(ashasbeenshown) thatareconnectedwith
science:andyet
itisunthinkablethatamanofMu\1ammad's
timecouldhavebeen
theauthorofthem.Modernscientific
knowledgethereforeallowsustounderstandcertainverses
ofthe
Qur'anwhich,untilnow,
ithasbeenimpossible tointerpret.
ThecomparisonofseveralBiblical
andQur'anicnarrationsof
thesamesubjectshowstheexistenceoffundamentaldifferences
betweenstatementsintheformer,which
arescientificallyun­
acceptable,anddeclarationsinthe
latterwhichareinperfect
agreementwithmodern
data:thiswasthecaseof theCreation
andtheFlood,forexample.Anextremelyimportantcomplement
totheBiblewesfoundinthe textoftheQur'anon thesubject
ofthehistoryoftheExodus,where
thetwotextswerevery
muchinagreementwitharchaeologicalfindings,inthedating
ofthetimeofMoses.Besides,there aremajordifferencesbe­
tweentheQur'anand theBibleontheothersubjects:theyserve
todisproveall thathasbeen maintained-withoutascrapof
evidence--concerningtheallegation
thatMul)ammadissupposed
tohavecopiedtheBibletoproducethe
textoftheQur'an.
Whenacomparativestudyismadebetweenthestatements
connectedwithscience
tobefoundinthecollectionofhadiths,
which
areattributedtoMul).ammadbutareoftenofdubious
authenticity(althoughtheyreflect
thebeliefsof theperiod),
andthedata
ofasimilarkindin theQur'an,thedisparitybe­
comes
soobviousthatanynotionofacommonoriginisruledout.
InviewofthelevelofknowledgeinMul)ammad'sday, itis
inconceivable
thatmanyof thestatementsintheQur'anwhich
areconnectedwithsciencecouldhavebeenthework ofaman.
Itis,moreover,perfectlylegitimate,notonlyto regardthe
Qur'an
astheexpressionofaRevelation, butalsotoaward ita

270. ?82 TIIE BIBIJ, THE QUR'AN AND SCIENCE
very special place, on account of the guarantee of authenticity it
provides and the presence in it of scientific statements which,
when studied today, appear Bs a challenge to explanation in
human terntg.
THEBIBLE,THE QURtANANDSCIENCE
veryspecialplace,onaccount oftheguaranteeofauthenticityit
providesandthepresence initofscientificstatementswhich,
whenstudiedtoday,appearasachallengetoexplanationin
humanterms.

271. Truwliterorion of tlw Ar&fu: Into l-p;tin Clutacten 253
TRANSLITERATION OF THE ARABIC INTO TATIN
CHARACTERS USED IN THIS BOOK
a
la
,t{
.bt
JiT
L\
LE
ri t.
-first lcttcr of the word
t
Lotherwisc
Lty
i, f and i iodi..tc thc clongation of thc concsponding
Arabic vowel
rat
d, !.
ei
Ll
c!
rd
is
rl
Liq
,il k
J
f
Ct
a
d
J
a
J
s
u
it
rs
.j l(
TramliterationoftheArabicIntoLotinClaaracte" 253
TRANSLITERATION OFTHEARABICINTO LATIN
CHARACTERS USEDINTHISBOOK
•
,
tl- ~
•
Iu ..b
t
•
"r'
b J:.z
•
t
,.
"
.:,
v
~ 1. ti
t. u f
t
h
J
q
•
t ~
clk
.Jd J
J ;~ rm
ttlr 0 n
J :1: •h
..r
:$ C:stletteroftheword...w
J
therwise..............u
Ji
'I
:~
':!
y
to.? :~ atranduindicatetheelongationofthecorresponding
" Arabicvowel